Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “RDX”

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

Finite element analysis of the Space Shuttle 2.5-inch frangible nut

Finite element analysis of the Space Shuttle 2.5-inch frangible nut was conducted to improve understanding of the current design and proposed design changes to this explosively-actuated nut. The 2.5-inch frangible nut is used in two places to attach the aft end of the Space Shuttle Orbiter to the External Tank. Both 2.5-inch frangible nuts must function to complete safe separation. The 2.5-inch frangible nut contains two explosive boosters containing RDX explosive each capable of splitting the nut in half, on command from the Orbiter computers. To ensure separation, the boosters are designed to be redundant. The detonation of one booster is sufficient to split the nut in half. However, beginning in 1987 some production lots of 2.5-inch frangible nuts have demonstrated an inability to separate using only a single booster. The cause of the failure has been attributed to differences in the material properties and response of the Inconel 718 from which the 2.5-inch frangible nut is manufactured. Subsequent tests have resulted in design modifications of the boosters and frangible nut. Model development and initial analysis was conducted by Sandia National Laboratories (SNL) under funding from NASA Lyndon B. Johnson Space Center (NASA-JSC) starting in 1992. Modeling codes previously developed by SNL were transferred to NASA-JSC for further analysis on this and other devices. An explosive bolt with NASA Standard Detonator (NSD) charge, a 3/4-inch frangible nut, and the Super*Zip linear separation system are being modeled by NASA-JSC.

Darin N. McKinnis↗

Experimental and Numerical Study of Ammonium Perchlorate Counterflow Diffusion Flames

Many solid rocket propellants are based on a composite mixture of ammonium perchlorate (AP) oxidizer and polymeric binder fuels. In these propellants, complex three-dimensional diffusion flame structures between the AP and binder decomposition products, dependent upon the length scales of the heterogeneous mixture, drive the combustion via heat transfer back to the surface. Changing the AP crystal size changes the burn rate of such propellants. Large AP crystals are governed by the cooler AP self-deflagration flame and burn slowly, while small AP crystals are governed more by the hot diffusion flame with the binder and burn faster. This allows control of composite propellant ballistic properties via particle size variation. Previous measurements on these diffusion flames in the planar two-dimensional sandwich configuration yielded insight into controlling flame structure, but there are several drawbacks that make comparison with modeling difficult. First, the flames are two-dimensional and this makes modeling much more complex computationally than with one-dimensional problems, such as RDX self- and laser-supported deflagration. In addition, little is known about the nature, concentration, and evolution rates of the gaseous chemical species produced by the various binders as they decompose. This makes comparison with models quite difficult. Alternatively, counterflow flames provide an excellent geometric configuration within which AP/binder diffusion flames can be studied both experimentally and computationally.

Smooke, M. D.↗

Storable Propellant Combustion Instability Program at Lewis Research Center

An experimental program at Lewis Research Center investigates acoustical-mode combustion instability in liquid propellant rockets. One phase of this program is concerned with nitrogen tetroxide and a 50-50 fuel blend of hydrazine-UDMH. Effects on combustor stability and performance by variations in injection velocities, impingement angle and distance, amd thrust per element of triplet injectors were studied in a 10.77-inch- diameter cylindrical combustor at chamber pressures of 100 and 300 psia. Nominal thrust levels were 6700 and 20 000 pounds. Stability rating was accomplished by the use of various size RDX explosive charges to generate tangential pressure disturbances. The injection velocity effect correlated by using a ratio V(sub o)/V(sub f). Stability correlation with V(sub o)/V(sub f) resulted in a sharply humped curve with maximum stability at a ratio of 1.2. Performance decreased with increase in V(sub o)/V(sub f) after a maximum at 0.7, which agreed fairly well with the "uniform mixture ratio distribution" criteria of the Jet Propulsion Laboratory. Variation of impingement angle from 38 deg to 120 deg indicated that performance correlated with the absolute velocity ratio V(sub o)/V(sub f), but stability correlation appeared to be best with a velocity ratio using the radial component of the fuel injection velocity V(sub o)/V(sub fr). Impingement distances from 0.5 to 1.0 inch appeared to have only slight effect on stability and performance. Investigation of injector thrust per element for V(sub o)/V(sub fr) ranging from 0.8 to 2.8 yielded convex maxima curves. Acoustic liners were also tested to improve a liner design computer program, to obtain design criteria, and to develop flight-type liners. A marginally stable and spontaneously unstable combustor were used to evaluate linear configurations. All liners were effective in the marginally stable configuration, and only liners with large theoretical absorptivity were successful in the spontaneously unstable combustor.

