Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “pilot program”

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 937 records · Page 52

Historical Review of Piloted Simulation at NASA Ames

This paper traces the conception and development of in-flight and ground based simulators at NASA Ames Research Center, starting in 1947 and continuing to the early 1990's. Problems with their development and operation and how limitations were handled are recounted. Advances needed in simulator equipment to improve performance and fidelity to gain pilot acceptance are discussed. The uses of these simulators in various aircraft research and development programs and their importance to aircraft design and flight testing are reviewed. Challenges remaining include a better understanding of the tradeoff between motion cues and visual cues, the importance of simulation sophistication when examining aircraft with marginal handling qualities characteristics, and the continuing need for upgrading simulation technology as more complex problems are encountered. Additional research is needed to understand the human behavior aspect in the pilot/simulator system.

Anderson, Seth B.↗

Motion of a Moving Object

SpaceAge Control, Inc., was established in 1968 to design, develop and manufacture pilot protection devices in support of space-based and high-performance test aircraft programs. In 1970, the company was awarded a NASA contract to produce precision, small-format position transducers for aircraft flight control testing. The successful completion of this contract led to the development and production of a complete line of position transducers. Today the company has over 600 customers in 20 industries and over 30 countries.

Source record↗

Convectively Induced Turbulence Encountered During NASA's Fall-2000 Flight Experiments

Aircraft encounters with atmospheric turbulence are a leading cause of in-flight injuries aboard commercial airliners and cost the airlines millions of dollars each year. Most of these injuries are due to encounters with turbulence in and around convection. In a recent study of 44 turbulence accident reports between 1990 and 1996, 82% of the cases were found to be near or within convective activity (Kaplan et al. 1999). According to NTSB accident reports, pilots' descriptions of these turbulence encounters include 'abrupt', 'in Instrument Meteorological Conditions (IMC)', 'saw nothing on the weather radar', and 'the encounter occurred while deviating around' convective activity. Though the FAA has provided guidelines for aircraft operating in convective environments, turbulence detection capability could decrease the number of injuries by alerting pilots of a potential encounter. The National Aeronautics and Space Administration, through its Aviation Safety Program, is addressing turbulence hazards through research, flight experiments, and data analysis. Primary focus of this program element is the characterization of turbulence and its environment, as well as the development and testing of hazard estimation algorithms for both radar and in situ detection. The ultimate goal is to operationally test sensors that will provide ample warning prior to hazardous turbulence encounters. In order to collect data for support of these activities, NASA-Langley's B-757 research aircraft was directed into regions favorable for convectively induced turbulence (CIT). On these flights, the airborne predictive wind shear (PWS) radar, augmented with algorithms designed for turbulence detection, was operated in real time to test this capability. In this paper, we present the results of two research flights when turbulence was encountered. Described is an overview of the flights, the general radar performance, and details of four encounters with severe turbulence.

Hamilton, David W.↗

Automated Rendezvous and Docking Sensor Testing at the Flight Robotics Laboratory

The Exploration Systems Architecture defines missions that require rendezvous, proximity operations, and docking (RPOD) of two spacecraft both in Low Earth Orbit (LEO) and in Low Lunar Orbit (LLO). Uncrewed spacecraft must perform automated and/or autonomous rendezvous, proximity operations and docking operations (commonly known as Automated Rendezvous and Docking, AR&D). The crewed versions may also perform AR&D, possibly with a different level of automation and/or autonomy, and must also provide the crew with relative navigation information for manual piloting. The capabilities of the RPOD sensors are critical to the success of the Exploration Program. NASA has the responsibility to determine whether the Crew Exploration Vehicle (CEV) contractor-proposed relative navigation sensor suite will meet the CEV requirements. The relatively low technology readiness of relative navigation sensors for AR&D has been carried as one of the CEV Projects top risks. The AR&D Sensor Technology Project seeks to reduce this risk by increasing technology maturation of selected relative navigation sensor technologies through testing and simulation, and to allow the CEV Project to assess the relative navigation sensors.

