Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “testing platform”

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 73 records · Page 4
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2016

Filter Media Tests Under Simulated Martian Atmospheric Conditions

Human exploration of Mars will require the optimal utilization of planetary resources. One of its abundant resources is the Martian atmosphere that can be harvested through filtration and chemical processes that purify and separate it into its gaseous and elemental constituents. Effective filtration needs to be part of the suite of resource utilization technologies. A unique testing platform is being used which provides the relevant operational and instrumental capabilities to test articles under the proper simulated Martian conditions. A series of tests were conducted to assess the performance of filter media. Light sheet imaging of the particle flow provided a means of detecting and quantifying particle concentrations to determine capturing efficiencies. The media's efficiency was also evaluated by gravimetric means through a by-layer filter media configuration. These tests will help to establish techniques and methods for measuring capturing efficiency and arrestance of conventional fibrous filter media. This paper will describe initial test results on different filter media.

Martian Atmosphere↗
NASA NTRS2007

Build-Up Approach to Updating the Mock Quiet Spike Beam Model

When a new aircraft is designed or a modification is done to an existing aircraft, the aeroelastic properties of the aircraft should be examined to ensure the aircraft is flight worthy. Evaluating the aeroelastic properties of a new or modified aircraft can include performing a variety of analyses, such as modal and flutter analyses. In order to produce accurate results from these analyses, it is imperative to work with finite element models (FEM) that have been validated by or correlated to ground vibration test (GVT) data, Updating an analytical model using measured data is a challenge in the area of structural dynamics. The analytical model update process encompasses a series of optimizations that match analytical frequencies and mode shapes to the measured modal characteristics of structure. In the past, the method used to update a model to test data was "trial and error." This is an inefficient method - running a modal analysis, comparing the analytical results to the GVT data, manually modifying one or more structural parameters (mass, CG, inertia, area, etc.), rerunning the analysis, and comparing the new analytical modal characteristics to the GVT modal data. If the match is close enough (close enough defined by analyst's updating requirements), then the updating process is completed. If the match does not meet updating-requirements, then the parameters are changed again and the process is repeated. Clearly, this manual optimization process is highly inefficient for large FEM's and/or a large number of structural parameters. NASA Dryden Flight Research Center (DFRC) has developed, in-house, a Mode Matching Code that automates the above-mentioned optimization process, DFRC's in-house Mode Matching Code reads mode shapes and frequencies acquired from GVT to create the target model. It also reads the current analytical model, as we11 as the design variables and their upper and lower limits. It performs a modal analysis on this model and modifies it to create an updated model that has similar mode shapes and frequencies as those of the target model. The Mode Matching Code output frequencies and modal assurance criteria (MAC) values that allow for the quantified comparison of the updated model versus the target model. A recent application of this code is the F453 supersonic flight testing platform, NASA DFRC possesses a modified F-15B that is used as a test bed aircraft for supersonic flight experiments. Traditionally, the finite element model of the test article is generated. A GVT is done on the test article ta validate and update its FEM. This FEM is then mated to the F-15B model, which was correlated to GVT data in fall of 2004, A GVT is conducted with the test article mated to the aircraft, and this mated F-15B/ test article FEM is correlated to this final GVT.

Herrera, Claudia Y.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Development of a Universal Small-Satellite Payload for On-Orbit Characterization and Evaluation of Novel Radiation-Shielding Materials

There is a need for novel lightweight radiation shielding materials for small satellites operating in LEO and beyond. Current commonly used shielding materials include aluminum and polyethylene, though often no additional shielding than that provided by structure is used due to mass and dimensional constraints. New materials are being developed which may offer advantages over these current solutions. These materials include novel lightweight composites impregnated with metallic nanoparticles, chitin-derived bioplastics, and aerogel-family materials. A compact CubeSat experiment payload that allows the simultaneous testing of numerus potential shielding materials would be useful to enable material comparison and efficacy validation. An effort currently underway seeks to develop such a miniaturized modularized payload, which will enable the testing of materials in 1U CubeSat form factor modules, with each module hosting four scintillator radiation detectors arrayed behind four sample material windows exposed to space. The first proposed mission will utilize a 2U payload volume to host two test quartets enabling eight materials to be tested. Such a test platform can potentially be used as a hosted payload on a variety of spacecraft to test additional materials in the future

