Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Full icosahedron”

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.

79 records · Page 5
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS1993

Radio Metric Errors Due to Mismatch and Offset Between a DSN Antenna Beam and the Beam of a Troposphere Calibration Instrument

Two components of the error of a troposphere calibration measurement were quantified by theoretical calculations. The first component is a beam mismatch error, which occurs when the calibration instrument senses a conical volume different from the cylindrical volume sampled by a Deep Space Network (DSN) antenna. The second component is a beam offset error, which occurs if the calibration instrument is not mounted on the axis of the DSN antenna. These two error sources were calculated for both delay (e.g., VLBI) and delay rate (e.g., Doppler) measurements. The beam mismatch error for both delay and delay rate drops rapidly as the beamwidth of the troposphere calibration instrument (e.g., a water vapor radiometer or an infrared Fourier transform spectrometer) is reduced. At a 10-deg elevation angle, the instantaneous beam mismatch error is 1.0 mm for a 6-deg beamwidth and 0.09 mm for a 0.5-deg beam (these are the full angular widths of a circular beam with uniform gain out to a sharp cutoff). Time averaging for 60-100 sec will reduce these errors by factors of 1.2-2.2. At a 20-deg elevation angle, the lower limit for current Doppler observations, the beam-mismatch delay rate error is an Allan standard deviation over 100 sec of 1.1 x 10 -14 with a 4-deg beam and 1.3 x 10 -15 for a 0.5-deg beam. A 50-m beam offset would result in a fairly modest (compared to other expected error sources) delay error (less than or equal to 0.3 mm for 60-sec integrations at any elevation angle is greater than or equal to 6 deg). However, the same offset would cause a large error in delay rate measurements (e.g., an Allan standard deviation of 1.2 x 10 -14 over 100 sec at a 20-deg elevation angle), which would dominate over other known error sources if the beamwidth is 2 deg or smaller. An on-axis location is essential for accurate troposphere calibration of delay rate measurements. A half-power beamwidth (for a beam with a tapered gain profile) of 1.2 deg or smaller is desired for calibration of all types of radio metrics. A water-vapor radiometer calibration beam of this size with very low sidelobes would require a clear aperture antenna with a diameter of at least 1.5 m if the primary water vapor sensing channel were in the 20-22 GHz range.

R P Linfield↗
NASA NTRS2026

Thermal Considerations for 2039 Opposition Class Nuclear Electric Propulsion/Chemical Propulsion Crewed Mars Mission

The high specific impulse (Isp) of Nuclear Electric Propulsion (NEP) technology offers the potential for advanced space mission capabilities. However, the five critical technology elements of NEP vehicles have yet to prove technical maturity levels for consideration into mission design. In response to the critical reviews by the NASA Engineering and Safety Center (NESC) and the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (NASEM), NASA’s Space Nuclear Propulsion (SNP) project created an NEP Technology Maturation Plan (TMP) for focused development of NEP technology. The TMP called for a coordinated set of technology development efforts to meet this objective. The Modular Assembled Radiators for NEP VehicLes (MARVL) Early Career Initiative (ECI) project was initiated to develop a portion of the fifth Critical Technology Element (CTE) of the NEP vehicle: the Primary Heat Rejection Subsystem (PHRS). A target application of a 2039 human-rated Mars mission was outlined in the TMP. For the outlined mission, a NEP vehicle will experience several thermal environments which will impact the design and operation of the PHRS. To maintain radiator temperatures within the required effective temperature range, the effect of natural, induced, and NEP internally generated heat loads on the radiator panel must be well understood. Furthermore, this analysis is critical for analyzing the influence of various orientations and positions of the NEP vehicle relative to nearby celestial bodies throughout the mission. This study conducted a complete enveloping analysis of the thermal environments influencing the NEP vehicle throughout the mission. Thermal analysis was conducted for the radiator panels based on the defined mission environments. This thermal analysis concludes with the selection of ideal radiator orientations for the NEP vehicle, and the identification of worst case hot and cold environmental sink temperatures throughout the mission. For the target application, the environmental sink temperature while the reactor is powered OFF or powered ON ranges from 30 K to 353 K and 2.7 K to 243 K respectively. When considering interplanetary space, the minimum environmental sink temperature when the reactor is powered OFF and the radiators are oriented “edge to Sun” is 2.7 K. The environmental thermal models generated in this study will be used for future studies with the full vehicle system model. The environmental sink temperature curves generated will be used for future radiator and component analysis to predict transient performance in the space environment. The environmental sink temperature and heat rejection capability curves will inform the trade between commissioning orbits that are in consideration. The model may also serve as a useful tool as reference for future crewed space missions, missions involving radiators or temperature sensitive equipment, or other missions requiring analysis of natural orbital thermal environments.

