Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Evolved Structures Generative Design”

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.

59 records · Page 4
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2006

Automated Antenna Design with Evolutionary Algorithms

Current methods of designing and optimizing antennas by hand are time and labor intensive, and limit complexity. Evolutionary design techniques can overcome these limitations by searching the design space and automatically finding effective solutions. In recent years, evolutionary algorithms have shown great promise in finding practical solutions in large, poorly understood design spaces. In particular, spacecraft antenna design has proven tractable to evolutionary design techniques. Researchers have been investigating evolutionary antenna design and optimization since the early 1990s, and the field has grown in recent years as computer speed has increased and electromagnetic simulators have improved. Two requirements-compliant antennas, one for ST5 and another for TDRS-C, have been automatically designed by evolutionary algorithms. The ST5 antenna is slated to fly this year, and a TDRS-C phased array element has been fabricated and tested. Such automated evolutionary design is enabled by medium-to-high quality simulators and fast modern computers to evaluate computer-generated designs. Evolutionary algorithms automate cut-and-try engineering, substituting automated search though millions of potential designs for intelligent search by engineers through a much smaller number of designs. For evolutionary design, the engineer chooses the evolutionary technique, parameters and the basic form of the antenna, e.g., single wire for ST5 and crossed-element Yagi for TDRS-C. Evolutionary algorithms then search for optimal configurations in the space defined by the engineer. NASA's Space Technology 5 (ST5) mission will launch three small spacecraft to test innovative concepts and technologies. Advanced evolutionary algorithms were used to automatically design antennas for ST5. The combination of wide beamwidth for a circularly-polarized wave and wide impedance bandwidth made for a challenging antenna design problem. From past experience in designing wire antennas, we chose to constrain the evolutionary design to a monopole wire antenna. The results of the runs produced requirements-compliant antennas that were subsequently fabricated and tested. The evolved antenna has a number of advantages with regard to power consumption, fabrication time and complexity, and performance. Lower power requirements result from achieving high gain across a wider range of elevation angles, thus allowing a broader range of angles over which maximum data throughput can be achieved. Since the evolved antenna does not require a phasing circuit, less design and fabrication work is required. In terms of overall work, the evolved antenna required approximately three person-months to design and fabricate whereas the conventional antenna required about five. Furthermore, when the mission was modified and new orbital parameters selected, a redesign of the antenna to new requirements was required. The evolutionary system was rapidly modified and a new antenna evolved in a few weeks. The evolved antenna was shown to be compliant to the ST5 mission requirements. It has an unusual organic looking structure, one that expert antenna designers would not likely produce. This antenna has been tested, baselined and is scheduled to fly this year. In addition to the ST5 antenna, our laboratory has evolved an S-band phased array antenna element design that meets the requirements for NASA's TDRS-C communications satellite scheduled for launch early next decade. A combination of fairly broad bandwidth, high efficiency and circular polarization at high gain made for another challenging design problem. We chose to constrain the evolutionary design to a crossed-element Yagi antenna. The specification called for two types of elements, one for receive only and one for transmit/receive. We were able to evolve a single element design that meets both specifications thereby simplifying the antenna and reducing testing and integration costs. The highest performance antenna found using a getic algorithm and stochastic hill-climbing has been fabricated and tested. Laboratory results correspond well with simulation. Aerospace component design is an expensive and important step in space development. Evolutionary design can make a significant contribution wherever sufficiently fast, accurate and capable software simulators are available. We have demonstrated successful real-world design in the spacecraft antenna domain; and there is good reason to believe that these results could be replicated in other design spaces.

Hornby, Gregory S.↗
NASA NTRS1996

An Open Computing Infrastructure that Facilitates Integrated Product and Process Development from a Decision-Based Perspective

