Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “sensitivity analysis”

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 451 records · Page 25
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2019

The LUVOIR Extreme Coronagraph for Living Planetary Systems (ECLIPS) II. Performance Evaluation, Aberration Sensitivity Analysis and Exoplanet Detection Simulations

Future space missions such as the Large UV-Optical-Infrared Surveyor (LUVOIR) and the Habitable Exoplanet Observatory (HabEx) require coronagraphs with active wavefront control to suppress starlight to discover and characterize habitable exoplanets. The Extreme Coronagraph for Living Planetary Systems (ECLIPS) is the coronagraph instrument on the LUVOIR Surveyor mission concept, an 8–15m segmented telescope. ECLIPS is split into three channels: UV (200 to 400 nm), optical (400 nm to 850 nm), and NIR (850 nm to 2.0 microns), with each channel equipped with two deformable mirrors for wavefront control, a suite of coronagraph masks, a low-order/out-of-band wavefront sensor, and separate science imagers and spectrographs. The Apodized Pupil Lyot Coronagraph (APLC) and the Vector Vortex Coronagraph (VVC) are the baselined mask technologies for ECLIPS to enable the required 10 -10 contrast for observations in the habitable zones of nearby stars. Their performance depends on active wavefront sensing and control, as well as metrology subsystems to compensate for aberrations induced by segment errors (piston and tip/tilt, among others), secondary mirror misalignment, and global low-order wavefront errors. Here we present the latest results of the simulation of these effects for the two technologies and discuss the achieved contrast for exoplanet detection and characterization after closed-loop wavefront estimation and control algorithms have been applied. Finally, we show simulated observations using high-fidelity spatial and spectral input models of complete planetary systems generated with the Haystacks code framework.

Roser Juanola-Parramon↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Transfer Function Models and Sensitivity Analysis

In many situations, real or induced flaws such as tight cracks with known morphology cannot be manufactured in part configuration specimens or in real parts. Typically, fatigue cracks are manufactured in simple geometry specimens such as flat plates, dog-bone shaped flat or round specimens. If a nondestructive evaluation (NDE) technique is required to provide a reliably detectable target flaw size denoted as α_(90/95) for induced flaws in real part, then the direct method for qualifying the NDE procedure is to use the appropriate induced flaw specimens and perform probability of detection analysis using these flaws. This can be described as direct POD demonstration testing, which may follow guidelines of MIL-HDBK-1823. This paper considers a case, where induced flaws are not available in part configuration specimens. Therefore, a direct POD demonstration study cannot be undertaken. In such situation, general practice for NDE procedure qualification is to use artificial flaws in simple geometry and part configuration specimens, and induced flaws in the chosen simple geometry specimens. Signal response data is taken on all sets of artificial and induced flaws. NDE procedure testing on induced flaw in simple geometry specimen is called NDE demonstration testing here. A transfer function NDE procedure qualification method for forward case calculates predicted induced flaw size for demonstration using a chosen target flaw size. Another transfer function method for inverse case, calculates the target flaw size using a given demonstration flaw size. The transfer function analysis assumes relationship of artificial flaw signal responses in real parts and simple geometry specimens; and induced flaw responses in simple geometry specimens to induced flaws in real parts. The signal response transfer relationships model should be defined before transfer function models can be devised. Assuming that the signal response transfer relationships model is valid, forward and inverse case transfer function methods have been devised. Because of lack of signal response data from induced flaws in real part, 90/95% POD/confidence (P/C) cannot be demonstrated directly. However, the transfer function method may be assessed using simulation to evaluate whether the resulting target flaw size or demonstration flaw size provides adequate confidence to the assumed signal response transfer relationships model. Therefore, the transfer function approach is a risk assessment approach. Both the signal response transfer relationships model and the transfer function model are important in managing risk in results provided by the transfer function NDE technique qualification or assessment. The signal response transfer relationships model needs to be validated with empirical data and then transfer function model needs to be validated for desired P/C on case-by-case basis.

Nondestructive evaluation↗