SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Negative Sequence”

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.

42 records · Page 3

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

NASA NTRS2005

Chapter 12 - Flight Envelope

The term "flight envelope" is used to refer to the boundaries of aircraft loading and flight conditions within which operation of the aircraft is satisfactory, and beyond which some aspect becomes unacceptable. This flight envelope represents, in fact, the limiting conditions arising from a matrix of inter-related flight envelopes covering the appropriate variables. Thus, for each loading (i.e., external stores configuration and its associated range of weight and center of gravity (c.g.) position) and aircraft configuration (i.e., position of undercarriage (u/c), flaps, slats, etc.), the envelopes of airspeed versus altitude, airspeed versus load factor, angle of attack versus angle of sideslip, etc., must be investigated to establish the limits within which all aspects such as handling qualities, engine behavior, structural loads, etc., remain acceptable. Flight testing of new or derivative aircraft models is carried out with the initial purpose of defining a flight envelope which is, first and foremost, safe and secondarily, which enables the effective use of the vehicle for its intended purpose. Flight testing occurs only after numerous reviews of the design and review of results from ground tests and predictions of flight characteristics in such areas as structures, aerodynamics, stability and control, flight controls (particularly fly-by-wire control systems, propulsion, etc.). Accordingly, opening and expanding the envelope is a task that must be approached cautiously, systematically, and with coordination and cooperation of the many disciplines involved in the design and test of an airplane. (Sections 8 and 10 cover test planning and safety of flight considerations, respectively). The fundamental tenet in establishing a flight envelope via flight test is risk reduction. This is reflected in the typical sequence of events leading to initial flight test - design reviews (both hardware and software), then ground test involving singular disciplines (windtunnel tests for aerodynamics, structurally loading the wing/fuselage/nacelle on a ground test article with loads anticipated to occur in flight, flight control system control law checkout, propulsion test cell runs and/or flying test bed tests, etc.), and then ground tests involving multi-disciplines (See Section 9). Only after these have been accomplished will an initial, limited, low-risk, flight envelope be established. The limited envelope will typically be in the middle of the projected final flight envelope. Subsequent flight tests will then be devoted to expanding the initial envelope by operating the airplane at increasing ranges - representing increasing risk - of engine operation, airspeeds both fast and slow, altitude, load factor both above and below 1g, centers of gravity (fore and aft), and with system/subsystem failures. Whether flight tests are to define a flight envelope on a new model airplane with the attendant new airframe, new engine(s), and new subsystems (hydraulics, pressurization, etc.), or on an airplane involving only a few of these areas such as new engines in an old airframe, the fundamental approach to establishing an envelope is the same.

H Walgemoed↗

NASA NTRS1964

Copper-Wire-Card Detectors

Card Design - Each copper-wire-card detector consisted of a winding of fine wire mounted to a 1.45- by 7 .00-inch rectangular card. Two wire sizes were used - 2-mil and 3-mil (fourteen 2-mil cards and thirty-two 3-mil cards). The total exposed effective area was about 1.2 square feet (0.11 square meters). A sketch of a detector is shown in figure X-1. These detectors are similar to the detectors flown on previous satellites. Quadrant Design - The 36 cards are arranged in four groups of 12 cards each with four pairs of 3-mil cards in parallel and four single 2-mil cards in parallel. Each group is mounted on a fiber-glass support that can readily be removed from the payload for repairs or replacements with appropriate spares. Individual cards can be replaced readily if necessary. The assembly of the quadrants is shown in figure II-2. Temperature-Balance Experiment - The grids for the temperature-balance experiment were wound with insulated wire. The thermal balance of such a winding has been examined under conditions approximating flight environment. One card of 3-mil wire with a thermistor attached was enclosed in a bell jar and exposed to the sun after evacuation. External radiation was reduced by shading the bell jar except for a window which allowed the sun's rays to strike the winding. The temperature of the thermistor was recorded at intervals. Figure X-2 shows that the temperature does not rise beyond 65° C in 20 minutes of continuous exposure to the sun. Complementary tests made by Dr. Roger E. Gaumer of Lockheed Aircraft Corp. give a ratio of absorptivity to emissivity of 1 for this type of enamel insulated wire. Compensation for Resistance Changes - Temperatures at the wire-card surfaces were expected to extend from -10° C to a maximum of 60° C. Since copper has a thermal coefficient of resistance of 0.33 percent per °C, the resistance of the wire would change 22 percent and a compensator had to be provided. A 100-ohm thermistor with a negative coefficient of -3-9 percent per °C was selected, wired in parallel with a 300-ohm fixed resistor and installed in series with each 2-mil card and with each pair of 3-mil cards. The effective resistance of 2-mil and 3-mil compensated cards is shown in figure X-3 for various temperatures and compared with the resistance of uncompensated copper. The increase in resistance from 20° C to 60° C is 12 ohms or 2.7 percent. Below 20° C the effective resistance also increases and the curve is similar to that obtained for high temperatures.