Nuclear Electric Propulsion↗
NASA NTRS2005

Chapter 19B - Antenna Radiation Patterns

Modern civil and military aircraft are equipped with a variety of communication devices, radio navigation equipment, and air traffic control systems. For all of these devices appropriate antennas must be available to transmit and receive the signals. As a result, as many as 30 antennas, and sometimes even more, are mounted around today's aircraft. For this reason, it is necessary to know the capabilities of the receiving/transmitting equipment on board. These capabilities are driven by the antenna characteristics. Therefore, coverage, shading, and beam pointing pattern data are necessary for optimum electronic coverage. The aircraft antenna has to convert the available power density of the electromagnetic field to an electric voltage at its connector. This voltage level must be sufficiently high to operate the connected equipment. The reciprocity principle states that it makes no difference if the antenna is receiving or transmitting. For the certification of the aircraft antennas it must be proven that the antennas are at least generating the minimum receiver input voltage which is required for each radio service. The prime condition is, of course, that the specified field power densities of the different radio navigation and communication services are available. An important property of a radio frequency link is the electro-magnetic field intensity at every point in space for a given output power of the antenna. As the propagation of radio frequency waves in free space is well known, the spatial distribution of the field intensity needs only be measured at one spatial sphere around the antenna. The information is usually given as distributions along the circumference of flat sections through this sphere: each of these is called an ARP. Several ARPs are usually required to describe the complete spatial antenna pattern of an antenna. In addition to mathematical modeling, measurements on sub-scale models, and static measurements on full size models or aircraft on the ground, dynamic measurements on aircraft in flight play the most important role in the aircraft antenna testing and certification. [19B-1] The shape of an ARP, for one given frequency, is determined by the shape of the antenna and the shape and material of the surface it is mounted on. As the directly transmitted waves interfere with waves reflected by the aircraft skin with its complex geometry, and the surface material parameters are only roughly known, it is not possible to predict the ARP with the required accuracy. In ground measurements the earth's surface also acts as a reflector thereby causing the ground ARP to be different from the in-flight ARP. As the in-flight ARP is the ARP we are actually interested in it becomes clear that it is necessary to conduct in-flight ARP measurements. The Flight Test Engineer must be aware of the needs of the specialists who are establishing the test program for measuring antenna patterns and radar cross sections. These tests will require special test equipment and dedicated flights to obtain the data that they require. This Section provides an introduction to the principles of determining antenna patterns and the flight techniques for determining both antenna patterns and radar cross section. Reference 19B-1 provides detailed information.

