Results for “Reference Electrode” — Page 6

NASA NTRS1994

Control of an Axisymmetric Jet Using Vortex Generators

The results of an experimental investigation on the effect of vortex generators, in the form of small tabs at the nozzle exit on the evolution of a jet, are reported in this paper. Primarily tabs of triangular shape are considered, and the effect is studied up to a jet Mach number of 1.8. Each tab is found to produce a dominant pair of counter-rotating streamwise vortices having a sense of rotation opposite to that expected from the wrapping of the boundary layer. This results in an inward indentation of the mixing layer into the core of the jet. A triangular-shaped tab with its apex leaning downstream, referred to as a delta tab, is found to be the most effective in producing such vortices, with a consequential large influence on the overall jet evolution. Two delta tabs, spaced 180 deg apart, completely bifurcate the jet. Four delta tabs stretch the mixing layer into four 'fingers,' resulting in a significant increase in the jet mixing downstream. For six delta tabs the mixing layer distortion settles back to a three finger configuration through an interaction of the streamwise vortices. The tabs are found to be equally effective in jets with turbulent or laminar initial boundary layers. Two sources of streamwise vorticity are postulated for the flow under consideration. One is the upstream 'pressure hill,' generated by the tab, which constitutes the main contributor of vorticity to the dominant pair. Another is due to vortex filaments shed from the sides of the tab and reoriented downstream by the mean shear of the mixing layer. Depending on the orientation of the tab, the latter source can produce a vortex pair having a sense of rotation opposite to that of the dominant pair. In the case of the delta tab, vorticity from the two sources add, explaining the strong effect in that configuration.

Streamwise Vorticity↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Battery Evaluation Profiles for X-57 and Future Urban Electric Aircraft

Battery energy density is one of the most critical design parameters for sizing all-electric aircraft, however it’s easily overestimated. Establishing the effective, usable energy density is confused by varying degrees of margin needed to account for structural and thermal management between different cell chemistry and pack designs. Therefore, a better methodology is needed to fairly compare emerging battery technologies for electric aircraft. Currently, there is a loss of critical information when vehicle trade studies are performed using “nominal” published cell-level performance metrics. Aircraft power demands rarely match these nominal power profiles, and aircraft designers lack the ability to accurately simulate the battery performance and temperature off-nominally unless the battery chemistry is well established. Conversely, battery suppliers have no generalized reference cases to publish more realistic performance metrics. This can lead to poor assumptions, such as aircraft studies assuming a fixed discharge efficiency of a battery, when in reality the usable energy in a pack is dependent on the power and thermal profile. Information needed to properly assess weight penalties for thermal management is also typically poorly characterized when assessing candidate batteries. This paper serves to better inform battery development, and similarly, provide aircraft designers with more realistic assumptions for applying knockdown margins in their designs. Detailed power and thermal performance estimates are provided, which provide a starting point for sizing power and thermal budgets using experimentally derived battery models. Results show that the X-57 battery-to-shaft efficiency is 77.3% for a particular optimized mission. Considering a 25% reserve on the battery capacity, this means that only roughly half of the original 55.3kWh ‘nominal’ pack energy can be converted to useful work during a mission. Further estimates on a clean-sheet VTOL optimization show an average 82.7% battery-to-shaft efficiency, using 98% peak efficiency inverters and 97.4% peak efficiency motors. Although higher battery efficiencies are possible, the resulting weight penalty negates improvement in vehicle performance. These trade-offs and resulting power profiles are provided as a starting point to better assess future battery designs.

Battery↗

NASA NTRS1989

Characterization testing of a 40 Ahr bipolar nickel hydrogen battery

In a continuing effort to develop NiH2 bipolar technology to a point where it can be used efficiently in space flight, testing of a second 40 Ahr, 10-cell bipolar battery has begun. This battery has undergone extensive characterization testing to determine the effects of such operating parameters as charge and discharge rates, temperature, and pressure. The fundamental design of this actively cooled bipolar battery is the same as the first battery. Most of the individual components, however, are from different manufacturers. Different testing procedures as well as certain unique battery characteristics make it difficult to directly compare the two sets of results. In general, the performance of this battery throughout characterization produced expected results. The main differences seen between the first and second batteries occurred during the high-rate discharge portion of the test matrix. The first battery also had poor high-rate discharge results, although better than those of the second battery. Minor changes were made to the battery frame design used for the first battery in an attempt to allow better gas access to the reaction sites for the second build and hopefully improve performance. The changes, however, did not improve the performance of the second battery and could have possibly contributed to the poorer performance that was observed. There are other component differences that could have contributed to the poorer performance of the second battery. The H2 electrode in the second battery was constructed with a Goretex backing which could have limited the high-rate current flow. The gas screen in the second battery had a larger mesh which again could have limited the high-rate current flow. Small scale 2 x 2 batteries are being tested to evaluate the effects of the component variations.