Detector↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Performance Assessment of LunaNet’s Augmented Forward Signal

LunaNet provides a common set of interoperable specifications for communication and position, navigation and time (PNT) services and interfaces soon to be implemented in lunar vicinity. The LunaNet Interoperability Specification (LNIS) provides the design for the GNSS-like Augmented Forward Signal (AFS), which enables orbiting and surface users in lunar space, such as Artemis, to estimate their position, velocity, and time. The specification of AFS defines two orthogonal signal components on a single carrier: the in-phase component (AFS-I), a lower-chip-rate data channel tailored for applications where low SWaP (Size, Weight, and Power) is critical (e.g., IoT devices or search and rescue), and the quadrature component (AFS-Q), a high-chip-rate data-less pilot signal for high-precision, robust lunar navigation and positioning applications. An initial description of AFS was provided in LNIS 2023, with initial analysis results shown in Dafesh 2024 and Dafesh 2025, and the current signal in space description provided in LNIS 2025. As part of NASA's Lunar Communication Relay and Navigation Systems (LCRNS) project, this work expands upon the initial analysis results and proposes a new expanded set of AFS-Q spreading codes that exceed the cross-correlation and autocorrelation sidelobe performance of L1C and other GNSS signals, while providing additional expansion capabilities for future service satellites. A set of 420 codes was selected from a Weil-based code derived from the prime number 10247, which is larger than the 10243 prime number used to derive BeiDou’s B1C Weil sequences. Both the initial set of 210 codes and the expanded set of 420 codes are shown to provide the best cross-correlation of any 10230-chip satellite navigation codes. The performance is demonstrated for hierarchical sets of spreading codes optimized and organized in sets of 30 codes. The work also compares LunaNet’s AFS to terrestrial GNSS signals in terms of acquisition, tracking, and data demodulation performance. Performance is evaluated for receivers that only track the 1.023 MCPS data channel spreading code for low SWaP IoT use cases, as well as for receivers that track both the 1.023 MCPS data channel and the 5.115 MCPS pilot channel spreading code for high-performance use cases. Performance is assessed in the presence of interference and thermal noise. The analysis is performed in terms of expected operating conditions on the lunar surface. Several unique flexibility aspects of the augmented forward signal are described, including the use of the Q channel’s secondary and tertiary codes to enable variable coherent integrations during acquisition. This is compared to GNSS signals such as L5/E5 and MBOC in terms of achievable processing gain for interference mitigation versus acquisition complexity. The work details acquisition and tracking techniques used to optimally acquire and track the primary, secondary, and tertiary codes on the Q channel, as well as acquisition of the I channel spreading code. Acquisition of the 8 ms, Q channel spreading code is also compared to joint acquisition of the I and Q channel primary codes in noise and interference environments

LCRNS↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Performance Assessment of LunaNet’s Augmented Forward Signal

LunaNet provides a common set of interoperable specifications for communication and position, navigation and time (PNT) services and interfaces soon to be implemented in lunar vicinity. The LunaNet Interoperability Specification (LNIS) provides the design for the GNSS-like Augmented Forward Signal (AFS), which enables orbiting and surface users in lunar space, such as Artemis, to estimate their position, velocity, and time. The specification of AFS defines two orthogonal signal components on a single carrier: the in-phase component (AFS-I), a lower-chip-rate data channel tailored for applications where low SWaP (Size, Weight, and Power) is critical (e.g., IoT devices or search and rescue), and the quadrature component (AFS-Q), a high-chip-rate data-less pilot signal for high-precision, robust lunar navigation and positioning applications. An initial description of AFS was provided in [1], with initial analysis results shown in [2] and [3] and the current signal in space description provided in [4]. As part of NASA's Lunar Communication Relay and Navigation Systems (LCRNS) project, this work expands upon the initial analysis results and proposes a new expanded set of AFS-Q spreading codes that exceed the cross-correlation and autocorrelation sidelobe performance of L1C and other GNSS signals, while providing additional expansion capabilities for future provider satellites. A set of 420 codes was selected from a Weil-based code derived from the prime number 10247, which is larger than the 10243 prime number used to derive Beidou’s B1C Weil sequences. Both the initial set of 210 codes and the expanded set of 420 codes are shown to provide the best cross-correlation of any 10230-chip satellite navigation codes. The performance is demonstrated for hierarchical sets of spreading codes optimized and organized in sets of 30 codes. The new codes were developed using an optimization approach and correlation methodology described in [5]. The work also compares LunaNet’s AFS to terrestrial GNSS signals in terms of acquisition, tracking, and data demodulation performance. Performance is evaluated for receivers that only track the 1.023 MCPS data channel spreading code for low SWaP IoT use cases, as well as for receivers that track both the 1.023 MCPS data channel and the 5.115 MCPS pilot channel spreading code for high-performance use cases. Performance is assessed in the presence of interference and thermal noise. The analysis is performed in terms of expected operating conditions on the lunar surface. Several unique flexibility aspects of the augmented forward signal are described, including the use of the Q channel’s secondary and tertiary codes to enable variable coherent integrations during acquisition. This is compared to GNSS signals such as L5/E5 and MBOC in terms of achievable processing gain for interference mitigation versus acquisition complexity. The work details acquisition and tracking techniques used to optimally acquire and track the primary, secondary, and tertiary codes on the Q channel, as well as acquisition of the I channel spreading code. Acquisition of the 8 ms Q channel spreading code is also compared to joint acquisition of the I and Q channel primary codes in noise and interference environments.

