Results for “fault estimation” — Page 41

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Strategy for Developing Technologies for Megawatt-class Nuclear Electric Propulsion Systems

In late fiscal year 2020, the Space Nuclear Propulsion (SNP) project began the process of formulating an investment strategy to support development of the technologies required for a high-power (megawatt-class) nuclear electric propulsion (NEP) system capable of performing human-scale missions. This activity was initiated concurrent with several high-level studies and assessments were either under way or had just concluded. Studies of human-scale Mars missions have been performed several times over the past two decades. One of the most recent studies examined opposition-class human Mars missions to occur in the late 2030s timeframe [1,2]. The mission architecture assumed a hybrid NEP/chem-propelled vehicle that used a high specific impulse (Isp) NEP-system and a liquid oxygen (LOx)-liquid methane high thrust chemical stage (two 110 kN (25 klbf) thrust, 365 s Isp engines) for maneuvers performed to enter and exit gravity wells. Trajectory analyses performed in this study showed that such a mission could be performed with 2-4 MWe directed into the electric propulsion system (operating for 20,000+ hours), with the large range representing different opposition-class Mars mission opportunities and permutations on the trajectory design, concept of operations, and technology choices. In 2020, the NASA Engineering and Safety Center (NESC) performed a study to evaluate the maturity of the different technologies required for nuclear propulsion systems [3]. The executive summary of this report provided the following top-level conclusions: • “The majority of critical technologies for… NEP/Chem… systems are relatively immature” • “TRLs [technology readiness levels] in the literature are often overestimated” • “The majority of critical technologies… for NEP/Chem… systems are at a relatively high level of advancement degree of difficulty (AD2 > 4) for maturation, requiring a dual development approach” • “The proper assessment of baseline TRL and AD2 values and the estimation of requirements and resources required for advancement have been consistent issues for NEP,” • “Non-advocate reviews should occur at the start of a technology program and at all key milestones.” In 2021, the National Academies of Science, Engineering, and Medicine (NASEM) issued a separate report [4] identifying the “primary technical and programmatic challenges, merits, and risks for maturing space nuclear propulsion technologies of interest to a future human Mars exploration mission.” That work contained several important findings, including: • “Developing a MWe-class NEP system for the baseline mission would require increasing power by orders of magnitude relative to NEP system flight- or ground-based technology demonstrations completed to date.” • “Subscale in-space flight testing of NEP systems cannot address many of the risks and potential failure modes associated with the baseline mission NEP system. With sufficient M&S [modeling & simulation] and ground testing, including modular subsystem tests at full scale and power, flight qualification requirements can be met by the cargo missions that will precede the first crewed mission to Mars. Fully integrated ground testing may not be required.” • “As a result of low and intermittent investment over the past several decades, it is unclear if even an aggressive program would be able to develop an NEP system capable of executing the baseline mission in 2039.” These efforts motivated the SNP project to investigate the technologies available for a megawatt-class high power nuclear electric propulsion system. That system is illustrated schematically in Figure 1 and is comprised of five separate top-level critical technology elements (CTEs). 1. Nuclear Reactor – Thermal power source for the system, utilizing high-assay low enriched uranium (HALEU) as the nuclear fuel. Reactor radiation shielding is also included in this CTE. 2. Power Conversion – Operates as a thermodynamic cycle, accepting nuclear reactor thermal power as an input and converting it to mechanical power. 3. Power Management and Distribution (PMAD) – Accepts as an input mechanical power from the power conversion system, which is used to generate electrical power. The PMAD system also distributes the generated electrical power to all other parts of the spacecraft, including the high-power EP system. The PMAD system may also perform duties such as isolation, fault detection, and power transformation/rectification for different spacecraft systems, including the thrusters. 4. Electric Propulsion (EP) – Accepts as an input electrical power, which is used to accelerate a propellant to high speeds to produce thrust. This system includes the power processing unit (PPU), which converts the power it receives to the correct current and voltage required by the thrusters, and the propellant storage and feed systems, which contain and meter the flow of propellant to the thrusters. 5. Thermal Management (Radiators/Heat Rejection) – The cold side of the thermodynamic power conversion cycle, accepts thermal power from the power conversion system and radiatively rejects that heat to space. In this paper, we describe the SNP project formulation and investment strategy that aims to accomplish the research and development required to advance the technology readiness for each CTE. The strategy relies heavily upon experimental testing supported by modeling and simulation to yield realistic assessments of the technologies, which in turn will be used to inform future NEP system-level design decisions and any potential technology downselects.