Luke Idziak↗
NASA NTRS1986

Dynamic posture analysis of Spacelab-1 crew members

Dynamic posture testing was conducted on the science crew of the Spacelab-1 mission on a single axis linear motion platform. Tests took place in pre- and post-flight sessions lasting approximately 20 min each. The pre-flight tests were widely spaced over the several months prior to the mission while the post-flight tests were conducted over the first, second, fourth, and sixth days after landing. Two of the crew members were also tested on the day of landing. Consistent with previous postural testing conducted on flight crews, these crew members were able to complete simple postural tasks to an acceptable level even in the first few hours after landing. Our tests were designed to induce dynamic postural responses using a variety of stimuli and from these responses, evaluate subtle changes in the postural control system which had occurred over the duration of the flight. Periodic sampling post-flight allowed us to observe the time course of readaptation to terrestrial life. Our observations of hip and shoulder position, when subjected to careful analysis, indicated modification of the postural response from pre- to post-flight and that demonstrable adjustments in the dynamic control of their postural systems were taking place in the first few days after flight. For transient stimuli where the platform on which they were asked to stand quickly moved a few centimeters fore or aft then stopped, ballistic or open loop 'programs' would closely characterize the response. During these responses the desired target position was not always achieved and of equal importance not always properly corrected some 15 seconds after the platform ceased to move. The persistent observation was that the subjects had a much stronger dependence on visual stabilization post-flight than pre-flight. This was best illustrated by a slow or only partial recovery to an upward posture after a transient base-of-support movement with eyes open. Postural responses to persistent wideband pseudorandom base-of-support translation were modeled as time invarient linear systems arrived at by Kalman adaptive filter techniques. Derived model parameters such as damping factor and fundamental frequency of the closed loop system showed significant modification between pre- and post-flight. This phenomenon is best characterized by movement of the poles toward increasing stability. While pre-flight data tended to show shoulders and hips moving in phase with each other, post-flight data showed a more disjoint behavior.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 400 WORDS).

Non-NASA Center↗
NASA NTRS1993

A chemical sensor and biosensor based totally automated water quality monitor for extended space flight: Step 1

The result of a literature search to consider what technologies should be represented in a totally automated water quality monitor for extended space flight is presented. It is the result of the first summer in a three year JOVE project. The next step will be to build a test platform at the Authors' school, St. John Fisher College. This will involve undergraduates in NASA related research. The test flow injection analysis system will be used to test the detection limit of sensors and the performance of sensors in groups. Sensor companies and research groups will be encouraged to produce sensors which are not currently available and are needed for this project.

Smith, Robert S.↗
NASA NTRS1993

Technology test bed and hydrogen cold flow facilities at the Marshall Space Flight Center

The Technology Test Bed and Hydrogen Cold Flow facilities at NASA's Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) in Huntsville, Alabama provide unique testing capabilities for the aerospace community. Located at the Advanced Engine Test Facility (AETF), these facilities are operated and maintained by MSFC Propulsion Laboratory personnel. They provide a systems and components level testing platform for validating new technology concepts and advanced systems design and for gaining a better understanding of the test article internal environments. A discussion follows of the particular capabilities of each facility to provide a range of testing options for specific test articles.