LCRNS↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Phosphate Textural Diversity in CI Chondrites and C-Type Asteroids

Introduction: Apatite, Ca 5 (PO 4 ) 3 (CL/F/OH-), is a ubiquitous phosphate found throughout the solar system, including the most primitive solids, CI-chondrites [1,2] and related samples of carbonaceous asteroids Ryugu [3] and Bennu [4], returned by JAXA’s Hayabusa2 and NASA’s OSIRIS-REx missions, respectively. Apatite in these primitive solids is found as individual grains or mineral clusters and has been inferred to form from the hydrothermal sequence during cooling of their respective parent body or bodies. To better understand the formation history and reworking of these early phosphates we have undertaken a highly coordinated study of phosphate microstructures, geochemistry and U/Pb geochronology from a suite of CI meteorites and carbonaceous asteroid samples. These data have identified novel phosphate microstructures and complex relationships across a suite of apatite grains from the early solar system, indicating multiple episodes of growth and modification on the CI parent body(ies). Methods: Samples of CI chondrites, Alais, Ivuna, Orgueil, Oued Chebeika 002, Yamato (Y) 82162, Y980115, Y980134, and two chips of Hayabusa2 Ryugu particles (A0262 and C0263) have been acquired for analysis. The bulk texture of the samples were first scanned by X-ray Computed Tomography (XCT) using the Nikon XT H 320 within the XFACT facility at NASA JSC or the Xradia 620 Versa at the UTCT facility. Based on the identification of petrofabrics or features of interest from the XCT data, samples were chipped, oriented, potted in epoxy and thick sections were prepared. After anhydrously polishing the samples with silicon carbide and dry diamond powder down to 1 µm, the samples were ion polished using a Hitachi ArBlade. Energy dispersive Xray spectrometry (EDS) maps were collected to ID phosphates of interest using a JEOL 7900F SEM. The internal microstructures of identified phosphates were then mapped by electron backscatter diffraction (EBSD) using the JEOL 7900F. Based on the EDS and EBSD data, domains of interest were targeted for quantitative chemical analyses using a JEOL 8530 EPMA. Subsequently, in situ U-Pb and 207 Pb/ 206 Pb ages will be collected using a Cameca ims1290 secondary ion mass spectrometer at UCLA across a range of microstructures. Results: Apatite grains are ubiquitous throughout the CI chondrites and carbonaceous asteroid materials, found as individual grains, disseminated clusters or grain aggregates. Apatite grains are associated with serpentine, magnet-ite, and/or carbonate. Of particular interest, we have identified individual and aggregate polycrystalline grains ex-hibiting an internal ‘honeycomb’ texture (Fig. 1). Some of these grains appear overprinted by subsequent alteration while others remain unaltered. Apatite halogen sites are dominated by the missing component, assumed to be OH, and F, comparable to published values from Bennu, Ryugu and CM-chondrites [3-5]. However, the Yamato CI-like meteorites show a broader range of Cl values, and one grain from Alais is dominated by CL. Summary: Apatite growth features indicate a protracted and complex growth history, consistent with precipitation from an evolving fluid system. The ‘honeycomb’ texture identified in some CI meteorites is, to the best of our knowledge, the first report of such a microstructure in meteoritic phosphate. The microtextures and zoning will guide subsequent age analyses, to better constrain the formation and reworking of phosphate in CI(-like) materials. Acknowledgments: We thank the National Institute of Polar Research, Japan for samples of Y82162, 980115 and 980134 meteorites, ASU’s Buseck Center for Meteorite Studies for samples of Ivuna and Alais meteorites, and JAXA curation for chips of Ryugu material. This work was funded by NASA ROSES LARS grant 24-LARS24-0014. References: [1] Morlok et al., 2016, GCA 70:5371-5394. [2] Alfin g et al., 2019, Geochemistry 79:125532. [3] Nakamura et al. (2022) Science 379:1-15. [4] Seifert et al. (2026) MAPS 61:504-521. [5] Piralla et al. (2021) MAPS 56:809-828.

