SEARCH · Search NASA
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.
This viewgraph information provides information on how the NASA Electronic Parts and Packaging (NEPP) Program evaluates the reliability of technologies for Electrical, Electronic, and Electromechanical (EEE) parts, and their suitability for spacecraft applications.
It is common practice within NASA to test electronic parts at the manufacturing lot level to demonstrate, statistically, that parts from the lot tested will not fail in service using generic application conditions. The test methods and the generic application conditions used have been developed over the years through cooperation between NASA, DoD, and industry in order to establish a common set of standard practices. These common practices, found in MIL-STD-883, MIL-STD-750, military part specifications, EEE-INST-002, and other guidelines are preferred because they are considered to be effective and repeatable and their results are usually straightforward to interpret. These practices can sometimes be unavailable to some NASA projects due to special application conditions that must be addressed, such as schedule constraints, cost constraints, logistical constraints, or advances in the technology that make the historical standards an inappropriate choice for establishing part performance and reliability. Alternate methods have begun to emerge and to be used by NASA programs to test parts individually or as part of a system, especially when standard lot tests cannot be applied. Four alternate screening methods will be discussed in this paper: Highly accelerated life test (HALT), forward voltage drop tests for evaluating wire-bond integrity, burn-in options during or after highly accelerated stress test (HAST), and board-level qualification.
On January 14, 2004, the President of the United States announced a new plan to explore space and extend a human presence across our solar system. The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) established the Exploration Systems Mission Directorate (ESMD) to develop and field a Constellation Architecture that will bring the Space Exploration vision to fruition. The Constellation Architecture includes a human-rated Crew Launch Vehicle (CLV) segment, managed by the Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC), comprised of the First Stage (FS), Upper Stage (US), and Upper Stage Engine (USE) elements. The CLV s purpose is to provide safe and reliable crew and cargo transportation into Low Earth Orbit (LEO), as well as insertion into trans-lunar trajectories. The architecture's Spacecraft segment includes, among other elements, the Crew Exploration Vehicle (CEV), managed by the Johnson Space Flight Center (JSC), which is launched atop the CLV. MSFC is also responsible for CLV and CEV stack integration. This paper provides an overview of the Avionics and Software integration approach (which includes the Integrated System Health Management (ISHM) functions), both within the CLV, and across the CEV interface; it addresses the requirements to be met, logistics of meeting those requirements, and the roles of the various groups. The Avionics Integration and Vehicle Systems Test (ANST) Office was established at the MSFC with system engineering responsibilities for defining and developing the integrated CLV Avionics and Software system. The AIVST Office has defined two Groups, the Avionics and Software Integration Group (AVSIG), and the Integrated System Simulation and Test Integration Group (ISSTIG), and four Panels which will direct trade studies and analyses to ensure the CLV avionics and software meet CLV system and CEV interface requirements. The four panels are: 1) Avionics Integration Panel (AIP), 2) Software Integration Panel, 3) EEE Panel, and 4) Systems Simulation and Test Panel. Membership on the groups and panels includes the MSFC representatives from the requisite engineering disciplines, the First Stage, the Upper Stage, the Upper Stage Engine projects, and key personnel from other NASA centers. The four panels will take the results of trade studies and analyses and develop documentation in support of Design Analysis Cycle Reviews and ultimately the System Requirements Review.
System reliability assessment is a methodology which incorporates reliability analyses performed at parts and components level such as Reliability Prediction, Failure Modes and Effects Analysis (FMEA) and Fault Tree Analysis (FTA) to assess risks, perform design tradeoffs, and therefore, to ensure effective productivity and/or mission success. The system reliability is used to optimize the product design to accommodate today?s mandated budget, manpower, and schedule constraints. Stand ard based reliability assessment is an effective approach consisting of reliability predictions together with other reliability analyses for electronic, electrical, and electro-mechanical (EEE) complex parts and components of large systems based on failure rate estimates published by the United States (U.S.) military or commercial standards and handbooks. Many of these standards are globally accepted and recognized. The reliability assessment is especially useful during the initial stages when the system design is still in the development and hard failure data is not yet available or manufacturers are not contractually obliged by their customers to publish the reliability estimates/predictions for their parts and components. This paper presents a methodology to assess system reliability using parts and components reliability estimates to ensure effective productivity and/or mission success in an efficient manner, low cost, and tight schedule.