Lightfoot, Robert↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

X-57 Flight Systems Integration Path

The foundation for a safe and successful flight test of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) X-57 Maxwell all-electric experimental airplane, or any X-Plane, is comprehensive system testing on the ground. This test campaign includes verification and validation (V&V) that the integrated system operates as designed and expected, as well as understanding how the system reacts and responds to failures that can occur during flight by performing failure modes and effects testing (FMET). The aircraft should be in the final flight configuration for these test activities because any modifications, even those that appear insignificant, could affect test outcomes. Although the plan was to perform V&V and FMET testing once the airplane was in the flight configuration, due to multiple component redesigns, concurrent software development, and other problems with on-aircraft testing, the X-57 Maxwell never made it into a full-flight configuration. As a result, a build-up approach was followed to test software and hardware as they became ready in order to continue making progress wherever possible. Using this approach revealed problems with the hardware and software faster than waiting for a full-flight configuration, allowing solutions to be found more quickly and in parallel with other project tasks. Other than unloaded motor testing in a lab setting, the only other test setup was on the airplane itself. On-aircraft testing was preferrable in order to test things as close to a flight configuration as possible but was time consuming due to the requirements for testing on the airplane. To overcome some of the on-aircraft barriers, off-aircraft test configurations, such as the Systems Integration Laboratory (SIL) and hardware-in-the-loop (HIL) setups, were used, but each of these setups had limitations to be considered. As a result, solutions found in the SIL or HIL configurations did not always work as expected on the airplane, resulting in an iterative process between on- and off-aircraft testing to find the final solution. Having a dedicated test platform such as an iron bird that closely represents the aircraft - without flight hardware - would have been the most effective off-aircraft test setup, which could have allowed the project to save time and money and potentially reach flight. This paper will highlight the V&V and FMET considerations and testing prerequisites, the build-up approaches to both software and system testing, the benefits and drawbacks to different test configurations, as well as battery testing and operations.

Kassidy M. Mclaughlin↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

X-57 Flight Systems Integration Path

The foundation for a safe and successful flight test of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) X-57 Maxwell all-electric experimental airplane, or any X-Plane, is comprehensive system testing on the ground. This test campaign includes verification and validation (V&V) that the integrated system operates as designed and expected, as well as understanding how the system reacts and responds to failures that can occur during flight by performing failure modes and effects testing (FMET). The aircraft should be in the final flight configuration for these test activities because any modifications, even those that appear insignificant, could affect test outcomes. Although the plan was to perform V&V and FMET testing once the airplane was in the flight configuration, due to multiple component redesigns, concurrent software development, and other problems with on-aircraft testing, the X-57 Maxwell never made it into a full-flight configuration. As a result, a build-up approach was followed to test software and hardware as they became ready in order to continue making progress wherever possible. Using this approach revealed problems with the hardware and software faster than waiting for a full-flight configuration, allowing solutions to be found more quickly and in parallel with other project tasks. Other than unloaded motor testing in a lab setting, the only other test setup was on the airplane itself. On-aircraft testing was preferrable in order to test things as close to a flight configuration as possible but was time consuming due to the requirements for testing on the airplane. To overcome some of the on-aircraft barriers, off-aircraft test configurations, such as the Systems Integration Laboratory (SIL) and hardware-in-the-loop (HIL) setups, were used, but each of these setups had limitations to be considered. As a result, solutions found in the SIL or HIL configurations did not always work as expected on the airplane, resulting in an iterative process between on- and off-aircraft testing to find the final solution. Having a dedicated test platform such as an iron bird that closely represents the aircraft - without flight hardware - would have been the most effective off-aircraft test setup, which could have allowed the project to save time and money and potentially reach flight. This paper will highlight the V&V and FMET considerations and testing prerequisites, the build-up approaches to both software and system testing, the benefits and drawbacks to different test configurations, as well as battery testing and operations.

