Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Free Flight CFD”

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.

77 records · Page 5

Flow Characterization Studies of the 10-MW TP3 Arc-Jet Facility: Probe Sweeps

This paper reports computational simulations and analysis in support of calibration and flow characterization tests in a high enthalpy arc-jet facility at NASA Ames Research Center. These tests were conducted in the NASA Ames 10-MW TP3 facility using flat-faced stagnation calorimeters at six conditions corresponding to the steps of a simulated flight heating profile. Data were obtained using a conical nozzle test configuration in which the models were placed in a free jet downstream of the nozzle. Experimental surveys of arc-jet test flow with pitot pressure and heat flux probes were also performed at these arc-heater conditions, providing assessment of the flow uniformity and valuable data for the flow characterization. Two different sets of pitot pressure and heat probes were used: 9.1-mm sphere-cone probes (nose radius of 4.57 mm or 0.18 in) with null-point heat flux gages, and 15.9-mm (0.625 in) diameter hemisphere probes with Gardon gages. The probe survey data clearly show that the test flow in the TP3 facility is not uniform at most conditions (not even axisymmetric at some conditions), and the extent of non-uniformity is highly dependent on various arc-jet parameters such as arc current, mass flow rate, and the amount of cold-gas injection at the arc-heater plenum. The present analysis comprises computational fluid dynamics simulations of the nonequilibrium flowfield in the facility nozzle and test box, including the models tested. Comparisons of computations with the experimental measurements show reasonably good agreement except at the extreme low pressure conditions of the facility envelope.

CFD↗

Design and Technology Maturation of the Stratospheric Projectile Experiment of Entry Dynamics

The supersonic and transonic dynamic stability of blunt-body reentry vehicles currently poses large risks in all of NASA’s ongoing entry missions (MSR SRL, MSR EES, and Dragonfly). These projects have allocated millions of dollars to testing and modeling efforts to buy down risk by using the current state-of-the-art (SoA) facilities at NASA’s disposal. While these facilities have heritage in supplying dynamics data to reentry missions, their availability is severely limited – particularly with the high number of concur-rent projects requesting simultaneous testing– and are costly when considering the science density per dollar. None of the current SoA facility methodologies allow the test model to have the dynamics fully develop through a flight relevant free-stream profile and as such require extrapolations with resultant high uncertainties in order to relate the test dynamics to flight expectations. SPEED is a NASA Ames Center Innovation Fund (CIF) project that is developing a highly tailorable and cost-effective test methodology to better assess the dynamic stability of blunt-body reentry vehicles via a stratospheric balloon flight. This is accomplished by dropping a suite of instrumented capsules from a stratospheric balloon to gain a statistically relevant dataset of scaled reentry vehicles in mission relevant free-flight conditions. This presentation will walk through how the test methodology is being implemented specifically for the Mars Sample Return (MSR) Earth Entry System (EES) geometry in an awarded Flight Opportunities Program (FOP) test flight in early CY24. SPEED Application to MSR: SPEED consists of three main mechanical systems: the Drop Platform, the Projectile, and the test Capsule. SPEED is being developed as a set of guidelines and recommendations for how to test with the proposed Concept of Operations (Conops) since the specific design parameters will vary depending on the specific project’s reference trajectory and entry vehicle design. As such, this presentation will walk through the development time-line as shown in Fig. 2. This is meant to serve as a blueprint for further missions as desired. Mechanical and Avionics Design. The SPEED test platform designed for the MSR-EES capsule geometry with nominal entry parameters has the ability to carry 10 Capsules to altitude instrumented with: 1. 3-Axis Accelerometer 2. IMU 3. Gyroscope 4. Magnetometer 5. Pressure Transducer cruciform 6. Uplook and Horizon Cameras To package the avionics/instrumentation suite, the capsule is approximately 1’ in diameter with the Outer Mold Line (OML) centroid-scaled from the full EES design. The internal volume is gutted and custom-shaped to fit the desired instrumentation suite, as well as to allow for the positioning of ballast mass such that the Center of Gravity is analogous to the flight vehicle. All structural components in the Capsule and Projectile are 3D printed, which significantly reduces the cost of each flight unit to around $1500 including all instrumentation, avionics, and structural components. Flight Conops. The test Capsule is accelerated to the desired altitude and Mach number while stowed in the Projectile, a missile-like vehicle consisting of steel ballast in the nose, a low-drag OML, and an Ejection Mechanism to reliably release the Capsule into the free-flow supersonic conditions. For the MSR-EES design, the capsule employs ~3kg of ballast mass at the nose to accelerate the 1.25kg test Capsule to ~Mach 1.7 at 23km altitude. This requires an initial release altitude of 40km, the quoted limit of a 80kg payload by the FOP-contracted balloon provider. Once the Ejection Mechanism avionics detect the proper conditions, the spring-loaded Ejection Mechanism will release and – guided by the sabot – expose the test Capsule to the desired test conditions for ~5 seconds of free-flight in the supersonic/transonic regimes. Dynamics in the subsonic regime will also be captured with the instrumentation suite with post-flight recovery operations aimed at recovering the high-G-load capable SD cards after the planned hard impact landings. Testing and Development: In the few months the SPEED project has worked the development of MSR-EES flight test, the team has performed lab and drone based testing which this presentation will overview. After the first design phase, the team fabricated Engineering Demonstration Units (EDUs) of all subsystems to perform validation testing shown in Fig. 5. After validation was completed on the subsystem level, a drone-drop test was performed at the recreational flight ceiling of 400ft altitude to assess the SPEED systems in a flight environment. Parameters such as in-flight stability, hard impact landing performance, and avionics performance were quantified and qualified. The FY23 CIF will culminate in a helicopter drop test aboard an Air National Guard Blackhawk. This will prepare the team for the CY24 FOP stratospheric balloon flight that should provide the final verification to begin offering the test platform for mission support. Focus of Presentation: This presentation will outline the technology maturation path of the SPEED implementation to the MSR-EES capsule baseline as well as the details regarding the mechanical system, avionics and instrumentation, and flight operations. Note that a complementary presentation is being submitted for a methodology overview of the SPEED test platform, introducing the testing technique and benefits as well as the full application space of the technology.

