Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “vibration testing random vibration force limiting”

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.

32 records · Page 2

New Approaches in Force-Limited Vibration Testing of Flight Hardware

To qualify flight hardware for random vibration environments the following methods are used to limit the loads in the aerospace industry: (1) Response limiting and notching (2) Simple TDOF model (3) Semi-empirical force limits (4) Apparent mass, etc. and (5) Impedance method. In all these methods attempts are made to remove conservatism due to the mismatch in impedances between the test and the flight configurations of the hardware that are being qualified. Assumption is the hardware interfaces have correlated responses. A new method that takes into account the un-correlated hardware interface responses are described in this presentation.

Random Vibration↗

Vibration and Acoustic Testing for Mars Micromission Spacecraft

The objective of the Mars Micromission program being managed by the Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) for NASA is to develop a common spacecraft that can carry telecommunications equipment and a variety of science payloads for exploration of Mars. The spacecraft will be capable of carrying robot landers and rovers, cameras, probes, balloons, gliders or aircraft, and telecommunications equipment to Mars at much lower cost than recent NASA Mars missions. The lightweight spacecraft (about 220 Kg mass) will be launched in a cooperative venture with CNES as a TWIN auxiliary payload on the Ariane 5 launch vehicle. Two or more Mars Micromission launches are planned for each Mars launch opportunity, which occur every 26 months. The Mars launch window for the first mission is November 1, 2002 through April 2003, which is planned to be a Mars airplane technology demonstration mission to coincide with the 100 year anniversary of the Kittyhawk flight. Several subsequent launches will create a telecommunications network orbiting Mars, which will provide for continuous communication with lenders and rovers on the Martian surface. Dedicated science payload flights to Mars are slated to start in 2005. This new cheaper and faster approach to Mars exploration calls for innovative approaches to the qualification of the Mars Micromission spacecraft for the Ariane 5 launch vibration and acoustic environments. JPL has in recent years implemented new approaches to spacecraft testing that may be effectively applied to the Mars Micromission. These include 1) force limited vibration testing, 2) combined loads, vibration and modal testing, and 3) direct acoustic testing. JPL has performed nearly 200 force limited vibration tests in the past 9 years; several of the tests were on spacecraft and large instruments, including the Cassini and Deep Space One spacecraft. Force limiting, which measures and limits the spacecraft base reaction force using triaxial force gages sandwiched between the spacecraft and the test fixture, alleviates the severe overtest at spacecraft resonances inherent in rigid fixture vibration tests. It has the distinct advantage over response limiting that the method is not dependent on the accuracy of a detailed dynamic model of the spacecraft. Combined loads, vibration, and modal testing were recently performed on the QuikSCAT spacecraft. The combined tests were performed in a single test setup per axis on a vibration shaker, reducing test time by a factor of two or three. Force gages were employed to measure the true c.g. acceleration of the spacecraft for structural loads verification using a sine burst test, to automatically notch random vibration test input accelerations at spacecraft resonances based on predetermined force limits, and to directly measure modal masses in a base drive modal test. In addition to these combined tests on the shaker, the QuikSCAT spacecraft was subjected to a direct field acoustic test by surrounding the spacecraft, still on the vibration shaker, with rock concert type acoustic speakers. Since the spacecraft contractor does not have a reverberant field acoustic test facility, performing a direct field acoustic test -saved the program nearly two weeks schedule time that would have been required for packing / unpacking and shipping of the spacecraft. This paper discusses the rationale behind and advantages of the above test approaches and provides examples of their actual implementation and comparisons to flight data. The applicability of the test approaches to Mars Micromission spacecraft qualification is discussed.

Kern, Dennis L.↗

CM-2 Environmental / Modal Testing of Spacehab Racks

Combined environmental/modal vibration testing has been implemented at the NASA Glenn Research Center's Structural Dynamics Laboratory. The benefits of combined vibration testing are that it facilitates test article modal characterization and vibration qualification testing. The Combustion Module-2 (CM-2) is a space experiment that launches on Shuttle mission STS 107 in the SPACEHAB Research Double Module. The CM-2 flight hardware is integrated into a SPACEHAB single and double rack. CM-2 rack level combined vibration testing was recently completed on a shaker table to characterize the structure's modal response and verify the random vibration response. Control accelerometers and limit force gauges, located between the fixture and rack interface, were used to verify the input excitation. Results of the testing were used to verify the loads and environments for flight on the Shuttle.

