Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “TPS screening”

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 NTRSDate not supplied

BEAST: Expanding Sustainable Data Infrastructure for High-Enthalpy Facilities

Reproducible, data-driven thermal protection system (TPS) research requires that experimental records from high-enthalpy testing be consistently structured, traceable, and accessible across campaigns and institutions. In practice, however, arcjet and plasma facilities data remain largely fragmented: raw diagnostics are stored in ad hoc formats, material sample histories are disconnected from test conditions, and metadata standards are absent, precluding systematic cross-campaign analysis and long-term reuse. BEAST (Backend for Experiment Analysis, Storage, and Traceability) is an open-source, web-based platform that addresses these limitations by providing a unified, queryable infrastructure for high-enthalpy ground-test data [1]. First presented at the 15th Ablation Workshop [2], BEAST has since undergone significant development. The platform ingests and structures multi-channel time-series diagnostics, facility configurations, and material property records within a common provenance model, ensuring end-to-end traceability from raw sensor acquisition to reduced experimental quantities. A versioned material library links specimen identity and processing history to the specific runs in which each sample was tested. An integrated modeling workbench enables training and evaluation of regression models directly on archived experimental data, supporting condition interpolation and the construction of empirical material response databases. Beyond its original deployment at NASA Ames Research Center, BEAST has been designed to be facility-agnostic, with ongoing efforts to extend its adoption to other facilities. Its modular architecture accommodates heterogeneous diagnostic setups and facility types, and its future open-source distribution allows institutions to build on a common data standard rather than maintaining isolated, bespoke solutions. BEAST is further integrated within a broader ecosystem of companion tools: arcjetCV [3] extracts recession rates and shock standoff distances from high-speed video using computer vision, and miniSTARscan [4] provides sub-minute, portable photogrammetric surface reconstruction of test articles before and after exposure. All tools share a common data schema, enabling seamless ingestion of surface geometry, imagery, and time-series data into a single, coherent experimental record.

Database↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

BEAST: Expanding Sustainable Data Infrastructure for High-Enthalpy Facilities

Reproducible, data-driven thermal protection system (TPS) research requires that experimental records from high-enthalpy testing be consistently structured, traceable, and accessible across campaigns and institutions. In practice, however, arcjet and plasma facilities data remain largely fragmented: raw diagnostics are stored in ad hoc formats, material sample histories are disconnected from test conditions, and metadata standards are absent, precluding systematic cross-campaign analysis and long-term reuse. BEAST (Backend for Experiment Analysis, Storage, and Traceability) is an open-source, web-based platform that addresses these limitations by providing a unified, queryable infrastructure for high-enthalpy ground-test data [1]. First presented at the 15th Ablation Workshop [2], BEAST has since undergone significant development. The platform ingests and structures multi-channel time-series diagnostics, facility configurations, and material property records within a common provenance model, ensuring end-to-end traceability from raw sensor acquisition to reduced experimental quantities. A versioned material library links specimen identity and processing history to the specific runs in which each sample was tested. An integrated modeling workbench enables training and evaluation of regression models directly on archived experimental data, supporting condition interpolation and the construction of empirical material response databases. Beyond its original deployment at NASA Ames Research Center, BEAST has been designed to be facility-agnostic, with ongoing efforts to extend its adoption to other facilities. Its modular architecture accommodates heterogeneous diagnostic setups and facility types, and its future open-source distribution allows institutions to build on a common data standard rather than maintaining isolated, bespoke solutions. BEAST is further integrated within a broader ecosystem of companion tools: arcjetCV [3] extracts recession rates and shock standoff distances from high-speed video using computer vision, and miniSTARscan [4] provides sub-minute, portable photogrammetric surface reconstruction of test articles before and after exposure. All tools share a common data schema, enabling seamless ingestion of surface geometry, imagery, and time-series data into a single, coherent experimental record.