The Major Constituent Analyzer (MCA) is a mass spectrometer-based instrument designed to provide critical monitoring of six major atmospheric constituents; nitrogen, oxygen, hydrogen, carbon dioxide, methane, and water vapor on-board the International Space Station. The analyzer has been an integral part of the Environmental Control and Life Support System (ECLSS) since the station went on-line. The Orion Air Monitor (OAM) was derived from the MCA and heavily optimized for reduced mass, lower power, faster water vapor response, and maintenance-free operation. The resulting OAM is approximately the size of the analyzer portion of the MCA, orbital-replacement unit 02 (ORU 02), while incorporating the functions of three other modules: Data Processing and Communication (ORU 01), Verification Gas Assembly (ORU 08), and Low Voltage Power Supply (ORU 04). The overlap in MCA and OAM requirements makes it possible to derive a common Air Monitor design that spans both applications while minimally impacting the weight and power limits imposed by the Multipurpose Crew Vehicle (MPCV). Benefits to ISS include the retirement of ORUs 01, 04, and 08, reducing up-mass and eliminating EEE parts obsolescence issues through the extended ISS mission phases. Benefits to MPCV and future deployed habitats under the Constellation program include greater interchangeability across ECLSS subsystems. This paper discusses the results of the requirements development study, where a superset of ISS and Orion air monitoring requirements were distilled; evaluated against increases in OAM functionality, mass, and power; and traded-off where possible using simple operating mode modifications. A system architecture and preliminary design addressing the common requirements will be presented.
QML stands for the Qualified Manufacturer List. It is maintained by DLA-Land and Maritime (formerly known as the Defense Supply Center Columbus, DSCC). This talk will address how we are bringing new technology products into the QML system. The focus will be on microcircuit parts used in space application. A new effort championed by NASA will be described. NASA EEE Parts Assurance Group (NEPAG) is making every effort to strengthen the MIL system and thereby support the space flight projects
An overview of NEPP plans for small missions and electrical, electronic, and electromechanical (EEE) parts.
Constant temperature hotwire anemometry data were acquired to determine the inlet turbulence conditions of a transonic turbine blade linear cascade. Flow conditions and angles were investigated that corresponded to the take-off and cruise conditions of the Variable Speed Power Turbine (VSPT) project and to an Energy Efficient Engine (EEE) scaled rotor blade tip section. Mean and turbulent flowfield measurements including intensity, length scale, turbulence decay, and power spectra were determined for high and low turbulence intensity flows at various Reynolds numbers and spanwise locations. The experimental data will be useful for establishing the inlet boundary conditions needed to validate turbulence models in CFD codes.
This paper presents preliminary findings on a possible approach to reducing tip leakage losses. In this paper a computational study was conducted on the Energy Efficient Engine (EEE) High Pressure Turbine (HPT) rotor tip geometry using the commercial numerical solver ANSYS FLUENT. The flow solver was validated against aerodynamic data acquired in the NASA Transonic Turbine Blade Cascade facility. The scope of the ongoing study is to computationally investigate how the tip leakage and overall blade losses are affected by (1) injection from the tip near the pressure side, (2) injection from the tip surface at the camber line, and (3) injection from the tip surface into the tip separation bubble. The objective is to identify the locations on the tip surface at which to place appropriately configured blowing keeping in mind the film cooling application of tip blowing holes. The validation was conducted at Reynolds numbers of 85,000, 343,000, and 685,000 and at engine realistic flow conditions. The coolant injection simulations were conducted at a Reynolds number of 343,000 based on blade chord and inlet velocity and utilized the SST turbulence model in FLUENT. The key parameters examined are the number of jets, jet angle and jet location. A coolant to inlet pressure ratio of 1.0 was studied for angles of +30 deg, -30 deg, and 90 deg to the local free stream on the tip. For the 3 hole configuration, 3 holes spaced 3 hole diameters apart with length to diameter ratio of 1.5 were used. A simulation including 11 holes along the entire mean camber line is also presented (30 deg toward suction side). In addition, the effect of a single hole is also compared to a flat tip with no injection. The results provide insight into tip flow control methods and can be used to guide further investigation into tip flow control. As noted in past research it is concluded that reducing leakage flow is not necessarily synonymous with reducing losses due to leakage.