Helmut Bothe↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Motor Configuration Selection for A New Technical Challenge to Develop A 5 MW Cryogenic Motor and Drive

Due to aviation’s appreciable and growing share of humanity’s impact on our environment and estimates that CO2emissions only account for 34% of aviation’s total effective radiative forcing [1], there is a need to reach beyond climate goals that focus only on CO2emissions, such as the US Aviation Climate Action Plan’s [3] goal to reach net-zero carbon emissions by 2050.There is motivation to develop technology that pushes toward future large transport aircraft with net zero climate impact that are highly electrified (i.e., have higher power electrical propulsion system components). This paper describes a new, 6-year technical challenge to address this need by developing a 5 MW superconducting motor and cryogenic drive. Section 1 will detail the motivation for this work. Section 2 will describe the technical challenge and the selected specifications for the motor. Section 3 will present the results of a motor configuration trade study and the down selection of one configuration to develop a detailed design for. The technical challenge focuses on the design of a5 MW superconducting motor and cryogenic drive and demonstration of it at a 2+ MW scale to achieve TRL 3. Both fully superconducting (superconducting stator and rotor) and fully cryogenic (superconducting rotor and cryogenic stator) machine configurations will be explored. An emphasis will be placed on addressing the key tall poles for high power superconducting machines. Further details will be included in the full paper. The requirements and goals of the motor will be detailed. The rated speed (2,000 to 3,000 rpm) is defined to be appropriate for directly driving multi-MW fans or propellers. A range of rated speed is permitted because the motor is not designed for a specific aircraft and to provide design flexibility if AC losses in the stator winding are found to be a significant constraint (i.e., a lower speed can be selected to reduce electrical frequency). Relatively conservative requirements for efficiency (99%) and specific power (20 kW/kg) are defined, because TRL advancement and pushing toward flight readiness is emphasized over performance optimization. However, more aggressive efficiency and specific power goals are specified (99.9% and 40 kW/kg). The 3rd section will present the results of a motor configuration trade study. The study started with a qualitative assessment of sixteen motor configurations based on geometric, mechanical, thermal, and electromagnetic criteria. This assessment has been completed with three evaluators scoring all nine criteria. A configuration down select was made by prioritizing the sixteen configurations into four tiers based on each configuration’s total score and consideration of manufacturability, complexity, and support hardware (e.g., rotary vacuum seals, bearings). Configurations in priority A and B will be further evaluated through quantitative assessments, whereas those in priority C will only be further evaluated if time permits and priority D will not be further evaluated. Eight of the sixteen configurations were down selected for quantitative assessment, which will include analytical calculations and low-to moderate-fidelity finite element analysis to produce a preliminary Pareto front of efficiency versus specific power for each configuration. This assessment emphasizes the calculation of AC losses in the stator winding and an exploration of thermal management approaches to remove that heat and maintain cryogenic temperature. The final paper will include a description of each motor configuration that was considered. The quantitative assessments are underway, and an assessment of one configuration is complete for multiple stator conductor options. The remaining assessments are scheduled to be completed by late March so that the final down select to one configuration can be included in this paper.

Net Zero↗
NASA NTRS2026

Microstructural Evolution and Mechanical Properties of LP-DED NASA HR-1 – A Hydrogen Resistant AM Superalloy for Space Propulsion Applications