Brewer, Jeffrey C.↗

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 NTRS2005

Properties and Potential of Two (Ni,Pt)Ti Alloys for Use as High-Temperature Actuator Materials

The microstructure, transformation temperatures, basic tensile properties, shape memory behavior, and work output for two (Ni,Ti)Pt high-temperature shape memory alloys have been characterized. One was a Ni 30 Pt 20 Ti 50 alloy (referred to as 20Pt) with transformation temperatures above 230 °C and the other was a Ni 20 Pt 30 Ti 50 alloy (30Pt) with transformation temperatures above 530 °C. Both materials displayed shape memory behavior and were capable of 100% (no-load) strain recovery for strain levels up to their fracture limit (3-4%) when deformed at room temperature. For the 20Pt alloy, the tensile strength, modulus, and ductility dramatically increased when the material was tested just above the austenite finish (A f ) temperature. For the 30Pt alloy, a similar change in yield behavior at temperatures above the A f was not observed. In this case the strength of the austenite phase was at best comparable and generally much weaker than the martensite phase. A ductility minimum was also observed just below the A s temperature in this alloy. As a result of these differences in tensile behavior, the two alloys performed completely different when thermally cycled under constant load. The 20Pt alloy behaved similar to conventional binary NiTi alloys with work output due to the martensite-to-austenite transformation initially increasing with applied stress. The maximum work output measured in the 20Pt alloy was nearly 9 J/cm 3 and was limited by the tensile ductility of the material. In contrast, the martensite-to-austenite transformation in the 30Pt alloy was not capable of performing work against any bias load. The reason for this behavior was traced back to its basic mechanical properties, where the yield strength of the austenite phase was similar to or lower than that of the martensite phase, depending on temperature. Hence, the recovery or transformation strain for the 30Pt alloy under load was essentially zero, resulting in zero work output.

High-Temperature Shape Memory Alloy↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Battery Evaluation Profiles for X-57 and Future Urban Electric Aircraft

Battery energy density is one of the most critical design parameters for sizing all-electric aircraft, however it’s easily overestimated. Establishing the effective, usable energy density is confused by varying degrees of margin needed to account for structural and thermal management between different cell chemistry and pack designs. Therefore, a better methodology is needed to fairly compare emerging battery technologies for electric aircraft. Currently, there is a loss of critical information when vehicle trade studies are performed using “nominal” published cell-level performance metrics. Aircraft power demands rarely match these nominal power profiles, and aircraft designers lack the ability to accurately simulate the battery performance and temperature off-nominally unless the battery chemistry is well established. Conversely, battery suppliers have no generalized reference cases to publish more realistic performance metrics. This can lead to poor assumptions, such as aircraft studies assuming a fixed discharge efficiency of a battery, when in reality the usable energy in a pack is dependent on the power and thermal profile. Information needed to properly assess weight penalties for thermal management is also typically poorly characterized when assessing candidate batteries. This paper serves to better inform battery development, and similarly, provide aircraft designers with more realistic assumptions for applying knockdown margins in their designs. Detailed power and thermal performance estimates are provided, which provide a starting point for sizing power and thermal budgets using experimentally derived battery models. Results show that the X-57 battery-to-shaft efficiency is 77.3% for a particular optimized mission. Considering a 25% reserve on the battery capacity, this means that only roughly half of the original 55.3kWh ‘nominal’ pack energy can be converted to useful work during a mission. Further estimates on a clean-sheet VTOL optimization show an average 82.7% battery-to-shaft efficiency, using 98% peak efficiency inverters and 97.4% peak efficiency motors. Although higher battery efficiencies are possible, the resulting weight penalty negates improvement in vehicle performance. These trade-offs and resulting power profiles are provided as a starting point to better assess future battery designs.

