Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “facility capabilities”

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 55 records · Page 3

NASA Ames Thermophysics Ground Test Facilities Supporting Future Planetary Atmospheric Entry

A review of the current facility capabilities for testing Thermal Protection Systems and quantifying their entry environments at NASA Ames Research Center is presented based on the expected targets of interest to the Planetary Science and Astrobiology communities. While the operational capabilities of these facilities are generally considered sufficient for supporting future missions to targets of interest, expanded ground test capabilities such as larger sample sizes, flight-relevant gas mixtures, dusty environments, and flight-relevant shear/pressure combinations would reduce future entry vehicle design uncertainties and applied margins. These reduced uncertainties may translate into reduced entry vehicle masses, increased robustness, and decreased operational risks during entry phases for science missions. Expanded ground test capabilities would also offer the ability to study material failure modes in environments even more representative of flight than are currently achievable. A list of desired future test capabilities is presented along with suggestions of possible methods of achieving each. The main recommendation of this paper is the undertaking of a detailed study of the benefits and associated costs of each of these expanded capabilities to determine the best future path.

arc jet↗

Reflective Focused Schlieren System Improved for Use in 10- by 10-Foot Supersonic Wind Tunnel

The reflective focused schlieren system that was developed for use in the 10- by 10-Foot Supersonic Wind Tunnel (10x10 SWT) at the NASA Glenn Research Center at Lewis Field as part of the Unstart Test Program was improved this past year. In April 1999, the development and use of the system was presented at the Supersonic Tunnel Association International in Bedford, England. A focused schlieren system is similar to a standard schlieren system in that shock waves coming from an object in supersonic flow can be seen using a standard video camera. Unlike the standard schlieren system, which produces a two-dimensional schlieren image, a focused schlieren system can produce a threedimensional image. The preceding drawing shows the components of the reflective focused schlieren system being developed for use in the 10x10 SWT. Although the system worked well for the Unstart Test Program, it was not sensitive enough to be classified as a facility capability. Therefore, a program was implemented to improve the sensitivity of the reflective focused schlieren system so that it could be a facility capability for Glenn's 10x10 SWT. Several techniques were implemented to increase the sensitivity and to improve the overall operation of the system. These included refinement of the source grid, improvement in the cutoff grid production, improvement of the source grid and cutoff grid alignment, installation of an improved light source, and incorporation of an image-enhancing system. These changes are being implemented with the system set up in the laboratory. A checkout test of the system is planned in the 10x10 SWT in March 2000. Of these techniques, the most developed is the refinement of the source grid. The original system had a pattern of -in. by -in. squares on -in. centers (distance between the center points of adjacent squares). This gave a ratio of light to dark (reflective to nonreflective area) of 3:1. The recommended ratio is 1:1. In order to accomplish this, a pattern of -in.-diameter dots on 3/8-in. centers was developed. Preliminary tests with this pattern showed an increase in system sensitivity and image clarity. Further testing and refinement are scheduled. The former and improved dot patterns are shown. The use of glass plates to produce the cutoff grid improved the cutoff grid's quality and helped to align it with the source grid. The cutoff grid, which is the negative of the source grid, is made by exposing photography film (or glass plates) to the proper light while it is installed in the focused schlieren system. The exposed film or plate is removed from the system and then developed as a photograph negative. Because the glass plates are rigid, they eliminate the risk of distortion when the negative is reinstalled in the system and realigned with the source grid.

Williamson, Gary Scott↗

Mars Sample Return (MSR) Sample Receiving Facility (SRF) Assessment Study (MSAS)

