Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “TUNNELING”

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 109 records · Page 6
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS1994

Comparison of X-31 flight, wind-tunnel, and water-tunnel yawing moment asymmetries at high angles of attack

The X-31 aircraft are being used in the enhanced fighter maneuverability (EFM) research program, which is jointly funded by the (U.S.) Advanced Research Projects Agency (ARPA) and Germany's Federal Ministry of Defense (FMOD). The flight test portion of the program, which involves two aircraft, is being conducted by an International Test Organization (ITO) comprising the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), the U.S. Navy, the U.S. Air Force, Rockwell International, and Deutsche Aerospace (DASA). The goals of the flight program are to demonstrate EFM technologies, investigate close-in-combat exchange ratios, develop design requirements, build a database for application to future fighter aircraft, and develop and validate low-cost prototype concepts. For longitudinal control the X-31 uses canards, symmetrical movement of the trailing-edge flaps, and pitch deflection of the thrust vectoring system. The trim, inertial coupling, and engine gyroscopic coupling compensation tasks are performed primarily by the trailing-edge flaps. For lateral-directional control the aircraft uses differential deflection of the trailing-edge flaps for roll coordination and a conventional rudder combined with the thrust vectoring system to provide yaw control. The rudder is only effective up to about 40 deg angle of attack (alpha), after which the thrust vectoring becomes the primary yaw control effector. Both the leading-edge flaps and the inlet lip are scheduled with the angle of attack to provide best performance.

Brent R Cobleigh↗
NASA NTRS1999

Data Corrections and Wind-Tunnel Data Comparisons of a 5% TCA Model in the NASA Ames 12-ft Pressure Tunnel

The objectives of this research are: 1) To determine the effect of geometric variations near the inboard leading-edge flap on high-lift and stability and control performance data; 2) To determine Re effects on TCA (Technology Concept Aircraft) high-lift configuration for optimum high-lift and stability and control performance at takeoff, climbout, approach and landing conditions; and 3) To obtain flow-visualization data on upper surface of wing for CFD validations. This paper is presented in viewgraph form.

Zuniga, Fanny A.↗
NASA NTRS2022

Experimental and Computational Study of the X-59 Wind Tunnel Model at Glenn Research Center 8- by 6-foot Supersonic Wind Tunnel

The Commercial Supersonics Technology (CST) Project under the NASA Advanced Air Vehicles Program (AAVP) focuses on developing technologies for enabling designs of future commercial supersonic aircraft. Many different technology areas are being addressed, such as designing airframes for better efficiency, improving engine integration for minimizing noise, maximizing combustion efficiency, and reducing high-altitude emissions, but the greatest emphasis has been on understanding the contributions to sonic boom loudness and learning how to shape the airframe and integrate the engine(s) such that the boom noise is minimized.

CST↗
DOE OSTI2020

Lessons Learned from Hanford's Purex Tunnel 2 Structural Stabilization Project - 20509