Battery Electric Aircraft↗

NASA NTRS2026

Spacecraft Water Impurity Monitor, a System for Water Quality Analysis on Exploration Missions Beyond Low Earth Orbit

Exploration missions beyond low-earth-orbit (LEO) will require advanced instrumentation to monitor water quality. Traveling beyond LEO means the transfer of water samples to an Earth-based laboratory for detailed analysis is not feasible. Detailed analysis of water composition during exploration is still necessary, because having the capability to determine the specific organic chemical causing a change in total organic carbon (TOC) or the specific metal or ionic species causing a change in conductivity has the potential to inform the crew health and system management decisions. On a new vehicle such as a lunar or Mars surface habitat or a Mars transit vehicle, finding “new” impurities not seen on ISS should be expected. The key is to identify the impurity so the correct action can be taken. On ISS we can measure TOC, conductivity, and other physical properties but do not have the capability for detailed analysis using vehicle instrumentation. This is acceptable because ISS can send samples down to Earth for further analysis and obtain the detailed composition. The Spacecraft Water Impurity Monitor (SWIM) will provide detailed water quality analysis for missions in which sample down mass is not available. SWIM is a system comprising organic and inorganic analysis modules. For organic chemicals, a gas chromatograph mass spectrometer (GCMS) detects and identifies organic impurities. For inorganic species, a capillary electrophoresis capacitively coupled contactless conductivity detection (CE-C4D) system as well as ion specific electrodes detect and identify metal ions and other inorganic salts / acids. The SWIM technology demonstration project has completed a System Requirements Review (SRR) to finalize detection requirements and is currently working to refine vehicle interface requirements for a future technology demonstration. The project also has begun preliminary flight design activities for the core analyzers in the instrument suite.

Water Monitoring↗

NASA NTRS1995

A review of nickel hydrogen battery technology

This paper on nickel hydrogen batteries is an overview of the various nickel hydrogen battery design options, technical accomplishments, validation test results and trends. There is more than one nickel hydrogen battery design, each having its advantage for specific applications. The major battery designs are individual pressure vessel (IPV), common pressure vessel (CPV), bipolar and low pressure metal hydride. State-of-the-art (SOA) nickel hydrogen batteries are replacing nickel cadmium batteries in almost all geosynchronous orbit (GEO) applications requiring power above 1 kW. However, for the more severe low earth orbit (LEO) applications (greater than 30,000 cycles), the current cycle life of 4000 to 10,000 cycles at 60 percent DOD should be improved. A NASA Lewis Research Center innovative advanced design IPV nickel hydrogen cell led to a breakthrough in cycle life enabling LEO applications at deep depths of discharge (DOD). A trend for some future satellites is to increase the power level to greater than 6 kW. Another trend is to decrease the power to less than 1 kW for small low cost satellites. Hence, the challenge is to reduce battery mass, volume and cost. A key is to develop a light weight nickel electrode and alternate battery designs. A common pressure vessel (CPV) nickel hydrogen battery is emerging as a viable alternative to the IPV design. It has the advantage of reduced mass, volume and manufacturing costs. A 10 Ah CPV battery has successfully provided power on the relatively short lived Clementine Spacecraft. A bipolar nickel hydrogen battery design has been demonstrated (15,000 LEO cycles, 40 percent DOD). The advantage is also a significant reduction in volume, a modest reduction in mass, and like most bipolar designs, features a high pulse power capability. A low pressure aerospace nickel metal hydride battery cell has been developed and is on the market. It is a prismatic design which has the advantage of a significant reduction in volume and a reduction in manufacturing cost.

Smithrick, John J.↗

NASA NTRS2026

Spacecraft Water Impurity Monitor, a System for Water Quality Analysis on Exploration Missions Beyond Low Earth Orbit

Exploration missions beyond low-earth-orbit (LEO) will require advanced instrumentation to monitor water quality. Traveling beyond LEO means the transfer of water samples to an Earth-based laboratory for detailed analysis is not feasible. Detailed analysis of water composition during exploration is still necessary, because having the capability to determine the specific organic chemical causing a change in total organic carbon (TOC) or the specific metal or ionic species causing a change in conductivity has the potential to inform the crew health and system management decisions. On a new vehicle such as a lunar or Mars surface habitat or a Mars transit vehicle, finding “new” impurities not seen on ISS should be expected. The key is to identify the impurity so the correct action can be taken. On ISS we can measure TOC, conductivity, and other physical properties but do not have the capability for detailed analysis using vehicle instrumentation. This is acceptable because ISS can send samples down to Earth for further analysis and obtain the detailed composition. The Spacecraft Water Impurity Monitor (SWIM) will provide detailed water quality analysis for missions in which sample down mass is not available. SWIM is a system comprising organic and inorganic analysis modules. For organic chemicals, a gas chromatograph mass spectrometer (GCMS) detects and identifies organic impurities. For inorganic species, a capillary electrophoresis capacitively coupled contactless conductivity detection (CE-C4D) system as well as ion specific electrodes detect and identify metal ions and other inorganic salts / acids. The SWIM technology demonstration project has completed a System Requirements Review (SRR) to finalize detection requirements and is currently working to refine vehicle interface requirements for a future technology demonstration. The project also has begun preliminary flight design activities for the core analyzers in the instrument suite.

