Results for “Engineering manufacturable high frequency” — Page 3

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Development and Testing of Pulse Guns for Combustion Instability Testing

To test liquid rocket engines (LREs) for combustion instabilities, devices such as bombs are often used to create pressure wave disturbances. Bombs, while effective, are inherently dangerous, expensive, and difficult to procure. Over the years, pulse guns have been used as a safer and more cost-effective way to generate controlled pressure disturbances in engine chambers. In anticipation of the need for stability testing of prototype LREs at NASA Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC), a set of pulse guns have been designed, fabricated, tested, and characterized. The pulse gun program is funded by the RS-25 Engine Program managed out of MSFC and funded by NASA’s Space Launch System (SLS) through the MSFC Liquid Engines Office (LEO). A pulse gun is a simple device – like a traditional gun, it has a breech and barrel section. However, unlike a traditional gun, there is no bullet, as the purpose of the pulse gun is strictly to fire a high pressure pulse. Instead of a firing pin and primer that would normally be used in a traditional gun, an initiator is used to activate the gun powder. The initiator is a highly reliable pyrotechnic initiator. For this study, clone versions of the NASA Standard Initiator (NSI) were used. The initiator is used to ignite a pre-measured amount of gun powder loaded into the breech. When the pressure of the burnt gun powder exceeds the set point of a downstream burst disk, the disk ruptures, allowing the high pressure pulse to travel downstream through the barrel section. A ballistic pressure transducer located in the breech section is used to measure the short duration, high pressure pulse. Some configurations of the pulse gun have barrel sections that include one or more additional ballistic pressure transducers. These additional pressure measurements help track the degradation and damping of the pulse as it travels out of the barrel section. The measurements may also be used to determine the velocity of pulse. The objective of this paper is to present the different variants of this newly-developed pulse gun and characterize performance over a range of parameters. The parameters include breech diameter, barrel length, amount of gun powder used, the way the gun powder is packed, and the pressure setting of the burst disk. There are a total of six pulse guns: three with the 0.25 inch breech and three different length barrels, and three with the 0.40 inch breech and three different length barrels. For both breech sizes, the associated barrels are referred to as standard, one-port, and two-port barrels. The standard barrel has no instrumentation and is likely the barrel that will be used for engine stability testing. The one- and two-port barrels were designed specifically for pulse gun component testing to allow measurements of the magnitude and timing of the high pressure pulse as it makes its way through the pulse gun. The burst disks tested were commercially-available burst disks designed to rupture at 8,000, 16,000, and 24,000 psid. Testing was accomplished by firing the pulse gun into a test chamber pressurized with nitrogen at about 2300 psig. A total of four Model 113B23 High frequency ICP® pressure sensors (10k psi) were mounted in the test chamber, in the same plane as the pulse gun. Two of the sensors had “trimmed” adapters, and two did not. Given the symmetrical configuration of the sensors within the test chamber, different amplitudes of pressure measurements are attributed to the use of trimmed versus untrimmed adapters. The untrimmed adapters, with their narrower passages, tended to amplify the pressure amplitudes by as much as 50%. In total, 41 pulse gun tests have been conducted.Data are still being analyzed, but some trends are apparent. For example, measurements taken within the pulse gun are shown in Figures 3 and 4 for Hot-fires (HFs) # 11 and 39, respectively. Both tests were identical in that the 0.40 inch ID breech, two-port barrel, 8,000 psid burst disk, and same amount of gunpowder (6.639 grains for HF# 11, and 6.576 grains for HF# 39) were used, and the back pressure in the nitrogen test chamber was ~2300 psig. Despite keeping all these variables constant, the results from these two tests look quite different. For both tests, the first pressure peak shown in the P2111 trace within the breech is the firing of the initiator. The second peak and any subsequent peaks are from the combustion of the gunpowder. It should be noted that because the sensors are dynamic, the ~2300 psig baseline static pressure is not shown in the figures. For HF# 11, the burst disk clearly ruptured in a little over 0.1 ms from the time the initiator was fired. This is evident from the abrupt rise in pressure for P2112 followed by another abrupt rise in pressure for P2113. The sensors track the movement of the high pressure pulse through the pulse gun. For HF# 39, however, there was nearly 1 ms delay between the initiator firing and the burst disk rupturing. The only difference between these two tests was the way in which the gunpowder was packed within the breech. For HF# 11, the gunpowder was poured directly into the breech, atop the initiator, and held in place with a vegetable fiber wad appropriately sized for the barrel diameter. Once in place, the wad firmly held the gunpowder in place. For HF# 39, the gunpowder was rolled within cigarette paper with the ends of the paper twisted. The rolled gunpowder was gently pushed down into the breech, toward the initiator, and no wad was used. This method of loading the gunpowder consistently produced longer delays in the rupture of the burst disk, presumably because there was a steady, fuller burning of the gunpowder. The burst disk was rated for 8,000 psid, which means that the burst disk should not have opened until the pressure in the breech reached ~10,300 since there was ~2300 psig back pressure in the test chamber. In the case of HF# 11, the breech pressure only reached roughly 4200 psi before there was leakage either through or past the burst disk, but for HF#39, the breech pressure reached 10,600 psi prior to the burst disk opening. The temperature of the burst disk is certainly a factor in determining when the burst disk will rupture. A sharp rise in the burst disk temperature could weaken it and cause it to stray from the designed set point burst pressure. The burst disks are manufactured of Inconel to try to reduce their sensitivity to temperature, but how the burst disks perform above 900°F is not documented. All burst disks were engineered and tested by the manufacturer for ambient temperature conditions. One theory for why rolling the gunpowder in cigarette paper may produce better results is related to a more controlled temperature environment. The cigarette paper may act as a sheath that protects the burst disk from excessive temperatures during the rapid buildup of pressure in the breech. The ultimate benefit of not breeching the burst disk prematurely is shown in Figures 5 and 6, which graphs the resultant pressure pulse produced in the test chamber. For HF #11, the peak pressure on the P2123 trimmed adapter is about 270 psi, while for HF# 39 it is 343 psi, which is about 1.27 times greater in magnitude. In either case, the pressure pulse is ~20 μs in width once it reaches the test chamber. Another pressure rise about 100 μs later can be seen on the sensors located across from the pulse gun port, P2124 and P2121. These pressures are lower due to attenuation of the pressure wave as it moves across the test chamber. After the wave encounters the wall, it reflects back and forth within the chamber until it completely dissipates.

