Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Fluids”

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.

100 records · Page 5
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Spike-Nosed Bodies and Forward Injected Jets in Supersonic Flow

The paper contains new numerical simulation and experimental test results of blunt body drag reduction using thin spikes mounted in front of a body and one- or two-phase jets injected against a supersonic flow. Numerical simulations utilizing the NASA CFL3D code were conducted at the Hampton University Fluid Mechanics and Acoustics Laboratory (FM&AL) and experimental tests were conducted using the facilities of the IM/MSU Aeromechanics and Gas Dynamics Laboratory. Previous results were presented at the 37 t h AIAA/ASME/SAE/ASEE Joint Propulsion Conference. Those results were based on some experimental and numerical simulation tests for supersonic flow around spike-nosed or shell-nosed bodies, and numerical simulations were conducted only for a single spike-nosed or shell-nosed body at zero attack angle, alpha=0 o . In this paper, experimental test results of gas, liquid and solid particle jet injection against a supersonic flow are presented. In addition, numerical simulation results for supersonic flow around a multiple spike-nosed body with non-zero attack angles and with a gas and solid particle forward jet injection are included. Aerodynamic coefficients: drag, C D , lift, C L , and longitudinal momentum, M z , obtained by numerical simulation and experimental tests are compared and show good agreement.

M Gilinsky↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Spike-Nosed Bodies and Forward Injected Jets in Supersonic Flow

The paper contains new numerical simulation and experimental test results of blunt body drag reduction using thin spikes mounted in front of a body and one- or two-phase jets injected against a supersonic flow. Numerical simulations utilizing the NASA CFL3D code were conducted at the Hampton University Fluid Mechanics and Acoustics Laboratory (FM&AL) and experimental tests were conducted using the facilities of the IM/MSU Aeromechanics and Gas Dynamics Laboratory. Previous results were presented at the 37th AIAA/ASME/SAE/ASEE Joint Propulsion Conference. Those results were based on some experimental and numerical simulation tests for supersonic flow around spike-nosed or shell-nosed bodies, and numerical simulations were conducted only for a single spike-nosed or shell-nosed body at zero attack angle, alpha = 0 degrees. In this paper, experimental test results of gas, liquid and solid particle jet injection against a supersonic flow are presented. In addition, numerical simulation results for supersonic flow around a multiple spike-nosed body with non-zero attack angles and with a gas and solid particle forward jet injection are included. Aerodynamic coefficients: drag, C (sub D), lift, C(sub L), and longitudinal momentum, M(sub z), obtained by numerical simulation and experimental tests are compared and show good agreement.

M Gilinsky↗
NASA NTRS2026

An Investigation Regarding the Effects of Volume Dynamics on Gas Turbine Engine Performance and Operability

This work explores the impact of adding volume dynamics to an electrified turbofan engine model. The zero-dimensional single-input single-output volume elements capture the physics of fluid compressibility of flow in the engine core gas path turbomachinery during transient operation with greater fidelity. Some background regarding the motivation for this effort is provided. A model of the volume element is developed from first principles. The baseline engine model is described and an explanation is given of the modifications made to incorporate the volume elements into the new model. Details of the simulated inputs, designed to elicit exaggerated dynamic responses and to facilitate comparison between the baseline and modified engine models, are explicated. The results of these simulations are presented and discussed, demonstrating that the transient performance and operability of the modified engine model, measured by parameters such as shaft speeds, thrust, and high-pressure compressor (HPC) stall margin, are impacted by the additional dynamics. Commentary is provided regarding potential explanations for the differences in behavior exhibited by the two models. Finally, suggestions are offered for future work that might improve the volume models developed in this effort and leverage the improved fidelity enabled by the modeling of turbomachinery volume dynamics.