Kurt A Polzin↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Examining the Role of IMU Health Characterization and Monitoring in UAS Safety

Inertial measurement units (IMUs) can be vital for vehicle attitude and position estimation in unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs). Degradation in these units could result in incorrect position estimates that are utilized in vehicle control, trajectory prediction, and other critical systems; however, the modes and effects of degradation in these IMUs are not well understood. In order to quantify the risk posed by degradation in these sensors, a study was conducted on the types of IMUs prevalent in the commercial market, their known failure modes, and the applicability to health monitoring methods for risk reduction and increased safety in an increasingly autonomous airspace. First, use cases and failure modes of the various types and reliability of commercially available IMUs were reviewed, and knowledge gaps and issues in the field were identified. Noting that inexpensive and lightweight MEMS (Microelectromechanical Systems) IMUs are some of the most commonly used but least reliable sensors in sUAS (small Unmanned Aerial Systems), five inexpensive MEMS IMUs were chosen for a performance evaluation study, selected from the Pixhawk autopilot systems, hobby sUAS, and prior NASA experimental studies. For each of these IMUs, a 10-minute bias test and a 12-hour drift test were performed for the accelerometers in a benchtop setting, using a BeagleBone Black for data collection. Using these results, the sensors’ performance is compared to their reported specifications, and the utility of implementing diagnostic methods for MEMS IMUs for research and commercial applications is evaluated. The paper concludes with a planned study for the evaluation of vibration-induced degradation for the selected sensors.

IMUs↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Experimental and Numerical Investigation of the NASA High Efficiency Centrifugal Compressor Vaned Stage Geometry and Aerodynamic Performance

Since its inception in the early 2010s, the NASA High Efficiency Centrifugal Compressor (HECC) has been enigmatic for the propulsion research community: experimental data and numerical simulations of the stage have generally not aligned in their quantifications of performance metrics. Typically, the fault for these disagreements is assigned to the numerical simulations as the simulations are models, and models are inherently incomplete representations of the experiment. This “incompleteness” may manifest in assumptions regarding roughness or heat transfer, simplifications of the flow path (i.e., neglecting bleed flows), or the oft-scapegoated turbulence model. In the case of HECC, recent work showed unexpected discrepancies between the intended impeller geometry defined in the design report (termed Design-Intent) and the manufactured impeller used in the experimental campaigns (termed As-Manufactured). That work used numerical simulations to establish that the geometric differences between the Design-Intent and As-Manufactured impellers were significant enough to result in drastically different performance predictions for the HECC vaneless diffuser configuration. The Design-Intent impeller simulations over predicted the performance relative to the experiment, whereas the As-Manufactured simulations better represented the experimental data, both in terms of one-dimensional performance metrics and spanwise flow profiles. This effort expands on that work by examining in detail the geometry and aerodynamic performance of the HECC vaned diffuser configuration. Further differences between the Design-Intent and As-Manufactured geometries have been discovered in the vaned diffuser and exit guide vanes, and these differences are documented herein. The summations of the geometric differences for all of the components were used to create two numerical models of HECC vaned diffuser configuration: the Design-Intent simulations which are generated from the original geometry definitions given in the design report and the As-Manufactured simulations which are the best available representation of the manufactured compressor hardware used in the experimental test campaigns. In congruence with the earlier vaneless diffuser work, the numerical predictions of the Design-Intent choked mass flow rate, total pressure ratio, and efficiency were notably greater than that of the As-Manufactured simulations. To increase confidence in the experimental dataset, measurements from a recent test campaign conducted in 2024 are used to validate the original experimental data acquired from 2012 to 2014 with good repeatability overall, especially considering the passage of time and differences in the data acquisition systems between the test campaigns. Both numerical simulations were then extensively evaluated against the experimental data. The As-Manufactured simulations provided better estimates of the stage performance than the Design-Intent cases in terms of most performance metrics. Nonetheless, more detailed results still show opportunities for improvement. Despite a more accurate representation of the physical hardware, characterization of the impeller work input remains a challenge even for rigorously developed numerical models.