McNelis, Mark E.↗

CM-2 Environmental/Modal Testing of SPACEHAB Racks

Combined environmental/modal vibration testing has been implemented at the NASA Glenn Research Center's Structural Dynamics Laboratory. The benefits of combined vibration testing are that it facilitates test article modal characterization and vibration qualification testing. The Combustion Module-2 (CM-2) is a space experiment that will launch on shuttle mission STS-107 in the SPACEHAB Research Double Module. The CM-2 flight hardware is integrated into a SPACEHAB single and double rack. CM-2 rack-level combined vibration testing was recently completed on a shaker table to characterize the structure's modal response and verify the random vibration response. Control accelerometers and limit force gauges, located between the fixture and rack interface, were used to verify the input excitation. Results of the testing were used to verify the loads and environments for flight on the shuttles.

McNelis, Mark E.↗

Application of the Bootstrap Statistical Method in Deriving Vibroacoustic Specifications

This paper discusses the Bootstrap Method for specification of vibroacoustic test specifications. Vibroacoustic test specifications are necessary to properly accept or qualify a spacecraft and its components for the expected acoustic, random vibration and shock environments seen on an expendable launch vehicle. Traditionally, NASA and the U.S. Air Force have employed methods of Normal Tolerance Limits to derive these test levels based upon the amount of data available, and the probability and confidence levels desired. The Normal Tolerance Limit method contains inherent assumptions about the distribution of the data. The Bootstrap is a distribution-free statistical subsampling method which uses the measured data themselves to establish estimates of statistical measures of random sources. This is achieved through the computation of large numbers of Bootstrap replicates of a data measure of interest and the use of these replicates to derive test levels consistent with the probability and confidence desired. The comparison of the results of these two methods is illustrated via an example utilizing actual spacecraft vibroacoustic data.

Hughes, William O.↗

Force limited vibration testing of Cassini spacecraft cosmic dust analyser

The testing of the cosmic dust analyzer for the Cassini mission using the force limited method in order to avoid overtesting and to verify the ability of the specimen design to withstand the loads during launch and cruise, is reported on. In order to implement the method, force gages, fixtures and a test controller are required and the test specimen is subjected to sine vibration, random vibration and half sine shock. The practical aspects of the use of the force limited method are described. Due to the high loads and the weak design of the structural element, a notching method is used which provides the possibility of limiting the excitation to flight expected levels.

Jahn, Heiko↗

Force limits measured on a space shuttle flight

The random vibration forces between a payload and the sidewall of the space shuttle have been measured in flight and compared with the force specifications used in ground vibration tests. The flight data are in agreement with a semi-empirical method, which is widely used to predict vibration test force limits.

force limiting vibration tests↗

Cassini Spacecraft and Instrument Force Limited Vibration Testing

During the past three years, force limiting has been used in the vibrations tests of most of the instruments and major equipment on the CASSINI spacecraft, as well as in the axial random vibration test of the complete flight spacecraft in November of 1996.

vibration↗

Global Ecosystem Dynamics Investigation (GEDI) Structural Verification Unit (SVU) Vibration Test

This presentation describes the vibration test campaign of the Structural Verification Unit for the Global Ecosystem Dynamics Investigation (GEDI) mission The Structural Verification Unit test campaign served multiple purposes including the qualification of the instrument primary structure, verification of the structure's stiffness, Aperture Control Mechanism assembly level verification, and validation of the control approach for protoflight instrument vibration testing. Testing included three axes of sine burst, random, and sine vibration excitation. This test sequence required a high number of response instrumentation sensors that included tri-axial accelerometers and tri-axial force gauges. Multiple response limiting methods that included acceleration, force, and moment measurements were used to ensure the safety of the flight hardware. The lessons and specific test details learned on the structural verification unit test campaign will reduce test risks for the upcoming instrument-level vibration tests.

Structural Verification Unit↗

A New Approach in Force-Limited Vibration Testing of Flight Hardware

The force-limited vibration test approaches discussed in NASA-7004C were developed to reduce overtesting associated with base shake vibration tests of aerospace hardware where the interface responses are excited coherently. This handbook outlines several different methods of specifying the force limits. The rationale for force limiting is based on the disparity between the impedances of typical aerospace mounting structures and the large impedances of vibration test shakers when the interfaces in general are coherently excited. Among these approaches, the semi-empirical method is presently the most widely used method to derive the force limits. The inclusion of the incoherent excitation of the aerospace structures at mounting interfaces has not been accounted for in the past and provides the basis for more realistic force limits for qualifying the hardware using shaker testing. In this paper current methods for defining the force limiting specifications discussed in the NASA handbook are reviewed using data from a series of acoustic and vibration tests. A new approach based on considering the incoherent excitation of the structural mounting interfaces using acoustic test data is also discussed. It is believed that the new approach provides much more realistic force limits that may further remove conservatism inherent in shaker vibration testing not accounted for by methods discussed in the NASA handbook. A discussion on using FEM/BEM analysis to obtain realistic force limits for flight hardware is provided.