Water Monitoring↗

NASA NTRS1994

Bipolar Ag-Zn battery

The silver-zinc (AgZn) battery system has been unique in its ability to safely satisfy high power demand applications with low mass and volume. However, a new generation of defense, aerospace, and commercial applications will impose even higher power demands. These new power demands can be satisfied by the development of a bipolar battery design. In this configuration the power consuming, interelectrode current conductors are eliminated while the current is then conducted via the large cross-section electrode substrate. Negative and positive active materials are applied to opposite sides of a solid silver foil substrate. In addition to reducing the weight and volume required for a specified power level, the output voltage performance is also improved as follows. Reduced weight through: elimination of the plastic cell container; elimination of plate leads and intercell connector; and elimination of internal plate current collector. Increased voltage through: elimination of resistance of current collector; elimination of resistance of plate lead; and elimination of resistance of intercell connector. EPI worked previously on development of a secondary bipolar silver zinc battery. This development demonstrated the electrical capability of the system and manufacturing techniques. One difficulty with this development was mechanical problems with the seals. However, recent improvements in plastics and adhesives should eliminate the major problem of maintaining a seal around the periphery of the bipolar module. The seal problem is not as significant for a primary battery application or for a requirement for only a few discharge cycles. A second difficulty encountered was with activation (introducing electrolyte into the cell) and with venting gas from the cell without loss of electrolyte. During previous work, the following projections for energy density were made from test data for a high power system which demonstrated in excess of 50 discharge/charge cycles. Projected system power = 100 kilowatts; discharge time = 30 seconds; discharge current density = 1.75 amps/sq in.; system weight = 86 lbs (9.7 WH/lb); and system volume = 1071 cu. in. (.78 WH/cu. in.). EPI is currently working on a development program to produce a bipolar silver-zinc battery design for NASA. The potential application would be to power electromechanical actuators for space launch vehicles.

Giltner, L. John↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Exposure of Highly Reflective Far-Ultraviolet Coatings to LEO Environment for TRL Advancement for the Habitable Worlds Observatory

Over the past several years, our team at the NASA Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC), in collaboration with the Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) and the Naval Research Laboratory (NRL), have developed several new protected Al coating technologies with improved Far-Ultraviolet (FUV) reflectance performance and more robust environmental stability. These include Al protected with lithium-based fluoride (LiF) coatings such as hot deposited LiF (eLiF), XeF 2 -passivated LiF coatings (XeLiF), Li 3 AlF 6 overcoats, AlF 3 (plasma passivated), and XeF 2 passivated MgF 2 coatings (XeMgF 2 ). However, despite these developments, relatively little experimental information exists regarding the long-term stability of these coatings after simultaneous exposure to the Low Earth Orbit (LEO) environment. To evaluate their environmental durability and advance their Technology Readiness Level (TRL), representative samples of these coating technologies, Al+XeLiF, Al+eLiF, Al+Li 3 AlF 6 , Al+AlF 3 , Al+XeMgF 2 , and bare Al as reference samples, were flown onboard the International Space Station (ISS) as part of the Materials International Space Station Experiment 20 (MISSE-20). The MISSE platform is operated by Aegis Aerospace for relatively long-duration (e.g. 6 months) external exposure experiments in a space environment. The coatings were deposited on ULE and Zerodur substrates, and witness samples deposited on the same coatings runs, but on glass slides were left on Earth as control. A subset of the flight samples were fitted with MgF 2 windows to reduce direct exposure to atomic oxygen (AO) and charged particles, and still let through UV and other types of radiation on these samples. After approximately 6 months of exposure in the forward-facing (RAM) direction, the samples were returned to Earth and characterized by performing FUV/NUV/VIS/NIR reflectance measurements to quantify degradation, spectroscopic ellipsometry to evaluate coating thickness and optical constants, atomic force microscopy (AFM) to quantify surface roughness evolution during the flight in the ISS. The MgF 2 protective windows were also analyzed through FUV transmission measurements. Comparison with the witness samples left on the ground and with the flown bare Al samples (with just the naturally occurring Al 2 O 3 layer) provided a quantitative assessment of coating thickness variations, optical performance degradation, and morphological changes induced by prolonged exposure to the LEO environment.

