SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “ARC Overview”

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.

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

132 records · Page 8

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

NASA NTRS2005

Artificial Gravity Research Project

Protecting the health, safety, and performance of exploration-class mission crews against the physiological deconditioning resulting from long-term weightlessness during transit and long-term hypogravity during surface operations will require effective, multi-system countermeasures. Artificial gravity (AG), which would replace terrestrial gravity with inertial forces generated by rotating the transit vehicle or by a human centrifuge device within the transit vehicle or surface habitat, has long been considered a potential solution. However, despite its attractiveness as an efficient, multi-system countermeasure and its potential for improving the environment and simplifying operational activities (e.g., WCS, galley, etc.), much still needs to be learned regarding the human response to rotating environments before AG can be successfully implemented. This paper will describe our approach for developing and implementing a rigorous AG Research Project to address the key biomedical research questions that must be answered before developing effective AG countermeasure implementation strategies for exploration-class missions. The AG Research Project will be performed at JSC, ARC, extramural academic and government research venues, and international partner facilities maintained by DLR and IMBP. The Project includes three major ground-based human research subprojects that will lead to flight testing of intermittent short-radius AG in ISS crewmembers after 201 0, continuous long-radius AG in CEV crews transiting to and from the Moon, and intermittent short-radius AG plus exercise in lunar habitats. These human ground-based subprojects include: 1) a directed, managed international short-radius project to investigate the multi-system effectiveness of intermittent AG in human subjects deconditioned by bed rest, 2) a directed, managed long-radius project to investigate the capacity of humans to live and work for extended periods in rotating environments, and 3) a focused, investigator-initiated project to investigate system-specific adaptation to and from rotating environments. The AG Research Project also includes two major animal research subprojects: 1) a directed, managed ground-based subproject using rodents and, possibly, sub-human primates, to address mechanistic issues that cannot be studied in humans, to rapidly develop higher sample numbers than can be achieved in the human subprojects, and to establish feasible parameter operating bands to reduce the breadth of the human subprojects, and 2) a flight subproject using rodents to estimate the physiological effects of long term exposure to hypogravity and to investigate the effects of contamination by terrestrial gravity in estimating AG effectiveness. The animal flight subproject would be performed aboard ISS using the CAM module in approximately the 2008-201 1 timeframe. The paper will first present an overview of the key biomedical research questions to be answered. It will then describe the overall approaches to be utilized in developing and implementing the AG Research Project, including definition of the intended scientific research, management and development approaches, identification of roles and responsibilities, risk management, and definition of project deliverables. The primary focus of the paper will be on the first of the three ground-based human research subprojects, since it is the only one currently in development and is scheduled to start active subject investigations in April of 2005.

Kamman, Michelle R.↗

NASA NTRS2013

Hypersonic Inflatable Aerodynamic Decelerator (HIAD) Technology Development Overview