pitch damping coefficient↗

Subsonic Ultra Green Aircraft Research: Phase IV Final Report – Volume I Mach 0.80 Transonic Truss-Braced Wing High-Speed Design Report

This design report summarizes work performed by the Boeing Subsonic Ultra-Green Aircraft Research (SUGAR) team from December 2016 through June 2018. In Phase IV of the SUGAR program, Boeing is working to improve the productivity of a TTBW configuration by updating the Mach 0.745 vehicle concept to operate efficiently at Mach 0.80. Due to the aerodynamic and structural design challenges associated with adapting the design to a higher speed, design tasks have been broken into several subtasks. The information in this report (Volume I) documents the development of a Mach 0.80 vehicle outer mold line, maturation of TTBW structural concepts, and presents a preliminary high-liftsystem assessment. Results from these studies were integrated into an aircraft-level performance code that estimates the benefits of TTBW technology, both on its own and as a part of the SUGAR integrated technology suite. The aerodynamic performance results presented herein detail the high cruise efficiency of the TTBW concept operating at M=0.80. Results from the RANS code OVERFLOW indicate that the TTBW is aerodynamically well suited for operation at the design M=0.80 transonic cruise Mach number. Aircraft-level performance predictions show that the TTBW offers a 7.2% improvement in fuel burn (per seat) for an economic mission of 900nm, and a 9.0% improvement in fuel burn (per seat) for a 3500nm mission with full passenger payload, relative to an aspect ratio 13 conventional tube and wing configuration of equivalent technology. Integration of the TTBW performance benefits into the SUGAR technology suite shows a 55.9% reduction in fuel burn (for the economic mission) relative to the reference (SUGAR Free) aircraft, which is a consistently sized traditional cantilever wing, single-aisle transport typical of the 2008 fleet. This benefit does not include the performance improvement potential of hybrid-electric systems studied in earlier phases of the SUGAR program Structural concept development work completed in Phase IV has identified several strut attachment concepts that are worth additional development activity – an inboard strut attachment swivel joint concept (which enables the strut to carry axial loads while avoiding strut bending induced by wing twist during flight) significantly simplifies the construction of the main strut. An outboard offset strut attachment concept holds significant potential for further reductions in wing-strut interference drag. Based on work performed to date on Phase IV and the previous phases of the SUGAR program, the TTBW concept continues to remain a viable concept for significantly improving the performance of future aircraft. High-fidelity aerodynamic analysis of the Mach 0.80 TTBW aircraft has shown fuel burn improvement that has exceeded initial expectations despite the increase in cruise Mach number. Structural concept maturation has continued to refine the TTBW structure, and has found no obvious ‘show-stoppers’ to date. Therefore, the potential benefit of improved performance through the use of a very high aspect ratio strut-braced wing continues to warrant additional study