CI chondrites↗

NASA NTRS2010

Ares I-X Ground Diagnostic Prototype

Automating prelaunch diagnostics for launch vehicles offers three potential benefits. First, it potentially improves safety by detecting faults that might otherwise have been missed so that they can be corrected before launch. Second, it potentially reduces launch delays by more quickly diagnosing the cause of anomalies that occur during prelaunch processing. Reducing launch delays will be critical to the success of NASA's planned future missions that require in-orbit rendezvous. Third, it potentially reduces costs by reducing both launch delays and the number of people needed to monitor the prelaunch process. NASA is currently developing the Ares I launch vehicle to bring the Orion capsule and its crew of four astronauts to low-earth orbit on their way to the moon. Ares I-X will be the first unmanned test flight of Ares I. It is scheduled to launch on October 27, 2009. The Ares I-X Ground Diagnostic Prototype is a prototype ground diagnostic system that will provide anomaly detection, fault detection, fault isolation, and diagnostics for the Ares I-X first-stage thrust vector control (TVC) and for the associated ground hydraulics while it is in the Vehicle Assembly Building (VAB) at John F. Kennedy Space Center (KSC) and on the launch pad. It will serve as a prototype for a future operational ground diagnostic system for Ares I. The prototype combines three existing diagnostic tools. The first tool, TEAMS (Testability Engineering and Maintenance System), is a model-based tool that is commercially produced by Qualtech Systems, Inc. It uses a qualitative model of failure propagation to perform fault isolation and diagnostics. We adapted an existing TEAMS model of the TVC to use for diagnostics and developed a TEAMS model of the ground hydraulics. The second tool, Spacecraft Health Inference Engine (SHINE), is a rule-based expert system developed at the NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory. We developed SHINE rules for fault detection and mode identification. The prototype uses the outputs of SHINE as inputs to TEAMS. The third tool, the Inductive Monitoring System (IMS), is an anomaly detection tool developed at NASA Ames Research Center and is currently used to monitor the International Space Station Control Moment Gyroscopes. IMS automatically "learns" a model of historical nominal data in the form of a set of clusters and signals an alarm when new data fails to match this model. IMS offers the potential to detect faults that have not been modeled. The three tools have been integrated and deployed to Hangar AE at KSC where they interface with live data from the Ares I-X vehicle and from the ground hydraulics. The outputs of the tools are displayed on a console in Hangar AE, one of the locations from which the Ares I-X launch will be monitored. In a previous publication, we discussed how we selected the three tools based primarily on their ability to be certified for human spaceflight and described our plans for the prototype. This abstract is due October 23, 2009, and the Ares I-X launch is currently scheduled for October 27, 2009. If this abstract is accepted, then the full paper will describe how the prototype performed before the launch. It will include an analysis of the prototype's accuracy, including false-positive rates, false-negative rates, and receiver operating characteristics (ROC) curves. It will also include a description of the prototype's computational requirements, including CPU usage, main memory usage, and disk usage. If the prototype detects any faults during the prelaunch period then the paper will include a description of those faults. Similarly, if the prototype has any false alarms then the paper will describe them and will attempt to explain their causes. Also, the paper will describe the three tools and how they are used in the prototype. It will include a description of the TEAMS models of the Ares I-X first-stage TVC and associated ground hydraulics and how we adapted the TVC model for use in real-time diagnostics. It will describe the SHINE rules used for fault detection and mode identification and the software architecture that interfaces the various pieces of existing software that are part of the prototype to one another. It will describe how we selected the sensor values and commands that were used to train the IMS model and how we optimized the number of clusters in the IMS model. It will include screen shots of the graphical display that we developed in Java to display the outputs of the three tools. Because Ares I-X data was not yet available to us while we were developing the prototype, we used historical data from the Space Shuttle's Solid Rocket Booster (SRB) TVCs and the associated ground hydraulics to train IMS and to test the entire prototype. Because most of the failure modes that we modeled have never occurred in the Shuttle we inserted simulated failures into the Shuttle data. The Ares I-X first-stage TVC is very similar to the SRB TVC and we expect the data will be very similar. After the launch, we will determine how similar the data actually is and report how any differences in the data affected the diagnostic accuracy of the prototype. Finally, although we did not get the prototype certified, we designed it in a way that it could be certified and wrote a preliminary certification plan. The paper will include a brief summary of how we considered the need for certification in the design of the prototype, how we tested the prototype before deploying it to Hangar AE, and how we would propose to get it certified if it were deployed as an operational system. The paper will conclude with a description of some of the challenges we faced and some of the lessons learned in developing and deploying the prototype.

International Space Station↗