Mitchell, J.↗

Automated Rendezvous and Docking Sensor Testing at the Flight Robotics Laboratory

The Exploration Systems Architecture defines missions that require rendezvous, proximity operations, and docking (RPOD) of two spacecraft both in Low Earth Orbit (LEO) and in Low Lunar Orbit (LLO). Uncrewed spacecraft must perform automated and/or autonomous rendezvous, proximity operations and docking operations (commonly known as Automated Rendezvous and Docking, (AR&D).) The crewed versions of the spacecraft may also perform AR&D, possibly with a different level of automation and/or autonomy, and must also provide the crew with relative navigation information for manual piloting. The capabilities of the RPOD sensors are critical to the success of the Exploration Program. NASA has the responsibility to determine whether the Crew Exploration Vehicle (CEV) contractor-proposed relative navigation sensor suite will meet the CEV requirements. The relatively low technology readiness of relative navigation sensors for AR&D has been carried as one of the CEV Projects top risks. The AR&D Sensor Technology Project seeks to reduce this risk by increasing technology maturation of selected relative navigation sensor technologies through testing and simulation, and to allow the CEV Project to assess the relative navigation sensors.

Howard, Richard T.↗

Integrated Docking Simulation and Testing with the Johnson Space Center Six-Degree of Freedom Dynamic Test System

The Exploration Systems Architecture defines missions that require rendezvous, proximity operations, and docking (RPOD) of two spacecraft both in Low Earth Orbit (LEO) and in Low Lunar Orbit (LLO). Uncrewed spacecraft must perform automated and/or autonomous rendezvous, proximity operations and docking operations (commonly known as Automated Rendezvous and Docking, AR&D). The crewed versions may also perform AR&D, possibly with a different level of automation and/or autonomy, and must also provide the crew with relative navigation information for manual piloting. The capabilities of the RPOD sensors are critical to the success of the Constellation Program; this is carried as one of the CEV Project top risks. The Exploration Technology Development Program (ETDP) AR&D Sensor Technology Project seeks to reduce this risk by increasing technology maturation of selected relative navigation sensor technologies through testing and simulation. One of the project activities is a series of "pathfinder" testing and simulation activities to integrate relative navigation sensors with the Johnson Space Center Six-Degree-of-Freedom Test System (SDTS). The SDTS will be the primary testing location for the Orion spacecraft s Low Impact Docking System (LIDS). Project team members have integrated the Orion simulation with the SDTS computer system so that real-time closed loop testing can be performed with relative navigation sensors and the docking system in the loop during docking and undocking scenarios. Two relative navigation sensors are being used as part of a "pathfinder" activity in order to pave the way for future testing with the actual Orion sensors. This paper describes the test configuration and test results.

Mitchell, Jennifer D.↗

Emergency flight control system using one engine and fuel transfer

A system for emergency aircraft control uses at least one engine and lateral fuel transfer that allows a pilot to regain control over an aircraft under emergency conditions. Where aircraft propulsion is available only through engines on one side of the aircraft, lateral fuel transfer provides means by which the center of gravity of the aircraft can be moved over to the wing associated with the operating engine, thus inducing a moment that balances the moment from the remaining engine, allowing the pilot to regain control over the aircraft. By implementing the present invention in flight control programming associated with a flight control computer (FCC), control of the aircraft under emergency conditions can be linked to the yoke or autopilot knob of the aircraft. Additionally, the center of gravity of the aircraft can be shifted in order to effect maneuvers and turns by spacing such center of gravity either closer to or farther away from the propelling engine or engines. In an alternative embodiment, aircraft having a third engine associated with the tail section or otherwise are accommodated and implemented by the present invention by appropriately shifting the center of gravity of the aircraft. Alternatively, where a four-engine aircraft has suffered loss of engine control on one side of the plane, the lateral fuel transfer may deliver the center of gravity closer to the two remaining engines. Differential thrust between the two can then control the pitch and roll of the aircraft in conjunction with lateral fuel transfer.