SUGAR↗

NASA Tech Briefs, September 2006

Topics covered include: Improving Thermomechanical Properties of SiC/SiC Composites; Aerogel/Particle Composites for Thermoelectric Devices; Patches for Repairing Ceramics and Ceramic- Matrix Composites; Lower-Conductivity Ceramic Materials for Thermal-Barrier Coatings; An Alternative for Emergency Preemption of Traffic Lights; Vehicle Transponder for Preemption of Traffic Lights; Automated Announcements of Approaching Emergency Vehicles; Intersection Monitor for Traffic-Light-Preemption System; Full-Duplex Digital Communication on a Single Laser Beam; Stabilizing Microwave Frequency of a Photonic Oscillator; Microwave Oscillators Based on Nonlinear WGM Resonators; Pointing Reference Scheme for Free-Space Optical Communications Systems; High-Level Performance Modeling of SAR Systems; Spectral Analysis Tool 6.2 for Windows; Multi-Platform Avionics Simulator; Silicon-Based Optical Modulator with Ferroelectric Layer; Multiplexing Transducers Based on Tunnel-Diode Oscillators; Scheduling with Automated Resolution of Conflicts; Symbolic Constraint Maintenance Grid; Discerning Trends in Performance Across Multiple Events; Magnetic Field Solver; Computing for Aiming a Spaceborne Bistatic- Radar Transmitter; 4-Vinyl-1,3-Dioxolane-2-One as an Additive for Li-Ion Cells; Probabilistic Prediction of Lifetimes of Ceramic Parts; STRANAL-PMC Version 2.0; Micromechanics and Piezo Enhancements of HyperSizer; Single-Phase Rare-Earth Oxide/Aluminum Oxide Glasses; Tilt/Tip/Piston Manipulator with Base-Mounted Actuators; Measurement of Model Noise in a Hard-Wall Wind Tunnel; Loci-STREAM Version 0.9; The Synergistic Engineering Environment; Reconfigurable Software for Controlling Formation Flying; More About the Tetrahedral Unstructured Software System; Computing Flows Using Chimera and Unstructured Grids; Avoiding Obstructions in Aiming a High-Gain Antenna; Analyzing Aeroelastic Stability of a Tilt-Rotor Aircraft; Tracking Positions and Attitudes of Mars Rovers; Stochastic Evolutionary Algorithms for Planning Robot Paths; Compressible Flow Toolbox; Rapid Aeroelastic Analysis of Blade Flutter in Turbomachines; General Flow-Solver Code for Turbomachinery Applications; Code for Multiblock CFD and Heat-Transfer Computations; Rotating-Pump Design Code; Covering a Crucible with Metal Containing Channels; Repairing Fractured Bones by Use of Bioabsorbable Composites; Kalman Filter for Calibrating a Telescope Focal Plane; Electronic Absolute Cartesian Autocollimator; Fiber-Optic Gratings for Lidar Measurements of Water Vapor; Simulating Responses of Gravitational-Wave Instrumentation; SOFTC: A Software Correlator for VLBI; Progress in Computational Simulation of Earthquakes; Database of Properties of Meteors; Computing Spacecraft Solar-Cell Damage by Charged Particles; Thermal Model of a Current-Carrying Wire in a Vacuum; Program for Analyzing Flows in a Complex Network; Program Predicts Performance of Optical Parametric Oscillators; Processing TES Level-1B Data; Automated Camera Calibration; Tracking the Martian CO2 Polar Ice Caps in Infrared Images; Processing TES Level-2 Data; SmaggIce Version 1.8; Solving the Swath Segment Selection Problem; The Spatial Standard Observer; Less-Complex Method of Classifying MPSK; Improvement in Recursive Hierarchical Segmentation of Data; Using Heaps in Recursive Hierarchical Segmentation of Data; Tool for Statistical Analysis and Display of Landing Sites; Automated Assignment of Proposals to Reviewers; Array-Pattern-Match Compiler for Opportunistic Data Analysis; Pre-Processor for Compression of Multispectral Image Data; Compressing Image Data While Limiting the Effects of Data Losses; Flight Operations Analysis Tool; Improvement in Visual Target Tracking for a Mobile Robot; Software for Simulating Air Traffic; Automated Vectorization of Decision-Based Algorithms; Grayscale Optical Correlator Workbench; "One-Stop Shopping" for Ocean Remote-Sensing and Model Data; State Analysis Database Tool; Generating CAHV and CAHVOmages with Shadows in ROAMS; Improving UDP/IP Transmission Without Increasing Congestion; FORTRAN Versions of Reformulated HFGMC Codes; Program for Editing Spacecraft Command Sequences; Flight-Tested Prototype of BEAM Software; Mission Scenario Development Workbench; Marsviewer; Tool for Analysis and Reduction of Scientific Data; ASPEN Version 3.0; Secure Display of Space-Exploration Images; Digital Front End for Wide-Band VLBI Science Receiver; Multifunctional Tanks for Spacecraft; Lightweight, Segmented, Mostly Silicon Telescope Mirror; Assistant for Analyzing Tropical-Rain-Mapping Radar Data; and Anion-Intercalating Cathodes for High-Energy- Density Cells.