Computer applications for design have evolved rapidly over the past several decades, and significant payoffs are being achieved by organizations through reductions in design cycle times. These applications are overwhelmed by the requirements imposed during complex, open engineering systems design. Organizations are faced with a number of different methodologies, numerous legacy disciplinary tools, and a very large amount of data. Yet they are also faced with few interdisciplinary tools for design collaboration or methods for achieving the revolutionary product designs required to maintain a competitive advantage in the future. These organizations are looking for a software infrastructure that integrates current corporate design practices with newer simulation and solution techniques. Such an infrastructure must be robust to changes in both corporate needs and enabling technologies. In addition, this infrastructure must be user-friendly, modular and scalable. This need is the motivation for the research described in this dissertation. The research is focused on the development of an open computing infrastructure that facilitates product and process design. In addition, this research explicitly deals with human interactions during design through a model that focuses on the role of a designer as that of decision-maker. The research perspective here is taken from that of design as a discipline with a focus on Decision-Based Design, Theory of Languages, Information Science, and Integration Technology. Given this background, a Model of IPPD is developed and implemented along the lines of a traditional experimental procedure: with the steps of establishing context, formalizing a theory, building an apparatus, conducting an experiment, reviewing results, and providing recommendations. Based on this Model, Design Processes and Specification can be explored in a structured and implementable architecture. An architecture for exploring design called DREAMS (Developing Robust Engineering Analysis Models and Specifications) has been developed which supports the activities of both meta-design and actual design execution. This is accomplished through a systematic process which is comprised of the stages of Formulation, Translation, and Evaluation. During this process, elements from a Design Specification are integrated into Design Processes. In addition, a software infrastructure was developed and is called IMAGE (Intelligent Multidisciplinary Aircraft Generation Environment). This represents a virtual apparatus in the Design Experiment conducted in this research. IMAGE is an innovative architecture because it explicitly supports design-related activities. This is accomplished through a GUI driven and Agent-based implementation of DREAMS. A HSCT design has been adopted from the Framework for Interdisciplinary Design Optimization (FIDO) and is implemented in IMAGE. This problem shows how Design Processes and Specification interact in a design system. In addition, the problem utilizes two different solution models concurrently: optimal and satisfying. The satisfying model allows for more design flexibility and allows a designer to maintain design freedom. As a result of following this experimental procedure, this infrastructure is an open system that it is robust to changes in both corporate needs and computer technologies. The development of this infrastructure leads to a number of significant intellectual contributions: 1) A new approach to implementing IPPD with the aid of a computer; 2) A formal Design Experiment; 3) A combined Process and Specification architecture that is language-based; 4) An infrastructure for exploring design; 5) An integration strategy for implementing computer resources; and 6) A seamless modeling language. The need for these contributions is emphasized by the demand by industry and government agencies for the development of these technologies.

Hale, Mark A.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Trajectory Engineering with Modular Patched Conics for Entry Systems and TPS (TEMPEST)

Brief Presenter Biography (35 word limit): Bohdan Wesely is an Aerospace Engineer in the Entry Systems and Technology Division at Ames. He has worked on a variety of projects for NASA including integrated TPS (thermal protection system) flight hardware deliveries and testing services for commercial partners. Introduction: TEMPEST is a new trajectory analysis framework that is designed to fill the gap between dedicated flight mechanics tools and aerothermal and TPS sizing tools. The project started as an SJSU master’s thesis and has since evolved into a general conceptual design tool capable of studying a wide variety of entry problems. Development is ongoing in the Entry Systems and Technology Division at NASA ARC. Why TEMPEST: Space missions involving entry into a planetary atmosphere involve a series of unique requirements across multiple disciplines. Whether it is traditional entry descent and landing (EDL), or aerocapture, the vehicle must navigate to its target landing location or orbit state, and the TPS must protect the payload during entry. The design process typically involves iterative handoffs between various flight mechanics, flow solver, and material response level tools. During the early conceptual phase, a wide variety of feasible trajectories are simulated in a Monte Carlo scenario which broadly satisfy the mission or landing requirements. Next, computational fluid dynamics (CFD), direct simulation Monte Carlo (DSMC), and other flow solver analyses are performed at various key trajectory points to generate an aero-database, heating and TPS design requirements also emerge at this stage. At this point, with updated aerodynamics from the various flow solvers, trajectories can be re-run, this in turn can change the required freestream conditions for the CFD tools, and as a project progresses, these analyses converge, and uncertainty is reduced. However, there is always a “hand-off” occurring between two inherently coupled phenomena. Analysis Description: One of the goals with TEMPEST is to use a variety of first principles estimation methods coupled with an atmosphere model to predict vehicle aerothermodynamics across the entire flight regime while propagating a 3 or 6 degree of freedom (DoF) trajectory. Aerodynamics methods include modified Newtonian, Maxwell and Cercignani- Lampis-Lord (CLL) for continuum, transitional, and free molecular flow regimes. Aerothermodynamics include boundary layer and reference enthalpy methods, and Mutation++ for non-equilibrium chemistry modeling. TEMPEST is also capable of stitching multiple trajectory segments together to study mission scenarios like multi-pass aerocapture and aero-gravity assists. Most of the program is implemented in MATLAB using modern system objects, it relies on several C++ shared libraries for supporting tools like Gmsh, the Global Reference Atmospheric Model (GRAM), and Mutation++. The various first principles aerothermal estimation methods are discretized across either a structured axisymmetric panel mesh or an unstructured tri-mesh generated from an open-source tool such as Gmsh, this allows solutions on the same mesh to be compared across tools such as CB-Aero. CFD Coupling. A physics-aware, gaussian process CFD anchoring scheme is proposed to adjust the various first principles methods as a CFD database is populated. One goal for this anchoring module is to inform the project where CFD should be run. Full knowledge of the entire trajectory, atmosphere, and aerothermodynamics allows for easier identification of high sensitivity areas and uncertainty quantification. While the first principles effects are well known and proven accurate in existing tools such as CB- Aero and Cart3D, a physics aware CFD anchoring scheme increases tool credibility across a project lifecycle. Material Response Modeling. Correct TPS sizing is critical for optimizing mass for science payloads and ensuring mission success. The process typically involves a thermal analysis along the trajectory with surface heating environments as a boundary condition. Several design constraints are maximum bondline temperature and maximum recession with various margining techniques. The material response tool FIAT, developed out of NASA Ames, is currently being integrated into the TEMPEST environment. TPS recession, shape change, mass loss, and mass property alteration are all factors that can perturb an entry trajectory. For missions like Mars 2020, recession was minimal and was safely handled separately as a post process. For missions such as Jupiter Galileo with a high TPS mass fraction or asteroid entries, recession plays a major role. The proposed fully coupled scheme is to use an epoch-based approach where the trajectory integration is halted after a recession threshold, the energy balance and FIAT are solved at each panel, the mesh, aerodynamics, and mass properties are updated, and the trajectory continues. Several computational tradeoffs have been made during the development of TEMPEST to limit the cost of a single trajectory and preserve its utility as a conceptual, rapid iteration tool. Conclusion: Development of TEMPEST is ongoing and the project is still in its infancy. This talk aims to showcase its unique capabilities to support future NASA entry systems missions.

