Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “pressure tests”

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.

At least 91 records · Page 5
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS1988

Description of an oscillating flow pressure drop test rig

A test rig designed to generate heat exchanger pressure drop information under oscillating flow conditions is described. This oscillating flow rig is based on a variable stroke and variable frequency linear drive motor. A frequency capability of 120 hertz and a mean test pressure up to 15 mPA (2200 psi) allows for testing at flow conditions found in modern high specific power Stirling engines. An important design feature of this rig is that it utilizes a single close coupled dynamic pressure transducer to measure the pressure drop across the test sample. This eliminates instrumentation difficulties associated with the pressure sensing lines common to differential pressure transducers. Another feature of the rig is that it utilizes a single displacement piston. This allows for testing of different sample lengths and configurations without hardware modifications. All data acquisition and reduction for the rig is performed with a dedicated personal computer. Thus the overall system design efficiently integrates the testing and data reduction procedures. The design methodology and details of the test rig are described.

Wood, J. Gary↗
NASA NTRS1991

Evaluation of the concept of pressure proof testing fuselage structures

The FAA and NASA have recently completed independent technical evaluations of the concept of pressure proof testing the fuselage of commercial transport airplanes. The results of these evaluations are summarized. The objectives of the evaluations were to establish the potential benefit of the pressure proof test, to quantify the most desirable proof test pressure, and to quantify the required proof test interval. The focus of the evaluations was on multiple-site cracks extending from adjacent rivet holes of a typical fuselage longitudinal lap splice joint. The FAA and NASA do not support pressure proof testing the fuselage of aging commercial transport aircraft. The argument against proof testing is as follows: (1) a single proof test does not insure an indefinite life; therefore, the proof test must be repeated at regular intervals; (2) for a proof factor of 1.33, the required proof test interval must be below 300 flights to account for uncertainties in the evaluation; (3) conducting the proof test at a proof factor of 1.5 would considerably exceed the fuselage design limit load; therefore, it is not consistent with accepted safe practices; and (4) better safety can be assured by implementing enhanced nondestructive inspection requirements, and adequate reliability can be achieved by an inspection interval several times longer than the proof test interval.

Harris, Charles E.↗
NASA NTRS1993

Design, analysis, and fabrication of a pressure box test fixture for tension damage tolerance testing of curved fuselage panels

A pressure box test fixture was designed and fabricated to evaluate the effects of internal pressure, biaxial tension loads, curvature, and damage on the fracture response of composite fuselage structure. Previous work in composite fuselage tension damage tolerance, performed during NASA contract NAS1-17740, evaluated the above effects on unstiffened panels only. This work extends the tension damage tolerance testing to curved stiffened fuselage crown structure that contains longitudinal stringers and circumferential frame elements. The pressure box fixture was designed to apply internal pressure up to 20 psi, and axial tension loads up to 5000 lb/in, either separately or simultaneously. A NASTRAN finite element model of the pressure box fixture and composite stiffened panel was used to help design the test fixture, and was compared to a finite element model of a full composite stiffened fuselage shell. This was done to ensure that the test panel was loaded in a similar way to a panel in the full fuselage shell, and that the fixture and its attachment plates did not adversely affect the panel.

Smith, P. J.↗
NASA NTRS1984

Design and testing of high-pressure railguns and projectiles

Attention is given to the results of high-pressure tests involving four railgun designs and four projectile types. Explosive magnetic-flux compression generators were employed to power the railguns. On the basis of the experimental data, it appears that the high-strength projectiles have lower resistance to acceleration than low-strength projectiles, which expand against the bore during acceleration. While confined in the bore, polycarbonate projectiles can be subjected to pressures as high as 1.3 GPa without shattering. In multishot railguns, it is important to prevent an accumulation of sooty material from the plasma armature in railgun seams.

Peterson, D. R.↗
NASA NTRS1988

An experimental investigation of the effect of test-cell pressure on the performance of resistojets

The effect of test-cell pressure on the performance of two resistojets was investigated. Tests were conducted in a vacuum facility at pressures ranging from 0.000043 to 0.54 torr for two resistojet configurations: a laboratory model and an engineering model for the Space Station. The tests showed that for each thruster there was a decline in performance when tested in vacuum pressures above 0.001 torr. Measurements were made of surface temperature, thrust, and exit-plane pitot pressure over the range of test-cell pressures. From these measurements, the decline in performance of the laboratory-model resistojet at higher cell pressures was attributed to heat losses due to convection. For the engineering-model resistojet, the decline in performance was found to be a combination of heat loss and an effect of cell pressure on the nozzle flow.