In 2019, U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) contractor CH2M Hill Plateau Remediation Company (CHPRC) completed structurally stabilizing the Plutonium Uranium Extraction Plant (Purex) waste storage Tunnel 2 with engineered grout. This action significantly reduced risk to Hanford workers, the surrounding community and environment by preventing future collapse of the tunnel and possible release of radioactive materials. Decades of plutonium production at the Purex facility required construction of two large underground tunnels for storage of highly contaminated plutonium processing equipment that had failed during the operation of Purex and other facilities across the Hanford Site. Following the partial collapse of Purex Tunnel 1 on May 9, 2017, DOE and CHPRC took immediate action to safely stabilize the collapsed section of the tunnel. The hole in the tunnel was filled the next day as a temporary stabilization measure, and no contamination was detected as a result of the partial collapse of the tunnel. Workers then stabilized Tunnel 1 in its entirety by filling with engineered grout, which also encapsulated the radioactive equipment and railcars within the tunnel. Grouting eliminated the risk of further collapse and stabilized the tunnel contents, all while not precluding future remedial actions or final closure decisions. While conducting an integrity analysis of Tunnel 1 by using construction drawings, photos and other historical documents, project teams also analyzed the much larger Purex Tunnel 2. The analysis found Tunnel 2 did not meet current codes for structural integrity, and it may not be able to bear the weight of the soil above the tunnel. Therefore, it was determined that Tunnel 2 was also at risk of collapse. DoE's independent panel of experts determined grouting to be the best choice for stabilizing Tunnel 2 because it provides the highest level of stability and protection, and does not preclude future remedial actions. DOE authorized CHPRC to commence work and the Purex Tunnel 2 Structural Stabilization Project was launched in December of 2017. The paper will discuss the process of recognizing the following critical aspects and risks associated with stabilizing Tunnel 2, and the actions taken by the project team to mitigate these risks, including: - Tunnel investigation and data collection to assist with future remediation; - On-site batching and mock-ups to provide the large quantity of grout required for stabilizing the tunnel; - Workforce involvement and innovative actions that mitigated the project's most significant potential hazards, including traffic control; - Project team high level of execution translated into successful project execution. Sharing lessons learned from this critical risk-reduction effort can enhance the safety and efficiency of other complex and hazardous projects across the DOE complex. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
NASA NTRS1994

Wall interaction effects for a full-scale helicopter rotor in the NASA Ames 80- by 120-foot wind tunnel

A full-scale helicopter rotor test was conducted in the NASA Ames 80- by 120-Foot Wind Tunnel with a four-bladed S-76 rotor system. This wind tunnel test generated a unique and extensive data base covering a wide range of rotor shaft angles-of-attack and rotor thrust conditions from 0 to 100 knots. Three configurations were tested: (1) empty tunnel; (2) test stand body (fuselage) and support system; and (3) fuselage and support system with rotor installed. Empty tunnel wall pressure data are evaluated as a function of tunnel speed to understand the baseline characteristics. Aerodynamic interaction effects between the fuselage and the walls of the tunnel are investigated by comparing wall, ceiling, and floor pressures for various tunnel velocities and fuselage angles-of-attack. Aerodynamic interaction effects between the rotor and the walls of the tunnel are also investigated by comparing wall, ceiling, and floor pressures for various rotor shaft angles, rotor thrust conditions, and tunnel velocities. Empty tunnel wall pressure data show good repeatability and are not affected by tunnel speed. In addition, the tunnel wall pressure profiles are not affected by the presence of the fuselage apart from a pressure shift. Results do not indicate that the tunnel wall pressure profiles are affected by the presence of the rotor. Significant changes in the wall, ceiling, and floor pressure profiles occur with changing tunnel speeds for constant rotor thrust and shaft angle conditions. Significant changes were also observed when varying rotor thrust or rotor shaft angle-of-attack. Other results indicate that dynamic rotor loads and blade motion are influenced by the presence of the tunnel walls at very low tunnel velocity and, together with the wall pressure data, provide a good indication of flow breakdown.

Shinoda, Patrick M.↗
NASA NTRS1986

Current wind tunnel capability and planned improvements at the NASA Langley Research Center

NASA Langley's major wing wind tunnels and the projected facilities planned to be completed by 1988 are presented. Special capabilities, uses, and the improvements done during the Langley's tunnel revitalization program are described for the following facilities: (1) the 30 x 60-ft subsonic tunnel, (2) the 4 x 7-m low-speed testing tunnel, (3) the Low-Turbulence Tunnel, (4) the Spin Tunnel, (5) the National Transonic Pressure Tunnel, (6) Transonic Cryogenic Tunnel, (7) the National Transonic Facility, (8) the 16-ft Transonic Tunnel, (9) the Transonic Dynamic Tunnel, (10) the Unitary Plan Wind Tunnel, and (11) a new 20-inch supersonic wind tunnel which is currently undergoing final checkout. The design concept of an extremely-low disturbance level supersonic tunnel, the upgrading plans for the hypersonic aerothermal complex, and the present and planned capabilities for testing the hydrogen-fueled Scramjet engines are also presented. In addition, uses of inexpensive simple-to-operate research wind tunnels are discussed. Tunnel diagrams and graphs of upgrade results are included.

