Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “CFR engine”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 37 records · Page 2
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

A Call To Action To Engage The Community To Meet The Challenges That Must Be Tackled To Make Electrified Aircraft Propulsion Real

Technology risk reduction is essential, as it is necessary to demonstrate the potential of Electrified Aircraft Propulsion (EAP). However, more is needed for implementation. The industry is leading EAP by developing a diverse community of novel vehicles from short-haul, small, urban-focused electric vertical takeoff and landing (eVTOL) to regional air mobility (RAM) and hybrid-electric, single-aisle transport category airplanes. There are a variety of novel EAP technologies for each of these novel vehicles. And the industry is not only looking at novel technology to advance the state of the art. Instead, the industry is looking to certify these novel aircraft through their regulatory authorities, such as the US Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), the European Union Aviation Safety Authority (EASA), Transport Canada Civil Aviation (TCCA), and Brazil’s Agência Nacional de Aviação Civil (National Civil Aviation Agency, ANAC), as well as other regulatory authorities. The NASA Electrified Powertrain Flight Demonstration (EPFD) project has partnered with two industry partners to advance integrated MW-class powertrain system technology demonstration that includes an assessment of their regulatory and standards gaps in their technology. The EPFD has conducted a generic regulatory gap analysis of hybrid electric engines that aligns with the industry partners’ efforts. The EPFD regulations and standards team is integrated into the industry standards community. The international industry standards community is wrestling with critical key challenges to certification. While some certification elements are proprietary, several technology elements cut across company propriety in aircraft engines (US 14 CFR Part 33 and EASA CS-E, regulations that only reflect reciprocating and turbine engines). The approach that several of these regulatory authorities have taken is to collaborate to address their challenges. The Certification Management Team (CMT) consists of the EASA, FAA, TCCA, and ANAC, and they have begun to address common questions, such as the Loss of Power Control (LOPC) for electric engines. They have reached out to the standards community to seek answers. The industry standards development organizations (SDO) have also looked ahead to address current regulations and standards gaps. The ASTM has built key committees in its ASTM F44 General Aviation Committee and F39 Aircraft Systems Committee. The SAE has established the E-40 Electric Propulsion and AE-10 High Voltage committees.

Standards↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

A Call To Action To Engage The Community To Meet The Challenges That Must Be Tackled To Make Electrified Aircraft Propulsion Real

Technology risk reduction is essential, as it is necessary to demonstrate the potential of Electrified Aircraft Propulsion (EAP). However, more is needed for implementation. The industry is leading EAP by developing a diverse community of novel vehicles from short-haul, small, urban-focused electric vertical takeoff and landing (eVTOL) to regional air mobility (RAM) and hybrid-electric, single-aisle transport category airplanes. There are a variety of novel EAP technologies for each of these novel vehicles. And the industry is not only looking at novel technology to advance the state of the art. Instead, the industry is looking to certify these novel aircraft through their regulatory authorities, such as the US Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), the European Union Aviation Safety Authority (EASA), Transport Canada Civil Aviation (TCCA), and Brazil’s Agência Nacional de Aviação Civil (National Civil Aviation Agency, ANAC), as well as other regulatory authorities. The NASA Electrified Powertrain Flight Demonstration (EPFD) project has partnered with two industry partners to advance integrated MW-class powertrain system technology demonstration that includes an assessment of their regulatory and standards gaps in their technology. The EPFD has conducted a generic regulatory gap analysis of hybrid electric engines that aligns with the industry partners’ efforts. The EPFD regulations and standards team is integrated into the industry standards community. The international industry standards community is wrestling with critical key challenges to certification. While some certification elements are proprietary, several technology elements cut across company propriety in aircraft engines (US 14 CFR Part 33 and EASA CS-E, regulations that only reflect reciprocating and turbine engines). The approach that several of these regulatory authorities have taken is to collaborate to address their challenges. The Certification Management Team (CMT) consists of the EASA, FAA, TCCA, and ANAC, and they have begun to address common questions, such as the Loss of Power Control (LOPC) for electric engines. They have reached out to the standards community to seek answers. The industry standards development organizations (SDO) have also looked ahead to address current regulations and standards gaps. The ASTM has built key committees in its ASTM F44 General Aviation Committee and F39 Aircraft Systems Committee. The SAE has established the E-40 Electric Propulsion and AE-10 High Voltage committees.

Standards↗
NASA NTRS1946

Effect of Fuel Composition, Engine Operating Variables, and Spark-Plug Type and Condition on Preignition-Limited Performance of an R-2800 Cylinder

