Search NASASearch

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “thermal power”

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.

1,299 records · Page 73

High-Order Methods in NASA’s Next Generation of Computational Fluid Dynamics Tools

The missions of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) routinely produce unique requirements and challenges for development and application of Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) methods. NASA presently embodies four distinct Mission Directorates: Aeronautics Research, Exploration Systems, Science, and Space Operations. These missions generate requirements for systems that operate in a wide variety of environments. They range from the high-speed flight of aerodynamically optimized vehicles operating in the earth’s atmosphere to spacecraft designed for missions that don’t favor aerodynamic optimization, some operating in the atmosphere of planets and planetary moons such as Mars and Venus or Saturn’s moon Titan. Systems supporting these vehicles, such as rocket and jet propulsion, reaction control systems, fluid and thermal transfer systems, etc. can also generate their own unique set of flow phenomena that challenge today’s CFD methodology. Through the NASA Engineering and Safety Center (NESC), NASA annually conducts state-of-the-discipline assessments in fifteen distinct engineering disciplines. These assessments are performed by the NASA Technical Fellows that lead Technical Discipline Teams (TDT) of recognized experts in these fifteen areas. In the Aerosciences discipline, three topics have been identified as the top challenges for the discipline: aero-plume interaction prediction, unsteady separated flows, and aerothermodynamic prediction. These challenge areas are defined by the Agency’s high-risk projects and problems on which the NESC is requested to perform independent testing, analysis, and assessments. When viewed as a whole, these tests, analyses, and assessments provide a clear view of the recurring technical challenges facing Agency engineers and researchers and can be used to guide future research and technology development. The present state-of-the-art in the application of CFD at NASA is the use of Reynolds-Averaged Navier- Stokes (RANS) solvers, primarily executed in a steady-state mode of operation. In isolated cases, Unsteady RANS (URANS) solvers have been employed when steady RANS solutions produce poorly converging or oscillating results or in cases, such as aeroelastic analysis, which require unsteady aerodynamic simulation. For most traditional external and internal aerodynamic flows, structured overset grids or unstructured grids are employed to minimize geometric modeling and grid generation times. Grid adaptation, primarily as a series of coarse-grain intermediate processing steps is also seeing use on particularly complex flow problems and configurations. In the case of aerothermodynamic flows, engineers have been forced to continue to employ structured grid techniques as the present unstructured grid methodology has proven inadequate in the prediction of surface heating. In the area of aero-plume interaction modeling, two-gas, frozen chemistry simulation is generally the state-of-the- art, with some production solvers capable of predicting flows with only a single gas component. Prediction of flows falling into the afore-mentioned top Aerosciences technical challenges have severely stressed the present state-of-the-art in CFD prediction and for some problems, such as unsteady separated flows and aero-plume interaction cases, engineers have begun employing Large Eddy Simulation (LES) and Hybrid RANS/LES techniques. In some isolated aero-propulsion interaction cases, chemically reacting flow simulations have been applied. These methods are highly evolutionary and engineers have little experience in their application, so they cannot be heavily relied upon in today’s application environment. Therefore, this leads one to muse over which numerical technologies will be included in the CFD tools that will be employed 30 years in the future. This presentation will describe specific technical problems that have stressed NASA’s traditional CFD methods to their breaking point and will link these issues to the Agency’s top Aerosciences technical challenges. The discussion will then shift to the characteristics of future CFD solvers that will be required to attack these challenges and how these characteristics differ from the present state-of-the- art. High-order methods certainly appear to have a place in the development of future CFD tools and some of the physical characteristics of our most challenging problems suggest that high-order methods are the only way to effectively solve them. But there are some relatively severe implementation issues that face these methods, particularly in the area of general applicability and robust operation as an engineering tool. Desired characteristics of next-generation CFD solvers will be discussed and the author’s view of which emerging numerical technologies might be employed to address these attributes will also be presented

David M Schuster

The SPT-deep Cluster Catalog: Sunyaev–Zel’dovich Selected Clusters from Combined SPT-3G and SPTpol Measurements over 100 Square Degrees