vaned diffuser↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Experimental and Numerical Investigation of the NASA High Efficiency Centrifugal Compressor Vaned Stage Geometry and Aerodynamic Performance

Since its inception in the early 2010s, the NASA High Efficiency Centrifugal Compressor (HECC) has been enigmatic for the propulsion research community: experimental data and numerical simulations of the stage have generally not aligned in their quantifications of performance metrics. Typically, the fault for these disagreements is assigned to the numerical simulations as the simulations are models, and models are inherently incomplete representations of the experiment. This “incompleteness” may manifest in assumptions regarding roughness or heat transfer, simplifications of the flow path (i.e., neglecting bleed flows), or the oft-scapegoated turbulence model. In the case of HECC, recent work showed unexpected discrepancies between the intended impeller geometry defined in the design report (termed Design-Intent) and the manufactured impeller used in the experimental campaigns (termed As-Manufactured). That work used numerical simulations to establish that the geometric differences between the Design-Intent and As-Manufactured impellers were significant enough to result in drastically different performance predictions for the HECC vaneless diffuser configuration. The Design-Intent impeller simulations over predicted the performance relative to the experiment, whereas the As-Manufactured simulations better represented the experimental data, both in terms of one-dimensional performance metrics and spanwise flow profiles. This effort expands on that work by examining in detail the geometry and aerodynamic performance of the HECC vaned diffuser configuration. Further differences between the Design-Intent and As-Manufactured geometries have been discovered in the vaned diffuser and exit guide vanes, and these differences are documented herein. The summations of the geometric differences for all of the components were used to create two numerical models of HECC vaned diffuser configuration: the Design-Intent simulations which are generated from the original geometry definitions given in the design report and the As-Manufactured simulations which are the best available representation of the manufactured compressor hardware used in the experimental test campaigns. In congruence with the earlier vaneless diffuser work, the numerical predictions of the Design-Intent choked mass flow rate, total pressure ratio, and efficiency were notably greater than that of the As-Manufactured simulations. To increase confidence in the experimental dataset, measurements from a recent test campaign conducted in 2024 are used to validate the original experimental data acquired from 2012 to 2014 with good repeatability overall, especially considering the passage of time and differences in the data acquisition systems between the test campaigns. Both numerical simulations were then extensively evaluated against the experimental data. The As-Manufactured simulations provided better estimates of the stage performance than the Design-Intent cases in terms of most performance metrics. Nonetheless, more detailed results still show opportunities for improvement. Despite a more accurate representation of the physical hardware, characterization of the impeller work input remains a challenge even for rigorously developed numerical models.

centrifugal compressor↗

NASA NTRS2017

Board Level Proton Testing Book of Knowledge for NASA Electronic Parts and Packaging Program