Pulse Gun↗

NASA NTRS2012

NASA Tech Briefs, September 2012

Topics covered include: Beat-to-Beat Blood Pressure Monitor; Measurement Techniques for Clock Jitter; Lightweight, Miniature Inertial Measurement System; Optical Density Analysis of X-Rays Utilizing Calibration Tooling to Estimate Thickness of Parts; Fuel Cell/Electrochemical Cell Voltage Monitor; Anomaly Detection Techniques with Real Test Data from a Spinning Turbine Engine-Like Rotor; Measuring Air Leaks into the Vacuum Space of Large Liquid Hydrogen Tanks; Antenna Calibration and Measurement Equipment; Glass Solder Approach for Robust, Low-Loss, Fiber-to-Waveguide Coupling; Lightweight Metal Matrix Composite Segmented for Manufacturing High-Precision Mirrors; Plasma Treatment to Remove Carbon from Indium UV Filters; Telerobotics Workstation (TRWS) for Deep Space Habitats; Single-Pole Double-Throw MMIC Switches for a Microwave Radiometer; On Shaft Data Acquisition System (OSDAS); ASIC Readout Circuit Architecture for Large Geiger Photodiode Arrays; Flexible Architecture for FPGAs in Embedded Systems; Polyurea-Based Aerogel Monoliths and Composites; Resin-Impregnated Carbon Ablator: A New Ablative Material for Hyperbolic Entry Speeds; Self-Cleaning Particulate Prefilter Media; Modular, Rapid Propellant Loading System/Cryogenic Testbed; Compact, Low-Force, Low-Noise Linear Actuator; Loop Heat Pipe with Thermal Control Valve as a Variable Thermal Link; Process for Measuring Over-Center Distances; Hands-Free Transcranial Color Doppler Probe; Improving Balance Function Using Low Levels of Electrical Stimulation of the Balance Organs; Developing Physiologic Models for Emergency Medical Procedures Under Microgravity; PMA-Linked Fluorescence for Rapid Detection of Viable Bacterial Endospores; Portable Intravenous Fluid Production Device for Ground Use; Adaptation of a Filter Assembly to Assess Microbial Bioburden of Pressurant Within a Propulsion System; Multiplexed Force and Deflection Sensing Shell Membranes for Robotic Manipulators; Whispering Gallery Mode Optomechanical Resonator; Vision-Aided Autonomous Landing and Ingress of Micro Aerial Vehicles; Self-Sealing Wet Chemistry Cell for Field Analysis; General MACOS Interface for Modeling and Analysis for Controlled Optical Systems; Mars Technology Rover with Arm-Mounted Percussive Coring Tool, Microimager, and Sample-Handling Encapsulation Containerization Subsystem; Fault-Tolerant, Real-Time, Multi-Core Computer System; Water Detection Based on Object Reflections; SATPLOT for Analysis of SECCHI Heliospheric Imager Data; Plug-in Plan Tool v3.0.3.1; Frequency Correction for MIRO Chirp Transformation Spectroscopy Spectrum; Nonlinear Estimation Approach to Real-Time Georegistration from Aerial Images; Optimal Force Control of Vibro-Impact Systems for Autonomous Drilling Applications; Low-Cost Telemetry System for Small/Micro Satellites; Operator Interface and Control Software for the Reconfigurable Surface System Tri-ATHLETE; and Algorithms for Determining Physical Responses of Structures Under Load.