Burcham, Jr., Frank W.↗

Multi-Sensor Testing for Automated Rendezvous and Docking Sensor Testing at the Flight Robotics Laboratory

The Exploration Systems Architecture defines missions that require rendezvous, proximity operations, and docking (RPOD) of two spacecraft both in Low Earth Orbit (LEO) and in Low Lunar Orbit (LLO). Uncrewed spacecraft must perform automated and/or autonomous rendezvous, proximity operations and docking operations (commonly known as AR&D). The crewed missions may also perform rendezvous and docking operations and may require different levels of automation and/or autonomy, and must provide the crew with relative navigation information for manual piloting. The capabilities of the RPOD sensors are critical to the success of the Exploration Program. NASA has the responsibility to determine whether the Crew Exploration Vehicle (CEV) contractor proposed relative navigation sensor suite will meet the requirements. The relatively low technology readiness level of AR&D relative navigation sensors has been carried as one of the CEV Project's top risks. The AR&D Sensor Technology Project seeks to reduce the risk by the testing and analysis of selected relative navigation sensor technologies through hardware-in-the-loop testing and simulation. These activities will provide the CEV Project information to assess the relative navigation sensors maturity as well as demonstrate test methods and capabilities. The first year of this project focused on a series of"pathfinder" testing tasks to develop the test plans, test facility requirements, trajectories, math model architecture, simulation platform, and processes that will be used to evaluate the Contractor-proposed sensors. Four candidate sensors were used in the first phase of the testing. The second phase of testing used four sensors simultaneously: two Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) Advanced Video Guidance Sensors (AVGS), a laser-based video sensor that uses retroreflectors attached to the target vehicle, and two commercial laser range finders. The multi-sensor testing was conducted at MSFC's Flight Robotics Laboratory (FRL) using the FRL's 6-DOF gantry system, called the Dynamic Overhead Target System (DOTS). The target vehicle for "docking" in the laboratory was a mockup that was representative of the proposed CEV docking system, with added retroreflectors for the AVGS. The multi-sensor test configuration used 35 open-loop test trajectories covering three major objectives: (1) sensor characterization trajectories designed to test a wide range of performance parameters; (2) CEV-specific trajectories designed to test performance during CEV-like approach and departure profiles; and (3) sensor characterization tests designed for evaluating sensor performance under more extreme conditions as might be induced during a spacecraft failure or during contingency situations. This paper describes the test development, test facility, test preparations, test execution, and test results of the multi-sensor series of trajectories.

Brewster, L.↗

Robust Modal Filtering and Control of the X-56A Model with Simulated Fiber Optic Sensor Failures

The X-56A aircraft is a remotely-piloted aircraft with flutter modes intentionally designed into the flight envelope. The X-56A program must demonstrate flight control while suppressing all unstable modes. A previous X-56A model study demonstrated a distributed-sensing-based active shape and active flutter suppression controller. The controller relies on an estimator which is sensitive to bias. This estimator is improved herein, and a real-time robust estimator is derived and demonstrated on 1530 fiber optic sensors. It is shown in simulation that the estimator can simultaneously reject 230 worst-case fiber optic sensor failures automatically. These sensor failures include locations with high leverage (or importance). To reduce the impact of leverage outliers, concentration based on a Mahalanobis trim criterion is introduced. A redescending M-estimator with Tukey bisquare weights is used to improve location and dispersion estimates within each concentration step in the presence of asymmetry (or leverage). A dynamic simulation is used to compare the concentrated robust estimator to a state-of-the-art real-time robust multivariate estimator. The estimators support a previously-derived mu-optimal shape controller. It is found that during the failure scenario, the concentrated modal estimator keeps the system stable.