Database↗
NASA NTRS2020

Evaluation of Fatigue Damage Accumulation Functions for Delamination Initiation and Propagation

The present report follows on the cohesive fatigue damage model methodology proposed in NASA-TP-2018-219838. In that report, an empirical function describing the incremental damage due to cyclic loading was used to calculate fatigue damage within a cohesive formulation. The form of the function was developed such that, when integrated at a constant stress amplitude from no damage to failure, it produces a life versus load response that is consistent with an S-N diagram. Therefore, the parameters of the damage model could be obtained by fitting the model predictions to an S-N diagram. The finite element analyses performed demonstrate that the cohesive fatigue accumulation function provides a link between the S-N diagram that describes crack initiation, and the Paris law that characterizes the rate of crack propagation. However, when the model was proposed, it was not known whether the form of the damage accumulation function associated with a desired S-N diagram is unique and, if not, if the link between S-N and the Paris law is unique and independent of the fatigue function selected. In the effort described herein, several alternative forms of the damage function that reproduce the desired features of S-N diagrams were found and evaluated. The effects of each of these functions on the predicted parameters of the Paris law and the propagation threshold are discussed. The results indicate that the predicted exponent m of the Paris law is indeed independent of the damage accumulation function. However, different functions predict different values for the pre-factor C of the Paris law. Therefore, the proper damage accumulation function must be selected by comparison with experiments. One of the new damage accumulation functions proposed herein was found to be particularly useful for analysis because of the ease with which the model parameters can be determined with a minimal amount of experimental information. The effectiveness of the proposed methodology and damage function was demonstrated by conducting analyses of a double cantilever beam test, a mixed-mode bending test, and a three-point bending test of a skin/doubler specimen. The results indicate that the same set of model parameters can provide accurate predictions of the rate of fatigue crack propagation for a variety of material interfaces, mode mixities, load levels, and stress ratios.

DKIN/Stiffener Debonding↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

From Exploration Flight Test-1 to Artemis II--A NASA Langley's Orion Aerosciences Overview

The Orion Aerosciences program at NASA Langley has played a central role in advancing the aerodynamic and aeroheating prediction capabilities required for the Orion crew vehicle’s return from deep space. This presentation provides a technical overview of aerosciences contributions spanning Exploration Flight Test-1 (EFT-1), Artemis I, and the ongoing post-flight analysis of Artemis II. EFT-1 provided the first high-energy entry dataset for Orion, enabling critical validation of aerodynamic force and moment predictions, static and dynamic stability characteristics, and aeroheating environments at relevant flight Mach and Reynolds numbers. Flight-derived pressure data were used to refine the Flush Air Data System (FADS) methodology for atmospheric density reconstruction and to improve Best Estimated Trajectory (BET) solutions. The EFT-1 data also offered key insights into heat shield performance, including char layer recession, in-depth thermal response, and material retention behavior under flight conditions, informing updates to both thermal response models and uncertainty quantification practices. Building on EFT-1, Artemis I extended the database to true lunar-return conditions. Observations of heat shield performance, including localized char loss, bondline response, and recession variability, provided an unprecedented opportunity to reassess Thermal Protection System (TPS) and aeroheating modeling assumptions. Aerodynamic reconstruction efforts incorporated improved FADS calibration, enhanced atmospheric modeling, and refined force and moment databases to reduce trajectory and load uncertainties. Aeroheating comparisons between pre-flight predictions and flight data enabled targeted model updates, particularly in transitional flow environments and wake heating regions. For Artemis II, these lessons were systematically incorporated into the pre-flight prediction process. Updates included refined aerodynamic databases anchored to flight-validated corrections, improved density estimation and BET methodologies using enhanced database interpolation algorithm and FADS modeling, and revised aeroheating design environments informed by Artemis I material response observations. By the time of the workshop, Artemis II post-flight analysis will be underway, and preliminary findings will be presented where available, including early comparisons of aerodynamic reconstruction, atmospheric density estimation, and thermal protection system performance relative to updated predictions. Collectively, this body of work is a testament to the dedicated and multidisciplinary team whose sustained efforts have contributed to the program’s success and to the progressive maturation of Orion aerosciences modeling through numerical modeling, ground and flight data assimilation. The integrated advancement of aerodynamics, trajectory reconstruction, FADS-based density estimation, and aeroheating analysis has reduced predictive uncertainty and strengthened confidence for future crewed lunar and deep-space missions.

Orion↗
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↗