Source record↗

NASA NTRS2004

Analysis of Electrical Characteristics of Thin Film Photovoltaic Cells

Solar energy is the most abundant form of energy in many terrestrial and extraterrestrial environments. Often in extraterrestrial environments sunlight is the only readily available form of energy. Thus the ability to efficiently harness solar energy is one of the ultimate goals in the design of space power systems. The essential component that converts solar energy into electrical energy in a solar energy based power system is the photovoltaic cell. Traditionally, photovoltaic cells are based on a single crystal silicon absorber. While silicon is a well understood technology and yields high efficiency, there are inherent disadvantages to using single crystal materials. The requirements of weight, large planar surfaces, and high manufacturing costs make large silicon cells prohibitively expensive for use in certain applications. Because of silicon s disadvantages, there is considerable ongoing research into alternative photovoltaic technologies. In particular, thin film photovoltaic technologies exhibit a promising future in space power systems. While they are less mature than silicon, the better radiation hardness, reduced weight, ease of manufacturing, low material cost, and the ability to use virtually any exposed surface as a substrate makes thin film technologies very attractive for space applications. The research group lead by Dr. Hepp has spent several years researching copper indium disulfide as an absorber material for use in thin film photovoltaic cells. While the group has succeeded in developing a single source precursor for CuInS2 as well as a unique method of aerosol assisted chemical vapor deposition, the resulting cells have not achieved adequate efficiencies. While efficiencies of 11 % have been demonstrated with CuInS2 based cells, the cells produced by this group have shown efficiencies of approximately 1 %. Thus, current research efforts are turning towards the analysis of the individual layers of these cells, as well as the junctions between them, to determine the cause of the poor yields. As a student of electrical engineering with some material science background, my role in this research is to develop techniques for analyzing the electrical characteristics of the CuInS2 cells. My first task was to design a shadow mask to be used to place molybdenum contacts under a layer of CuInS;! in order to analyze the contact resistance between the materials. In addition, I have also analyzed evaporated aluminum top contacts and have tested various methods of increasing their thicknesses in order to decrease series resistance. More recently I have worked with other members of the research group in reviving a vertical cold-wall reactor for experimentation with CuInS2 quantum dots. As part of that project, I have improved the design for a variable frequency and pulse width square wave generator to be used in driving the precursor injection process. My task throughout the remainder of my tenure is to continue to analyze and develop tools for the analysis of electrical properties of the CuInS2 cells with the ultimate goal of discovering ways to improve the efficiency of our photovoltaic cells. Traditionally, photovoltaic cells are based on a single crystal silicon absorber. While The research group lead by Dr. Hepp has spent several years researching copper indium

Kasick, Michael P.↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Development of a Ground Multi-Mission Low-Cost Optical Terminal (LCOT) for Free-Space Optical Communications