Modal Filtering↗

Robust Modal Filtering and Control of the X-56A Model with Simulated Fiber Optic Sensor Failures

The X-56A aircraft is a remotely-piloted aircraft with flutter modes intentionally designed into the flight envelope. The X-56A program must demonstrate flight control while suppressing all unstable modes. A previous X-56A model study demonstrated a distributed-sensing-based active shape and active flutter suppression controller. The controller relies on an estimator which is sensitive to bias. This estimator is improved herein, and a real-time robust estimator is derived and demonstrated on 1530 fiber optic sensors. It is shown in simulation that the estimator can simultaneously reject 230 worst-case fiber optic sensor failures automatically. These sensor failures include locations with high leverage (or importance). To reduce the impact of leverage outliers, concentration based on a Mahalanobis trim criterion is introduced. A redescending M-estimator with Tukey bisquare weights is used to improve location and dispersion estimates within each concentration step in the presence of asymmetry (or leverage). A dynamic simulation is used to compare the concentrated robust estimator to a state-of-the-art real-time robust multivariate estimator. The estimators support a previously-derived mu-optimal shape controller. It is found that during the failure scenario, the concentrated modal estimator keeps the system stable.

Modal Filtering↗

Orion SysML Model, Digital Twin, and Lessons Learned for Artemis I

In 2015 it was recognized by NASA’s Orion Chief Engineer that NASA’s design insight into the Orion subsystems for Artemis I were not sufficient to provide traditional engineering support to flight operations. To address these concerns and provide an opportunity to apply emerging model-based systems engineering and digital twin methodologies and provide opportunities for employees across NASA to get hands-on training, an Orion digital twin pilot project was initiated in 2020. With the increase in complexities of spacecraft, and decreased time to made decisions during missions in critical or emergency situations, digital modeling and integration of design can reduce the time to answer questions by days and required human resources by an order of magnitude over historical approaches and was identified to be critical capability for NASA’s future. This paper describes the genesis of this digital twin pilot project, efforts undertaken, a reproducible methodology to take available system information from a mature program to create an executable SysML model that supports a link to unit-specific data, thus forming a connection to the physical asset, and associated lessons learned and project deliverables.

MBSE↗

Pilot Test Remediation of a Fractured Bedrock Aquifer at the Maywood Superfund Site, Maywood, New Jersey - 19217

The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) and Cabrera Services are conducting a Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA) Pilot Test treatment of a fractured bedrock aquifer at the Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action Program (FUSRAP) Maywood Superfund Site (FMSS) located in Maywood, New Jersey (NJ), USA. The Maywood Chemical Company Superfund Site in Bergen County, NJ is listed on the United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) Superfund National Priorities List (NPL). The National Superfund Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Information System (CERCLIS) identification number is NJD980529762. The Maywood Chemical Company Superfund Site (hereafter referred to as the FMSS) consists of 92 designated properties in the communities of Maywood, Lodi and Rochelle Park, NJ. These are collectively known as FMSS 'Vicinity Properties' and include property owned by the federal government (the Maywood Interim Storage Site, or MISS); the Stepan Company (former location of the Maywood Chemical Works, or MCW); 62 residential properties; three properties owned by the state or federal government; four municipal properties; and 21 commercial properties. The Stepan Company property includes contaminated buildings and three remediated U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) licensed burial pits; the MISS also includes a contaminated building. Contamination on the FMSS is being addressed under three separate actions coordinated by the lead regulator USEPA Region 2. The USACE is addressing thorium (Th) and other wastes at the site defined as 'FUSRAP waste' in the Soils and Buildings and Groundwater Records of Decision (ROD) for the FMSS. Stepan Company is addressing other chemical wastes (non-FUSRAP waste) at the FMSS. The Groundwater ROD [1] was signed into agreement by USACE Division Commander in June 2012 and USEPA Region 2 Administrator in July 2012 and presents the selected remedial actions for Operable Unit (OU) 2 groundwater at the MISS and adjacent properties. The selected remedial action is removal of non-radiologically contaminated soils on the MISS containing arsenic, lithium, and benzene with concentrations above cleanup levels, and monitored natural attenuation (MNA) of arsenic, lithium, and benzene in groundwater. In situ treatment of arsenic in the overburden aquifer using oxidation reduction (redox) alteration will also be performed if needed to meet the groundwater cleanup levels after the source soil is removed. The need for in situ treatment will be determined during the Groundwater ROD review at least three to four years after the contaminated source soil removal is completed. The third action addressing non-FUSRAP chemical wastes will be the responsibility of the Stepan Company as a primary responsible party in this action. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