Volume dynamics↗
NASA NTRS2015

Numerical Modeling of the Transient Chilldown Process of a Cryogenic Propellant Transfer Line

Before cryogenic fuel depots can be fully realized, efficient methods with which to chill down the spacecraft transfer line and receiver tank are required. This paper presents numerical modeling of the chilldown of a liquid hydrogen tank-to-tank propellant transfer line using the Generalized Fluid System Simulation Program (GFSSP). To compare with data from recently concluded turbulent LH2 chill down experiments, seven different cases were run across a range of inlet liquid temperatures and mass flow rates. Both trickle and pulse chill down methods were simulated. The GFSSP model qualitatively matches external skin mounted temperature readings, but large differences are shown between measured and predicted internal stream temperatures. Discrepancies are attributed to the simplified model correlation used to compute two-phase flow boiling heat transfer. Flow visualization from testing shows that the initial bottoming out of skin mounted sensors corresponds to annular flow, but that considerable time is required for the stream sensor to achieve steady state as the system moves through annular, churn, and bubbly flow. The GFSSP model does adequately well in tracking trends in the data but further work is needed to refine the two-phase flow modeling to better match observed test data.

Temperature Sensors↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Design and Analysis of Battery Thermal Management Systems

Thermal management of battery cell packs is a critically needed technology. The purpose of this work is to design new and improved Battery Thermal Management Systems (BTMS) for use in electric airplanes. The BTMS should be 3D printable and hold twelve to sixteen 18650 batteries. To minimize aircraft’s weight, an actively air-cooled battery pack was chosen to avoid the excess weight of water-cooled and phase change material (PCM) cooled packs. As a result, significant changes were made to remove all metal in the pack and replace it with lower density polymer matrix composites (PMCs) which can be additively manufactured. Two air cooled battery pack configurations (traditional propeller fans & bladeless fans) were designed, modeled, and compared. These packs were first modeled in SolidWorks 2021 3D CAD, then imported into COMSOL MultiPhysics to be studied using the “Heat Transfer in Solids and Fluids” module. The design with the bladeless fans eliminated the need to use high conductivity heavy metal to remove unwanted thermal energy. These bladeless fans were designed entirely out of PMCs. This thermal pack design weighs 0.04 kg less than that of the traditional propeller fans design and has increased the battery pack energy density by 8.25 Wh/kg.

Thermal Management System for Battery Packs↗
NASA NTRS2026

CFD-Assisted Nodal Modeling of Sloshing in a Cryogenic Propellant Tank

During autogenous pressurization, tank sloshing causes a significant increase in pressurant consumption to maintain constant ullage pressure during draining of the tank. This increase in pressurant consumption is caused by a significant increase in condensation at the liquid-vapor interface. Sloshing strongly affects the liquid side heat transfer coefficient and thereby the condensation rate. Traditionally, sloshing is modeled by CFD code using the VOF (Volume of Fluid) method to track the liquid vapor interface during sloshing. CFD calculations require a very fine grid to accurately compute the heat and mass transfer at the interface. Therefore, computations are time consuming and prohibit performing many parametric studies often needed during the design of a new system. This paper describes an alternative approach by developing a CFD-assisted nodal model to predict system parameters more economically with reasonable accuracy. In this approach, a multi-node model of tank pressurization was developed using GFSSP. A multi-node model was needed to account for stratification. The model computes heat and mass transfer at the interface to calculate the condensation rate. The liquid side heat transfer is computed using the parameters of sloshing dynamics such as frequency, wave amplitude, and interface area. The parameters of sloshing dynamics are computed by the CFD code LOCI-Stream. The model predictions were compared with test data for several cases.

Cryogenic Tank Sloshing↗
NASA NTRS1993

Development of global/chemistry model for jet-fuel thermal stability based on observations from static and flowing experiments

Two global-chemistry models for oxidative deposition of jet fuels are evaluated by integrating them into a Computational Fluid Dynamics with Chemistry (CFDC) code. A previously developed two-step global-chemistry model was found to be insufficient to describe the thermal-oxidation and -deposition rates associated with a Jet-A fuel. A new global-chemistry model has been developed systematically based on observations from flowing and static experiments. The global-autoxidation reaction is modified such that the reaction rate becomes zeroth-order with respect to the dissolved oxygen concentration. The generation of deposit-forming precursor is coupled with the autoxidation reaction by introducing a radical species ROO. A formulation for the sticking probability has also been developed. Deposition profiles are well represented by this new model under a variety of temperature and flow conditions. The model correctly predicts the changes in magnitude and spatial location of the deposition peak due to changes in flow. The CFDC model, which is designed for flowing systems, has been extended to static experiments. The model incorporates a non-depleting species F(sub s) representing all non-oxygen compounds responsible for deposition. Static experiments were found to provide a useful and inexpensive method for estimating the concentration of F(sub s) in the fuel.

