Results for “code verification, physics validation” — Page 2

NASA NTRS2018

NOS3: NASA Operational Simulator for Small Satellites

The NASA Operational Simulator for Small Satellites (NOS3) is a suite of open-source software tools to aid in areas such as software development, integration & test (I&T), mission operations/training, verification and validation (V&V), and software systems check-out. NOS3 provides a software development environment, a multi-target build system, operational interface/ground software, dynamics and environment simulations, and software-based hardware models. NOS3 has just recently been open-sourced by NASA and is available for immediate use. It enables the development of flight software (FSW) early in the project life cycle when hardware availability is limited. Small satellite development suffers from extensive lead times on many of the commercial-off-the-shelf (COTS) components as well as limited funding for engineering test units (ETUs). To alleviate the need to provide a hardware test-bed for each developer/tester, NOS3 hardware models are based upon characteristic data or manufacturer's data sheets for each individual component. The NOS3 hardware models' fidelity is such that FSW executes unaware that physical hardware is not present. This allows FSW binaries to be compiled for both the simulation environment and the flight computer without changing the FSW source code. For hardware models that provide data which is dependent upon the environment and spacecraft dynamics, such as a GPS receiver or magnetometer, an open-source tool from NASA GSFC (42 Spacecraft Simulator) is used to provide the necessary data. The underlying infrastructure used to transfer messages between FSW and the hardware models can also be used to monitor, intercept, and inject messages, which has proven to be beneficial for V&V of larger missions such as James Webb Space Telescope (JWST). As hardware is selected and becomes available, drivers can be added to the NOS3 environment to enable hardware-in-the-loop (HWIL) testing. When strict time synchronization is not vital, any number of combinations of hardware components and software-based models can be tested. NOS3 was actively used for FSW development and component testing of the Simulation-to-Flight 1 (STF-1) CubeSat and the Lunar IceCube CubeSat. As NOS3 matures, hardware models have been added for common small satellite components such as GPS receivers, electrical power systems and batteries, and antenna systems.

Suder, Mark↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Pretest Simulations of a Supersonic Mixing and Combustion Validation Experiment to Assess Sensitivities

The reliance on CFD simulations to develop, design, and optimize scramjet systems (or components) has become commonplace. This reliance inevitably hinges on the ability of the computational analyst to quantify the level of confidence in their computational results. Unfortunately, nearly all the measured data available for this assessment comes from antiquated experimental datasets, or from tests that focused on the extraction of scramjet system (or component) performance. The objective of a CFD validation experiment is to quantify the predictive accuracy of one or more of the CFD physics submodels, implying that other uncertainties related to replicating the facility flow environment (e.g., knowledge of boundary conditions) must be minimized to the extent possible. This inevitably places stringent requirements on the quality and quantity of measurements taken to accurately specify inflow, outflow, and surface conditions for the CFD simulations; in addition to the measurements taken for the validation of physics submodels. This places additional demands on the experimental process above and beyond those for test article performance assessment. A recent high speed code credibility workshop series sponsored by AFRL identified a gap in existing validation data for fundamental assessments of turbulent mixing and combustion CFD closure models at scramjet engine relevant conditions. To address this gap, engineers at AFRL have designed a coaxial jet flame configuration that will be tested at two facilities (Research Cell 19 at the Air Force Research Lab, and at Purdue University). The effort described here documents pretest simulations of this validation experiment with the goal of fleshing out the extent of the facility flowpath that must be included to adequately reproduce the facility test section flow environment. The findings indicate that the flow around the support structure for the fuel injection centerbody upstream of the facility nozzle generates disturbances that persist throughout the nozzle expansion process; corrupting the azimuthal symmetry that was desired in the fuel/air mixing region of the test section. Simulations without this support structure maintained a high degree of azimuthal symmetry up until the fuel injection plane. However, even in this scenario the azimuthal symmetry was not maintained once the centerbody boundary layer transitioned to a wake flow downstream of the fuel injection plane.

CFD↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Pretest Simulations of a Supersonic Mixing and Combustion Validation Experiment to Assess Sensitivities

The reliance on CFD simulations to develop, design, and optimize scramjet systems (or components) has become commonplace. This reliance inevitably hinges on the ability of the computational analyst to quantify the level of confidence in their computational results. Unfortunately, nearly all the measured data available for this assessment comes from antiquated experimental datasets, or from tests that focused on the extraction of scramjet system (or component) performance. The objective of a CFD validation experiment is to quantify the predictive accuracy of one or more of the CFD physics submodels, implying that other uncertainties related to replicating the facility flow environment (e.g., knowledge of boundary conditions) must be minimized to the extent possible. This inevitably places stringent requirements on the quality and quantity of measurements taken to accurately specify inflow, outflow, and surface conditions for the CFD simulations; in addition to the measurements taken for the validation of physics submodels. This places additional demands on the experimental process above and beyond those for test article performance assessment. A recent high speed code credibility workshop series sponsored by AFRL identified a gap in existing validation data for fundamental assessments of turbulent mixing and combustion CFD closure models at scramjet engine relevant conditions. To address this gap, engineers at AFRL have designed a coaxial jet flame configuration that will be tested at two facilities (Research Cell 19 at the Air Force Research Lab, and at Purdue University). The effort described here documents pretest simulations of this validation experiment with the goal of fleshing out the extent of the facility flowpath that must be included to adequately reproduce the facility test section flow environment. The findings indicate that the flow around the support structure for the fuel injection centerbody upstream of the facility nozzle generates disturbances that persist throughout the nozzle expansion process; corrupting the azimuthal symmetry that was desired in the fuel/air mixing region of the test section. Simulations without this support structure maintained a high degree of azimuthal symmetry up until the fuel injection plane. However, even in this scenario the azimuthal symmetry was not maintained once the centerbody boundary layer transitioned to a wake flow downstream of the fuel injection plane.