This paper presents preliminary findings on a possible approach to reducing tip leakage losses. In this paper a computational study was conducted on the EEE (Energy Efficient Engine) HPT (High Pressure Turbine) rotor tip geometry using the commercial numerical solver ANSYS FLUENT. The flow solver was validated against aerodynamic data acquired in the NASA Transonic Turbine Blade Cascade facility. The scope of the ongoing study is to computationally investigate how the tip leakage and overall blade losses are affected by 1. injection from the tip near the pressure side, 2. injection from the tip surface at the camber line, and 3. injection from the tip surface into the tip separation bubble. The objective is to identify the locations on the tip surface at which to place appropriately configured blowing keeping in mind the film cooling application of tip blowing holes. The validation was conducted at Reynolds numbers of 85,000, 343,000 and 685,000 and at engine realistic flow conditions. The coolant injection simulations were conducted at a Reynolds number of 343,000 based on blade chord and inlet velocity and utilized the SST turbulence model in FLUENT. The key parameters examined are the number of jets, jet angle and jet location. A coolant to inlet pressure ratio of 1.0 was studied for angles of +30 deg., -30 deg. and 90 deg. to the local free stream on the tip. For the 3 hole configuration, 3 holes spaced 3 hole diameters apart with length to diameter ratio of 1.5 were used. A simulation including 11 holes along the entire mean camber line is also presented (30 degrees toward suction side). In addition, the effect of a single hole is also compared to a flat tip with no injection. The results provide insight into tip flow control methods and can be used to guide further investigation into tip flow control. As noted in past research it is concluded that reducing leakage flow is not necessarily synonymous with reducing losses due to leakage.
This tutorial provides an overview of the natural space radiation environment, an introduction to radiation effect types, an overview of EEE parts selection, scrubbing, and radiation mitigation, and an introduction to radiation testing.
Radiation Hardness Assurance (RHA) consists of all activities undertaken to ensure that the electronics and materials of a space system perform to their design specifications after exposure to the mission space environment. The subset of interests for NEPP and the REAG, are EEE parts. It is important to register that all of these undertakings are in a feedback loop and require constant iteration and updating throughout the mission life. More detail can be found in the reference materials on applicable test data for usage on parts.
My name is Isaac Lopez and I am a junior at the University of Houston majoring in Mechanical Engineering Technology. I will be completing my first tour at the NASA-Johnson Space Center ("JSC") as a Mechanical Engineer within the Human Interfaces Branch. Throughout my tour, I was given the opportunity to work on multiple projects that have expanded my knowledge and interest in acoustics and engineering design. One of the projects I worked on at JSC consisted of doing acoustic simulation of the EVA comm. cap. While working on the comm. cap headset, my main duty consisted of simulating the acoustics of the headset to find a solution to the condensing water that can accumulate and block the acoustic tube, causing attenuation or complete loss of audio in one ear for an astronaut using the EVA. For this project, I had to create a Creo model of the comm. cap so that I would be able to import it into Comsol for acoustic simulation. I also had the opportunity to design a portable and lightweight beam degrader for the EEE Parts and Radiation team. With the help of Creo, I was able to make a CAD design and put together a small working prototype for the radiation team to demonstrate the capabilities that the beam degrader had. In addition to these projects, JSC allowed me to work closely on projects with other interns. I had the opportunity to help another intern with his acoustic diverter, intended to improve the sound quality in Node 1 of the ISS. During this project, I helped with some of the acoustic testing inside the anechoic chamber as well as helping record data during testing at the ISS mock up. During the course of my first tour, I was able to learn and continually improve on my CAD drafting skills. With each project I worked on, I acquired new ways to create and improve various designs with various constraints. Furthermore, I also had the opportunity to work with electrical engineers and learn about the electronic components that would provide control of the beam degrader functions. I was able to take the knowledge, skills and designs I had acquired during my tour at JSC (such as Finite Element Analysis) and apply them to my work on the Comsol Multiphysics software for acoustics simulation. I was also able to use it to do some stress analysis on a proposed design for a proposed Habitat structure. My time at JSC has been invaluable as it helped me grow and more fully-comprehend my major as well as spark an interest in acoustics and how much it relates to mechanical engineering. This internship has taught me that engineering is much more than a profession - it is embedded in our daily lives as a puzzle that requires critical thinking as an everyday challenge that makes life more interesting.
