SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Destructive Physical Analysis (DPA)”

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.

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

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

22 records · Page 2

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

NASA NTRS1993

COMSAT's destructive physical analysis of aerospace nickel-cadmium cells for NASA/Goddard Space Flight Center

Over the past 5 years, COMSAT has performed numerous destructive physical analyses (DPA's) on NASA-Goddard-supplied nickel-cadmium (Ni/Cd) cells. The samples included activated but uncycled cells, wet stored cells, cycled cells, and anomalous cells. The DPA's provided visual, morphological, and chemical analyses of the cell components. The DPA data for the analyzed cells are presented. For the cells investigated, the leading cause of poor performance, as determined by DPA, has been poor negative electrode utilization, which resulted in negative-electrode-limiting operation.

Robbins, Kathleen M. B.↗

NASA NTRS2018

Achieving Improved Reliability with Failure Analysis

Reliability is the ability of a product to properly function, within specified performance limits, for a specified period of time, under the life cycle application conditions. Failure analysis is a vital tool in the effort to ensure reliability of electronic products and systems throughout their product lifecycle. Today, organizations involved in activities within the electronics supply chain are facing new challenges, not just from complex assembly styles, harsher lifecycle environments, and sophisticated supply chains, but also from customers who are demanding a quicker turn-around. Unfortunately, root cause failure analysis is often performed incompletely, leading to a poor understanding of failure mechanisms and causes and, customer dissatisfaction due to recurring failures. The PDC starts with an introduction to reliability concepts, physics of failure and an overview of failure mechanisms that affect PCBs, PCBAs and components. The PDC then dives into root cause hypothesizing techniques (Pareto, FMEA, fishbone, FTA), non-destructive and destructive analysis and, materials characterization will be discussed. Numerous failure analysis case studies will be used to illustrate the techniques and analysis principles to arrive at the root cause(s) of field failures on printed circuit boards, active components, and assemblies. What Will You Learn: Topics include: Overview of Reliability Concepts Failure mechanisms of electronic products Root cause analysis Failure analysis techniques -Non-destructive techniques (optical, CSAM etc.) -Destructive analysis (DPA, Decap, FIB etc.) -Materials characterization (XRF, EDS, TMA/DSC etc.) Who Will Benefit: Reliability engineers, failure analysis engineers, engineering managers, design engineers, component engineers, quality assurance functions and, personnel involved with reliability activities within their company.

non-destructive techniques↗

NASA NTRS2015

[Redesign of the Spacesuit Long Life Battery and the Personal Life Support System Battery]