V. R. Katta↗
NASA NTRS2026

Space Suit Material Compatibility with Space Vehicle Coolant PMS-1.5R

During a survey of 82P on February 11, 2023, a shiny substance was detected on the Progress vehicle. The suspected material was PMS-1.5R, a low volatility silicone oil coolant used in the vehicle. Crew exposure to the coolant was a concern as the low volatility would increase residence time, the time a material will stay on a surface after exposure to vacuum. A review of space suit materials revealed several materials with compatibility concerns that could impact Extravehicular Activity (EVA) operations and safety. To understand the risk, space suit materials were exposed to a simulant and tested. This testing provided the basis for rationale generated to continue with EVA operations for US EVA 86 on April 2, 2023. This testing also served as the basis to assess impacts to ISS EMU hardware due to potential contamination brought inside ISS on Russian space suits during RS EVA 61 on October 25, 2023, following an ISS Russian Multipurpose Lab Module (MLM) radiator leak of the same fluid on October 9, 2023. This paper will discuss the testing performed and analyze test results impacts to EVA operations. Additional work was conducted to determine coolant evaporation rates in space vacuum and demonstrate that no significant unreacted coolant from the MLM leak would remain on ISS surfaces long enough to contaminate the EMU or affect the ISS ECLSS water separator.

Space Suit Materials↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

A Simplified Model of VIPER Thermal Management System. Part I: Loop Heat Pipe

NASA’s Volatiles Investigating Polar Exploration Rover (VIPER) uses a combination of loop heat pipes (LHPs) and heaters as the primary hardware to modulate the temperature of the electronic boxes and payloads instruments. LHPs have been designed and instrumented to be capable of passive and active shutdown. The goal of the passive shutdown, using a thermal control valve (TCV) to limit the flow of the working fluid, is to preserve thermal energy and avoid unnecessary heat leaks during lunar night. The goal of the active shutdown on the other hand, is to forcefully increase the vehicle internal temperature to bakeout the payload instruments. Several numerical modeling tools are available to analyze LHP performance under the complex set of operational requirements and environments levied on the VIPER Thermal Management System (TMS). Yet, while those numerical modeling tools are capable of detailed performance analysis, they tend to take large computational resources and long computational time. In this paper, a model of a single LHP developed based on control volume approach is presented. By using the control volume approach, the complex geometry of the LHP, and the components attached to it, are reduced to thermal lump capacitances, thus reducing the computation effort. This paper also describes the effort to correlate the proposed LHP model using thermal vacuum (TVAC) test data.

Loop Heat Pipe↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

A Simplified Model of VIPER Thermal Management System. Part I: Loop Heat Pipe

NASA’s Volatiles Investigating Polar Exploration Rover (VIPER) uses a combination of loop heat pipes (LHPs) and heaters as the primary hardware to modulate the temperature of the electronic boxes and payloads instruments. LHPs have been designed and instrumented to be capable of passive and active shutdown. The goal of the passive shutdown, using a thermal control valve (TCV) to limit the flow of the working fluid, is to preserve thermal energy and avoid unnecessary heat leaks during lunar night. The goal of the active shutdown on the other hand, is to forcefully increase the vehicle internal temperature to bakeout the payload instruments. Several numerical modeling tools are available to analyze LHP performance under the complex set of operational requirements and environments levied on the VIPER Thermal Management System (TMS). Yet, while those numerical modeling tools are capable of detailed performance analysis, they tend to take large computational resources and long computational time. In this paper, a model of a single LHP developed based on control volume approach is presented. By using the control volume approach, the complex geometry of the LHP, and the components attached to it, are reduced to thermal lump capacitances, thus reducing the computation effort. This paper also describes the effort to correlate the proposed LHP model using thermal vacuum (TVAC) test data.

