Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “MISSE-20”

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.

111 records · Page 7
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Using Open Innovation in Reducing Risk to Crews

In the exploration of destinations outside of Earth's neighborhood, specifically Mars, scientific and engineering inquiries have occurred by two means; observations from satellites and observations by landed spacecraft. Satellite observations (Mariner, MRO, Mars Odyssey, provide global-scale spatial and temporal data while landed spacecraft (Viking, Mars Pathfinder, Spirit, Opportunity, Phoenix Mars Lander) investigate highly localized areas of the surface of the planet. In preparation for human exploration, extensive knowledge of the surface and atmospheric environments should be known before the first human leaves Earth. The primary goal of performing reconnaissance on Mars on a sub-global scale is to know as much as possible about the environment to which crews will be subjected. At the current rate of launching and landing probes to Mars, it will take a very long time to understand the surface and atmospheric conditions associated with the regions where prospective crews may land. Meanwhile electronics and electrical systems are rapidly getting smaller. One can argue that to acquire the knowledge of the region, one must take hundreds, maybe thousands of measurements simultaneously. One means to perform such a task is to deploy a swarm of sensors. Such a swarm would perform an in-situ assessment of the region. Imagine a close flyby mission to Mars for example, where mini- to micro-sensors are deposited into the atmosphere over half an orbit or more. The sensors, captured by the atmospheric drag and Martian gravity slowly descend buffeted about by Martian winds and weather until they settle on the surface a great time later (think of how long dust takes to settle). As they descend they communicate a vast array of data; temperature, chemistry, pressure, radiation dose, electric or magnetic properties from a region of the planet and an individual sensor need not measure the same quantity as its neighbors. Initially, they could move at the whim of the environment but later versions could have locomotion or propulsion mechanisms. Humans wouldn't need to decide where the sensors go, the sensors do that for themselves. This is a key strength of a sensor swarm. The intelligence relies on the group not on a decision maker on earth. Real time sensor inputs direct what the swarm considers most interesting to investigate resulting in emergent behavior. We issued a $20,000 challenge to the global innovators to provide solutions as to how such a swarm could be initialized and by what protocols and methodologies by which they operate. Over 400 innovators from 49 countries took a look at the problem, with three receiving partial awards for solutions.

Mel Ferebee↗
NASA NTRS2010

Ares I-X Ground Diagnostic Prototype

Automating prelaunch diagnostics for launch vehicles offers three potential benefits. First, it potentially improves safety by detecting faults that might otherwise have been missed so that they can be corrected before launch. Second, it potentially reduces launch delays by more quickly diagnosing the cause of anomalies that occur during prelaunch processing. Reducing launch delays will be critical to the success of NASA's planned future missions that require in-orbit rendezvous. Third, it potentially reduces costs by reducing both launch delays and the number of people needed to monitor the prelaunch process. NASA is currently developing the Ares I launch vehicle to bring the Orion capsule and its crew of four astronauts to low-earth orbit on their way to the moon. Ares I-X will be the first unmanned test flight of Ares I. It is scheduled to launch on October 27, 2009. The Ares I-X Ground Diagnostic Prototype is a prototype ground diagnostic system that will provide anomaly detection, fault detection, fault isolation, and diagnostics for the Ares I-X first-stage thrust vector control (TVC) and for the associated ground hydraulics while it is in the Vehicle Assembly Building (VAB) at John F. Kennedy Space Center (KSC) and on the launch pad. It will serve as a prototype for a future operational ground diagnostic system for Ares I. The prototype combines three existing diagnostic tools. The first tool, TEAMS (Testability Engineering and Maintenance System), is a model-based tool that is commercially produced by Qualtech Systems, Inc. It uses a qualitative model of failure propagation to perform fault isolation and diagnostics. We adapted an existing TEAMS model of the TVC to use for diagnostics and developed a TEAMS model of the ground hydraulics. The second tool, Spacecraft Health Inference Engine (SHINE), is a rule-based expert system developed at the NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory. We developed SHINE rules for fault detection and mode identification. The prototype uses the outputs of SHINE as inputs to TEAMS. The third tool, the Inductive Monitoring System (IMS), is an anomaly detection tool developed at NASA Ames Research Center and is currently used to monitor the International Space Station Control Moment Gyroscopes. IMS automatically "learns" a model of historical nominal data in the form of a set of clusters and signals an alarm when new data fails to match this model. IMS offers the potential to detect faults that have not been modeled. The three tools have been integrated and deployed to Hangar AE at KSC where they interface with live data from the Ares I-X vehicle and from the ground hydraulics. The outputs of the tools are displayed on a console in Hangar AE, one of the locations from which the Ares I-X launch will be monitored. In a previous publication, we discussed how we selected the three tools based primarily on their ability to be certified for human spaceflight and described our plans for the prototype. This abstract is due October 23, 2009, and the Ares I-X launch is currently scheduled for October 27, 2009. If this abstract is accepted, then the full paper will describe how the prototype performed before the launch. It will include an analysis of the prototype's accuracy, including false-positive rates, false-negative rates, and receiver operating characteristics (ROC) curves. It will also include a description of the prototype's computational requirements, including CPU usage, main memory usage, and disk usage. If the prototype detects any faults during the prelaunch period then the paper will include a description of those faults. Similarly, if the prototype has any false alarms then the paper will describe them and will attempt to explain their causes. Also, the paper will describe the three tools and how they are used in the prototype. It will include a description of the TEAMS models of the Ares I-X first-stage TVC and associated ground hydraulics and how we adapted the TVC model for use in real-time diagnostics. It will describe the SHINE rules used for fault detection and mode identification and the software architecture that interfaces the various pieces of existing software that are part of the prototype to one another. It will describe how we selected the sensor values and commands that were used to train the IMS model and how we optimized the number of clusters in the IMS model. It will include screen shots of the graphical display that we developed in Java to display the outputs of the three tools. Because Ares I-X data was not yet available to us while we were developing the prototype, we used historical data from the Space Shuttle's Solid Rocket Booster (SRB) TVCs and the associated ground hydraulics to train IMS and to test the entire prototype. Because most of the failure modes that we modeled have never occurred in the Shuttle we inserted simulated failures into the Shuttle data. The Ares I-X first-stage TVC is very similar to the SRB TVC and we expect the data will be very similar. After the launch, we will determine how similar the data actually is and report how any differences in the data affected the diagnostic accuracy of the prototype. Finally, although we did not get the prototype certified, we designed it in a way that it could be certified and wrote a preliminary certification plan. The paper will include a brief summary of how we considered the need for certification in the design of the prototype, how we tested the prototype before deploying it to Hangar AE, and how we would propose to get it certified if it were deployed as an operational system. The paper will conclude with a description of some of the challenges we faced and some of the lessons learned in developing and deploying the prototype.