This book of knowledge (BoK) provides a critical review of the benefits and difficulties associated with using proton irradiation as a means of exploring the radiation hardness of commercial-off-the-shelf (COTS) systems. This work was developed for the NASA Electronic Parts and Packaging (NEPP) Board Level Testing for the COTS task. The fundamental findings of this BoK are the following. The board-level test method can reduce the worst case estimate for a board's single-event effect (SEE) sensitivity compared to the case of no test data, but only by a factor of ten. The estimated worst case rate of failure for untested boards is about 0.1 SEE/board-day. By employing the use of protons with energies near or above 200 MeV, this rate can be safely reduced to 0.01 SEE/board-day, with only those SEEs with deep charge collection mechanisms rising this high. For general SEEs, such as static random-access memory (SRAM) upsets, single-event transients (SETs), single-event gate ruptures (SEGRs), and similar cases where the relevant charge collection depth is less than 10 μm, the worst case rate for SEE is below 0.001 SEE/board-day. Note that these bounds assume that no SEEs are observed during testing. When SEEs are observed during testing, the board-level test method can establish a reliable event rate in some orbits, though all established rates will be at or above 0.001 SEE/board-day. The board-level test approach we explore has picked up support as a radiation hardness assurance technique over the last twenty years. The approach originally was used to provide a very limited verification of the suitability of low cost assemblies to be used in the very benign environment of the International Space Station (ISS), in limited reliability applications. Recently the method has been gaining popularity as a way to establish a minimum level of SEE performance of systems that require somewhat higher reliability performance than previous applications. This sort of application of the method suggests a critical analysis of the method is in order. This is also of current consideration because the primary facility used for this type of work, the Indiana University Cyclotron Facility (IUCF) (also known as the Integrated Science and Technology (ISAT) hall), has closed permanently, and the future selection of alternate test facilities is critically important. This document reviews the main theoretical work on proton testing of assemblies over the last twenty years. It augments this with review of reported data generated from the method and other data that applies to the limitations of the proton board-level test approach. When protons are incident on a system for test they can produce spallation reactions. From these reactions, secondary particles with linear energy transfers (LETs) significantly higher than the incident protons can be produced. These secondary particles, together with the protons, can simulate a subset of the space environment for particles capable of inducing single event effects (SEEs). The proton board-level test approach has been used to bound SEE rates, establishing a maximum possible SEE rate that a test article may exhibit in space. This bound is not particularly useful in many cases because the bound is quite loose. We discuss the established limit that the proton board-level test approach leaves us with. The remaining possible SEE rates may be as high as one per ten years for most devices. The situation is actually more problematic for many SEE types with deep charge collection. In cases with these SEEs, the limits set by the proton board-level test can be on the order of one per 100 days. Because of the limited nature of the bounds established by proton testing alone, it is possible that tested devices will have actual SEE sensitivity that is very low (e.g., fewer than one event in 1 × 10(exp 4) years), but the test method will only be able to establish the limits indicated above. This BoK further examines other benefits of proton board-level testing besides hardness assurance. The primary alternate use is the injection of errors. Error injection, or fault injection, is something that is often done in a simulation environment. But the proton beam has the benefit of injecting the majority of actual SEEs without risk of something being missed, and without the risk of simulation artifacts misleading the SEE investigation.

Guertin, Steven M.↗

DOE OSTI2024

Innovating the next generation of commercial smart building software

Nearly 30% of commercial building energy use is wasted due to equipment faults and HVAC controls problems. The result is increased emissions, compromised comfort and productivity, and less reliable coordination of building power needs with a clean grid. The energy impact alone represents $17 billion in potential savings. Today’s smart building software provides a robust solution to address these operational deficiencies. Energy management and information systems (EMIS) are saving up to 9% on average, with two-year paybacks. They are being incorporated into energy management processes, commissioning services, and utility programs. As effective as they are, two barriers prevent even deeper benefits; limited personnel to fix problems once they are identified, and the expense and time to manually implement changes in control systems. In partnership with the research community, the EMIS industry is developing new capabilities to overcome these barriers. Moving beyond siloed products for either fault detection and diagnostics, or optimal control, these new capabilities empower users to not only automatically identify faults, but also to push corrective action, and control improvements to their buildings. In this paper, several areas for enhancements are documented: ‘one-time’ correction of faults such as setpoints, schedules, and economizer lockouts; short-term active testing for automated proportional integral derivative (PID) loop tuning and functional testing; and continuous supervisory control for demand flexibility and year-round efficiency. Results are presented from a pair of partner implementations out of a dozen providers integrating these enhancements into their products, including field tests from across the country, and insights into operator acceptance and integration into operations and maintenance practices.

Casillas, Armando↗