Bower, R. E.↗
NASA NTRS2001

Revalidation of the NASA Ames 11-by 11-Foot Transonic Wind Tunnel with a Commercial Airplane Model

The 11-By 11-Foot Transonic leg of the Unitary Plan Wind Tunnel (UPWT) was modernized to improve tunnel performance, capability, productivity, and reliability. Wind tunnel tests to demonstrate the readiness of the tunnel for a return to production operations included an Integrated Systems Test (IST), calibration tests, and airplane validation tests. One of the two validation tests was a 0.037-scale Boeing 777 model that was previously tested in the 11-By 11-Foot tunnel in 1991. The objective of the validation tests was to compare pre-modernization and post-modernization results from the same airplane model in order to substantiate the operational readiness of the facility. Evaluation of within-test, test-to-test, and tunnel-to-tunnel data repeatability were made to study the effects of the tunnel modifications. Tunnel productivity was also evaluated to determine the readiness of the facility for production operations. The operation of the facility, including model installation, tunnel operations, and the performance of tunnel systems, was observed and facility deficiency findings generated. The data repeatability studies and tunnel-to-tunnel comparisons demonstrated outstanding data repeatability and a high overall level of data quality. Despite some operational and facility problems, the validation test was successful in demonstrating the readiness of the facility to perform production airplane wind tunnel%, tests.

Kmak, Frank J.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Inlet Performance of the NFAC 1/50th-scale 80- by 120- Foot Wind Tunnel

The National Full-Scale Aerodynamics Complex 80- by 120-Foot Wind Tunnel (80x120) was dedicated in 1987 and rated at 100 knots for full-scale aircraft testing at NASA Ames Research Center. The 80x120 is the world’s largest wind tunnel, designed as an open circuit tunnel with a large aerodynamically treated inlet open to the ambient atmospheric air. In 2017, damage was sustained within the wind tunnel drive system, opening a window to do testing using the existing 1/50th-scale model of the 80- by 120-Foot Wind Tunnel within the full-scale 80- by 120-Foot Wind tunnel test section. The objective of the research was to quantify the turbulence levels within the 1/50th-scale test section as a function of onset atmospheric wind direction (± 90 deg from tunnel center-line), variable test section speed (5 – 50 m/s) and purposeful obtrusion of wind flow into the inlet. The model wind tunnel inlet, contraction, and test section are geometrically identical to that of the full-scale wind tunnel and model testing provides aerodynamic performance characteristics under controlled test conditions allowing for insight into the full-scale test section flow quality. The test section turbulence levels are minimally affected by the onset direction of the ambient atmospheric wind, but are dramatically affected by the speed in the tunnel while operated in the presence of winds. Original design specifications were axial/vertical/lateral turbulence ≤ 0.5% at maximum test section speed, though early full scale tunnel testing determined that lateral turbulence would be ≤ 0.6%. For test section speeds ≥ 30 m/s the tunnel is within the design specification limits. Between 5 m/s and 30 m/s, the test section turbulence levels are dependent on the onset wind direction and test section speed where test section turbulence in the axial, vertical and lateral directions was seen to be between 0.5% and 1% and, at times, greater than 1%. Finally, testing was performed with blockage designs at the inlet to disrupt the wind flow quality entering the tunnel contraction zone in an attempt to create higher levels of turbulence for high turbulent test conditions simulating the earth’s boundary layer. The highest turbulence levels measured were 6% in the axial direction by use of large spires designed to obstruct ≈ 50% of the inlet area.