Loop Heat Pipe↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

The NASA Turbulent Heat Flux (THX) Experiments: Summary and Lessons Learned

The Turbulent Heat Flux (THX) experiments were conducted at NASA Glenn Research Center (GRC) in order to collect measurements of velocities and temperatures for computational fluid dynamics (CFD) validation of heated flows, with a focus on propulsion system components. The experiments spanned 5 phases; four of which were conducted in the GRC AeroAcoustic Propulsion Laboratory (AAPL) using the Small Hot Jet Flow Rig (SHJAR). In addition to making velocity measurements with Particle Image Velocimetry (PIV), the THX experiments introduced a new Raman-scattering based capability to measure temperatures. Computational studies were also conducted for each of the experimental configurations, in order to provide a baseline of expected CFD results and conduct an assessment of the capability of various CFD approaches for calculating flows where the turbulent transport of heat was important. Two of the collected sets of data were used for American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics (AIAA) Propulsion Aerodynamic Workshops (PAWs). The data set from the 5th phase, collected for heated supersonic jets, was also used to construct new validation cases for the NASA Turbulence Model Resource (TMR). This paper provides an overview of the experiments and associated computations for each of the 5 test phases. Key experimental findings are presented. Lessons learned are provided concerning the effect of computational modeling choice on accuracy of predicting turbulent flows where thermal transport is important. Emphasis is placed on comparing Reynolds-averaged Navier-Stokes approaches with large-eddy simulation approaches. The benefits of utilizing a conjugate heat transfer method in conjunction with CFD solver for film cooling is demonstrated.

RANS↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Time-History Statistics of Soot Formation in A Model Gas Turbine Combustor

Soot formation is a complex dynamic and intermittent process determined by properties of the fuel, combustor design, and combustor operation. Although the major steps in soot formation (i.e., formation of precursors, inception, growth and evolution) are similar for a variety of carbonaceous fuels, applications, and operating conditions, it remains unclear when the temporal transition between these steps occurs. An engineering prediction tool coupled with computational fluid physics (CFD), therefore needs to accurately model all these complex steps. To develop such a model, we propose the time-history concept for understanding the time dependency of soot formation as a function of local properties (i.e., temperature, velocity, local fuel air ratio, etc.). We continue our previous work with modeling the DLR aero-combustor [1] with our updated in-house CFD code, Open National Combustion Code (OpenNCC), that now includes a Multiple Time-Scale Flamelet Progress Variable approach and a the semi-empirical two-equation soot model. We injected massless tracer particles upstream of the injector region of the combustor to collect time-history statistics of the solution variables. The correlations between the collected statistics with respect to the experimental soot volume fraction data showed that time-history effect of certain flow variables, including turbulent kinetic energy (TKE), and multiple species is indeed important for soot formation. We then conducted a time-history based correlation analysis to determine the key species and the concentration ranges critical for soot formation (C6H5-based nucleation, acetylene-based surface growth, and oxidation with OH and O2). Based on the time-history correlation coefficient (THCC) analysis, we propose possible modifications to improve the current two-equation model.

LES↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

The NASA Turbulent Heat Flux Experiments: Summary and Lessons Learned

The Turbulent Heat Flux (THX) experiments were conducted at NASA Glenn Research Center (GRC) in order to collect measurements of velocities and temperatures for computational fluid dynamics (CFD) validation of heated flows, with a focus on propulsion system components. The experiments spanned 5 phases; four of which were conducted in the GRC AeroAcoustic Propulsion Laboratory (AAPL) using the Small Hot Jet Flow Rig (SHJAR). In addition to making velocity measurements with Particle Image Velocimetry (PIV), the THX experiments introduced a new Raman-scattering based capability to measure temperatures. Computational studies were also conducted for each of the experimental configurations, in order to provide a baseline of expected CFD results and conduct an assessment of the capability of various CFD approaches for calculating flows where the turbulent transport of heat was important. Two of the collected sets of data were used for American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics (AIAA) Propulsion Aerodynamic Workshops (PAWs). The data set from the 5th phase, collected for heated supersonic jets, was also used to construct new validation cases for the NASA Turbulence Model Resource (TMR). This paper provides an overview of the experiments and associated computations for each of the 5 test phases. Key experimental findings are presented. Lessons learned are provided concerning the effect of computational modeling choice on accuracy of predicting turbulent flows where thermal transport is important. Emphasis is placed on comparing Reynolds- averaged Navier-Stokes approaches with large-eddy simulation approaches. The benefits of utilizing a conjugate heat transfer method in conjunction with CFD solver for film cooling is demonstrated.