Kassidy McLaughlin↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Supersonic Free-Flight Dynamics Testing in the Stratosphere

A new technique for obtaining stratospheric free-flight dynamics data for atmospheric entry capsules is described. The Stratospheric Projectile Experiment of Entry Dynamics (SPEED) represents a new approach to characterizing the free-flight dynamics of vehicles in the supersonic and transonic regime of flight. The SPEED test architecture leverages a stratospheric balloon and 3D-printed flight system in a novel two-stage configuration to deliver test articles to supersonic conditions in the atmosphere which achieve dynamic similitude with a full-scale vehicle. Designed to address the limitations of existing test facilities, SPEED captures the complete time evolution of a vehicle’s dynamic state while producing a statistically significant number of observed flight trajectories to address the stochastic nature of the wake-driven dynamic stability phenomenon. SPEED was developed over two years at NASA Ames Research Center. The inaugural flight of the SPEED test platform was conducted in the summer of 2024 where scaled capsules of the Mars Sample Return Earth Entry System and Dragonfly entry vehicle were tested. This paper describes the motivation for a new test architecture, operational constraints and achievable flight test envelopes, the design and development of the SPEED concept, and results from the demonstration flight. Techniques for estimating the dynamic aerodynamic characteristics and atmospheric conditions for each test article individually and as a collective are also discussed.

Entry Vehicle↗
NASA NTRS2001

A Hardware-in-the-Loop Testbed for Spacecraft Formation Flying Applications

The Formation Flying Test Bed (FFTB) at NASA Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC) is being developed as a modular, hybrid dynamic simulation facility employed for end-to-end guidance, navigation, and control (GN&C) analysis and design for formation flying clusters and constellations of satellites. The FFTB will support critical hardware and software technology development to enable current and future missions for NASA, other government agencies, and external customers for a wide range of missions, particularly those involving distributed spacecraft operations. The initial capabilities of the FFTB are based upon an integration of high fidelity hardware and software simulation, emulation, and test platforms developed at GSFC in recent years; including a high-fidelity GPS simulator which has been a fundamental component of the Guidance, Navigation, and Control Center's GPS Test Facility. The FFTB will be continuously evolving over the next several years from a too[ with initial capabilities in GPS navigation hardware/software- in-the- loop analysis and closed loop GPS-based orbit control algorithm assessment to one with cross-link communications and relative navigation analysis and simulation capability. Eventually the FFT13 will provide full capability to support all aspects of multi-sensor, absolute and relative position determination and control, in all (attitude and orbit) degrees of freedom, as well as information management for satellite clusters and constellations. In this paper we focus on the architecture for the FFT13 as a general GN&C analysis environment for the spacecraft formation flying community inside and outside of NASA GSFC and we briefly reference some current and future activities which will drive the requirements and development.

Leitner, Jesse↗
NASA NTRS1991

Pressurization and expulsion of cryogenic liquids: Generic requirements for a low gravity experiment

Requirements are presented for an experiment designed to obtain data for the pressurization and expulsion of a cryogenic supply tank in a low gravity environment. These requirements are of a generic nature and applicable to any cryogenic fluid of interest, condensible or non-condensible pressurants, and various low gravity test platforms such as the Space Shuttle or a free-flyer. Background information, the thermophysical process, preliminary analytical modeling, and experimental requirements are discussed. Key parameters, measurements, hardware requirements, procedures, a test matrix, and data analysis are outlined.

Vandresar, Neil T.↗
NASA NTRS2002

Simulation of Guidance, Navigation, and Control Systems for Formation Flying Missions

Concepts for missions of distributed spacecraft flying in formation abound. From high resolution interferometry to spatially distributed in-situ measurements, these mission concepts levy a myriad of guidance, navigation, and control (GNC) requirements on the spacecraft/formation as a single system. A critical step toward assessing and meeting these challenges lies in realistically simulating distributed spacecraft systems. The Formation Flying TestBed (FFTB) at NASA Goddard Space Flight Center's (GSFC) Guidance, Navigation, and Control Center is a hardware-in-the-loop simulation and development facility focused on GNC issues relevant to formation flying systems. The FFTB provides a realistic simulation of the vehicle dynamics and control for formation flying missions in order to: (1) conduct feasibility analyses of mission requirements, (2) conduct and answer mission and spacecraft design trades, and (3) serve as a host for GNC software and hardware development and testing. The initial capabilities of the FFTB are based upon an integration of high fidelity hardware and software simulation, emulation, and test platforms developed or employed at GSFC in recent years, including a high-fidelity Global Positioning System (GPS) simulator which has been a fundamental component of the GNC Center's GPS Test Facility. The FFTB will be continuously evolving over the next several years from a tool with capabilities in GPS navigation hardware/software-in-the-loop analysis and closed loop GPS-based orbit control algorithm assessment. Eventually, it will include full capability to support all aspects of multi-sensor, absolute and relative state determination and control, in all (attitude and orbit) degrees of freedom, as well as information management for satellite clusters and constellations. A detailed description of the FFTB architecture is presented in the paper.