Inlet Performance↗
NASA NTRS2010

Measurements and Computations of Second-Mode Instability Waves in Three Hypersonic Wind Tunnels

High-frequency pressure-fluctuation measurements were made in AEDC Tunnel 9 at Mach 10 and the NASA Langley 15-Inch Mach 6 and 31-Inch Mach 10 tunnels. Measurements were made on a 7deg-half-angle cone model. Pitot measurements of freestream pressure fluctuations were also made in Tunnel 9 and the Langley Mach-6 tunnel. For the first time, second-mode waves were measured in all of these tunnels, using 1-MHz-response pressure sensors. In Tunnel 9, second-mode waves could be seen in power spectra computed from records as short as 80 micro-s. The second-mode wave amplitudes were observed to saturate and then begin to decrease in the Langley tunnels, indicating wave breakdown. Breakdown was estimated to occur near N approx. equals 5 in the Langley Mach-10 tunnel. The unit-Reynolds-number variations in the data from Tunnel 9 were too large to see the same processes. In Tunnel 9, the measured transition locations were found to be at N = 4.5 using thermocouples, and N = 5.3 using 50-kHz-response pressure sensors. What appears to be a very long transitional region was observed at a unit Reynolds number of 13.5 million per meter in Tunnel 9. These results were consistent with the high-frequency pressure fluctuation measurements. High-frequency pressure fluctuation measurements indicated that transition did occur in the Langley Mach-6 tunnel, but the location of transition was not precisely determined. Unit Reynolds numbers in the Langley Mach-10 tunnel were too low to observe transition. More analysis of this data set is expected in the future.

Berridge, Dennis C.↗
NASA NTRS2019

Shockwave/Boundary-Layer Interaction Studies Performed in the NASA Langley 20-Inch Mach 6 Air Tunnel