force limiting responses↗

Benefits of Spacecraft Level Vibration Testing

NASA-HDBK-7008 Spacecraft Level Dynamic Environments Testing discusses the approaches, benefits, dangers, and recommended practices for spacecraft level dynamic environments testing, including vibration testing. This paper discusses in additional detail the benefits and actual experiences of vibration testing spacecraft for NASA Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC) and Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) flight projects. JPL and GSFC have both similarities and differences in their spacecraft level vibration test approach: JPL uses a random vibration input and a frequency range usually starting at 5 Hz and extending to as high as 250 Hz. GSFC uses a sine sweep vibration input and a frequency range usually starting at 5 Hz and extending only to the limits of the coupled loads analysis (typically 50 to 60 Hz). However, both JPL and GSFC use force limiting to realistically notch spacecraft resonances and response (acceleration) limiting as necessary to protect spacecraft structure and hardware from exceeding design strength capabilities. Despite GSFC and JPL differences in spacecraft level vibration test approaches, both have uncovered a significant number of spacecraft design and workmanship anomalies in vibration tests. This paper will give an overview of JPL and GSFC spacecraft vibration testing approaches and provide a detailed description of spacecraft anomalies revealed.

Spacecraft Vibration Test↗

Analysis of dual control vibration testing

Analysis of dual control vibration testing is conducted using a two-degree-of-freedom system to represent the interaction between a vibration mode of a test item and a mode of a mounting structure. The results indicate that exact dual control based on specification of the source free acceleration and blocked force is strictly valid only if phase is taken into account. However, extremal dual control without phase alleviates overtesting without risk of undertesting, when the limit acceleration and force specifications are chosen to envelope the coupled system results. Several approaches to deriving appropriate force specifications are explored. Random vibration parametric results from the literature are used to estimate the limit force between coupled oscillators with different source and load masses.

Scharton, Terry D.↗

Motion and force controlled vibration testing

A technique for controlling both the input acceleration and force in vibration tests is proposed to alleviate the overtesting risks and the problems associated with response limiting in conventional vibration tests of aerospace hardware. Previous research on impedance and force controlled vibration tests is reviewed and a simple equation governing the dual control of acceleration and force is derived. A practical method for implementing the dual control technique in random vibration tests has been demonstrated in JPL's environmental test facility using a conventional digital controller operating in the extremal mode. The dual control technique provides appropriate real-time notching of the input acceleration and a corresponding reduction of the test item response at resonances. Issues concerning the need for force and acceleration phase information, the adequacy of specifying the blocked force, and the derivation of the total force for multipoint supports are discussed.

Scharton, Terry D.↗

On the Contribution of Turbulent Boundary Layers to the Noise Inside a Fuselage

The following report deals in preliminary fashion with the transmission through a fuselage of random noise generated on the fuselage skin by a turbulent boundary layer. The concept of attenuation is abandoned and instead the problem is formulated as a sequence of two linear couplings: the turbulent boundary layer fluctuations excite the fuselage skin in lateral vibrations and the skin vibrations induce sound inside the fuselage. The techniques used are those required to determine the response of linear systems to random forcing functions of several variables. A certain degree of idealization has been resorted to. Thus the boundary layer is assumed locally homogeneous, the fuselage skin is assumed flat, unlined and free from axial loads and the 'cabin' air is bounded only by the vibrating plate so that only outgoing waves are considered. Some of the details of the statistical description have been simplified in order to reveal the basic features of the problem. The results, strictly applicable only to the limiting case of thin boundary layers, show that the sound pressure intensity is proportional to the square of the free stream density, the square of cabin air density and inversely proportional to the first power of the damping constant and to the second power of the plate density. The dependence on free stream velocity and boundary layer thickness cannot be given in general without a detailed knowledge of the characteristics of the pressure fluctuations in the boundary layer (in particular the frequency spectrum). For a flat spectrum the noise intensity depends on the fifth power of the velocity and the first power of the boundary layer thickness. This suggests that boundary layer removal is probably not an economical means for decreasing cabin noise. In general, the analysis presented here only reduces the determination of cabin noise intensity to the measurement of the effect of any one of our variables (free stream velocity, boundary layer thickness, plate thickness or the characteristic velocity of propagation in the plate). The plate generates noise by vibrating in resonance over a wide range of frequencies and increasing the damping constant is consequently an effective method of decreasing noise generation. One of the main features of the results is that the relevant quantities upon which noise intensity depends are non-dimensional numbers in which boundary layer and plate properties enter as ratios. This is taken as an indication that in testing models of structures for boundary layer noise it is not sufficient to duplicate in the model the structural characteristics of the fuselage. One must match properly the characteristics of the exicitng pressure fluctuations to that of the structure.

Corcos, G. M.↗