Burns, Rich↗
NASA NTRS2010

Analysis of a Channeled Centerbody Supersonic Inlet for F-15B Flight Research

The Propulsion Flight Test Fixture at the NASA Dryden Flight Research Center is a unique test platform available for use on the NASA F-15B airplane, tail number 836, as a modular host for a variety of aerodynamics and propulsion research. The first experiment that is to be flown on the test fixture is the Channeled Centerbody Inlet Experiment. The objectives of this project at Dryden are twofold: 1) flight evaluation of an innovative new approach to variable geometry for high-speed inlets, and 2) flight validation of channeled inlet performance prediction by complex computational fluid dynamics codes. The inlet itself is a fixed-geometry version of a mixed-compression, variable-geometry, supersonic in- let developed by TechLand Research, Inc. (North Olmsted, Ohio) to improve the efficiency of supersonic flight at off-nominal conditions. The concept utilizes variable channels in the centerbody section to vary the mass flow of the inlet, enabling efficient operation at a range of flight conditions. This study is particularly concerned with the starting characteristics of the inlet. Computational fluid dynamics studies were shown to align well with analytical predictions, showing the inlet to remain unstarted as designed at the primary test point of Mach 1.5 at an equivalent pressure altitude of 29,500 ft local conditions. Mass-flow-related concerns such as the inlet start problem, as well as inlet efficiency in terms of total pressure loss, are assessed using the flight test geometry.

Ratnayake, Nalin A.↗
NASA NTRS1994

SpaceHab 1 maintenance experiment

The SpaceHab 1 flight on STS-57 served as a test platform for evaluation of two space station payloads. The first payload evaluated a space station maintenance concept using a sweep signal generator and a 48-channel logic analyzer to perform fault detection and isolation. Crew procedures files, test setup diagram files, and software to configure the test equipment were created on the ground and uplinked on the astronauts' voice communication circuit to perform tests in flight. In order to use these files, the portable computer was operated in a multi-window configuration. The test data transmitted to the ground allowing the ground staff to identify the cause of the fault and provide the crew with the repair procedures and diagrams. The crew successfully repaired the system under test. The second payload investigated hand soldering and de-soldering of standard components on printed circuit (PC) boards in zero gravity. It also used a new type of intra-vehicular foot restraints which uses the neutral body posture in zero-g to provide retention of the crew without their conscious attention.

Bohannon, Jackie W.↗
NASA NTRS2021

Demonstrations of System-Level Autonomy for Spacecraft

System-level autonomy refers to autonomously meeting the crosscutting needs of a system through awareness and coordinated control spanning the system's breadth of capabilities. In contrast to function-level autonomy, which focuses on capabilities required to achieve a specific function such as surface navigation or image recognition, system-level autonomy addresses the needs to coordinate and manage activities and resources, and estimate the state, across subsystems. This paper describes demonstrations that were conducted on a spacecraft workstation testbed. The autonomy was provided by system-level planning and execution integrated with system-level estimators of orbit knowledge and spacecraft hardware health. These components are embedded in a system-level framework defining how goals are formed and executed, which elements exist, and how control authority is distributed among components. The planning and execution system at the heart of the framework has the capability to schedule, execute and monitor completion of tasks, as well as plan around unexpected events including new science opportunities and anomalies. The planning and scheduling system is the Multi-mission EXECutive (MEXEC), supported by the system-level health state estimator Model-Based Off-Nominal State Identification and Detection (MONSID), and Autonomous Navigation (AutoNav) algorithms, which determine the orbital system state based on optical observation of other targets. These components are applicable to many kinds of missions on different platforms. These demonstrations were elaborations of earlier experiments conducted on the ASTERIA (Arcsecond Space Telescope Enabling Research In Astrophysics) CubeSat, described in a companion submission [1]. The spacecraft’s extended mission served as an in-flight test platform, during which some individual autonomous capabilities were flown successfully. The autonomy experiments described here were performed on the ASTERIA workstation testbed.