Once confined to the realm of laboratory experiments and theoretical papers, space-based laser communications (lasercomm) are on the verge of achieving mainstream status. Organizations from Facebook to NASA, and missions from cubesats to Orion are employing lasercomm to achieve gigabit communication speeds at mass and power requirements lower than that of traditional radio frequency (RF) methods. Since first demonstrating free-space optical communications services with Lunar Laser Communications Demonstration (LLCD) in 2013, NASA has invested in developing optical communications technologies and capabilities to enhancing its space communications networks. Along with evolving optical space terminals, NASA is also developing lasercomm grounds stations capable of meeting the rapidly increasing data volume demands of upcoming missions, from low-earth to lunar orbits and beyond and integrating these advanced capabilities into its Near-Space and Deep Space Networks. To meet this emerging need, the Low-Cost Optical Terminal (LCOT) project at NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC) is designing, building and validating a prototype for a flexible, multi-mission, and economical optical ground terminal that could be used as a blueprint for a global network of optical ground stations, capable of supporting a wide variety of missions. To date a major impediment to widespread adoption of laser communication has been the lack of an existing ground network infrastructure. A mission that wishes to take advantage of laser communication not only needs to invest in an optical space terminal, but it must also finance the creation of ground terminals to receive the downlink signal. This adds significant additional cost. Missions that do decide to incur the cost of financing a network of ground terminals end up building highly specialized optical receivers that are operable as receivers for that specific mission only. Significant Non-Recurring Engineering (NRE) cost is invested to build highly specialized one-of-a-kind ground terminals that go into storage after that particular mission is over. This is not an economical approach and does nothing to grow the number of optical ground stations available to future missions. In essence each mission that wants to take advantage of the benefits of lasercom has to start from scratch to provide a ground terminal network to support it. As long as this is the case, the cost for using laser communications will be too high for most missions to consider. LCOT intends to close this gap in technology by designing and developing a standard optical ground terminal design that is flexible enough to serve as a receiver for a wide range of future missions – a ground terminal that can be quickly reconfigured to receive downlinks at different wavelengths using different signal formats. Not only does LCOT have the industry-building objectives of utilizing commercial-off-the-shelf (COTS) components to the maximum extent possible, but also spurs the commercial development of other necessary lasercomm components not currently offered by industry. Finally, LCOT will give NASA scientists and engineers a facility where they can gain real-world experience with optical communications. It will give engineers a cost-effective way to try out new concepts and processes by providing the infrastructure for such testing. In this way it is hoped LCOT will serve as a stimulus for innovation in optical communications and speed its widespread adoption by future missions. The LCOT is comprised of five subsystems: Free-Space Optical, Transceiver, Amplifier, Monitor and Control, and Observatory Infrastructure. In August 2021, the LCOT team installed a 70 cm telescope, developed by Planewave Instruments that was optimized for optical communications. Free-Space Optical subsystem comprises of the telescope and its associated hardware, including a transmitter optical assembly, wide field cameras, two optical benches, and an adaptive optics subsystem. The transmit optical assembly, a unique concept design, is a cluster of four functionally independent transmit subassemblies located on the receive telescope. In addition to receiving optical signals and directing the expanded beam with high precision to the space terminal, it also performs tracking functions. The transmit optical assembly will support operations from Low Earth Orbit (LEO) through lunar and will be used as a template for industry manufacturing. The Optical Infrastructure subsystem is responsible for providing environmentally controlled shelters for LCOT equipment and various other systems. To maintain the safety and proper functionality of the telescope, a 16 ft Astrohaven clamshell dome procured which provides all-sky coverage without the need to rotate the dome. Additionally, Atmospheric Monitoring Assembly (AMA) will be part of optical infrastructure subsystem to ensure accurate performance of the LCOT. Like existing optical ground stations, LCOT will measure standard weather station parameters, infrared all sky image of cloud cover, and cloud height. LCOT, however, adds requirements for measuring night time seeing and, in the future, daytime seeing. Unlike other optical ground terminals, the LCOT is transceiver agnostic; user transceivers may be duplex transceivers, standalone receivers, or standalone transmitters with or without acquisition beacon functionality. As such, the LCOT project accommodates testing with external customer transceivers in a flexible manor, further complimenting its intended multi-mission goals. Another unique component of LCOT is the use of a new amplifier technology – the Very Large Mode Area (VLMA) amplifiers. This new technology allows LCOT to avoid the issues faced by previous laser communications ground terminals, gives users more flexibility and modular capability, and is capable of reaching an order of magnitude higher peak power than traditional High Power Optical Amplifiers (HPOA). One drawback of the VLMA HPOA approach is that the amplified light is output into free-space. The solution developed by LCOT is an optics train that couples the output of the VLMA amplifier into a short fiber for transport to the transmit telescopes with high efficiency. Like many of the LCOT components, a set of detailed manufacturing drawings have been created for the optics train to allow any machine shop with a multi-axis Computer Numerical Control (CNC) machine to fabricate the piece parts from commonly available materials. In line with the goals of LCOT, the monitor and control functions are developed as a modular and flexible system with the ability to support future hardware or algorithm changes, minimizing disruptions. A main priority of development in the Monitor and Control Subsystem (MCS) is the safety monitor system.

laser communication↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Development of a Ground Multi-mission Low Cost Optical Terminal(LCOT) for Free-Space Optical Communication