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) has actively pursued metal additive manufacturing (AM) technologies for spaceflight applications since the late 2000s. AM offers transformative advantages in cost, schedule, part consolidation, and design flexibility. Among the various AM techniques, laser powder directed energy deposition (LP-DED) is particularly well suited for fabricating complex geometries with fine feature resolution. In propulsion systems that utilize high-pressure gaseous hydrogen—such as liquid hydrogen rocket engines—hydrogen environment embrittlement (HEE) presents a serious threat to material performance 1,2 . Mechanical property degradation under these conditions can compromise component reliability, especially under cyclic loading. To address this challenge, NASA developed NASA HR-1 (Hydrogen Resistant-1) as a solution for liquid rocket engine components operating in hydrogen-rich environments, using the LP-DED technique 3-9 . A key component in a liquid rocket engine is the exhaust nozzle, which is typically regeneratively cooled (regen) due to the high heat flux. NASA HR-1 was specifically developed for regen nozzle applications using hydrogen as a propellant, providing resistance to HEE, a critical issue for many materials. The AM version of NASA HR-1 was also formulated to achieve high ultimate tensile strength, along with high yield strength and ductility in this environment 5,6 . Low-cycle fatigue (LCF) is another important consideration in nozzle design, as components are expected to endure multiple starts and missions. Additionally, the LP-DED version of the alloy exhibits improved thermal conductivity compared to its wrought counterpart, which benefits nozzle cooling. Overall, NASA HR-1 offers an excellent balance of high strength, HEE resistance, LCF performance, thermal conductivity, and ductility to meet the demanding requirements of channel-cooled nozzles and other components used with hydrogen and other propellants. The LP-DED–processed NASA HR-1 requires several post-processing heat treatment steps to achieve the material properties desirable for its intended application 6 . These steps include stress relief, homogenization, solution annealing, and aging for precipitation hardening. The stress relief treatment mitigates residual stresses accumulated during the LP-DED process and minimizes the potential for distortion. Homogenization, a common step for AM materials, reduces elemental segregation and promotes recrystallization to develop a more equiaxed grain structure. The subsequent solution annealing treatment heats the part to a solid solution temperature to dissolve the undesirable η-phase that forms during cooling from homogenization, followed by rapid cooling to retain an η-phase–free microstructure. Finally, aging promotes precipitation of the strengthening γ′ phase in the alloy. The integration of compositional design and optimized thermal processing enables high-quality LP-DED NASA HR-1 components with excellent microstructural and mechanical stability. Improved chemical and microstructure homogeneity enhances ductility and fatigue resistance—both critical for safe and reliable operation in high-pressure hydrogen environments. NASA has successfully fabricated and hot-fire tested multiple subscale and full-scale channel wall nozzles using LP-DED NASA HR-1 5,6, 9-14 . These efforts included process refinements to support thin-wall construction and various channel geometries. Throughout development, several key observations emerged. After homogenization, the as-built columnar grain structure transforms into a fully equiaxed microstructure. However, subsequent treatments—such as solution annealing and aging—result in changes that are more difficult to track. The grain structure remains largely unchanged, and the γ′ precipitates, typically 5–10 nm in diameter, are beyond the resolution of scanning electron microscopy (SEM). While transmission electron microscopy (TEM) can resolve these fine precipitates, TEM sample preparation is time-consuming and difficult for LP-DED material. As an alternative, differential scanning calorimetry (DSC) offers a useful, qualitative approach to monitor precipitate evolution throughout different stages of heat treatment. The overall goal is to improve the understanding of how heat treatment affects the microstructure and mechanical performance of LP-DED NASA HR-1. This paper presents heat treatment design considerations, microstructural characterization, mechanical testing – including tensile and LCF testing in both air and hydrogen environments.

Superalloy↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Trajectory Engineering with Modular Patched Conics for Entry Systems and TPS (TEMPEST)