CFD↗

NASA NTRS2015

The Suomi National Polar-Orbiting Partnership (SNPP): Continuing NASA Research and Applications

The Suomi National Polar-orbiting Partnership (SNPP) satellite was successfully launched into a polar orbit on October 28, 2011 carrying 5 remote sensing instruments designed to provide data to improve weather forecasts and to increase understanding of long-term climate change. SNPP provides operational continuity of satellite-based observations for NOAA's Polar-orbiting Operational Environmental Satellites (POES) and continues the long-term record of climate quality observations established by NASA's Earth Observing System (EOS) satellites. In the 2003 to 2011 pre-launch timeframe, NASA's SNPP Science Team assessed the adequacy of the operational Raw Data Records (RDRs), Sensor Data Records (SDRs), and Environmental Data Records (EDRs) from the SNPP instruments for use in NASA Earth Science research, examined the operational algorithms used to produce those data records, and proposed a path forward for the production of climate quality products from SNPP. In order to perform these tasks, a distributed data system, the NASA Science Data Segment (SDS), ingested RDRs, SDRs, and EDRs from the NOAA Archive and Distribution and Interface Data Processing Segments, ADS and IDPS, respectively. The SDS also obtained operational algorithms for evaluation purposes from the NOAA Government Resource for Algorithm Verification, Independent Testing and Evaluation (GRAVITE). Within the NASA SDS, five Product Evaluation and Test Elements (PEATEs) received, ingested, and stored data and performed NASA's data processing, evaluation, and analysis activities. The distributed nature of this data distribution system was established by physically housing each PEATE within one of five Climate Analysis Research Systems (CARS) located at either at a NASA or a university institution. The CARS were organized around 5 key EDRs directly in support of the following NASA Earth Science focus areas: atmospheric sounding, ocean, land, ozone, and atmospheric composition products. The PEATES provided the system level interface with members of the NASA SNPP Science Team and other science investigators within each CARS. A sixth Earth Radiation Budget CARS was established at NASA Langley Research Center (NASA LaRC) to support instrument performance, data evaluation, and analysis for the SNPP Clouds and the Earth's Radiant Budget Energy System (CERES) instrument. Following the 2011 launch of SNPP, spacecraft commissioning, and instrument activation, the NASA SNPP Science Team evaluated the operational RDRs, SDRs, and EDRs produced by the NOAA ADS and IDPS. A key part in that evaluation was the NASA Science Team's independent processing of operational RDRs and SDRs to EDRs using the latest NASA science algorithms. The NASA science evaluation was completed in the December 2012 to April 2014 timeframe with the release of a series of NASA Science Team Discipline Reports. In summary, these reports indicated that the RDRs produced by the SNPP instruments were of sufficiently high quality to be used to create data products suitable for NASA Earth System science and applications. However, the quality of the SDRs and EDRs were found to vary greatly when considering suitability for NASA science. The need for improvements in operational algorithms, adoption of different algorithmic approaches, greater monitoring of on-orbit instrument calibration, greater attention to data product validation, and data reprocessing were prominent findings in the reports. In response to these findings, NASA, in late 2013, directed the NASA SNPP Science Team to use SNPP instrument data to develop data products of sufficiently high quality to enable the continuation of EOS time series data records and to develop innovative, practical applications of SNPP data. This direction necessitated a transition of the SDS data system from its pre-launch assessment mode to one of full data processing and production. To do this, the PEATES, which served as NASA's data product testing environment during the prelaunch and early on-orbit periods, were transitioned to Science Investigator-led Processing Systems (SIPS). The distributed data architecture was maintained in this new system by locating the SIPS at the same institutions at which the CARS and PEATES were located. The SIPS acquire raw SNPP instrument Level 0 (i.e. RDR) data over the full SNPP mission from the NOAA ADS and IDPS through the NASA SDS Data Distribution and Depository Element (SD3E). The SIPS process those data into NASA Level 1, Level 2, and global, gridded Level 3 standard products using peer-reviewed algorithms provided by members of the NASA Science Team. The SIPS work with the NASA SNPP Science Team in obtaining enhanced, refined, or alternate real-time algorithms to support the capabilities of the Direct Readout Laboratory (DRL). All data products, algorithm source codes, coefficients, and auxiliary data used in product generation are archived in an assigned NASA Distributed Active Archive Center (DAAC).

remote sensing↗