Manzella, D. H.↗
NASA NTRS1995

Apparatus for testing high pressure injector elements

An apparatus for testing and evaluating the spray pattern of high pressure fuel injector elements for use in supplying fuel to combustion engines is presented. Prior art fuel injector elements were normally tested by use of low pressure apparatuses which did not provide a purge to prevent mist from obscuring the injector element or to prevent frosting of the view windows; could utilize only one fluid during each test; and had their viewing ports positioned one hundred eighty (180 deg) apart, thus preventing optimum use of laser diagnostics. The high pressure fluid injector test apparatus includes an upper hub, an upper weldment or housing, a first clamp and stud/nut assembly for securing the upper hub to the upper weldment, a standoff assembly within the upper weldment, a pair of window housings having view glasses within the upper weldment, an injector block assembly and purge plate within the upper weldment for holding an injector element to be tested and evaluated, a lower weldment or housing, a second clamp and stud/nut assembly for securing the lower weldment to the upper hub, a third clamp and stud/nut assembly for securing the lower hub to the lower weldment, mechanisms for introducing fluid under high pressure for testing an injector element, and mechanisms for purging the apparatus to prevent frosting of view glasses within the window housings and to permit unobstructed viewing of the injector element.

Myers, William Neill↗
NASA NTRS1993

Apparatus for testing high pressure injector elements

An apparatus for testing and evaluating the spray pattern of high pressure fuel injector elements for use in supplying fuel to combustion engines is presented. Prior art fuel injector elements were normally tested by use of low pressure apparatuses which did not provide a purge to prevent mist from obscuring the injector element or to prevent frosting of the view windows; could utilize only one fluid during each test; and had their viewing ports positioned one hundred eighty (180 deg) apart, thus preventing optimum use of laser diagnostics. The high pressure fluid injector test apparatus includes an upper hub, an upper weldment or housing, a first clamp and stud/nut assembly for securing the upper hub to the upper weldment, a standoff assembly within the upper weldment, a pair of window housings having view glasses within the upper weldment, an injector block assembly and purge plate within the upper weldment for holding an injector element to be tested and evaluated, a lower weldment or housing, a second clamp and stud/nut assembly for securing the lower weldment to the upper weldment, a lower hub, a third clamp and stud/nut assembly for securing the lower hub to the lower weldment, mechanisms for introducing fluid under high pressure for testing an injector element, and mechanisms for purging the apparatus to prevent frosting of view glasses within the window housings and to permit unobstructed viewing of the injector element.

Myers, William Neill↗
NASA NTRS2015

Pressure Venting Tests of Phenolic Impregnated Carbon Ablator (PICA)

A series of tests was devised to investigate the pressure venting behavior of one of the candidate ablators for the Orion capsule heat shield. Three different specimens of phenolic impregnated carbon ablator (PICA) were instrumented with internal pressure taps and subjected to rapid pressure changes from near vacuum to one atmosphere and simulated Orion ascent pressure histories. The specimens vented rapidly to ambient pressure and sustained no detectable damage during testing. Peak pressure differences through the thickness of a 3-inch-thick specimen were less than 1 psi during a simulated ascent pressure history.

Blosser, Max L.↗
NASA NTRS1990

An evaluation of the pressure proof test concept for thin sheet 2024-T3

The concept of pressure proof testing of fuselage structures with fatigue cracks to insure structural integrity was evaluated from a fracture mechanics viewpoint. A generic analytical and experimental investigation was conducted on uniaxially loaded flat panels with crack configurations and stress levels typical of longitudinal lap splice joints in commercial transport aircraft fuselages. The results revealed that the remaining fatigue life after a proof test was longer than that without the proof test because of crack growth retardation due to increased crack closure. However, based on a crack length that is slightly less than the critical value at the maximum proof test stress, the minimum assured life or proof test interval must be no more than 550 pressure cycles for a 1.33 proof factor and 1530 pressure cycles for a 1.5 proof factor to prevent in-flight failures.

Dawicke, D. S.↗
NASA NTRS1990

An evaluation of the pressure proof test concept for thin sheet 2024-T3

The concept of pressure proof testing of fuselage structures with fatigue cracks to insure structural integrity was evaluated from a fracture mechanics viewpoint. A generic analytical and experimental investigation was conducted on uniaxially loaded flat panels with crack configurations and stress levels typical of longitudinal lap-splice joints in commercial transport aircraft fuselage. The results revealed that the remaining fatigue life after a proof test was longer than that without the proof test because of crack growth retardation due to increased crack closure. However, based on a crack length that is slightly less than the critical value at the maximum proof test stress, the minimum assured life or proof test interval must be no more than 550 pressure cycles for a 1.33 proof factor and 1530 pressure cycles for a 1.5 proof factor to prevent in-flight failures.