Tabata, William K.↗

JANNAF 37th Combustion Subcommittee Meeting

This volume, the first of two volumes is a compilation of 59 unclassified/unlimited-distribution technical papers presented at the Joint Army-Navy-NASA-Air Force (JANNAF) 37th Combustion Subcommittee (CS) meeting held jointly with the 25th Airbreathing Propulsion Subcommittee (APS), 19th Propulsion Systems Hazards Subcommittee (PSHS), and 1st Modeling and Simulation Subcommittee (MSS) meetings. The meeting was held 13-17 November 2000 at the Naval Postgraduate School and Hyatt Regency Hotel, Monterey, California. Topics covered at the CS meeting include: a keynote address on the Future Combat Systems, and review of a new JANNAF Modeling and Simulation Subcommittee, and technical papers on gun propellant burning rate, gun tube erosion, advanced gun propulsion concepts, ETC guns, novel gun propellants; liquid, hybrid and novel propellant combustion; solid propellant combustion kinetics, GAP, ADN and RDX combustion, sandwich combustion, metal combustion, combustion instability, and motor combustion instability.

Fry, Ronald S.↗

Stakeholder-Engaged Structured Decision Making for the Los Alamos Legacy Cleanup Mission - 20501

The Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) environmental legacy cleanup program requires decisions to be made for environmental remediation, decommissioning and disposal or management of radioactive waste. This legacy cleanup program was established to address groundwater contamination, material disposal areas (MDAs) that have been used to dispose of radioactive and other waste material, and 'aggregate areas' that might produce radioactive or other chemical waste as a result of remediation activities. The LANL site is regulated for environmental concerns under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). However, some parts of LANL, such as material disposal area G (MDA G), have disposed of radioactive waste under DOE Order 435.1, and are subject to other regulations. For example, decommissioning the remote-handled TRU material stored in 33 shafts at MDA G falls under EPA's 40 CFR 191. Collectively, the regulations are all aimed in the same direction of finding the best solution, either through constructs such as 'as low as reasonably achievable' (ALARA), considering balancing factors as opposed to only cost and human health risk, and, under EPA regulations such as RCRA and NEPA, evaluating impact from all chemicals and both human health and ecological endpoints. Despite the basic goals and objectives of the regulations or their guidance, the main challenge is in their implementation. Arguably perhaps, but really in principle, all of these (and similar) regulations are asking for a decision analysis to be performed. Implementation challenges encountered have included lack of understanding of decision analysis in the industry, lack of effective stakeholder engagement in the decision analysis process, and lack of appreciation of the need to separate value judgments from science, the latter leading to developing conservative, or protective, science-based models. Conservative models lead to poor solutions, lack of effective stakeholder engagement leads to long drawn out protracted approaches to finding a solution (which also might never be found with this approach), and lack of understanding of decision analysis and Bayesian statistics causes poor models to be built, which creates unfortunate situations of 'garbage in, garbage out' becoming the basis for decision making. Stakeholder-engaged structured decision making (SDM) is an approach to solving problems that relies on the theory of decision science to involve stakeholders in the decision-making process. This approach incorporates stakeholder values using a scientifically rigorous methodology that separates value judgments from science in a way that helps avoid the pitfalls of biased, protective, or conservative modeling. This approach has its foundation in Keeney's 1992 treatise on value-focused thinking [1]. Keeney advocated a paradigm shift in decision making based on the idea that the standard way of thinking about decisions is backwards. The standard approach of focusing first on identifying alternatives rather than on articulating values results in a reactive approach with the emphasis on mechanics and fixed choices instead of the core values that have meaning to stakeholders. This paradigm shift effectively engages all stakeholders in the decision-making process while using a values focused thinking approach that can lead to the identification of decision opportunities and the creation of better alternatives. The intent is to be proactive and generate solutions that are related directly to values and objectives as identified by stakeholders. There are, perhaps, two overarching reasons why SDM can be used to benefit LANL's environmental legacy cleanup. Some of LANL's remaining waste management and environmental management problems are challenging and complex (for example, the Cr and RDX plumes, and MDAs) and while the traditional approach has, arguably, worked well for relatively simple risk-based problems, it cannot, or should not, be applied to more complex problems if the most effective and efficient solutions are desired. The second reason is cost. This has perhaps become more critical since publication of the Government Accountability Office (GAO) reports that DoE's environmental liability is considered a high-risk concern for the nation [2]. The focus of SDM is on structuring solutions to decision risk problems by first addressing stakeholder and decision maker values and subsequently developing decision objectives and ways to measure those objectives, preference weighting across objectives, identifying decision alternatives that best achieve those values, and characterizing uncertainty in predictions of the measures. Because a complete decision model is created using SDM, it can be evaluated to find the main elements of the model that drive, or predict, the best solution. This approach creates complete decision models that are transparent, traceable, reproducible and technically defensible. The science behind SDM, or decision analysis, is well founded, yet it is not unusual to see ad hoc approaches to decision making implemented under various environmental regulations that are pertinent to the LANL site, including NEPA, RCRA and DOE Order 435.1. Such ad hoc approaches are often not transparent or traceable, and lack reproducibility and technical defensibility. The LANL legacy cleanup program has embarked on using SDM to address the complex problems that remain. Stakeholder meetings have been held, and a prototype version of the stakeholder value system has been developed. Further meetings are expected in the future to address specific project needs. This is a long-term endeavor considering the complex environmental problems faced by DOE EM in Los Alamos (EM-LA), and careful planning, consideration of stakeholder value systems, and engagement with stakeholders throughout the SDM process is expected to lead to a successful endpoint. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