The NASA Electronic Parts and Packaging (NEPP) program, and its subset the NASA Electronic Parts Assurance Group (NEPAG), are NASA's point-of-contacts for reliability and radiation tolerance of electrical, electronic, and electromechanical (EEE) parts and their packages. This presentation includes a Fiscal Year 2015 program overview.
A pathfinder prototype unit and two flight power processing units (PPUs) are being developed by the Aerojet Rocketdyne Corporation in Redmond, Washington and ZIN Technologies in Cleveland, Ohio, in support of the NEXT-C Project. This project is being led by the NASA Glenn Research Center in Cleveland, Ohio, and will also yield two flight thrusters. This hardware is being considered to be provided as Government Furnished Equipment for the New Frontiers Program, and is applicable to a variety of planetary science missions and astrophysics science missions. The design of the NEXT-C PPU evolves from the hardware fabricated under the NEXT technology development project. The power processing unit operates from two sources: a wide input 80 to 160 V high-power bus and a nominal 28 V low-power bus. The unit includes six power supplies. Four power supplies (beam, accelerator, discharge, and neutralizer keeper) are needed for steady state operation, while two cathode heater power supplies (neutralizer and discharge) are utilized during thruster startup. The unit in total delivers up to 7 kW of regulated power to a single gridded-ion thruster. Significant modifications to the initial design include: high-power adaptive-delay control, upgrade of design to EEE-INST-002 compliance, telemetry accuracy improvements, incorporation of telemetry to detect plume-mode operation, and simplification of the design in select areas to improve manufacturability and commercialization potential. The project is presently in the prototype phase and preparing for qualification level environmental testing.
This tutorial provides an overview of the natural space radiation environment, an introduction to radiation effect types, an overview of EEE parts selection, scrubbing, and radiation mitigation, and an introduction to radiation testing.
Additive Manufacturing (AM) is a technology that builds three dimensional objects by adding material layer-upon-layer throughout the fabrication process. The Electrical, Electronic and Electromechanical (EEE) parts packaging group at Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) is investigating how various AM and 3D printing processes can be adapted to the microgravity environment of space to enable on demand manufacturing of electronics. The current state-of-the art processes for accomplishing the task of printing electronics through non-contact, direct-write means rely heavily on the process of atomization of liquid inks into fine aerosols to be delivered ultimately to a machine's print head and through its nozzle. As a result of cumulative International Space Station (ISS) research into the behaviors of fluids in zero-gravity, our experience leads us to conclude that the direct adaptation of conventional atomization processes will likely fall short and alternative approaches will need to be explored. In this report, we investigate the development of an alternative approach to atomizing electronic materials by way of thermal atomization, to be used in place of conventional aerosol generation and delivery processes for printing electronics in space.
NEPP Mission Statement: Provide NASAs leadership for developing and maintaining guidance for the screening, qualification, test, and reliable usage of electrical, electronic, and electromechanical (EEE) parts by NASA, in collaboration with other government Agencies and industry.