Once confined to the realm of laboratory experiments and theoretical papers, space-based laser communications (lasercomm) are on the verge of achieving mainstream status. Organizations from Facebook to NASA, and missions from cubesats to Orion are employing lasercomm to achieve gigabit communication speeds at mass and power requirements lower than that of traditional radio frequency (RF) methods. Since first demonstrating free-space optical communications services with Lunar Laser Communications Demonstration (LLCD) in 2013, NASA has invested in developing optical communications technologies and capabilities to enhancing its space communications networks. Along with evolving optical space terminals, NASA is also developing lasercomm grounds stations capable of meeting the rapidly increasing data volume demands of upcoming missions, from low-earth to lunar orbits and beyond and integrating these advanced capabilities into its Near-Space and Deep Space Networks. To meet this emerging need, the Low-Cost Optical Terminal (LCOT) project at NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC) is designing, building and validating a prototype for a flexible, multi-mission, and economical optical ground terminal that could be used as a blueprint for a global network of optical ground stations, capable of supporting a wide variety of missions. To date a major impediment to widespread adoption of laser communication has been the lack of an existing ground network infrastructure. A mission that wishes to take advantage of laser communication not only needs to invest in an optical space terminal, but it must also finance the creation of ground terminals to receive the downlink signal. This adds significant additional cost. Missions that do decide to incur the cost of financing a network of ground terminals end up building highly specialized optical receivers that are operable as receivers for that specific mission only. Significant Non-Recurring Engineering (NRE) cost is invested to build highly specialized one-of-a-kind ground terminals that go into storage after that particular mission is over. This is not an economical approach and does nothing to grow the number of optical ground stations available to future missions. In essence each mission that wants to take advantage of the benefits of lasercom has to start from scratch to provide a ground terminal network to support it. As long as this is the case, the cost for using laser communications will be too high for most missions to consider. LCOT intends to close this gap in technology by designing and developing a standard optical ground terminal design that is flexible enough to serve as a receiver for a wide range of future missions – a ground terminal that can be quickly reconfigured to receive downlinks at different wavelengths using different signal formats. Not only does LCOT have the industry-building objectives of utilizing commercial-off-the-shelf (COTS) components to the maximum extent possible, but also spurs the commercial development of other necessary lasercomm components not currently offered by industry. Finally, LCOT will give NASA scientists and engineers a facility where they can gain real-world experience with optical communications. It will give engineers a cost-effective way to try out new concepts and processes by providing the infrastructure for such testing. In this way it is hoped LCOT will serve as a stimulus for innovation in optical communications and speed its widespread adoption by future missions. The LCOT is comprised of five subsystems: Free-Space Optical, Transceiver, Amplifier, Monitor and Control, and Observatory Infrastructure. In August 2021, the LCOT team installed a 70 cm telescope, developed by Planewave Instruments that was optimized for optical communications. Free-Space Optical subsystem comprises of the telescope and its associated hardware, including a transmitter optical assembly, wide field cameras, two optical benches, and an adaptive optics subsystem. The transmit optical assembly, a unique concept design, is a cluster of four functionally independent transmit subassemblies located on the receive telescope. In addition to receiving optical signals and directing the expanded beam with high precision to the space terminal, it also performs tracking functions. The transmit optical assembly will support operations from Low Earth Orbit (LEO) through lunar and will be used as a template for industry manufacturing. The Optical Infrastructure subsystem is responsible for providing environmentally controlled shelters for LCOT equipment and various other systems. To maintain the safety and proper functionality of the telescope, a 16 ft Astrohaven clamshell dome procured which provides all-sky coverage without the need to rotate the dome. Additionally, Atmospheric Monitoring Assembly (AMA) will be part of optical infrastructure subsystem to ensure accurate performance of the LCOT. Like existing optical ground stations, LCOT will measure standard weather station parameters, infrared all sky image of cloud cover, and cloud height. LCOT, however, adds requirements for measuring night time seeing and, in the future, daytime seeing. Unlike other optical ground terminals, the LCOT is transceiver agnostic; user transceivers may be duplex transceivers, standalone receivers, or standalone transmitters with or without acquisition beacon functionality. As such, the LCOT project accommodates testing with external customer transceivers in a flexible manor, further complimenting its intended multi-mission goals. Another unique component of LCOT is the use of a new amplifier technology – the Very Large Mode Area (VLMA) amplifiers. This new technology allows LCOT to avoid the issues faced by previous laser communications ground terminals, gives users more flexibility and modular capability, and is capable of reaching an order of magnitude higher peak power than traditional High Power Optical Amplifiers (HPOA). One drawback of the VLMA HPOA approach is that the amplified light is output into free-space. The solution developed by LCOT is an optics train that couples the output of the VLMA amplifier into a short fiber for transport to the transmit telescopes with high efficiency. Like many of the LCOT components, a set of detailed manufacturing drawings have been created for the optics train to allow any machine shop with a multi-axis Computer Numerical Control (CNC) machine to fabricate the piece parts from commonly available materials. In line with the goals of LCOT, the monitor and control functions are developed as a modular and flexible system with the ability to support future hardware or algorithm changes, minimizing disruptions. A main priority of development in the Monitor and Control Subsystem (MCS) is the safety monitor system.