NASA, in partnership with the European Space Agency (ESA), is seeking to return Martian geological and atmospheric samples to Earth for scientific study in the early 2030s. Due to the possibility that the samples could contain extraterrestrial life, Mars Sample Return (MSR) is classified as a Category V: Restricted Earth Return mission by the NASA Planetary Protection Office. As a result of this classification, a MSR Sample Receiving Facility (SRF) must not only provide a pristine environment to ensure samples are protected from terrestrial contamination for scientific investigations, it must also provide high-containment (biosafety level 4 [BSL-4]-equivalence) to isolate the samples from Earth’s biosphere until the samples are deemed safe for release and/or sterilized. The nominal utilization period for a SRF is anticipated to be 2-5 years and is intended to enable curation activities, biohazard assessment, select early science activities, and the rapid release of samples to the scientific community. However, to account for possible delays in schedule or the identification of extant life, this anticipated period of time must be flexible to accommodate schedule extensions and contingency plans. Due to requirements for high-level biological containment and cleanliness, a traditional receiving/curation facility cannot be utilized for MSR. Therefore, beginning in 2022, NASA Johnson Space Center is performing a MSR SRF Assessment Study (MSAS) to investigate the most optimal facility modality for a MSR SRF, as well as start to define programmatic early estimate of costs and schedules before the initial design phase begins. NASA is partnering with industry contractors (architectural and engineering firms with BSL-4 and cleanroom technology experience, as well as other contracted infrastructure and construction specialists) along with selected experts from NASA, ESA, existing U.S. BSL-4 facilities, and other U.S. government agencies, to carry out the assessment study. The MSAS should also aid in the future refinement of the science requirements (e.g., contamination control, equipment accommodations) before site-specific design would commence. As part of the MSAS, NASA is planning to assess an array of possibilities for a MSR SRF. One of the main considerations is the facility modality and whether an existing BSL-4 facility can be utilized (for some or all functions); or, if new constructure would be required, would a traditional fixed facility or a modular facility the best choice. MSAS will also investigate the ability of the modalities to accommodate two different facility capability endmembers: 1) a minimal facility focusing on biohazard assessment and curation tasks with a small footprint, and 2) an enhanced facility with additional capabilities to enable expedited processing and the completion of time-sensitive and (some) sterilization-sensitive science. The assessment is intended to generate information that will inform the selection of facility modalities for high-level conceptual design development. While the assessment study will focus on SRF requirements for accommodating curation, science, and sample safety assessment infrastructure, it will also consider an array of other factors, such as ease of access for international users, decommissioning, repurposing, future sale or lease following MSR’s use of the facility, and uncontained preparatory laboratory spaces. Upon completion of the study, the preferred modality and refined requirements would be utilized for site-specific design but will not be finalized until NASA’s completion of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) process.

A.D. Harrington↗

Leveraging the High Flux Isotope Reactor for nuclear fuel development: a review of experiments, facilities, and capabilities

Materials testing reactors (MTRs) have been used to develop in-core nuclear fuels and materials since the outset of the nuclear power industry. However, the closure of prominent MTRs worldwide and protracted construction timelines for new facilities have increased reliance on existing infrastructure for near-term irradiation testing needs. One facility that can support these needs is the High Flux Isotope Reactor (HFIR) at Oak Ridge National Laboratory. HFIR boasts the highest steady-state neutron flux in the Western Hemisphere and, among other roles, has been used to rapidly administer high fluences on fuels and materials for fission and fusion reactor applications. This paper reviews HFIR facilities and infrastructure, fuel-bearing irradiation experiments conducted in HFIR, and select nonfueled experiments that demonstrate advanced techniques transferable to fuels experiments. Collectively, these examples underscore HFIR's potential role as a nuclear fuels testbed supporting both the existing reactor fleet and advanced reactor fuel development.

Fuel qualification↗

Current Test Capabilities of NASA Langley’s Arc-Heated Scramjet Test Facility

The Arc-Heated Scramjet Test Facility at NASA Langley Research Center has demonstrated itself repeatedly as a key contributor to fundamental hypersonic research and scramjet engine technology development in the Mach 4.7 to 8 range. Since its inception in the 1970’s, the facility has hosted numerous scramjet engine configurations that explored the performance and operability of airframe-integrated hydrogen-fueled scramjet flow path concepts, successfully maturing both analysis tools and design technique and methodology for hypersonic propulsion. Contributions to major programs include extensive tests of the hydrogen-fueled NASP and Hyper-X scramjet engines, and the hydrocarbon-fueled HIFiRE Flight 2 scramjet flow path, in addition to fundamental in-house research. The facility capabilities have expanded to include direct-connect flow path support, gaseous hydrocarbon fuels, dynamic trajectory simulation and extension of flight simulation down to Mach 2.2. The low-Mach upgrades include increased air flow rate and controls capability and two new low-Mach nozzles (Mach 2.2 and 3.5). The facility recently completed verification of the new operational range through successful envelope expansion tests with the Mach 2.2 nozzle. With these new modifications, the operating envelope for the facility is now Mach 2.2 – 8.0(+), with a demonstrated dynamic pressure simulation of 2000 psf at the low end, and margin available for even more. Lastly, a continuous run time of over 5 minutes has been demonstrated, indicating that run time is limited only by test hardware or back-pressure requirements. This paper will provide a detailed description of these previously unreported upgrades and expanded simulation capabilities.