Dawicke, D. S.↗
NASA NTRS1972

Aerodynamic characteristics of the Scout 133R vehicle determined from wind tunnel tests

Bending moments and other associated parameters were measured on a Scout vehicle during a launch through high velocity horizontal winds. Comparison of the measured data with predictions revealed some unexplained discrepancies. Possible sources of error in the experimental data and predictions were considered; one of which is the predicted aerodynamic characteristics. A wind tunnel investigation was initiated, including supersonic force and pressure tests, to better define the aerodynamics. In addition to basic aerodynamic coefficients from the force test, detailed pressure and load distributions along the body were established from the pressure test. Pressure coefficients were integrated to determine normal load distributions, total normal force, and total pitching moment of the body. Comparison of the normal forces from pressure and force tests resulted in agreement within 15%. Comparison of pitching moment data from the two tests resulted in larger differences.

Abramson, F. B.↗
NASA NTRS2012

Orion ECLSS/Suit System - Ambient Pressure Integrated Suit Test

The Ambient Pressure Integrated Suit Test (APIST) phase of the integrated system testing of the Orion Vehicle Atmosphere Revitalization System (ARS) technology was conducted for the Multipurpose Crew Vehicle (MPCV) Program within the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Exploration Systems Mission Directorate. Crew and Thermal Systems Division performed this test in the eleven-foot human-rated vacuum chamber at the NASA Johnson Space Center. This testing is the first phase of suit loop testing to demonstrate the viability of the Environmental Control and Life Support System (ECLSS) being developed for Orion. APIST is the first in a series, which will consist of testing development hardware including the Carbon dioxide and Moisture Removal Amine Swing-bed (CAMRAS) and the air revitalization loop fan with human test subjects in pressure suits at varying suit pressures. Follow-on testing, to be conducted in 2013, will utilize the CAMRAS and a development regulator with human test subjects in pressure suits at varying cabin and suit pressures. This paper will discuss the results and findings of APIST and will also discuss future testing.

Barido, Richard A.↗
NASA NTRS1991

An evaluation of the pressure proof test concept for 2024-T3 aluminium alloy sheet

The concept of pressure proof testing of fuselage structures with fatigue cracks to insure structural integrity was evaluated from a fracture mechanics viewpoint. A generic analytical and experimental investigation was conducted on uniaxially loaded flat panels with crack configurations and stress levels typical of longitudinal lap splice joints in commercial transport aircraft fuselages. The results revealed that the remaining fatigue life after a proof cycle was longer than that without the proof cycle because of crack growth retardation due to increased crack closure. However, based on a crack length that is slightly less than the critical value at the maximum proof stress, the minimum assured life or proof test interval must be no more than 550 pressure cycles for a 1.33 proof factor and 1530 pressure cycles for a 1.5 proof factor to prevent in-flight failures.

Dawicke, D. S.↗
NASA NTRS2014

Orion ECLSS/Suit System Intermediate Pressure Integrated Suit Test

The Intermediate Pressure Integrated Suit Test (IPIST) phase of the integrated system testing of the Orion Vehicle Atmosphere Revitalization System (ARS) technology was conducted for the Multipurpose Crew Vehicle (MPCV) Program within the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Exploration Systems Mission Directorate. This test was performed in the eleven-foot human-rated vacuum chamber at the NASA Johnson Space Center by the Crew and Thermal Systems Division. This testing is the second phase of suit loop testing to demonstrate the viability of the Environmental Control and Life Support System (ECLSS) being developed for Orion. The IPIST configuration consisted of development hardware that included the CAMRAS, air revitalization loop fan and suit loop regulator. Two test subjects were in pressure suits at varying suit pressures. Follow-on testing, to be conducted in 2014, will utilize the same hardware with human test subjects in pressure suits at vacuum. This paper will discuss the results and findings of IPIST and will also discuss future testing.

Barido, Richard A.↗
NASA NTRS1928

The Measurement of Pressure Through Tubes in Pressure Distribution Tests

The tests described in this report were made to determine the error caused by using small tubes to connect orifices on the surface of aircraft to central pressure capsules in making pressure distribution tests. Aluminum tubes of 3/16-inch inside diameter were used to determine this error. Lengths from 20 feet to 226 feet and pressures whose maxima varied from 2 inches to 140 inches of water were used. Single-pressure impulses for which the time of rise of pressure from zero to a maximum varied from 0.25 second to 3 seconds were investigated. The results show that the pressure recorded at the capsule on the far end of the tube lags behind the pressure at the orifice end and experiences also a change in magnitude. For the values used in these tests the time lag and pressure change vary principally with the time of rise of pressure from zero to a maximum and the tube length. Curves are constructed showing the time lag and pressure change. Empirical formulas are also given for computing the time lag. Analysis of pressure distribution tests made on airplanes in flight shows that the recorded pressures are slightly higher than the pressures at the orifice and that the time lag is negligible. The apparent increase in pressure is usually within the experimental error, but in the case of the modern pursuit type of airplane the pressure increase may be 5 per cent. For pressure-distribution tests on airships the analysis shows that the time lag and pressure change may be neglected.

Hemke, Paul E↗