Pilot Test Remediation of a Fractured Bedrock Aquifer at the Maywood Superfund Site, Maywood, New Jersey - 20073

The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) and Cabrera Services are conducting a Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA) Pilot Test treatment of a fractured bedrock aquifer at the Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action Program (FUSRAP) Maywood Superfund Site (FMSS) located in Maywood, New Jersey (NJ), USA. The Maywood Chemical Company Superfund Site in Bergen County, NJ is listed on the United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) Superfund National Priorities List (NPL). The National Superfund Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Information System (CERCLIS) identification number is NJD980529762. The Maywood Chemical Company Superfund Site (hereafter referred to as the FMSS) consists of 92 designated properties in the communities of Maywood, Lodi and Rochelle Park, NJ. These are collectively known as FMSS 'Vicinity Properties' and include property owned by the federal government (the Maywood Interim Storage Site, or MISS); the Stepan Company (former location of the Maywood Chemical Works, or MCW); 62 residential properties; three properties owned by the state or federal government; four municipal properties; and 21 commercial properties. The Stepan Company property includes contaminated buildings and three remediated U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) licensed burial pits; the MISS also includes a contaminated building. Contamination on the FMSS is being addressed under three separate actions coordinated by the lead regulator USEPA Region 2. The USACE is addressing thorium (Th) and other wastes at the site defined as 'FUSRAP waste' in the Soils and Buildings and Groundwater Records of Decision (ROD) for the FMSS. Stepan Company is addressing other chemical wastes (non-FUSRAP waste) at the FMSS. The Groundwater ROD [1] was signed into agreement by USACE Division Commander in June 2012 and USEPA Region 2 Administrator in July 2012 and presents the selected remedial actions for Operable Unit (OU) 2 groundwater at the MISS and adjacent properties. The selected remedial action is removal of non-radiologically contaminated soils on the MISS containing arsenic, lithium, and benzene with concentrations above cleanup levels, and monitored natural attenuation (MNA) of arsenic, lithium, and benzene in groundwater. In situ treatment of arsenic in the overburden aquifer using oxidation reduction (redox) alteration will also be performed if needed to meet the groundwater cleanup levels after the source soil is removed. The need for in situ treatment will be determined during the Groundwater ROD review at least three to four years after the contaminated source soil removal is completed. The third action addressing non-FUSRAP chemical wastes will be the responsibility of the Stepan Company as a primary responsible party in this action. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

Energy Technology Proving Ground FY-2026 Program Plan (Rev.1)

New methods of energy production and distribution are required to meet clean energy goals and demands across all U.S. energy sectors. Idaho National Laboratory’s (INL) Integrated Energy Systems (IES) initiative is enabling clean energy research, development, and demonstration (RD&D) activities. To date, IES demonstration programs have been limited by distributed infrastructure and a lack of large-scale facilities to accommodate industry-scale research of Technical Readiness Level (TRL) 6-8 technologies. The IES initiative plans to eliminate these constraints by establishing a new research complex at INL known as the Energy Technology Proving Ground (Proving Ground) to be led by the Energy and Environment Science and Technology Directorate. The Energy and Environment Science and Technology (EES&T) directorate, one of five Idaho National Laboratory (INL) RD&D organizations, focuses on clean energy technologies that anchor the industry-enabling research of the Proving Ground. The Proving Ground will combine diverse clean energy systems into lean integrated test bed of independent multiscale capabilities available to the government and commercial industries to perform research; and will enable INL’s goal of becoming a Net-Zero entity by 2031. This program encompasses existing and new research space at both the in-town Research and Education Campus (REC) and the Arco desert site (the Site). The Proving Ground will support the maturation of IES technologies from TRL 1 through 8 by providing the infrastructure and capabilities needed to sustain a continuum of RD&D from basic science to industry-scale. To establish The Proving Ground and meet INL’s net-zero goals by 2031, nine research program areas have been identified within the IES initiative that require expanded and new capital infrastructure. This program plan provides guidance for establishing the Proving Ground at the Site for plug-and-play pilot testing and proofing of integrated energy system functionality including fission and renewable energy sources for industry driven application platforms.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗

Small Aircraft Data Distribution System

The CARVE Small Aircraft Data Distribution System acquires the aircraft location and attitude data that is required by the various programs running on a distributed network. This system distributes the data it acquires to the data acquisition programs for inclusion in their data files. It uses UDP (User Datagram Protocol) to broadcast data over a LAN (Local Area Network) to any programs that might have a use for the data. The program is easily adaptable to acquire additional data and log that data to disk. The current version also drives displays using precision pitch and roll information to aid the pilot in maintaining a level-level attitude for radar/radiometer mapping beyond the degree available by flying visually or using a standard gyro-driven attitude indicator. The software is designed to acquire an array of data to help the mission manager make real-time decisions as to the effectiveness of the flight. This data is displayed for the mission manager and broadcast to the other experiments on the aircraft for inclusion in their data files. The program also drives real-time precision pitch and roll displays for the pilot and copilot to aid them in maintaining the desired attitude, when required, during data acquisition on mapping lines.

Chazanoff, Seth L.↗

An Automated Stall-Speed Warning System

The NASA Dryden Flight Research Facility embarked upon a project with the United States Army Aviation Engineering Flight Activity (USAAEFA) to develop and test a stall-speed warning system. NASA designed and built an automated stall-speed warning system which presents both airspeed and stall speed to the pilot. The airspeed and stall speed are computed in real time by monitoring the basic aerodynamic parameters {dynamic pressure, horizontal and vertical accelerations, and pressure altitude) and other parameters (elevator and flap positions, engine torques, and fuel flow). In addition, an aural warning at predetermined stall margins is presented to the pilot through a voice synthesizer. Once the system was designed and installed in the aircraft, a flight-test program of less than 20 hr was anticipated to determine the stall-speed software coefficients. These coefficients would then be inserted in the system's software and then test flown over a period of about 10 hr for the purposes of evaluation.

Pilot↗

Pilot-Scale Silicone Process for Low-Cost Carbon Dioxide Capture. Final Scientific/Technical Report