Far Ultraviolet (FUV)↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

ARCTRON: A Rapid Experimental Proving Ground for TPS Experiments and Arcjet Technology Development

Innovation in high-enthalpy facilities is fundamentally limited by the cost and risk of experimentation. New concepts for plasma control, diagnostics, facility components, and plasma-material interaction often require repeated iterations that are impractical to perform in production arcjets. As a result, promising ideas may remain unexplored or reach operational facilities only after significant development effort. ARCTRON is being developed as a rapid experimental proving ground where new ideas in plasma science, arcjet engineering, diagnostics, and material response can be conceived, tested, and quantitatively evaluated before transition to large-scale facilities. The platform combines radio-frequency (RF) and DC arc plasma generation, externally applied magnetic fields, configurable gas composition, reduced-pressure operation, laser heating, electrical biasing, and modular diagnostic access. These capabilities permit the plasma source, applied forcing, test article, and measurement configuration to be modified independently, allowing individual physical mechanisms to be isolated more readily than in a traditional test environment. One class of investigations addresses fundamental plasma-surface interaction physics. Conventional material tests often expose a specimen simultaneously to convective heating, reactive species, pressure, shear, radiation, and surface-current effects. The resulting material response may be measured accurately, while the contribution of each mechanism remains difficult to identify. ARCTRON is designed to vary these effects selectively. Plasma chemistry can be changed independently through configurable gas mixtures; magnetic fields and electrical biasing can modify charged-particle transport; laser heating can provide a non-plasma thermal input; and pressure, flow, and discharge mode can be varied over a broad operating space. This enables controlled tests of hypotheses involving surface catalycity, reactive-species transport, plasma-assisted oxidation, electromagnetic effects, shear, and the relative contributions of thermal and chemical loading. A second class of investigations enabled by this approach concerns the engineering of high-enthalpy facilities themselves. Arc-heated facilities are limited by electrode erosion, unstable arc attachment, localized heating, and damage to nozzles and other plasma-facing components. ARCTRON provides a lower-cost environment for testing concepts intended to mitigate these limitations. Candidate investigations include the use of applied magnetic fields to alter current paths and reduce plasma interaction with nozzle walls, ExB forcing to introduce controlled plasma rotation, magnetic or geometric approaches for distributing arc attachment, and alternative electrode or discharge configurations intended to reduce erosion and improve stability. Because the platform is reconfigurable, these concepts can be evaluated through repeated design--build--test cycles before they are considered for implementation in operational facilities. The platform also supports the development and validation of diagnostics that may be difficult to introduce initially into a large arcjet. Current and planned measurements include spatially resolved optical emission spectroscopy, electrostatic probes, fast imaging, pyrometry, calorimetry, laser-induced fluorescence, and absorption spectroscopy. These diagnostics are intended not merely to document a nominal operating condition, but to constrain the local plasma state and its relationship to component or material response. The modular facility geometry allows diagnostic concepts to be tested, calibrated, and compared under repeatable conditions before deployment in more demanding environments. ARCTRON is also supported by an integrated software suite. Automated control and data acquisition allow discharge parameters, gas composition, magnetic fields, diagnostic timing, and test configuration to be recorded as part of each experiment (STARDAC - Software for Testing, Analysis, Research Data, and Control). The Backend for Experiment Analysis, Storage, and Traceability (BEAST) is a database that provides the infrastructure needed to associate heterogeneous measurements with facility configuration, specimen identity, calibration state, geometry, and analysis provenance. This backend is particularly important for exploratory campaigns, in which many related configurations may be tested, and the value of an individual experiment depends on its connection to earlier and subsequent iterations. Complementary analysis capabilities, including computer-vision-based transient response measurements (arcjetCV), three-dimensional surface reconstruction (STARSCAN), and model-based Bayesian inference (SHIELD), and tomography data analysis (TOMATO, PuMA) can be incorporated when required by a specific hypothesis without becoming the focus of every campaign. The central objective of ARCTRON is therefore not to maximize heat flux or reproduce a complete flight environment. Its purpose is to reduce the cost and time required to ask consequential questions about plasma behavior, plasma-facing materials, diagnostics, and arcjet technology. By providing a controlled environment for rapid reconfiguration, mechanism isolation, quantitative measurement, and iterative engineering, ARCTRON can help mature concepts that would otherwise remain too speculative or too risky for evaluation in production facilities. The resulting knowledge can then guide the design of material models, focus test objectives in larger arcjets, reduce facility-development risk, and improve the physical basis of high-enthalpy ground testing. This work will present the ARCTRON architecture, operating modes, diagnostic suite, and digital experimental workflow. Initial experimental results from the first integrated operation of the facility will be presented, including flow characterization, power limitations, and deployment of the initial diagnostic suite. Ongoing development efforts aimed at catalycity characterization, magnetic plasma control, and advanced optical diagnostics will also be discussed, illustrating how the platform supports rapid iteration from concept to experiment.