Bohdan O Wesely↗
NASA NTRS2016

Space Launch System Spacecraft and Payload Elements: Making Progress Toward First Launch

Significant and substantial progress continues to be accomplished in the design, development, and testing of the Space Launch System (SLS), the most powerful human-rated launch vehicle the United States has ever undertaken. Designed to support human missions into deep space, SLS is one of three programs being managed by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration's (NASA's) Exploration Systems Development directorate. The Orion spacecraft program is developing a new crew vehicle that will support human missions beyond low Earth orbit, and the Ground Systems Development and Operations (GSDO) program is transforming Kennedy Space Center (KSC) into next-generation spaceport capable of supporting not only SLS but also multiple commercial users. Together, these systems will support human exploration missions into the proving ground of cislunar space and ultimately to Mars. SLS will deliver a near-term heavy-lift capability for the nation with its 70 metric ton Block 1 configuration, and will then evolve to an ultimate capability of 130 metric tons. The SLS program marked a major milestone with the successful completion of the Critical Design Review in which detailed designs were reviewed and subsequently approved for proceeding with full-scale production. This marks the first time an exploration class vehicle has passed that major milestone since the Saturn V vehicle launched astronauts in the 1960s during the Apollo program. Each element of the vehicle now has flight hardware in production in support of the initial flight of the SLS - Exploration Mission-1 (EM-1), an uncrewed mission to orbit the moon and return, and progress in on track to meet the initial targeted launch date in 2018. In Utah and Mississippi, booster and engine testing are verifying upgrades made to proven shuttle hardware. At Michoud Assembly Facility (MAF) in Louisiana, the world's largest spacecraft welding tool is producing tanks for the SLS core stage. This paper will particularly focus on work taking place at Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) and United Launch Alliance (ULA) in Alabama, where upper stage and adapter elements of the vehicle are being constructed and tested. Providing the Orion crew capsule/launch vehicle interface and in-space propulsion via a cryogenic upper stage, the Spacecraft/Payload Integration and Evolution (SPIE) Element serves a key role in achieving SLS goals and objectives. The SPIE element marked a major milestone in 2014 with the first flight of original SLS hardware, the Orion Stage Adapter (OSA) which was used on Exploration Flight Test-1 with a design that will be used again on EM-1. Construction is already underway on the EM-1 Interim Cryogenic Propulsion Stage (ICPS), an in-space stage derived from the Delta Cryogenic Second Stage. Manufacture of the Orion Stage Adapter and the Launch Vehicle Stage Adapter is set to begin at the Friction Stir Facility located at MSFC while structural test articles are either completed (OSA) or nearing completion (Launch Vehicle Stage Adapter). An overview is provided of the launch vehicle capabilities, with a specific focus on SPIE Element qualification/testing progress, as well as efforts to provide access to deep space regions currently not available to the science community through a secondary payload capability utilizing CubeSat-class satellites.