GE Global Research has developed, over the last 8 years, a platform of cost effective CO 2 capture technologies based on a non-aqueous aminosilicone solvent (GAP-1m). As demonstrated in a previous funded DOE project (DE-FE0007502), the GAP-1m solvent has increased CO 2 working capacity, lower volatility and corrosivity than the benchmark aqueous amine technology. The current report describes the cooperative program between GE Global Research (GE GRC), and the National Carbon Capture Center (NCCC) to design, construct, and operate a pilot-scale process using GAP-1m solvent to demonstrate its performance at 0.5 MWe. (i) Performance of the GAP-1m solvent was demonstrated in a 0.5 MWe pilot with real flue gas for over 900 hrs. of operation using two alternative desorption designs: a Continuous Stirred Tank Reactor (CSTR), and a Steam Stripper Column (SSC). The CSTR is a one-stage separation unit with reduced space requirements, and capital cost. The alternative is a multi-stage separation column, with improved desorption efficiency. Testing the two desorber options allowed us to identify the most cost effective, and space efficient desorber solution. (ii) CSTR Campaign: The CSTR desorber unit was designed, fabricated and integrated with the pilot solvent test unit (PSTU), replacing the PSTU Steam Stripper Column at NCCC. Solvent management and waste water special procedures were implemented to accommodate operation of the non-aqueous solvent in the PSTU. Performance of the GAP-1m solvent with the CSTR was demonstrated for over 500 hrs. while varying temperature of the desorption (230 – 265 oF), solvent circulation rate (GAP-1m : CO 2 (molar) = 1.5 – 4), and flue gas flow rates (0.2 – 0.5 MWe). Solvent carry-over in the CO 2 product was minimized by maintaining water content below 5 wt.%, and desorption pressure at 7 psig. CO 2 capture efficiency achieved was 95% at 0.25 MWe (GAP-1m : CO 2 = 4 (molar), 230 oF desorption), and 65% at 0.5 MWe (GAP-1m : CO 2 (molar) = 1.5, 248 oF). Solvent loss was dominated by thermal degradation of the rich solvent. (iii) Steam Stripper Column Campaign: Higher expected cost of the solvent vs. aqueous amines makes solvent management a top priority to maintain the low cost for the process. During the testing of the GAP-1m solvent with the CSTR, thermal degradation of the rich solvent was found to be the main mechanism in solvent loss. Small amounts of water in the working solution were found to be an effective way to enable steam stripping, thereby lowering desorption temperature, and hence reducing thermal degradation. Steam stripping also increased working capacity by 30% due to a more efficient desorption. The concept was first tested in a glass stripping column (lab scale, GE GRC), optimized in a continuous bench scale system (2 kWe, GE GRC), and demonstrated in a 0.5 MWe PSTU at NCCC. No special system modifications were required to the PSTU to accommodate the testing of the non-aqueous GAP-1 solvent with the regenerator column. SSC was found to be more robust towards solvent entrainment (H 2 O < 35 wt.%). 90 – 95% CO 2 capture efficiency was achieved under stoichiometric conditions at 0.5 MWe (235 oF desorption, 2 psig and 19 wt. % H 2 O). Both CO 2 capture efficiency and specific duty reached optimum conditions at 18 wt.% H 2 O. Low amine degradation (< 0.05 wt.%/day) was recorded over 350 hrs. of operation. Controlled water addition to GAP-1m solvent decreased the desorption temperature, thermal degradation, and improved the CO 2 working capacity due to more efficient absorption and desorption processes. Under these conditions, the GAP-1m solvent exhibited a 25% increased working capacity, and 10% reduction in specific steam duty vs. MEA, at 10 oF lower desorption temperature. (iv) Techno-economic Analysis: The pilot-scale PSTU engineering data were used to update the capture system process models, and the techno-economic analysis was performed for a 550 MW coal fired power plant. The 1st year CO 2 removal cost for the aminosilicone-based carbon-capture process was evaluated at $48/ton CO 2 using the steam stripper column. This is a 20% reduction compared to MEA, primarily due to lower overall capital cost. CO 2 cost using the CSTR desorber is dominated by the economics of the solvent make-up. The steam stripper desorber is the preferred unit operation due to a more efficient desorption, and reduced solvent make-up rate. Further reduction in CO 2 capture cost is expected by lowering the manufacturing cost of the solvent, implementing flowsheet optimization and/or implementing the next generation aminosilicone solvent with improved stability and increased CO 2 working capacity.

0.5 MW Pilot↗

Simulation validation of the XV-15 tilt-rotor research aircraft

The results of a simulation validation program of the XV-15 tilt-rotor research aircraft are detailed, covering such simulation aspects as the mathematical model, visual system, motion system, cab aural system, cab control loader system, pilot perceptual fidelity, and generic tilt rotor applications. Simulation validation was performed for the hover, low-speed, and sideward flight modes, with consideration of the in-ground rotor effect. Several deficiencies of the mathematical model and the simulation systems were identified in the course of the simulation validation project, and some were corrected. It is noted that NASA's Vertical Motion Simulator used in the program is an excellent tool for tilt-rotor and rotorcraft design, development, and pilot training.

Ferguson, S. W.↗