experimental diagnostics↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

ARCTRON: A Rapid Experimental Proving Ground for TPS Experiments and Arcjet Technology Development

Innovation in high-enthalpy facilities is fundamentally limited by the cost and risk of experimentation. New concepts for plasma control, diagnostics, facility components, and plasma-material interaction often require repeated iterations that are impractical to perform in production arcjets. As a result, promising ideas may remain unexplored or reach operational facilities only after significant development effort. ARCTRON is being developed as a rapid experimental proving ground where new ideas in plasma science, arcjet engineering, diagnostics, and material response can be conceived, tested, and quantitatively evaluated before transition to large-scale facilities. The platform combines radio-frequency (RF) and DC arc plasma generation, externally applied magnetic fields, configurable gas composition, reduced-pressure operation, laser heating, electrical biasing, and modular diagnostic access. These capabilities permit the plasma source, applied forcing, test article, and measurement configuration to be modified independently, allowing individual physical mechanisms to be isolated more readily than in a traditional test environment. One class of investigations addresses fundamental plasma-surface interaction physics. Conventional material tests often expose a specimen simultaneously to convective heating, reactive species, pressure, shear, radiation, and surface-current effects. The resulting material response may be measured accurately, while the contribution of each mechanism remains difficult to identify. ARCTRON is designed to vary these effects selectively. Plasma chemistry can be changed independently through configurable gas mixtures; magnetic fields and electrical biasing can modify charged-particle transport; laser heating can provide a non-plasma thermal input; and pressure, flow, and discharge mode can be varied over a broad operating space. This enables controlled tests of hypotheses involving surface catalycity, reactive-species transport, plasma-assisted oxidation, electromagnetic effects, shear, and the relative contributions of thermal and chemical loading. A second class of investigations enabled by this approach concerns the engineering of high-enthalpy facilities themselves. Arc-heated facilities are limited by electrode erosion, unstable arc attachment, localized heating, and damage to nozzles and other plasma-facing components. ARCTRON provides a lower-cost environment for testing concepts intended to mitigate these limitations. Candidate investigations include the use of applied magnetic fields to alter current paths and reduce plasma interaction with nozzle walls, ExB forcing to introduce controlled plasma rotation, magnetic or geometric approaches for distributing arc attachment, and alternative electrode or discharge configurations intended to reduce erosion and improve stability. Because the platform is reconfigurable, these concepts can be evaluated through repeated design--build--test cycles before they are considered for implementation in operational facilities. The platform also supports the development and validation of diagnostics that may be difficult to introduce initially into a large arcjet. Current and planned measurements include spatially resolved optical emission spectroscopy, electrostatic probes, fast imaging, pyrometry, calorimetry, laser-induced fluorescence, and absorption spectroscopy. These diagnostics are intended not merely to document a nominal operating condition, but to constrain the local plasma state and its relationship to component or material response. The modular facility geometry allows diagnostic concepts to be tested, calibrated, and compared under repeatable conditions before deployment in more demanding environments. ARCTRON is also supported by an integrated software suite. Automated control and data acquisition allow discharge parameters, gas composition, magnetic fields, diagnostic timing, and test configuration to be recorded as part of each experiment (STARDAC - Software for Testing, Analysis, Research Data, and Control). The Backend for Experiment Analysis, Storage, and Traceability (BEAST) is a database that provides the infrastructure needed to associate heterogeneous measurements with facility configuration, specimen identity, calibration state, geometry, and analysis provenance. This backend is particularly important for exploratory campaigns, in which many related configurations may be tested, and the value of an individual experiment depends on its connection to earlier and subsequent iterations. Complementary analysis capabilities, including computer-vision-based transient response measurements (arcjetCV), three-dimensional surface reconstruction (STARSCAN), and model-based Bayesian inference (SHIELD), and tomography data analysis (TOMATO, PuMA) can be incorporated when required by a specific hypothesis without becoming the focus of every campaign. The central objective of ARCTRON is therefore not to maximize heat flux or reproduce a complete flight environment. Its purpose is to reduce the cost and time required to ask consequential questions about plasma behavior, plasma-facing materials, diagnostics, and arcjet technology. By providing a controlled environment for rapid reconfiguration, mechanism isolation, quantitative measurement, and iterative engineering, ARCTRON can help mature concepts that would otherwise remain too speculative or too risky for evaluation in production facilities. The resulting knowledge can then guide the design of material models, focus test objectives in larger arcjets, reduce facility-development risk, and improve the physical basis of high-enthalpy ground testing. This work will present the ARCTRON architecture, operating modes, diagnostic suite, and digital experimental workflow. Initial experimental results from the first integrated operation of the facility will be presented, including flow characterization, power limitations, and deployment of the initial diagnostic suite. Ongoing development efforts aimed at catalycity characterization, magnetic plasma control, and advanced optical diagnostics will also be discussed, illustrating how the platform supports rapid iteration from concept to experiment.