Hypersonic↗

Mechanical Components Branch Test Facilities and Capabilities

The Mechanical Components Branch at NASA Glenn Research Center formulates, conducts, and manages research focused on propulsion systems for both present and advanced aeronautical and space vehicles. The branch is comprised of research teams that perform basic research in three areas: mechanical drives, aerospace seals, and space mechanisms. Each team has unique facilities for testing aerospace hardware and concepts. This report presents an overview of the Mechanical Components Branch test facilities.

Oswald, Fred B.↗

Does the Health Maintenance Facility Provide Speciality Capabilities?

The Health Maintenance Facility (HMF) is capable of handling all minor illnesses, most moderate illnesses, and some major illnesses on board a space station. Its primary purpose should be to treat problems that are mission threatening, not life threatening. The HMF will have greater medical capabilities than those currently on Navy submarines. Much of the discussion in this document focuses on the possibilities of treating specific medical conditions on board a space station. The HMF will be limited to caring for critically ill patients for a few days, so a crew return vehicle will be important.

Boyce, Joey↗

Hydrogen Fuel Capability Added to Combustor Flametube Rig

Facility capabilities have been expanded at Test Cell 23, Research Combustor Lab (RCL23) at the NASA Glenn Research Center, with a new gaseous hydrogen fuel system. The purpose of this facility is to test a variety of fuel nozzle and flameholder hardware configurations for use in aircraft combustors. Previously, this facility only had jet fuel available to perform these various combustor flametube tests. The new hydrogen fuel system will support the testing and development of aircraft combustors with zero carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions. Research information generated from this test rig includes combustor emissions and performance data via gas sampling probes and emissions measuring equipment. The new gaseous hydrogen system is being supplied from a 70 000-standard-ft3 tube trailer at flow rates up to 0.05 lb/s (maximum). The hydrogen supply pressure is regulated, and the flow is controlled with a -in. remotely operated globe valve. Both a calibrated subsonic venturi and a coriolis mass flowmeter are used to measure flow. Safety concerns required the placement of all hydrogen connections within purge boxes, each of which contains a small nitrogen flow that is vented past a hydrogen detector. If any hydrogen leaks occur, the hydrogen detectors alert the operators and automatically safe the facility. Facility upgrades and modifications were also performed on other fluids systems, including the nitrogen gas, cooling water, and air systems. RCL23 can provide nonvitiated heated air to the research combustor, up to 350 psig at 1200 F and 3.0 lb/s. Significant modernization of the facility control systems and the data acquisition systems was completed. A flexible control architecture was installed that allows quick changes of research configurations. The labor-intensive hardware interface has been removed and changed to a software-based system. In addition, the operation of this facility has been greatly enhanced with new software programming and graphic operator interface stations. Glenn s RCL23 facility systems were successfully checked out in the spring of 2002, and hydrogen combustor research testing began in the summer of 2002.

Frankenfield, Bruce J.↗

Survey of Facilities for Testing Photovoltaics

42-page report describes facilities capable of testing complete photovoltaic systems, subsystems, or components. Compilation includes facilities and capabilities of five field centers of national photovoltaics program, two state-operated agencies, and five private testing laboratories.

Weaver, R. W.↗

Aircraft Landing Dynamics Facility - A unique facility with new capabilities

The Aircraft Landing Dynamics Facility (ALDF), formerly called the Landing Loads Track, is described. The paper gives a historical overview of the original NASA Langley Research Center Landing Loads Track and discusses the unique features of this national test facility. Comparisons are made between the original track characteristics and the new capabilities of the Aircraft Landing Dynamics Facility following the recently completed facility update. Details of the new propulsion and arresting gear systems are presented along with the novel features of the new high-speed carriage. The data acquisition system is described and the paper concludes with a review of future test programs.