This paper highlights results from a collaborative study performed by The University of Tennessee Space Institute (UTSI) and NASA Langley Research Center on the Shockwave/Boundary-Layer Interaction (SWBLI) generated by a cylindrical protuberance on a flat plate in a Mach 6 flow. The study was performed in the 20-Inch Mach 6 Air Tunnel at NASA Langley Research Center and consisted of two separate entries. In the first entry, simultaneous high-speed schlieren and high-speed pressure-sensitive paint (PSP) imaging – which was performed for the first time in the 20-Inch Mach 6 facility at NASA Langley – were performed as well as simultaneous high-speed schlieren and oil-flow imaging. In the second entry, the model configuration was modified to increase the size of the interaction region. High-speed schlieren and infrared thermography (IR) surface imaging were performed in this second entry. The goal of these tests was to characterize the SBLI in the presence of a laminar, transitional, and turbulent boundary layer using high-speed optical imaging techniques. AoA = sting angle-of-attack (°) dcylinder = cylinder diameter (mm) dtrip = cylindrical tripping element diameter (mm) Δshock = shock stand-off distance (mm) hcylinder = cylinder height (mm) htrip = cylindrical tripping element height (mm) HSS = high-speed schlieren M∞ = freestream Mach number PSP = pressure-sensitive paint Re∞ = freestream unit Reynolds number (m-1) SWBLI = shockwave/boundary-layer interaction θplate = model plate angle (°) Introduction his paper highlights two experimental entries performed in the 20-Inch Mach 6 Air Blowdown Tunnel at NASA Langley Research Center in collaboration with The University of Tennessee Space Institute (UTSI). The purpose of these entries was to characterize the dynamic shockwave/boundary-layer interaction (SWBLI) between a vertical cylinder on a flat plate and laminar, transitional (XSWBLI), and turbulent (SWTBLI) boundary layers with a freestream Mach number of 6 using non-intrusive optical diagnostics. Experiments performed by Murphree et al.1,2 were among the first to specifically characterize XSWBLI induced by a vertical cylinder on a flat plate geometry using several optical measurement techniques. Recent optical studies of XSWBLI phenomenon have been performed by UTSI at Mach 2 in their low-enthalpy blow wind tunnel3-8 and by Texas A&M University and UTSI at Mach numbers of 6 and 7 in their Adjustable Contour Expansion wind tunnel.9 The experiments described in this paper were intended to complement previous studies by expanding the freestream unit Reynolds number range, Re∞, over which the XSWBLI phenomena has been observed. Additionally these experiments, made possible under NASA’s new facility funding model under the Aeronautics Evaluation and Test Capabilities (AETC) project, promoted collaboration between university and NASA researchers. The initial entry in the 20-Inch Mach 6 Air Tunnel at NASA Langley occurred in December of 2016. Originally, testing was to occur in November of 2016 in the 31-Inch Mach 10 Air Tunnel at NASA Langley. This facility was chosen so that the XSWBLI phenomenon could be observed at much higher Mach numbers than had previously been attempted in ground test experiments. The model selected for this experiment, a 10° half-angle wedge with a sharp leading edge (described in detail in section II.B), had previously been used by Danehy et al. [10] for boundary layer transition studies using the nitric oxide planar laser-induced fluorescence (NO PLIF) flow visualization technique. In that work, it was determined that transition could be induced downstream of a single htrip = 1-mm tall, dtrip = 4-mm diameter cylindrical tripping element and that the streamwise location of the transition could be changed for a single Re∞ by changing the model angle-of-attack (AoA) (see Fig. A3 in Ref. [10] for more details). Based on the findings of that work, a decision was made to use the wedge model with the cylindrical tripping element to trip the boundary layer flow ahead of a cylindrical protuberance in order to achieve a XSWBLI. Unfortunately, the 31-Inch Mach 10 facility had been taken offline for repairs in October of 2016 and a decision was made to move the test to the 20-Inch Mach 6 facility. Since the behavior of the boundary layer with the chosen model configuration had not been studied before in that facility and the available test time was limited, the entry was considered to be exploratory and was used to collect spatially-resolved and time-resolved flow and surface visualization data that would be used to inform a second entry. Test techniques included simultaneous high-speed schlieren (HSS) captured at 160 kHz and high-speed pressure sensitive paint captured at 10 kHz as well as oil flow visualization, captured at 750 Hz. The second entry in the 20-Inch Mach 6 facility occurred in June and July of 2017. In this follow-on test, modifications to the wind tunnel model were made based on observations made during the first entry and included removing the cylindrical tripping element, increasing the size of the cylinder used to induce the SWBLI to increase the size of the interaction while simultaneously improving spatial resolution, and using a swept ramp array, similar to that described in Ref. [11], to trip the flow to turbulence. Simultaneous HSS (captured at 140 kHz, 100 kHz, and 40 kHz) and conventional IR thermography (captured at 30 Hz) imaging were performed simultaneously in this follow-on entry. This paper is intended to serve as a summary of the work performed during these two entries, to detail lessons learned from each entry, and to highlight some of the datasets acquired. Details on the experimental setup, model configuration, and techniques used are provided. Papers providing a more rigorous analysis of data acquired during the second entry, including statistical, spectral, and modal decomposition methods, can be found in Refs. [12,13]. An entry examining XSWBLI in the 31-Inch Mach 10 Blowdown Wind Tunnel facility is currently planned for mid-to-late calendar year 2019, pending the success of facility repairs. The work performed and described in this paper and the upcoming entry in the 31-Inch Mach 10 facility at NASA Langley have been made possible by NASA’s new facility funding model under the Aeronautics Evaluation and Test Capabilities (AETC) project. Wind Tunnel Facility All experiments discussed in this paper were performed in the 20-Inch Mach 6 Air Tunnel at NASA Langley Research Center. Specific details pertaining to this facility can be found in Refs. [14,15], with only a brief description of the facility provided here. For both entries, the nominal freestream unit Reynolds number was varied between 1.8×106 m-1 (0.5×106 ft-1) and 26.3×106 m-1 (8×106 ft-1). The nominal stagnation pressure was varied between 0.21 MPa and 3.33 MPa and the nominal stagnation temperature was varied between 480 K and 520 K to achieve the desired Re∞ condition. For all runs, the nominal freestream Mach number was 6. The nearly square test section is 520.7-mm (20.5-inches) wide by 508-mm (20-inches) high. Two 431.8-mm (17-inch) diameter windows made of Corning 7940, Grade 5F schlieren-quality glass serve as the side walls of the tunnel and provide optical access for the high-speed schlieren measurements. A rectangular window made of the same material as the side windows served as the top wall of the test section and provided optical access for the high-speed PSP and oil flow measurements. For the second entry, this top window was replaced with a Zinc Selenide (ZnSe) window with an anti-reflection coating capable of passing IR wavelengths between 8μm and 12μm with greater than 98% transmittance. The model was sting supported by a strut attached to a hydraulic system that allows for the model pitch angle to be adjusted between -5° to +55°. For the first entry, an initial pitch/pause sweep of the model AoA was performed to observe the resulting SWBLI. Ultimately, however, the sting pitch angle for this entry was fixed at +10.0° so that the angle of the top surface of the wedge relative to the streamwise axis of the tunnel (referred to herein as the plate angle, θplate), was θplate = 0°. For the second entry, θplate = 0° and θplate = -13.25° were initially tested with the swept ramp array (discussed in the following section) to determine which orientation produced conditions most favorable for XSWBLI to occur based on the heating signatures observed over the top surface of the model in the IR thermography images. Based on these initial tests, θplate = -13.25° was set for the remainder of the runs in the second entry. For both entries, any model changes were performed in a housing located beneath the closed test section. Prior to performing a run of the tunnel, the housing was sealed and the tunnel started. Once the appropriate freestream conditions were achieved, the model was injected into the test section using a hydraulic injection system. B. Model Geometry For all runs, a 10° half-angle (20° full-angle) wedge model with a sharp leading edge was used. The model is described in detail in Refs. [10,16]. The top surface of the sharp leading edge of the model extended 47.8 mm from its upstream-most edge to a junction with the upstream edge of a stainless steel top plate that then extended an (a) (c) (b) Fig. 1 (a) Schematic of top surface of wedge model with gas seeding insert, (b) perspective view of the model in the 20-Inch Mach 6 tunnel with centerline pressure orifices on sharp leading edge, and (c) a perspective view of the model with stainless steel (top) and SLA middle insert (bottom) during the first entry. Flow occurs from left to right.