Brief Presenter Biography (35 word limit): Bohdan Wesely is an Aerospace Engineer in the Entry Systems and Technology Division at Ames. He has worked on a variety of projects for NASA including integrated TPS (thermal protection system) flight hardware deliveries and testing services for commercial partners. Introduction: TEMPEST is a new trajectory analysis framework that is designed to fill the gap between dedicated flight mechanics tools and aerothermal and TPS sizing tools. The project started as an SJSU master’s thesis and has since evolved into a general conceptual design tool capable of studying a wide variety of entry problems. Development is ongoing in the Entry Systems and Technology Division at NASA ARC. Why TEMPEST: Space missions involving entry into a planetary atmosphere involve a series of unique requirements across multiple disciplines. Whether it is traditional entry descent and landing (EDL), or aerocapture, the vehicle must navigate to its target landing location or orbit state, and the TPS must protect the payload during entry. The design process typically involves iterative handoffs between various flight mechanics, flow solver, and material response level tools. During the early conceptual phase, a wide variety of feasible trajectories are simulated in a Monte Carlo scenario which broadly satisfy the mission or landing requirements. Next, computational fluid dynamics (CFD), direct simulation Monte Carlo (DSMC), and other flow solver analyses are performed at various key trajectory points to generate an aero-database, heating and TPS design requirements also emerge at this stage. At this point, with updated aerodynamics from the various flow solvers, trajectories can be re-run, this in turn can change the required freestream conditions for the CFD tools, and as a project progresses, these analyses converge, and uncertainty is reduced. However, there is always a “hand-off” occurring between two inherently coupled phenomena. Analysis Description: One of the goals with TEMPEST is to use a variety of first principles estimation methods coupled with an atmosphere model to predict vehicle aerothermodynamics across the entire flight regime while propagating a 3 or 6 degree of freedom (DoF) trajectory. Aerodynamics methods include modified Newtonian, Maxwell and Cercignani- Lampis-Lord (CLL) for continuum, transitional, and free molecular flow regimes. Aerothermodynamics include boundary layer and reference enthalpy methods, and Mutation++ for non-equilibrium chemistry modeling. TEMPEST is also capable of stitching multiple trajectory segments together to study mission scenarios like multi-pass aerocapture and aero-gravity assists. Most of the program is implemented in MATLAB using modern system objects, it relies on several C++ shared libraries for supporting tools like Gmsh, the Global Reference Atmospheric Model (GRAM), and Mutation++. The various first principles aerothermal estimation methods are discretized across either a structured axisymmetric panel mesh or an unstructured tri-mesh generated from an open-source tool such as Gmsh, this allows solutions on the same mesh to be compared across tools such as CB-Aero. CFD Coupling. A physics-aware, gaussian process CFD anchoring scheme is proposed to adjust the various first principles methods as a CFD database is populated. One goal for this anchoring module is to inform the project where CFD should be run. Full knowledge of the entire trajectory, atmosphere, and aerothermodynamics allows for easier identification of high sensitivity areas and uncertainty quantification. While the first principles effects are well known and proven accurate in existing tools such as CB- Aero and Cart3D, a physics aware CFD anchoring scheme increases tool credibility across a project lifecycle. Material Response Modeling. Correct TPS sizing is critical for optimizing mass for science payloads and ensuring mission success. The process typically involves a thermal analysis along the trajectory with surface heating environments as a boundary condition. Several design constraints are maximum bondline temperature and maximum recession with various margining techniques. The material response tool FIAT, developed out of NASA Ames, is currently being integrated into the TEMPEST environment. TPS recession, shape change, mass loss, and mass property alteration are all factors that can perturb an entry trajectory. For missions like Mars 2020, recession was minimal and was safely handled separately as a post process. For missions such as Jupiter Galileo with a high TPS mass fraction or asteroid entries, recession plays a major role. The proposed fully coupled scheme is to use an epoch-based approach where the trajectory integration is halted after a recession threshold, the energy balance and FIAT are solved at each panel, the mesh, aerodynamics, and mass properties are updated, and the trajectory continues. Several computational tradeoffs have been made during the development of TEMPEST to limit the cost of a single trajectory and preserve its utility as a conceptual, rapid iteration tool. Conclusion: Development of TEMPEST is ongoing and the project is still in its infancy. This talk aims to showcase its unique capabilities to support future NASA entry systems missions.