This fall I was working on two different projects that culminated into a redesign of the spacesuit LLB (long life battery). I also did some work on the PLSS (personal life support system) battery with EC. My first project was redlining the work instruction for completing DPAs (destructive physical analysis) on battery cells in the department. The purpose of this document is to create a standard process and ensure that the data in the same way no matter who carries out the analysis. I observed three DPAs, conducted one with help, and conducted two on my own all while taking notes on the procedure. These notes were used to write the final work instruction that will become is the department standard. My second project continued the work of the summer co-op before me. I was testing aluminum heat sinks for their ability to provide good thermal conduction and structural support during a thermal runaway event. The heat sinks were designed by the summer intern but there was not much time for testing before he left. We ran tests with a heater on the bottom of a trigger cell to try to drive thermal runaway and ensure that it will not propagate to adjacent cells. We also ran heat-to-vent tests in an oven to see if the assembly provided structural support and prevented sidewall rupture during thermal runaway. These tests were carried out at ESTA (energy systems test area) and are providing very promising results that safe, high performing (greater than 180 Wh/kg) designs are possible. My main project was a redesign of the LLB battery. Another summer intern did some testing and concluded that there was no simple fix to mitigate thermal runaway propagation hazards in the current design. The only option was a clean sheet redesign of the battery. I was given a volume and ideal energy density and the rest of the design was up to me. First, I created new heat sink banks in Creo using the information gathered in the metal heat sink tests from the summer intern. After this, I made capture plates to hold the cells in place and I worked on nickel bussings for the electrical connections between the cells. Finally, I designed the test box enclosure that included sections for flame arresting materials. The battery brick design, which is the heart of the battery, promises to become the first for a manned spacecraft application to achieve greater than 180 Wh/kg. My work in redlining the DPA work instructions will also be used in selecting the cells for the battery. We had a few options of cells that would provide the necessary power output and needed to make a choice. We repeatedly charged and discharged cells for around a month until they went through 100 lifecycles. The plan is to compare the DPA results on fresh and cycled cells from each manufacturer to see if cycling introduces any differences. After the complete LLB design was approved, the parts were ordered and testing should begin the first week of December. Some of my side projects included working on the CAD data for the PLSS with EC and attending the NASA Aerospace Battery Workshop in Huntsville. I was also a member of the Tours and Lectures Committee for the USRA and Pathways interns. I coordinated Apollo Evening and was on the committee for touring KSC and seeing an Atlas 5 launch. I really enjoyed my time at JSC and I would like to continue working for NASA or another aerospace company in the future. I have worked other internships prior to this, but I think the heavy research and development focus is the best fit for me. I originally thought I would need to go to grad school to work in an environment like this, but I now see it is possible with a bachelor’s degree and hard work. I would like to go into the workforce and maybe continue my education with night classes.

Scharf, Stephanie↗

NASA NTRS2015

[Fall 2015 Abstract by Stephanie Scharf]

This Fall I worked on two different projects that culminated into a redesign of the spacesuit LLB (long life battery). I also did some work on the PLSS (personal life support system) battery with EC. My first project was redlining the work instruction for completing DPAs (destructive physical analysis) on battery cells in the Branch. The purpose of this document is to create a standard process and ensure that the data is collected in the same way, no matter who carries out the analysis. I observed three DPAs, conducted one with help, and conducted two on my own, all while taking notes on the procedure. These notes were used to write the final work instruction, which will become the Branch standard. My second project continued the work of the Summer co-op before me. I tested aluminum heat sinks for their ability to provide good thermal conduction and structural support during a thermal runaway event. The heat sinks had been designed by the previous Summer co-op, but there was not much time for testing before he left. We thus ran tests with a heater on the bottom of a trigger cell to try to drive thermal runaway and ensure that it will not propagate to adjacent cells. We also ran heat-to-vent tests in an oven to see if the assembly provided structural support and prevented sidewall rupture during thermal runaway. These tests were carried out at ESTA (Energy Systems Test Area) and are providing very promising results, indicating that safe, high performing (>180 Wh/kg) designs are possible. My main project was a redesign of the LLB (Lightweight Lithium Battery). Another summer intern had done some testing and concluded that there was no simple fix to mitigate thermal runaway propagation hazards in the existing design. The only option was a clean sheet redesign of the battery. I was given a volume and ideal energy density, and the rest of the design was up to me. First, I created new heat sink banks in CREO, using the information gathered in the metal heat sink tests from the summer intern. After this, I made capture plates to hold the cells in place, and I worked on nickel bussings for the electrical connections between the cells. Finally, I designed the test box enclosure that included sections for flame arresting materials. The battery brick design, which is the heart of the battery, promises to become the first for a manned spacecraft application to achieve > 180 Wh/kg. My work in redlining the DPA work instructions will also be used in selecting the cells for the battery. We had a few options for cells that would provide the necessary power output and needed to make a choice. We repeatedly charged and discharged cells for around a month until they went through 100 lifecycles. The plan was to compare the DPA results on fresh and cycled cells from each manufacturer to see if cycling introduces any differences. After the complete LLB design was approved, the parts were ordered and testing should begin the first week of December. Cutting open a cell for DPA After photo from oven heat-to-vent test

Scharf, Stephanie↗