Source record↗

Comparison of Pre- and Post-Flight Estimations of Pitch Damping Coefficients for Unguided Entry Vehicles

Introduction: Pre-flight predictions of pitch damping coefficient (𝐶!!+𝐶!"̇)curves are used in entry simulations to determine flight readiness and if any dynamic remediation strategies are required. Accurate characterization of these pitch damping coefficient curves is crucial for mission success. Historically, pre-flight estimations of these curves are derived experimentally either via ballistic range testing or with 1-degree-of-freedom (DOF) free-or forced-oscillation wind tunnel testing. Methodology:With post-flight best-estimated trajectories, a fitting procedure as described in Karlgaard, et. al. [1] is used to compare pre-and post-flight pitch damping coefficients. This technique relies on an assumed analytical form of the trajectory, a limited 3-DOF representation described in Schoenenbergerand Queen [2], which results in anEuler-Cauchy solution form.This solution assumes constant density,thus limited amplitude multi-peak windows of the trajectory are considered to populate the pitch damping-amplitudes pace. Fig. 1 shows preliminary estimations of the pitch damping coefficients estimated using the post-flight best estimated trajectoryfor MER B, using a3-amplitude-peak window. Important to note is that the Euler-Cauchy solution also assumes planar motion, thus coning or 𝛽contribution is not included. Further,the estimated post-flight pitch damping approximations and the pre-flight predictions shown are effective representations of pitch damping, or the integrated effect of the pitch damping coefficient over one pitch cycle at the corresponding cycle’s peak amplitude. Effective pitch damping coefficient curves provide more intuitive insights about where the vehicle is stable and permits readily processed comparisons between data-sets. It is important to note that most pitch damping curves, such as those reported in aerodatabases and utilized in flight mechanics trajectory simulations, are represented in instantaneous angle-of-attack space distinct from what is presented in Fig 1. The extracted post-flight pitch damping coefficient points show a wide range of values across a narrow band of amplitudes (Fig.1a), albeit centered on the published pre-flight approximation. This also applies to the prediction as a function of Mach in Fig1b, where the post-flight scatter points are centered around the pre-flight predictions, but the pre-flight predictions notably lack data aboveMach 5.Further tuning of the technique, such as changing the number of peaks considered in each stencil, resolving density in higher resolution, and employing more accurate fitting procedures (beyond scipy.curve_fit()), will be performed. PosterFocus:This study will apply this reconstruction method to the as-flown trajectories for the following unguided entry vehicles: MER A, MER B, IRVE3, Phoenix, Insight, Pathfinder, and SIAD. The pitch damping coefficient will be derived from these trajectories and compared with the pre-flight predictions. Comparing across different missions, entry environments, and vehicle geometries can inform where our pre-flight testing methodologies accurately capture the flight dynamics. Results will provide valuable insight into the accuracy of pre-flight predicted pitch damping curves. Beyond that, this method can shed light on how accurate these curves need to be, which can inform uncertainty ranges applied to pre-flight curves for other missions.

pitch damping coefficient↗