Bathel, Brett F.↗
NASA NTRS2015

Advancing Test Capabilities at NASA Wind Tunnels

NASA maintains twelve major wind tunnels at three field centers capable of providing flows at 0.1 M 10 and unit Reynolds numbers up to 45106m. The maintenance and enhancement of these facilities is handled through a unified management structure under NASAs Aeronautics and Evaluation and Test Capability (AETC) project. The AETC facilities are; the 11x11 transonic and 9x7 supersonic wind tunnels at NASA Ames; the 10x10 and 8x6 supersonic wind tunnels, 9x15 low speed tunnel, Icing Research Tunnel, and Propulsion Simulator Laboratory, all at NASA Glenn; and the National Transonic Facility, Transonic Dynamics Tunnel, LAL aerothermodynamics laboratory, 8 High Temperature Tunnel, and 14x22 low speed tunnel, all at NASA Langley. This presentation describes the primary AETC facilities and their current capabilities, as well as improvements which are planned over the next five years. These improvements fall into three categories. The first are operations and maintenance improvements designed to increase the efficiency and reliability of the wind tunnels. These include new (possibly composite) fan blades at several facilities, new temperature control systems, and new and much more capable facility data systems. The second category of improvements are facility capability advancements. These include significant improvements to optical access in wind tunnel test sections at Ames, improvements to test section acoustics at Glenn and Langley, the development of a Supercooled Large Droplet capability for icing research, and the development of an icing capability for large engine testing. The final category of improvements consists of test technology enhancements which provide value across multiple facilities. These include projects to increase balance accuracy, provide NIST-traceable calibration characterization for wind tunnels, and to advance optical instruments for Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) validation. Taken as a whole, these individual projects provide significant enhancements to NASA capabilities in ground-based testing. They ensure that these wind tunnels will provide accurate and relevant experimental data for years to come, supporting both NASAs mission and the missions of our government and industry customers.

wind tunnel testing↗