Bohdan O Wesely↗
NASA NTRS2010

Ares I-X Ground Diagnostic Prototype

Automating prelaunch diagnostics for launch vehicles offers three potential benefits. First, it potentially improves safety by detecting faults that might otherwise have been missed so that they can be corrected before launch. Second, it potentially reduces launch delays by more quickly diagnosing the cause of anomalies that occur during prelaunch processing. Reducing launch delays will be critical to the success of NASA's planned future missions that require in-orbit rendezvous. Third, it potentially reduces costs by reducing both launch delays and the number of people needed to monitor the prelaunch process. NASA is currently developing the Ares I launch vehicle to bring the Orion capsule and its crew of four astronauts to low-earth orbit on their way to the moon. Ares I-X will be the first unmanned test flight of Ares I. It is scheduled to launch on October 27, 2009. The Ares I-X Ground Diagnostic Prototype is a prototype ground diagnostic system that will provide anomaly detection, fault detection, fault isolation, and diagnostics for the Ares I-X first-stage thrust vector control (TVC) and for the associated ground hydraulics while it is in the Vehicle Assembly Building (VAB) at John F. Kennedy Space Center (KSC) and on the launch pad. It will serve as a prototype for a future operational ground diagnostic system for Ares I. The prototype combines three existing diagnostic tools. The first tool, TEAMS (Testability Engineering and Maintenance System), is a model-based tool that is commercially produced by Qualtech Systems, Inc. It uses a qualitative model of failure propagation to perform fault isolation and diagnostics. We adapted an existing TEAMS model of the TVC to use for diagnostics and developed a TEAMS model of the ground hydraulics. The second tool, Spacecraft Health Inference Engine (SHINE), is a rule-based expert system developed at the NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory. We developed SHINE rules for fault detection and mode identification. The prototype uses the outputs of SHINE as inputs to TEAMS. The third tool, the Inductive Monitoring System (IMS), is an anomaly detection tool developed at NASA Ames Research Center and is currently used to monitor the International Space Station Control Moment Gyroscopes. IMS automatically "learns" a model of historical nominal data in the form of a set of clusters and signals an alarm when new data fails to match this model. IMS offers the potential to detect faults that have not been modeled. The three tools have been integrated and deployed to Hangar AE at KSC where they interface with live data from the Ares I-X vehicle and from the ground hydraulics. The outputs of the tools are displayed on a console in Hangar AE, one of the locations from which the Ares I-X launch will be monitored. In a previous publication, we discussed how we selected the three tools based primarily on their ability to be certified for human spaceflight and described our plans for the prototype. This abstract is due October 23, 2009, and the Ares I-X launch is currently scheduled for October 27, 2009. If this abstract is accepted, then the full paper will describe how the prototype performed before the launch. It will include an analysis of the prototype's accuracy, including false-positive rates, false-negative rates, and receiver operating characteristics (ROC) curves. It will also include a description of the prototype's computational requirements, including CPU usage, main memory usage, and disk usage. If the prototype detects any faults during the prelaunch period then the paper will include a description of those faults. Similarly, if the prototype has any false alarms then the paper will describe them and will attempt to explain their causes. Also, the paper will describe the three tools and how they are used in the prototype. It will include a description of the TEAMS models of the Ares I-X first-stage TVC and associated ground hydraulics and how we adapted the TVC model for use in real-time diagnostics. It will describe the SHINE rules used for fault detection and mode identification and the software architecture that interfaces the various pieces of existing software that are part of the prototype to one another. It will describe how we selected the sensor values and commands that were used to train the IMS model and how we optimized the number of clusters in the IMS model. It will include screen shots of the graphical display that we developed in Java to display the outputs of the three tools. Because Ares I-X data was not yet available to us while we were developing the prototype, we used historical data from the Space Shuttle's Solid Rocket Booster (SRB) TVCs and the associated ground hydraulics to train IMS and to test the entire prototype. Because most of the failure modes that we modeled have never occurred in the Shuttle we inserted simulated failures into the Shuttle data. The Ares I-X first-stage TVC is very similar to the SRB TVC and we expect the data will be very similar. After the launch, we will determine how similar the data actually is and report how any differences in the data affected the diagnostic accuracy of the prototype. Finally, although we did not get the prototype certified, we designed it in a way that it could be certified and wrote a preliminary certification plan. The paper will include a brief summary of how we considered the need for certification in the design of the prototype, how we tested the prototype before deploying it to Hangar AE, and how we would propose to get it certified if it were deployed as an operational system. The paper will conclude with a description of some of the challenges we faced and some of the lessons learned in developing and deploying the prototype.

International Space Station↗