Schorr, Andrew A.↗
NASA NTRS2018

From Apollo to the Future, the NASA Curation Model for Engaging the Sample Science Community Maximizes Science on Extraterrestrial Samples

The Astromaterials Acquisition and Curation Office at Johnson Space Center (JSC) has enjoyed a long-term partnership (50 years!) with a broad community of planetary sample scientists. This partnership has enabled the curators of planetary samples to plan for and enact evolving requirements for preservation of sample scientific integrity and for handling and long-term storage. The basis for this relationship is a standing peer review advisory committee composed of leading scientists who are recognized for achievements in sample analysis. The committee and its descendants have brought familiarity with the most relevant scientific investigations and the associated analytical and contamination challenges. Beginning with Apollo, the review committee was charged with oversight of curatorial operations and with ensuring fair access to samples. As additional samples from other planetary bodies were acquired, the committee evolved, taking on new responsibilities, reflected in committee name changes. However, oversight of curatorial operations and fair allocation of samples remain basic responsibilities. Committee recommendations are sent to the NASA Headquarters Discipline Scientist for approval. To minimize conflict of interest and maximize fair access, the rules governing the make-up of the committee is structured. Systematic rotation of leadership and staggered terms of membership allow the committee to retain expertise while bringing in fresh ideas. The first peer review committee was called the Lunar Sample Analysis and Planning Team (LSAPT) and was formalized in early 1968 with about 15 members. Their function was to review a) the equipment and procedures used in the new Lunar Receiving Laboratory (LRL); b) the proficiency and capability of the LRL staff; c) the sequence of sample analysis and allocation after quarantine release; and d) the findings of the Preliminary Examination Team (PET). According to LSAPT member Gerald Wasserburg, one of the first issues they faced was deciding whether to have most of the sample analyses performed in house at the LRL or to distribute samples to members of the scientific community. LSAPT concluded that the major scientific investigations should be carried out externally to the LRL by scientists chosen for their expertise in specific disciplines. Further they recommended that the PET's basic characterization of samples be circulated to the broad scientific community. LSAPT set its own agenda, paid attention to facility details, closely monitored the move of samples from the LRL to the interim curatorial facility in 1973, and was active in inspecting curation facilities. Between 1975 and 1979, a Facility Subcommittee of LSAPT oversaw the design and construction of a permanent facility for preservation of lunar samples. The result was an outstanding facility still in use today. In 1977, a separate peer review committee, the Meteorite Working Group (MWG), was formed to evaluate requests for new meteorites then being collected in Antarctica under what would in 1980 become a 3-agency agreement (National Science Foundation, NASA, Smithsonian Institution). By 1979, after lunar samples were moved into the new permanent facility, the vacated gloveboxes and laboratory were prepared for meteorite curation. Recognizing that LSAPT had been helpful in setting up the JSC curatorial facility for Antarctic meteorites, JSC recommended the review committee be given expanded duties, including advice on curation and analysis of materials from other planetary bodies and the name be changed to Lunar and Planetary Sample Team (LAPST). In 1993, LAPST was renamed the Curation and Analysis Planning Team for Extraterrestrial Materials (CAPTEM) to reflect additional functions. CAPTEM is chartered to be (1) a community-based, interdisciplinary forum for discussion and analysis of matters concerning the collection and curation of extraterrestrial samples, including planning future sample return missions and (2) a standing review panel, charged with evaluating proposals requesting allocation of all extraterrestrial samples contained in NASA collections. Efficiency and flexibility are gained through use of subcommittees, both ad hoc and standing. Transition of the MWG to a subcommittee of CAPTEM was completed in 2017. Today subcommittees review allocation requests for lunar samples, Antarctic meteorites, cosmic dust, Stardust cometary samples, Genesis solar wind samples, and samples returned from asteroids. Other subcommittees address facilities, informatics, and micro-cratered substrates. Planetary samples have been sent to research teams in over 30 countries world-wide. The expertise in the care and fair distribution of astromaterials by NASA using this model spans generations of planetary sample scientists and is a valuable resource to be tapped for future sample returns - OSIRIS-REx, Hayabusa 2, and Mars 2020.

Allton, Judith↗