We present a catalog of 500 galaxy cluster candidates in the SPT-Deep field: a 100 deg$^{2}$ field that combines data from the SPT-3G and SPTpol surveys to reach noise levels of 3.0, 2.2, and 9.0 μK-arcmin at 95, 150, and 220 GHz, respectively. Candidates are selected via the thermal Sunyaev–Zel’dovich (SZ) effect with a minimum significance of ξ = 4.0, resulting in a catalog of purity ∼89%. Optical data from the Dark Energy Survey and infrared data from the Spitzer Space Telescope are used to confirm 442 cluster candidates. The clusters span 0.12 < z ≲ 1.8 and 1.0 × 10$^{14}$M$_{⊙}$/h$_{70}$ < M$_{500c}$ < 8.7 × 10$^{14}$M$_{⊙}$/h$_{70}$. The sample’s median redshift is 0.74, and the median mass is 1.7 × 10$^{14}$M$_{⊙}$/h$_{70}$; these are the lowest median mass and highest median redshift of any SZ-selected sample to date. We assess the effect of infrared emission from cluster member galaxies on cluster selection by performing a joint fit to the infrared dust and tSZ signals by combining measurements from SPT and overlapping submillimeter data from Herschel/SPIRE. We find that at high redshift (z > 1), the tSZ signal is reduced by $17.9_{−3.2}^{+3.8}$%$(3.8_{−0.7}^{+0.9}$%$)$ at 150 GHz (95 GHz) due to dust contamination. We repeat our cluster finding method on dust-nulled SPT maps and find the resulting catalog is consistent with the nominal SPT-Deep catalog, suggesting dust contamination does not significantly impact the SPT-Deep selection function; we attribute this lack of bias to the inclusion of the SPT 220 GHz band.

79 ASTRONOMY AND ASTROPHYSICS

SPT clusters with DES and HST weak lensing. II. Cosmological constraints from the abundance of massive halos

We present cosmological constraints from the abundance of galaxy clusters selected via the thermal Sunyaev-Zel’dovich (SZ) effect in South Pole Telescope (SPT) data with a simultaneous mass calibration using weak gravitational lensing data from the Dark Energy Survey (DES) and the Hubble Space Telescope (HST). The cluster sample is constructed from the combined SPT-SZ, SPTpol ECS, and SPTpol 500d surveys, and comprises 1,005 confirmed clusters in the redshift range 0.25–1.78 over a total sky area of 5200 deg 2 . We use DES Year 3 weak-lensing data for 688 clusters with redshifts 𝑧 < 0.95 and HST weak-lensing data for 39 clusters with 0.6 < 𝑧 < 1.7. The weak-lensing measurements enable robust mass measurements of sample clusters and allow us to empirically constrain the SZ observable-mass relation without having to make strong assumptions about, e.g., the hydrodynamical state of the clusters. For a flat Λ⁢ CDM cosmology, and marginalizing over the sum of massive neutrinos, we measure Ω m = 0.286 ± 0.032, 𝜎 8 = 0.817 ± 0.026, and the parameter combination 𝜎 8 ⁢(Ω m /0.3) 0.25 = 0.805 ± 0.016. Our measurement of 𝑆 8 ≡ 𝜎 8 ⁢$\sqrt{Ω_{m}/0.3}$ = 0.795 ± 0.029 and the constraint from Planck CMB anisotropies (2018 TT, TE, EE+lowE) differ by 1.1⁢𝜎. In combination with that Planck dataset, we place a 95% upper limit on the sum of neutrino masses ∑𝑚 𝜈 < 0.18 eV. When additionally allowing the dark energy equation of state parameter 𝑤 to vary, we obtain 𝑤 = −1.45 ± 0.31 from our cluster-based analysis. In combination with Planck data, we measure 𝑤 =−1.3⁢4$^{+0.22}_{−0.15}$, or a 2.2⁢𝜎 difference with a cosmological constant. We use the cluster abundance to measure 𝜎8 in five redshift bins between 0.25 and 1.8, and we find the results to be consistent with structure growth as predicted by the Λ⁢ CDM model fit to Planck primary CMB data.

79 ASTRONOMY AND ASTROPHYSICS