SEARCH · Search NASA
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.
Redundancy verification of parallel systems related to element MTBF and decision maker perspective involving acceptance risk of system failure
Design of failure free redundant systems and self- repairing techniques
ST-224 redundant inertial measurement system, using conventional gimbaled platforms, each with three skewed single-degree-of-freedom control gyro and one caged gyro
A failure detection and isolation technique is presented for application to 'off-the-shelf' type four-gimbaled inertial measurement units (IMUs) such as the KT-70 or Carousel IV. This study concentrates initially upon actual four-gimbaled IMU performance requirements for current Space Shuttle booster and orbiter mission phases. When this information is obtained for a simplex system, the remaining area of study necessary to attain redundant IMU capabilities is the establishment of mission-dependent performance failure detection thresholds. These thresholds, then, permit a careful evaluation of the capabilities of various 'off-the-shelf' four gimbaled IMUs to satisfy the Shuttle mission performance requirements with various failure detection and isolation methods.
The wing on the NASA F-111 transonic aircraft technology (TACT) airplane was modified to provide flexible leading and trailing edge flaps; this modified wing is known as the mission adaptive wing (MAW). A dual digital primary fly-by-wire flight control system was developed with analog backup reversion for redundancy. This report discusses the functions, design, and redundancy management of the flight control system for these flaps.
Strapdown redundant experimental sensor inertial navigation package containing gyros and accelerometers, discussing signal real time processing by digital computer
Strapdown redundant experimental sensor inertial navigation package containing gyros and accelerometers, discussing signal real time processing by digital computer
The 70-pound SE-7 engine is very similar with its two valves, ablative material, a silicon carbide liner, a silicon carbide throat, and overall configuration. There were different wraps. One had a ninety-degree ablative material orientation. That is important because it caused problems with the SE-8, but not for this application. It was not overly stressed. It was a validation of the off-the-shelf application approach. There were two SE-7 engines located on the stage near the bottom. They had their own propellant tanks. That was the application. All it did was give a little bit of gravity by firing to push the propellants to the bottom of the tanks for start or restart. It was not a particularly complicated setup. (See Slides 6 and 7, Appendix F) What had we learned? This was a proven engine in a space environment. There weren't any development issues. Off-the-shelf seemed to work. There were no operational issues, which made the SE-7 very cost-effective. Besides NASA, the customer for this application was the Douglas Aircraft Company. Douglas decided the off-the-shelf idea was cost-effective. With the Gemini Program, the company was McDonnell Aircraft Corporation, which was part of the reason the off-the-shelf idea was applied to the Apollo. (See Slide 8, Appendix F) However, here are some differences between Apollo and Gemini vehicles. For one thing, the Apollo vehicle was really moving at high speed when it re-entered the atmosphere. Instead of a mere 17,000 miles per hour, it was going 24,000 miles per hour. That meant the heat load was four times as high on the Apollo vehicle as on the Gemini craft. Things were vibrating a little more. We had two redundant systems. Apollo was redundant where it could be as much as possible. That was really a keystone or maybe an anchor point for Apollo. We decided to pursue the off-the-shelf approach. However, the prime contractor was a different entity - the North American Space Division. They thought they ought to tune up this off-the-shelf setup. It was a similar off-the-shelf application, but at a higher speed. They wanted to improve it. What they wanted to improve was the material performance of silicon carbide. They were uncomfortable with the cracks they were seeing. They were uncomfortable with the cracks in the throat, and feeling that the environment was a little tougher, that maybe it was going to rattle, perhaps something would fall out, and they would have a problem. They wanted to eliminate the ceramic liner, and they wanted a different throat material. (See Slides 9 and 10, Appendix F) The Rocketdyne solutions were to replace silicon carbide material with a more forgiving ceramic material. Also, due to the multiple locations within the vehicle, the shape of the nozzles varied. Some nozzles were long, and some nozzles were short. We came up with a single engine design with variable nozzle extensions and configurations to fit particular vehicle locations. (See Slides 10 and 11, Appendix F)
The paper describes a unified solution to three types of separation assurance problems that occur in en-route airspace: separation conflicts, arrival sequencing, and weather-cell avoidance. Algorithms for solving these problems play a key role in the design of future air traffic management systems such as NextGen. Because these problems can arise simultaneously in any combination, it is necessary to develop integrated algorithms for solving them. A unified and comprehensive solution to these problems provides the foundation for a future air traffic management system that requires a high level of automation in separation assurance. The paper describes the three algorithms developed for solving each problem and then shows how they are used sequentially to solve any combination of these problems. The first algorithm resolves loss-of-separation conflicts and is an evolution of an algorithm described in an earlier paper. The new version generates multiple resolutions for each conflict and then selects the one giving the least delay. Two new algorithms, one for sequencing and merging of arrival traffic, referred to as the Arrival Manager, and the other for weather-cell avoidance are the major focus of the paper. Because these three problems constitute a substantial fraction of the workload of en-route controllers, integrated algorithms to solve them is a basic requirement for automated separation assurance. The paper also reviews the Advanced Airspace Concept, a proposed design for a ground-based system that postulates redundant systems for separation assurance in order to achieve both high levels of safety and airspace capacity. It is proposed that automated separation assurance be introduced operationally in several steps, each step reducing controller workload further while increasing airspace capacity. A fast time simulation was used to determine performance statistics of the algorithm at up to 3 times current traffic levels.