experimental diagnostics↗

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 12 - Flight Envelope

The term "flight envelope" is used to refer to the boundaries of aircraft loading and flight conditions within which operation of the aircraft is satisfactory, and beyond which some aspect becomes unacceptable. This flight envelope represents, in fact, the limiting conditions arising from a matrix of inter-related flight envelopes covering the appropriate variables. Thus, for each loading (i.e., external stores configuration and its associated range of weight and center of gravity (c.g.) position) and aircraft configuration (i.e., position of undercarriage (u/c), flaps, slats, etc.), the envelopes of airspeed versus altitude, airspeed versus load factor, angle of attack versus angle of sideslip, etc., must be investigated to establish the limits within which all aspects such as handling qualities, engine behavior, structural loads, etc., remain acceptable. Flight testing of new or derivative aircraft models is carried out with the initial purpose of defining a flight envelope which is, first and foremost, safe and secondarily, which enables the effective use of the vehicle for its intended purpose. Flight testing occurs only after numerous reviews of the design and review of results from ground tests and predictions of flight characteristics in such areas as structures, aerodynamics, stability and control, flight controls (particularly fly-by-wire control systems, propulsion, etc.). Accordingly, opening and expanding the envelope is a task that must be approached cautiously, systematically, and with coordination and cooperation of the many disciplines involved in the design and test of an airplane. (Sections 8 and 10 cover test planning and safety of flight considerations, respectively). The fundamental tenet in establishing a flight envelope via flight test is risk reduction. This is reflected in the typical sequence of events leading to initial flight test - design reviews (both hardware and software), then ground test involving singular disciplines (windtunnel tests for aerodynamics, structurally loading the wing/fuselage/nacelle on a ground test article with loads anticipated to occur in flight, flight control system control law checkout, propulsion test cell runs and/or flying test bed tests, etc.), and then ground tests involving multi-disciplines (See Section 9). Only after these have been accomplished will an initial, limited, low-risk, flight envelope be established. The limited envelope will typically be in the middle of the projected final flight envelope. Subsequent flight tests will then be devoted to expanding the initial envelope by operating the airplane at increasing ranges - representing increasing risk - of engine operation, airspeeds both fast and slow, altitude, load factor both above and below 1g, centers of gravity (fore and aft), and with system/subsystem failures. Whether flight tests are to define a flight envelope on a new model airplane with the attendant new airframe, new engine(s), and new subsystems (hydraulics, pressurization, etc.), or on an airplane involving only a few of these areas such as new engines in an old airframe, the fundamental approach to establishing an envelope is the same.

H Walgemoed↗

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

Introduction to the JPSS-2 Advanced Technology Microwave Sounder (ATMS) Government Calibration Data Book (GCDB)