Haleh Safavi↗

NASA NTRS2017

Pressure-Fed LOX/LCH4 Reaction Control System for Spacecraft: Transient Modeling and Thermal Vacuum Hotfire Test Results

An integrated cryogenic liquid oxygen, liquid methane (LOX/LCH4) reaction control system (RCS) was tested at NASA Glenn Research Center's Plum Brook Station in the Spacecraft Propulsion Research Facility (B-2) under vacuum and thermal vacuum conditions. The RCS is a subsystem of the Integrated Cryogenic Propulsion Test Article (ICPTA), a pressure-fed LOX/LCH4 propulsion system composed of a single 2,800 lbf main engine, two 28 lbf RCS engines, and two 7 lbf RCS engines. Propellants are stored in four 48 inch diameter 5083 aluminum tanks that feed both the main engine and RCS engines in parallel. Helium stored cryogenically in a composite overwrapped pressure vessel (COPV) flows through a heat exchanger on the main engine before being used to pressurize the propellant tanks to a design operating pressure of 325 psi. The ICPTA is capable of simultaneous main engine and RCS operation. The RCS engines utilize a coil-on-plug (COP) ignition system designed for operation in a vacuum environment, eliminating corona discharge issues associated with a high voltage lead. There are two RCS pods on the ICPTA, with two engines on each pod. One of these two engines is a heritage flight engine from Project Morpheus. Its sea level nozzle was removed and replaced by an 85:1 nozzle machined using Inconel 718, resulting in a maximum thrust of 28 lbf under altitude conditions. The other engine is a scaled down version of the 28 lbf engine, designed to match the core and overall mixture ratios as well as other injector characteristics. This engine can produce a maximum thrust of 7 lbf with an 85:1 nozzle that was additively manufactured using Inconel 718. Both engines are film-cooled and capable of limited duration gas-gas and gas-liquid operation, as well as steady-state liquid-liquid operation. Each pod contains one of each version, such that two engines of the same thrust level can be fired as a couple on opposite pods. The RCS feed system is composed of symmetrical 3/8 inch lines that tap off of the main propellant manifold to send LOX and LCH4 outboard to the RCS pods. A Thermodynamic Vent System (TVS) is used to condition propellants at each pod by venting through an orifice and then routing the cold expansion products back through tubing that is welded along a large portion of the main RCS feed lines. Prior to final installation on the ICPTA, the RCS engines were tested in a small vacuum chamber at the Johnson Space Center (JSC) Energy Systems Test Area (ESTA) to verify functionality of the new COP ignition system and check out operation of the vacuum nozzles. After engine-level testing, the RCS engines were installed on the vehicle and a series of integrated hot-fire tests were performed at JSC consisting of various pulsing and steady-state firings as well as integrated main engine/RCS operation. The ICPTA was then integrated into the Plum Brook B-2 facility for vacuum and thermal/vacuum testing. Testing in the B-2 facility was composed of multiple thermal and pressure environments. The first set of tests were performed under ambient temperature and altitude pressure conditions. These tests consisted of a range of minimum impulse bit (MIB) pulsing sequences with low duty cycle, analogous to a coast phase in which the RCS is primarily used for station keeping. The primary goal of this sequence is to understand how propellant conditions were effected without an active TVS. In this scenario, consistent gas-gas operation is desirable since it results in a smaller MIB and more efficient propellant consumption. Multiple skin thermocouples are mounted on the feedlines, in addition to a submerged thermocouple on each commodity, in order to gather thermal data on the system. Higher duty cycle pulsing tests were then performed, analogous to an ascent or landing mission phase. The primary goal of this sequence was to examine how well the engines self-conditioned without active TVS when starting from a quiescent state. The TVS was then activated during some tests to demonstrate the capability to quickly condition the engines for higher pulsing demand scenarios. A thermocouple at the TVS outlet allows for the calculation of energy absorbed by the vented propellant. Lastly, tests with longer pulses and multiple engines firing either in sequence or simultaneously were run in order to gather transient system response data on waterhammer. Six total high-speed pressure transducers are installed on the RCS system, one sensor at the end of each propellant manifold line on the pods, and one at the tap-off location for each commodity. This will allow for the accurate characterization of waterhammer in the system under various propellant conditions and firing sequences. Other instrumentation for this test series includes nozzle throat thermocouples, chamber pressure measurement, heat soakback measurement, and tank wall plume impingement temperature measurement. The next set of tests were performed to demonstrate simultaneous main engine and RCS operation. Data from this test will be used to examine if there is any change to nominal operation of the RCS as a result of feed system interaction or other phenomenon. Some of these tests began under high vacuum conditions (target ambient pressure less than 1x10(exp -3) torr) and others began at altitude conditions. The last set of tests were performed with the B-2 cold wall active. Under these tests, many of the same low duty cycle MIB tests were repeated in order to characterize how propellant conditions changed with the lower heat leak. In this scenario the RCS manifold experiences much less heat leak, resulting in a change to how well the engines self-condition. As a result, an increase in maximum waterhammer pressures and a change in natural frequency of the system was expected due to higher density propellants. The lower heat leak should also result in a change to the MIB pulse profile, and data will be examined to understand how MIB repeatability is affected in the different operating environments. Parallel to the test efforts, a set of transient model development efforts were made to predict RCS performance. The primary effort was aimed at producing a SINDA/FLUINT model to predict propellant conditioning up to the engine inlet as a function of different environmental and operating parameters, with the goal of predicting chamber pressure, TVS performance, and propellant consumption over time. Preliminary results for this effort will be presented in comparison with test data. Additional modeling efforts were made using SINDA/FLUINT to predict waterhammer in the system since the software is capable of handling multiphase transient fluid dynamics. These results will be compared with the high-speed pressure transducer test data for validation purposes.