Prather, Maurice↗
NASA NTRS2015

NASA Operational Simulator for Small Satellites (NOS3)

The Simulation-to-Flight 1 (STF-1) CubeSat mission aims to demonstrate how legacy simulation technologies may be adapted for flexible and effective use on missions using the CubeSat platform. These technologies, named NASA Operational Simulator (NOS), have demonstrated significant value on several missions such as James Webb Space Telescope, Global Precipitation Measurement, Juno, and Deep Space Climate Observatory in the areas of software development, mission operationstraining, verification and validation (VV), test procedure development and software systems check-out. STF-1 will demonstrate a highly portable simulation and test platform that allows seamless transition of mission development artifacts to flight products. This environment will decrease development time of future CubeSat missions by lessening the dependency on hardware resources. In addition, through a partnership between NASA GSFC, the West Virginia Space Grant Consortium and West Virginia University, the STF-1 CubeSat will hosts payloads for three secondary objectives that aim to advance engineering and physical-science research in the areas of navigation systems of small satellites, provide useful data for understanding magnetosphere-ionosphere coupling and space weather, and verify the performance and durability of III-V Nitride-based materials.

modeling simulation↗
NASA NTRS2016

Simulation-To-Flight (STF-1): A Mission to Enable CubeSat Software-Based Validation and Verification

The Simulation-to-Flight 1 (STF-1) CubeSat mission aims to demonstrate how legacy simulation technologies may be adapted for flexible and effective use on missions using the CubeSat platform. These technologies, named NASA Operational Simulator (NOS), have demonstrated significant value on several missions such as James Webb Space Telescope, Global Precipitation Measurement, Juno, and Deep Space Climate Observatory in the areas of software development, mission operations/training, verification and validation (V&V), test procedure development and software systems check-out. STF-1 will demonstrate a highly portable simulation and test platform that allows seamless transition of mission development artifacts to flight products. This environment will decrease development time of future CubeSat missions by lessening the dependency on hardware resources. In addition, through a partnership between NASA GSFC, the West Virginia Space Grant Consortium and West Virginia University, the STF-1 CubeSat will hosts payloads for three secondary objectives that aim to advance engineering and physical-science research in the areas of navigation systems of small satellites, provide useful data for understanding magnetosphere-ionosphere coupling and space weather, and verify the performance and durability of III-V Nitride-based materials.

navigation↗
NASA NTRS2009

Design and Calibration of a Flowfield Survey Rake for Inlet Flight Research

The Propulsion Flight Test Fixture at the NASA Dryden Flight Research Center is a unique test platform available for use on NASA's F-15B aircraft, tail number 836, as a modular host for a variety of aerodynamics and propulsion research. For future flight data from this platform to be valid, more information must be gathered concerning the quality of the airflow underneath the body of the F-15B at various flight conditions, especially supersonic conditions. The flow angularity and Mach number must be known at multiple locations on any test article interface plane for measurement data at these locations to be valid. To determine this prerequisite information, flight data will be gathered in the Rake Airflow Gauge Experiment using a custom-designed flowfield rake to probe the airflow underneath the F-15B at the desired flight conditions. This paper addresses the design considerations of the rake and probe assembly, including the loads and stress analysis using analytical methods, computational fluid dynamics, and finite element analysis. It also details the flow calibration procedure, including the completed wind-tunnel test and posttest data reduction, calibration verification, and preparation for flight-testing.

Flynn, Darin C.↗