International Space Station↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Motor Configuration Selection for A New Technical Challenge to Develop A 5 MW Cryogenic Motor and Drive

Due to aviation’s appreciable and growing share of humanity’s impact on our environment and estimates that CO2emissions only account for 34% of aviation’s total effective radiative forcing [1], there is a need to reach beyond climate goals that focus only on CO2emissions, such as the US Aviation Climate Action Plan’s [3] goal to reach net-zero carbon emissions by 2050.There is motivation to develop technology that pushes toward future large transport aircraft with net zero climate impact that are highly electrified (i.e., have higher power electrical propulsion system components). This paper describes a new, 6-year technical challenge to address this need by developing a 5 MW superconducting motor and cryogenic drive. Section 1 will detail the motivation for this work. Section 2 will describe the technical challenge and the selected specifications for the motor. Section 3 will present the results of a motor configuration trade study and the down selection of one configuration to develop a detailed design for. The technical challenge focuses on the design of a5 MW superconducting motor and cryogenic drive and demonstration of it at a 2+ MW scale to achieve TRL 3. Both fully superconducting (superconducting stator and rotor) and fully cryogenic (superconducting rotor and cryogenic stator) machine configurations will be explored. An emphasis will be placed on addressing the key tall poles for high power superconducting machines. Further details will be included in the full paper. The requirements and goals of the motor will be detailed. The rated speed (2,000 to 3,000 rpm) is defined to be appropriate for directly driving multi-MW fans or propellers. A range of rated speed is permitted because the motor is not designed for a specific aircraft and to provide design flexibility if AC losses in the stator winding are found to be a significant constraint (i.e., a lower speed can be selected to reduce electrical frequency). Relatively conservative requirements for efficiency (99%) and specific power (20 kW/kg) are defined, because TRL advancement and pushing toward flight readiness is emphasized over performance optimization. However, more aggressive efficiency and specific power goals are specified (99.9% and 40 kW/kg). The 3rd section will present the results of a motor configuration trade study. The study started with a qualitative assessment of sixteen motor configurations based on geometric, mechanical, thermal, and electromagnetic criteria. This assessment has been completed with three evaluators scoring all nine criteria. A configuration down select was made by prioritizing the sixteen configurations into four tiers based on each configuration’s total score and consideration of manufacturability, complexity, and support hardware (e.g., rotary vacuum seals, bearings). Configurations in priority A and B will be further evaluated through quantitative assessments, whereas those in priority C will only be further evaluated if time permits and priority D will not be further evaluated. Eight of the sixteen configurations were down selected for quantitative assessment, which will include analytical calculations and low-to moderate-fidelity finite element analysis to produce a preliminary Pareto front of efficiency versus specific power for each configuration. This assessment emphasizes the calculation of AC losses in the stator winding and an exploration of thermal management approaches to remove that heat and maintain cryogenic temperature. The final paper will include a description of each motor configuration that was considered. The quantitative assessments are underway, and an assessment of one configuration is complete for multiple stator conductor options. The remaining assessments are scheduled to be completed by late March so that the final down select to one configuration can be included in this paper.

Net Zero↗