Atwell, Matthew J.↗

NASA NTRS2022

22” ADP Fan Rig Liners Design Report

A liner design study was conducted as part of a cooperative effort between five (5) government/industry teams that together seek to demonstrate the technology for designing and manufacturing acoustic liners that are twenty five percent (25%) more efficient than 1992 technology liners. The study emphasized teaming collaboration. The improved liners were designed by Pratt & Whitney and Boeing Airplane Company and built by Rohr Inc, and will be tested in the NASA/P& W 22-inch ADP fan rig at NASA Lewis Research Center's 9' x 15' wind tunnel. Design guidelines and decisions were made collectively during monthly design review telecons and at the formal final design review. The tools that were used to design the new improved liners were not new, but the process that was developed as part of this study that led into the evaluation and selection of the final and best liner designs is new. Until now, the liner design process as practiced by different industry teams varied greatly. Some procedures were based on empirical liner attenuation databases which could not adequately account for engine-to-engine hardwall fan noise spectral differences, while others were entirely theoretical. And regardless of which method one chose, the major difficulty was still the lack of understanding and knowledge of the actual hardwall fan source noise modal structure and farfield SPL spectra. The NASA-led effort to attempt actual measurements of the fan source noise modal structure by means of the rotating microphone array is expected to contribute significantly to the understanding of the nature of the fan tone noise modes, but the application to broadband noise is still a long way off. The new design process included consideration of the measured fan tone modes, but for the majority of the spectra a separate, systematic process was used. It is a common practice in the engine/nacelle industry that acoustic liners for new products are designed before actual measured hardwall engine far-field noise spectra are available. Target noise spectra are normally derived from existing engine noise databases with some adjustments to absolute SPLs and frequencies. This practice has been acceptable as long as the new engine was a derivative of the base engine. However, in the case of the ADP, the transition from a current engine base is too - great, and the adjustments could not adequately account for the quantum changes in SPL spectral differences. Examples were the 1992 single degree of freedom (SDOF) inlet and aft liners (designed by P&W) that would be used as the baseline liners against which the new improved liners' efficien¬cies would -be measured. As will be shown, these baseline liners have been found to be deeper than the desire optimum depths. The new liner design process begins with the selection of the target hard wall fan noise spectra. These spectra were obtained by scaling up (5.91 scale factor) the measured hardwall fan spectral data from the 22” ADP fan rig. Next, the modal energy contents for each 1/3-octave band center frequency of these hardwall fan noise spectra are estimated. (Within each 1/3-octave band center frequency, the model energy distribution approximation is for both tone and broadband noise). For the inlet noise, P&W uses a derivative of the NASA Lewis (Ed Rice's) method of classifying; and grouping propagating modes by their cutoff ratios. The next step is to assign energy level to each group of modes having the same cutoff ratio. In Ed Rice's model, the modes were grouped according to ten (10) cutoff ratio intervals with center values located at 1.026, 1.085, 1.155, 1.24, 1.35, 1.49, 1.69, 2.0, and 4.47 (with equal number of modes in each interval). The modes were assumed to have equal energy. P&W’s model expands the cutoff ratio-mode grouping into two hundred (200) smaller cutoff ratio intervals with center values located f1".'m 1.003 to 11.5 in 199 increasing incremental intervals. Next, P&W's model uses a "2-parameter" normal distribution as a template to assign energy levels to these 200 pre-determined cutoff ratio values (for each 1/3-octave band center frequency). In the past, P&W had conducted an extensive study to determine what "2-parameter" values are appropriate for fullscale inlet liners, and had developed a set of twenty-four (24) "2-pararneter" values (i.e. one for each 1/3-octave frequency band) that when used in Ed Rice's Inlet Attenuation Prediction Method produced predicted