The third Advanced Technology Microwave Sounder (ATMS) is an instrument onboard the Joint Polar Satellite System (JPSS), JPSS-2 (renamed NOAA-21 in orbit) mission. This report is to introduce the JPSS-2 Government Calibration Data Book (J2 GCDB) for ATMS, SN 304. This J2 GCDB document contains key information generated during the calibration testing campaign that is driving parameters for radiometric performance. This document also contains supporting data that augments the calibration results. The values in this document are utilized by ATMS’s calibration packet which is, in turn, an integral component in the interpretation of science data. The calibration data in this report was collected from tests such as shelf-level testing, antenna testing, instrument thermal vacuum (TVAC) testing; satellite TVAC testing; and JPSS-2 post-launch tests. JPSS-2 was launched on November 10, 2022. In the subsequent years, the Government will release an ATMS GCDB for each JPSS mission. We expect that all public users can download these ATMS GCDBs from the NOAA operational Integrated Calibration and Validation System (ICVS) website, see more discussions below. The goal of this GCDB is to demonstrate how to characterize ATMS measurements using JPSS-2 ATMS on-orbit operational data and to provide relevant explanations. This document serves as a primary public domain reference for calibrating operational ATMS Raw Data Records (RDR) science data, as used in the current operational Interface Data Processing Segment (IDPS) system. This same RDR science data is distributed through direct broadcast (DB) to DB users for use in their ground processing systems. This J2 GCDB provides the results of the ATMS system radiometric calibration, the antenna flat reflector emissivity [1], the antenna pattern measurements, the antenna pattern corrected brightness temperature [2], the brightness temperature of the lunar disk [3], Lunar Intrusion (LI) correction algorithm [4], receiver spectral parameters, and mechanical alignment on-orbit pointing results, and the striping effect appeared significantly in S-NPP on-orbit radiance data when the data are compared to the Radiative Transfer Model (RTM) simulation in numerical weather prediction (NWP) system [5]. It also provides the parameters required for conversion of telemetry counts to engineering units, for radiometric calibration, and for antenna beam geo-location. Moreover, it provides JPSS-2 ATMS Spectral Response Functions data, some additional information related to ATMS on-orbit performance, on-orbit lunar intrusion correction parameters and Earth contamination bias, and on how to derive ATMS RDR, antenna Temperature Data Records (TDR), and Sensor Data Records (SDR). Furthermore, an introduction of NOAA operational Integrated Calibration and Validation System (ICVS) website and services is added in this J2 GCDB. This ICVS hosts a long-term monitoring system which allows to visualization and comparison of data from JPSS missions, NOAA legacy Polar Operational Environmental Satellites (POES), and Geostationary Operational Environmental Satellites (GOES). From NOAA Comprehensive Large Array-data Stewardship System (CLASS), the public users can download all JPSS ATMS data products for all JPSS missions.

Microwave Sounder↗

NASA NTRS2005

Introduction to Flight Test Engineering [Introduction Aux Techniques Des Essais En Vol]

Flight test is at the core of what organizations must do in order to validate the operation and systems on an aircraft. While the AGARDograph series 300 and 160 series deal with aspects of this testing, this volume pulls it all together as an introduction to the process required to do effective flight test engineering. This volume was originally published in 1995. Its utility has been proven in that many flight test organizations and universities have requested copies for their engineers and students. It was felt that re-issuing it in a new format designed for electronic publication would be valuable to the community. This second printing changes none of the text, but rather reformats it. All the original references to AGARD (instead of RTO) are left in place so that none of the flavor of the original publication is lost. This is the Introductory Volume to the Flight Test Techniques Series. It is a general introduction to the various activities and aspects of Flight Test Engineering that must be considered when planning, conducting, and reporting a flight test program. Its main intent is to provide a broad overview to the novice engineer or to other people who have a need to interface with specialists within the flight test community. The first two Sections provide some insight into the question of why flight test and give a short history of flight test engineering. Sections 3 through 10 deal with the preparation for flight testing. They provide guidance on the preliminary factors that must be considered; the composition of the test team; the logistic support requirements; the instrumentation and data processing requirements; the flight test plan; the associated preliminary ground tests; and last, but by no means least, discuss safety aspects. Sections 11 through 27 describe the various types of flight tests that are usually conducted during the development and certification of a new or modified aircraft type. Each Section offers a brief introduction to the topic under consideration, and the nature and the objectives of the tests to be conducted. It lists the test instrumentation (and, where appropriate, other test equipment and facilities) required, describes the test maneuvers to be executed, and indicates the way in which the test data is selected, analyzed, and presented. The various activities that should take place between test flights are presented next. Items that are covered are: who to debrief; what type of reports to send where: types of data analysis required for next flight; review of test data to make a comparison to predicted data and some courses of action if there is not good agreement; and comments on selecting the next test flight. The activities that must take place upon completion of the test program are presented. The types of reports and briefings that should take place and a discussion of some of the uses of the flight test data are covered. A brief forecast is presented of where present trends may be leading.

Test facilities↗