RANS↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Preliminary Findings of the Experimental Development Unit Cold Flow Test for a Generation Zero Nuclear Propulsion Engine

Nuclear thermal propulsion (NTP) technology will greatly benefit human travel to Mars by significantly shortening transit times, improving crew safety, and providing more mission flexibility than traditional chemical rockets. As part of DRACO follow-on work to develop, build, and fly a generation zero NTP engine, a full scale flight-like experimental design unit (EDU) reactor was constructed to collect sufficient on-ground performance data to characterize flow induced vibrations (FIV) of critical reactor structures/components, inform development of the engine and reactor control algorithm, and collect pressure drop and flow distribution data across the reactor. The fluid conditions for the test program were designed to achieve system responses equivalent to that of an operational engine through all phases of engine operation including reactor startup, mainstage operation, reactor shutdown, and reactor cooldown. Over 100 tests were executed, flowing either GN2 or GHe through the EDU at varying flow rates and pressures. This experiment provided early validation of flow behavior and vibration risks before nuclear testing, boosted critical subsystem TRLs, informed design iterations, and reduced future test costs. The steady-state flow parameters for the experiment were modeled in Ansys Thermal Desktop, allowing rapid tuning and experiment-informed updates to a flight-like test matrix. The EDU dynamic environment was characterized with accelerometers, strain gauges, and high-frequency pressure transducers all sampled at 20 kHz. While many narrow-band oscillations were identified, no significant FIV occurred; the reactor structural responses tend to be enveloped by typical launch vehicle ascent vibration environments (defined up to 2 kHz), although significant energy is also present at higher frequencies.

Flow Induced Vibration↗
NASA NTRS2026

SERFE Ground Unit EVA Series After Three Year Spacesuit Stowage Period

NASA’s spacesuit government reference design for returning to the Moon is called the Exploration Extravehicular Mobility Unit (xEMU). The xEMU subassembly that provides life support, such as oxygen and thermal control, is the Portable Life Support System (PLSS). Inside the PLSS is a new technology that NASA wanted to test to provide cooling to the crew during EVAs (ExtraVehicular Activity). This technology is called the Spacesuit Water Membrane Evaporator (SWME). In order to test SWME in an improved thermal control loop (TCL) both on Earth and in Space, the Spacesuit Evaporation Rejection Flight Experiment (SERFE) was created. The Ground unit, or testbed at Johnson Space Center (JSC), tested the cooling technology in Earth’s gravity, while the Flight unit, or payload on the International Space Station (ISS), tested the cooling technology in micro-gravity. Since fluids flow differently in micro-gravity, testing in both environments would provide important data for improving cooling performance during EVAs. Both units completed 25 simulated EVAs with the same settings so SWME performance on the ground could be compared to the ISS. The Flight unit was completed first and performed EVAs on the ISS between 2020 and 2022. The Ground unit performed EVAs between 2021 and 2022. When the Flight unit came back from the ISS, it was taken apart for analysis. This analysis looked at how well SWME was able to maintain its heat rejection capability after various dwell times, such as a 90 day Airlock Coolant Loop Recovery (ALCLR) cycle, when the Extravehicular Mobility Unit (EMU) currently on the ISS would normally need maintenance. After a three year simulated spacesuit dwell, the Ground unit performed another EVA series in 2025 to test SWME’s shelf life. The results from this test series will inform mission planning as NASA plans to go back to the Moon and beyond.

Michael Lewandowski↗
NASA NTRS2026

SERFE Ground Unit EVA Series After Three Year Spacesuit Stowage Period

NASA’s spacesuit government reference design for returning to the Moon is called the Exploration Extravehicular Mobility Unit (xEMU). The xEMU subassembly that provides life support, such as oxygen and thermal control, is the Portable Life Support System (PLSS). Inside the PLSS is a new technology that NASA wanted to test to provide cooling to the crew during EVAs (ExtraVehicular Activity). This technology is called the Spacesuit Water Membrane Evaporator (SWME). In order to test SWME in an improved thermal control loop (TCL) both on Earth and in Space, the Spacesuit Evaporation Rejection Flight Experiment (SERFE) was created. The Ground unit, or testbed at Johnson Space Center (JSC), tested the cooling technology in Earth’s gravity, while the Flight unit, or payload on the International Space Station (ISS), tested the cooling technology in micro-gravity. Since fluids flow differently in micro-gravity, testing in both environments would provide important data for improving cooling performance during EVAs. Both units completed 25 simulated EVAs with the same settings so SWME performance on the ground could be compared to the ISS. The Flight unit was completed first and performed EVAs on the ISS between 2020 and 2022. The Ground unit performed EVAs between 2021 and 2022. When the Flight unit came back from the ISS, it was taken apart for analysis. This analysis looked at how well SWME was able to maintain its heat rejection capability after various dwell times, such as a 90 day Airlock Coolant Loop Recovery (ALCLR) cycle, when the Extravehicular Mobility Unit (EMU) currently on the ISS would normally need maintenance. After a three year simulated spacesuit dwell, the Ground unit performed another EVA series in 2025 to test SWME’s shelf life. The results from this test series will inform mission planning as NASA plans to go back to the Moon and beyond.