Development and testing of integrated circuits and redundant systems for circuit reliability and failure free systems
The work on the serpentine inspection system at JPL is described. The configuration of the inspection system consists of 20 DOF in total. In particular, the design and development of the serpentine micromanipulator end-effector tool which has 12 DOF is described. The inspection system is used for application in JPL's Remote Surface Inspection project and as a research tool in redundant manipulator control.
The engineering process of Design for Reliability (DfR) is well established in the automotive and aerospace industries. DfR should be useful in the future development of space life support systems. DfR is a sequence of tasks that develop system requirements and plan reliability analysis and testing. First and fundamentally, the reliability requirement is defined. Next the system reliability model is developed, often using a reliability block diagram. The overall system reliability requirement is allocated to the subsystems and an estimate of the attainable reliability is made. This expected reliability can be improved by simplifying the design by removing components or by replacing less reliable components. Improving reliability can require difficult compromises, such as reducing performance requirements, increasing budget, or extending testing. The actual system reliability can be determined only by testing, which should continue long enough to provide the required confidence in the measured value. New systems often have unexpected design errors that cause failures in early testing. The usual reliability improvement process of testing, finding the failure modes, and redesigning to remove them reduces the failure rate and is referred to as “reliability growth.” After redesign has been completed, the system should be further tested to determine the actual achieved reliability more accurately. If the final system failure rate is too high, redundant systems can be used to improve overall operational reliability. Adding redundancy simply to increase the one- or two-fault tolerance metric may sometimes reduce reliability. Reliability can be improved in three ways: redesigning the system to include more reliable subsystems and components, reliability growth testing and failure mode removal, and by using parallel redundant systems. DfR should combine these approaches to achieve the required reliability while managing performance, cost, and schedule.
The engineering process of Design for Reliability (DfR) is well established in the automotive and aerospace industries. DfR should be useful in the future development of space life support systems. DfR is a sequence of tasks that develop system requirements and plan reliability analysis and testing. First and fundamentally, the reliability requirement is defined. Next the system reliability model is developed, often using a reliability block diagram. The overall system reliability requirement is allocated to the subsystems and an estimate of the attainable reliability is made. This expected reliability can be improved by simplifying the design by removing components or by replacing less reliable components. Improving reliability can require difficult compromises, such as reducing performance requirements, increasing budget, or extending testing. The actual system reliability can be determined only by testing, which should continue long enough to provide the required confidence in the measured value. New systems often have unexpected design errors that cause failures in early testing. The usual reliability improvement process of testing, finding the failure modes, and redesigning to remove them reduces the failure rate and is referred to as “reliability growth.” After redesign has been completed, the system should be further tested to determine the actual achieved reliability more accurately. If the final system failure rate is too high, redundant systems can be used to improve overall operational reliability. Adding redundancy simply to increase the one- or two-fault tolerance metric may sometimes reduce reliability. Reliability can be improved in three ways: redesigning the system to include more reliable subsystems and components, reliability growth testing and failure mode removal, and by using parallel redundant systems. DfR should combine these approaches to achieve the required reliability while managing performance, cost, and schedule.
Redundant system reliability estimation after component failure
Load-transfer unit connects airborne computer to standby power supply in case primary supply fails. Concept adaptable to systems in which power interruptions cannot be tolerated; for example, computers with volatile memories, safety equipment, and precise timers. Load-transfer unit monitors voltages and load current. Microprocessor controls transistor switches that connect load to whichever power supply has highest priority and correct voltage.
Failure free electronic systems - computer simulation program documentation and redundant system test point allocation and reliability estimation
The work on the serpentine inspection system at JPL is described. The configuration of the inspection system consists of 20 degrees of freedom in total. In particular, the design and development of the serpentine micromanipulator end-effector tool which has 12 degrees of freedom is described. The inspection system is used for application in JPL's Remote Surface Inspection project and as a research tool in redundant manipulator control.
Linear frequency domain methods are inadequate in analyzing the 1975 Viking Orbiter (VO75) digital tape recorder servo due to dominant nonlinear effects such as servo signal limiting, unidirectional servo control, and static/dynamic Coulomb friction. The frequency loop (speed control) servo of the VO75 tape recorder is used to illustrate the analytical tools and methodology of system redundancy elimination and high order transfer function verification. The paper compares time-domain performance parameters derived from a series of nonlinear time responses with the available experimental data in order to select the best possible analytical transfer function representation of the tape transport (mechanical segment of the tape recorder) from several possible candidates. The study also shows how an analytical time-response simulation taking into account most system nonlinearities can pinpoint system redundancy and overdesign stemming from a strictly empirical design approach. System order reduction is achieved through truncation of individual transfer functions and elimination of redundant blocks.