Davis, P. A.↗

Space exploration initiative candidate nuclear propulsion test facilities

One-page descriptions for approximately 200 existing government, university, and industry facilities which may be available in the future to support SEI nuclear propulsion technology development and test program requirements are provided. To facilitate use of the information, the candidate facilities are listed both by location (Index L) and by Facility Type (Index FT). The included one-page descriptions provide a brief narrative description of facility capability, suggest potential uses for each facility, and designate a point of contact for additional information that may be needed in the future. The Nuclear Propulsion Office at NASA Lewis presently plans to maintain, expand, and update this information periodically for use by NASA, DOE, and DOD personnel involved in planning various phases of the SEI Nuclear Propulsion Project.

Baldwin, Darrell↗

Atmospheric Reentry Materials and Structures Evaluation Facility (ARMSEF). User Test Planning Guide

Test process, milestones and inputs are unknowns to first-time users of the ARMSEF. The User Test Planning Guide aids in establishing expectations for both NASA and non-NASA facility customers. The potential audience for this guide includes both internal and commercial spaceflight hardware/software developers. It is intended to assist their test engineering personnel in test planning and execution. Material covered includes a roadmap of the test process, roles and responsibilities of facility and user, major milestones, facility capabilities, and inputs required by the facility. Samples of deliverables, test article interfaces, and inputs necessary to define test scope, cost, and schedule are included as an appendix to the guide.

Source record↗

Structures Test Laboratory (STL). User Test Planning Guide

Test process, milestones and inputs are unknowns to first-time users of the STL. The User Test Planning Guide aids in establishing expectations for both NASA and non-NASA facility customers. The potential audience for this guide includes both internal and commercial spaceflight hardware/software developers. It is intended to assist their test engineering personnel in test planning and execution. Material covered includes a roadmap of the test process, roles and responsibilities of facility and user, major milestones, facility capabilities, and inputs required by the facility. Samples of deliverables, test article interfaces, and inputs necessary to define test scope, cost, and schedule are included as an appendix to the guide.

Zipay, John J.↗

Radiant Heat Test Facility (RHTF): User Test Planning Guide

Test process, milestones and inputs are unknowns to first-time users of the RHTF. The User Test Planning Guide aids in establishing expectations for both NASA and non- NASA facility customers. The potential audience for this guide includes both internal and commercial spaceflight hardware/software developers. It is intended to assist their test engineering personnel in test planning and execution. Material covered includes a roadmap of the test process, roles and responsibilities of facility and user, major milestones, facility capabilities, and inputs required by the facility. Samples of deliverables, test article interfaces, and inputs necessary to define test scope, cost, and schedule are included as an appendix to the guide.

DelPapa, Steven↗

Materials and Nondestructive Evaluation Laboratoriers: User Test Planning Guide

The Materials and Nondestructive Evaluation Laboratory process, milestones and inputs are unknowns to first-time users. The Materials and Nondestructive Evaluation Laboratory Planning Guide aids in establishing expectations for both NASA and non- NASA facility customers. The potential audience for this guide includes both internal and commercial spaceflight hardware developers. It is intended to assist their project engineering personnel in materials analysis planning and execution. Material covered includes a roadmap of the analysis process, roles and responsibilities of facility and user, major milestones, facility capabilities, and inputs required by the facility. Samples of deliverables, products, and inputs necessary to define scope of analysis, cost, and schedule are included as an appendix to the guide.

Schaschl, Leslie↗

Manufacturing Planning Guide

Manufacturing process, milestones and inputs are unknowns to first-time users of the manufacturing facilities. The Manufacturing Planning Guide aids in establishing expectations for both NASA and non-NASA facility customers. The potential audience for this guide includes both internal and commercial spaceflight hardware/software developers. It is intended to assist their project engineering personnel in manufacturing planning and execution. Material covered includes a roadmap of the manufacturing process, roles and responsibilities of facility and user, major milestones, facility capabilities, and inputs required by the facility. Samples of deliverables, products, and inputs necessary to define test scope, cost, and schedule are included as an appendix to the guide.

Waid, Michael↗

Antenna Test Facility (ATF): User Test Planning Guide

Test process, milestones and inputs are unknowns to first-time users of the ATF. The User Test Planning Guide aids in establishing expectations for both NASA and non-NASA facility customers. The potential audience for this guide includes both internal and commercial spaceflight hardware/software developers. It is intended to assist their test engineering personnel in test planning and execution. Material covered includes a roadmap of the test process, roles and responsibilities of facility and user, major milestones, facility capabilities, and inputs required by the facility. Samples of deliverables, test article interfaces, and inputs necessary to define test scope, cost, and schedule are included as an appendix to the guide.

Lin, Greg↗