SWME↗
NASA NTRS2026

In-suit CO2 Washout Test System (ICWTS) for CO2 Washout Verification in Spacesuits

Since the time of Mercury, Gemini, and Apollo, NASA has been performing CO 2 washout verification of spacesuits with Human in the Loop (HITL) test methods. Classically, the only instrumentation both with the accuracy and response time necessary was that of external mass spectrometers or medical gas analyzers fed by a long capillary line from the oro-nasal region within the suit. The helmet CO 2 washout configuration including the challenges posed by variation of a suited human subject frequently created difficulty in capturing adequate breath by breath data. For example, a nasal cannula could be worn with reasonable comfort however it posed the following challenges: (1) impeded the test subject’s ability to do a proper Valsalva maneuver; (2) frequently provided a corrupted waveform with relative movement; (3) precluded the ability to evaluate the Flow Weighted Average (FWA) at subject interface. A mouthpiece could be used in lieu of a cannula but posed challenges as well: (1) created potential disturbances of the flow field; (2) precluded the test subject from speaking during usage; and (3) presented comfort issues limiting the duration of test points. These challenges made it impractical to use a mouthpiece for anything other than short lab ambient environment tests. Technology development and NASA investment have afforded new capabilities to address some of these measurements providing improved data collection and are implemented in the In-suit CO 2 Washout Test System (ICWTS) which provides suit inlet/outlet pressure, temperature, relative humidity, partial pressure of oxygen, partial pressure of CO 2 , and flow measurement coupled with the acquisition of the inspired PPCO 2 including the ability for FWA measurement. This test system, coupled with use of the In-suit Respiration Mannequin Assembly (IRMA) and Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) combine to provide a full picture of the in-suit oro-nasal flow field and effectiveness of CO 2 washout in a spacesuit design.

Colin Campbell↗
NASA NTRS2026

In-suit CO 2 Washout Test System (ICWTS) for CO 2 Washout Verification in Spacesuits

Since the time of Mercury, Gemini, and Apollo, NASA has been performing CO 2 washout verification of spacesuits with Human in the Loop (HITL) test methods. Classically, the only instrumentation both with the accuracy and response time necessary was that of external mass spectrometers or medical gas analyzers fed by a long capillary line from the oro-nasal region within the suit. The helmet CO 2 washout configuration including the challenges posed by variation of a suited human subject frequently created difficulty in capturing adequate breath by breath data. For example, a nasal cannula could be worn with reasonable comfort however it posed the following challenges: (1) impeded the test subject’s ability to do a proper Valsalva maneuver; (2) frequently provided a corrupted waveform with relative movement; (3) precluded the ability to evaluate the Flow Weighted Average (FWA) at subject interface. A mouthpiece could be used in lieu of a cannula but posed challenges as well: (1) created potential disturbances of the flow field; (2) precluded the test subject from speaking during usage; and (3) presented comfort issues limiting the duration of test points. These challenges made it impractical to use a mouthpiece for anything other than short lab ambient environment tests. Technology development and NASA investment have afforded new capabilities to address some of these measurements providing improved data collection and are implemented in the In-suit CO 2 Washout Test System (ICWTS) which provides suit inlet/outlet pressure, temperature, relative humidity, partial pressure of oxygen, partial pressure of CO 2 , and flow measurement coupled with the acquisition of the inspired PPCO 2 including the ability for FWA measurement. This test system, coupled with use of the In-suit Respiration Mannequin Assembly (IRMA) and Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) combine to provide a full picture of the in-suit oro-nasal flow field and effectiveness of CO 2 washout in a spacesuit design.

Colin Campbell↗