The successful flight of the Inflatable Reentry Vehicle Experiment (IRVE)-3 has further demonstrated the potential value of Hypersonic Inflatable Aerodynamic Decelerator (HIAD) technology. This technology development effort is funded by NASA's Space Technology Mission Directorate (STMD) Game Changing Development Program (GCDP). This paper provides an overview of a multi-year HIAD technology development effort, detailing the projects completed to date and the additional testing planned for the future. The effort was divided into three areas: Flexible Systems Development (FSD), Mission Advanced Entry Concepts (AEC), and Flight Validation. FSD consists of a Flexible Thermal Protection Systems (FTPS) element, which is investigating high temperature materials, coatings, and additives for use in the bladder, insulator, and heat shield layers; and an Inflatable Structures (IS) element which includes manufacture and testing (laboratory and wind tunnel) of inflatable structures and their associated structural elements. AEC consists of the Mission Applications element developing concepts (including payload interfaces) for missions at multiple destinations for the purpose of demonstrating the benefits and need for the HIAD technology as well as the Next Generation Subsystems element. Ground test development has been pursued in parallel with the Flight Validation IRVE-3 flight test. A larger scale (6m diameter) HIAD inflatable structure was constructed and aerodynamically tested in the National Full-scale Aerodynamics Complex (NFAC) 40ft by 80ft test section along with a duplicate of the IRVE-3 3m article. Both the 6m and 3m articles were tested with instrumented aerodynamic covers which incorporated an array of pressure taps to capture surface pressure distribution to validate Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) model predictions of surface pressure distribution. The 3m article also had a duplicate IRVE-3 Thermal Protection System (TPS) to test in addition to testing with the Aerocover configuration. Both the Aerocovers and the TPS were populated with high contrast targets so that photogrammetric solutions of the loaded surface could be created. These solutions both refined the aerodynamic shape for CFD modeling and provided a deformed shape to validate structural Finite Element Analysis (FEA) models. Extensive aerothermal testing has been performed on the TPS candidates. This testing has been conducted in several facilities across the country. The majority of the testing has been conducted in the Boeing Large Core Arc Tunnel (LCAT). HIAD is continuing to mature testing methodology in this facility and is developing new test sample fixtures and control methodologies to improve understanding and quality of the environments to which the samples are subjected. Additional testing has been and continues to be performed in the NASA LaRC 8ft High Temperature Tunnel, where samples up to 2ft by 2ft are being tested over representative underlying structures incorporating construction features such as sewn seams and through-thickness quilting. With the successful completion to the IRVE-3 flight demonstration, mission planning efforts are ramping up on the development of the HIAD Earth Atmospheric Reenty Test (HEART) which will demonstrate a relevant scale vehicle in relevant environments via a large-scale aeroshell (approximately 8.5m) entering at orbital velocity (approximately 7km/sec) with an entry mass on the order of 4MT. Also, the Build to Print (BTP) hardware built as a risk mitigation for the IRVE-3 project to have a "spare" ready to go in the event of a launch vehicle delivery failure is now available for an additional sub-orbital flight experiment. Mission planning is underway to define a mission that can utilize this existing hardware and help the HIAD project further mature this technology.

Hughes, Stephen J.↗

NASA NTRS2011

Solar Dynamics Observatory Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Overview