The preignition characteristics of the R-2800 cylinder, as effected by fuel consumption, engine operating variables, and spark plug type and condition, were evaluated. The effects on preignition-limited performance of various percentages of aromatics (benzene, toluene, cumene, xylene) in a base fuel of triptane were investigated. Two paraffins (triptane and S + 6.0 ml TEL/gal) and two refinery blends (28-R and 33-R) were preignition rated. The effect of changes in the following engine operating variables on preignition limit was determined: inlet-air temperature, rear spark plug gasket temperature, engine speed, spark advance, tappet clearance, and oil consumption. Preignition limits of the R-2800 cylinder using Champion C34S and C35S and AC-LS86, LS87, and LS88 spark plugs were established and the effect of spark plug deterioration was investigated. No definite trends in preignition-limited indicated mean effective pressure were indicated for aromatics as a class when increased percentages of different aromatics were added to a base fuel of triptane. Three types of fuel (aromatics, paraffins, and refinery blends) showed a preignition range for this cylinder from 65 to 104 percent when based on the performance of S plus 6.0 ml TEL per gallon as 100 percent. The R-2800 cylinder is therefore relatively insensitive to fuel composition when compared to a CFR F-4 engine, which had a pre-ignition range from 72 to 100 percent for the same fuels. Six engine operating variables were investigated with the following results: preignition-limited indicated mean effective pressure decreased, with increases in engine speed, rear spark plug gasket temperature, inlet-air temperature, and spark advance beyond 20 F B.T.C. and was unaffected by rate of oil consumption or by tappet clearance. Spark plugs were rated over a range of preignition-limited indicated mean effective pressure from 200 to 390 pounds per square inch at a fuel-air ratio of 0.07 in the following order of increased resistance to preignition: AC-LS97, AC-LS88, Champion C358, AC-LS86, and Champion C34S. Spark plug deterioration in the form of cracks in the porcelain had been broken away from the center electrode and were retained in the spark plug cavity, the preignition limit was decreased as much as 57 percent. When the broken pieces had been removed, the preignition limit increased from that of the undamaged porcelain as the weight of removed porcelain was increased.

Pfender, John F.↗
NASA NTRS2019

Certification Rules and Standards Review

This report characterizes the certification practices for electric propulsion systems by modeling changes to current engine and propeller certification practices (14 CFR 23, 33 and 35 and means of compliance in standards developed by ASTM Committee F39 and F44). Industry technology paths are varied, so this report focuses on insights from the NASA X-57 Maxwell Distributed Electric Propulsion flight demonstrator system technology project. There are 122 sections of the regulation reviewed, where 28 needed tailoring or revision. A second report will examine the regulations to the X-57 system development products. A final report will describe a general regulatory gaps method for new vehicle concepts.

Schlickenmaier, Herbert↗
NASA NTRS2023

X-57 Maxwell Airworthiness Validation Plan

This report is a Final Airworthiness Validation Plan (AVP) and describes how an aircraft like X-57 does (and does not) meet current airworthiness standards. The objective of this report is to create an example certification basis, associated means of compliance (MoC), and method of compliance for a distributed electric propulsion airplane under 14 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 21, “Certification Procedures for Products and Articles,” and its associated relevant sections of 14 CFR for “Airworthiness Standards” of Part 23, “Normal Category Airplanes,” Part 33 “Aircraft Engines,” and Part 35 “Propellers.” The approach to meet the objective is to use NASA’s X-57 Modification (Mod) IV flight demonstrator as an example and categorize its applicability to the regulations and standards according to the following three conditions: 1. Identify, where applicable, that the MoC and methods of compliance can be associated with existing Standard Specifications and Standard Practices of (ASTM) Committee F39 on Aircraft Systems and ASTM Committee F44 on General Aviation Aircraft; 2. If relevant ASTM standards do not exist, identify means and-or methods of compliance from appropriate Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Advisory Circulars and other sources to use for the X-57 Mod IV vehicle; or 3. If no relevant certification rule, MoC, or method of compliance exists, highlight this omission and provide recommendations.

Herbert W Schlickenmaier↗
NASA NTRS2011

Avionics Systems Laboratory/Building 16. Historical Documentation

As part of this nation-wide study, in September 2006, historical survey and evaluation of NASA-owned and managed facilities that was conducted by NASA s Lyndon B. Johnson Space Center (JSC) in Houston, Texas. The results of this study are presented in a report entitled, "Survey and Evaluation of NASA-owned Historic Facilities and Properties in the Context of the U.S. Space Shuttle Program, Lyndon B. Johnson Space Center, Houston, Texas," prepared in November 2007 by NASA JSC s contractor, Archaeological Consultants, Inc. As a result of this survey, the Avionics Systems Laboratory (Building 16) was determined eligible for listing in the NRHP, with concurrence by the Texas State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO). The survey concluded that Building 5 is eligible for the NRHP under Criteria A and C in the context of the U.S. Space Shuttle program (1969-2010). Because it has achieved significance within the past 50 years, Criteria Consideration G applies. At the time of this documentation, Building 16 was still used to support the SSP as an engineering research facility, which is also sometimes used for astronaut training. This documentation package precedes any undertaking as defined by Section 106 of the NHPA, as amended, and implemented in 36 CFR Part 800, as NASA JSC has decided to proactively pursue efforts to mitigate the potential adverse affects of any future modifications to the facility. It includes a historical summary of the Space Shuttle program; the history of JSC in relation to the SSP; a narrative of the history of Building 16 and how it supported the SSP; and a physical description of the structure. In addition, photographs documenting the construction and historical use of Building 16 in support of the SSP, as well as photographs of the facility documenting the existing conditions, special technological features, and engineering details, are included. A contact sheet printed on archival paper, and an electronic copy of the work product on CD, are also provided

Slovinac, Patricia↗