liner attenuations that closely matched measured liner attenuations from several P&W's engines. In the absence of actual measured tone and broadband modal data from the 22" ADP rig, the process will use P&W's proprietary set of "2-parameter" values for this liner design study. For the aft noise, Boeing uses a modal energy approximation that the "transport energy" of each propagating mode is equal. This approximation is almost the same as the equal energy per mode approximation, except for modes that are near cutoff. Boeing's model forces these modes to have lower energy levels. Both P&W and Boeing agreed that the "transport energy" approximation should work well for the ADP aft fan noise which appears to be dominated by broadband noise. The design process then proceeds to calculate the optimum liner impedances for each frequency in both the inlet and the aft. These optimum impedances represent the target impedances that the designed liners should have. Liners with impedances matching the optimum impedances at all frequencies are "ideal" liners. These ideal liners are theoretically the best liners. Unfortunately, it has been showed that it is impossible to design and build such ideal liners. The next best liners are ones that have impedances matching the optimum impedances over some frequency range (not all frequencies as for the ideal). This is accomplished by the use of "frequency weightings". Several of P&W's and Boeing's existing computer decks were used for optimizing and matching the designed liner impedances to the target optimum values (with the various frequency weightings specified). The optimization produces liner candidates with predicted liner impedances and descriptions of their physical liner characteristics. These candidate liner impedances are then used to predict their spectral attenuation characteristics which are then used together with the target hardwall fan noise spectra to determine the resulting treated noise spectra and PNLT values. Further optimization around the selected candidate designs yield final designs that are best in PNLT attenuations. Use of the optimization decks allowed a large number of liner candidates to be screened in a relatively short period of time. This design process is systematic and is efficient. The new inlet SDOF liner design obtained from the improved process was predicted to be 34% more effective (per unit area) than the 1992 baseline inlet liner. This inlet liner design is a 112 rayl wovenwiremesh facesheet over a 0.312-inch deep honeycomb core. The new aft SDOF liner design was predicted to be 52% more efficient than the aft baseline liner. The new aft SDOF liner is "segmented" with a shallower liner on the core cowl (inner duct wall) and a deeper liner on the fan cowl (outer duct wall). The shallower liner is a 70.6 rayl woven-wiremesh facesheet over a 0.141-inch deep honeycomb core. The deeper liner is a 68 rayl woven-wiremesh facesheet over a 0.309-inch deep honeycomb core. All liner dimensions are for the 22-inch model-scale ADP fan rig liners. The selected advanced liners are "segmented" double-layer (DDOF) liners for the inlet and aft locations. Also, for the inlet, a bulk liner with ceramic foam for wider broadband noise absorption was also selected. Triple-layer liner designs were not considered since the model scaled liners ( 1/5. 91) were dimensionally too small to be built correctly, and irrin earlier concept study, Boeing found a triple-layer to have only very small benefits over a double-layer. The inlet DDOF liner was predicted to be 83% more effective than the baseline. The inlet DDOF design is a 78 rayl facesheet over a 0.080 top cavity depth, a 68 rayl septum and a 0.227-inch bottom cavity depth. The inlet bulk liner is a 60 rayl facesheet over a 0.33-inch deep honeycomb filled with high temperature (HTP) ceramic foam with a density of 4.8 lb/cu.ft and a flow resistivity of 167 rayl/cm. The inlet bulk liner was predicted to be 83% more effective than the baseline liner. The aft DDOF liners are segmented with a shallower liner on the core cowl and a deeper liner on the fan cowl. The shallow DDOF liner is a 49.8 rayl facesheet over a 0.093-inch top cavity depth, a septum of 88.2 rayls over a 0.181-inch bottom cavity depth. The deep DDOF liner is a 12.9 rayl facesheet over a 0.140-inch top cavity depth, a septum of 53.1 ray ls over a 0.258-inch botom cavity depth. The segmented aft DDOF liners were predicted to be 86% more efficient than the baseline liner.

turbofan acoustic treatment↗