The Solar Dynamics Observatory (SDO) was designed and built at the Goddard Space Flight Center, launched from Cape Canaveral on February 11, 2010, and reached its final geosynchronous science orbit on March 16, 2010. The purpose of SDO is to observe the Sun and continuously relay data to a dedicated ground station. SDO remains Sun-pointing throughout most of its mission for the instruments to take measurements of the Sun. The SDO attitude control system (ACS) is a single-fault tolerant design. Its fully redundant attitude sensor complement includes sixteen coarse Sun sensors (CSSs), a digital Sun sensor (DSS), three two-axis inertial reference units (IRUs), and two star trackers (STs). The ACS also makes use of the four guide telescopes included as a part of one of the science instruments. Attitude actuation is performed using four reaction wheels assemblies (RWAs) and eight thrusters, with a single main engine used to provide velocity-change thrust for orbit raising. The attitude control software has five nominal control modes, three wheel-based modes and two thruster-based modes. A wheel-based Safehold running in the attitude control electronics box improves the robustness of the system as a whole. All six modes are designed on the same basic proportional-integral-derivative attitude error structure, with more robust modes setting their integral gains to zero. This paper details the final overall design of the SDO guidance, navigation, and control (GN&C) system and how it was used in practice during SDO launch, commissioning, and nominal operations. This overview will include the ACS control modes, attitude determination and sensor calibration, the high gain antenna (HGA) calibration, and jitter mitigation operation. The Solar Dynamics Observatory mission is part of the NASA Living With a Star program, which seeks to understand the changing Sun and its effects on the Solar System, life, and society. To this end, the SDO spacecraft carries three Sun-observing instruments: Helioseismic and Magnetic Imager (HMI), led by Stanford University; Atmospheric Imaging Assembly (AIA), led by Lockheed Martin Space and Astrophysics Laboratory; and Extreme Ultraviolet Variability Experiment (EVE), led by the University of Colorado. The basic mission is to observe the Sun for a very high percentage of the 5-year mission (10-year goal) with long stretches of uninterrupted observations and with constant, high-data-rate transmission to a dedicated ground station to be located in White Sands, New Mexico. These goals guided the design of the spacecraft bus that will carry and service the three-instrument payload. Overarching design goals for the bus are geosynchronous orbit, near-constant Sun observations with the ability to fly through eclipses, and constant HGA contact with the dedicated ground station. A three-axis stabilized ACS is needed both to point at the Sun accurately and to keep the roll about the Sun vector correctly positioned with respect to the solar north pole. This roll control is especially important for the magnetic field imaging of HM I. The mission requirements have several general impacts on the ACS design. Both the AIA and HMI instruments are very sensitive to the blurring caused by jitter. Each has an image stabilization system (ISS) with some ability to filter out high frequency motion, but below the bandwidth of the ISS the control system must compensate for disturbances within the ACS bandwidth or avoid exciting jitter at higher frequencies. Within the ACS bandwidth, the control requirement imposed by AIA is to place the center of the solar disk no more than 2 arc sec, 3 , from a body-defined target based on one of the GTs that accompany the instrument. This body-defined target, called the science reference boresight (SRB), was determined from the postlaunch orientation of the GTs by averaging the bounding telescope boresights for pitch to get a pitch SRB coordinate, and by averaging the bounding boresights for yaw toet the yaw SRB coordinate. The location of this SRB in the 0.5-deg field-of-view for each GT then becomes the central target for each telescope; one GT is selected for use as the ACS controlling guide telescope (CGT) at any given time. Fine Sun-pointing is effected based on this SRB for all three instruments when the Sun is within the linear range of the CGT. In addition to limiting jitter, HMI science requires averaging several observations, making the instrument sensitive to low frequency motion that induces differential motion between each observation. This requires the spacecraft attitude to be stable about the roll axis to approximately 10 arcsec over a ten-minute period. Instrument calibrations require that the spacecraft point the SRB up to 2.5 degrees in pitch and yaw away from the center of the Sun, placing the Sun outside the field-of-view of the guide telescopes. In such instances, when the GTs cannot provide the definitive target for the ACS, on-board attitude determination combined with ephemeris prediction of the Sun direction must provide the definitive target. EVE is capable of observing the Sun with less dependence on attitude control. However, the ground data processing needs for calibrations result in the most strict attitude knowledge requirements for the mission: [35,70,70] arcsec, 3 , of knowledge with respect to the center of the solar disk. In addition to driving the ACS sensor selection, the knowledge requirements, which have their effect primarily during Inertial mode calibrations, drive the accuracy requirements for the solar ephemeris. The need to achieve and maintain geosynchronous orbit (GEO) drove the need for high-efficiency propulsive systems and appropriate attitude control. The main engine provided high specific impulse for the maneuvers to attain GEO, while the smaller ACS thrusters managed the disturbance torques of the larger engine and provided the capability for much smaller adjustment burns on orbit. SDO s large solar profile means that solar radiation pressure is a large torque disturbance, and the momentum buildup from this disturbance and the GEO altitude drives the ACS to use thrusters to manage vehicle momentum. The demanding data capture budget for the mission, however, requires SDO to avoid frequent thruster maneuvers, while concerns about on-orbit jitter restrict the maximum desired wheel speeds desired from the RWAs. The plan for on-orbit wheel speed and momentum management will be discussed as well as what is now being done in operation after the jitter environment was characterized. The SDO ACS hardware complement is single-fault tolerant. Two main processors carry virtually identical copies of the command and data handling and ACS software, and two identical attitude control electronics (ACE) boxes carry Coldfire processors with contingency ACS software and other hardware interface cards; the ACE structure allows reaction wheels to be commanded by the Sun-pointing Safehold independent of the Mil Std 1553 data bus. The sixteen Adcole CSSs are grouped into primary and backup sets of eight sensors, each set providing the ability to calculate a sun vector. Each set of eight eyes provides full 4 -steradian coverage. The Adcole DSS comprises an optics head and a separate electronics box providing a 1553 data interface. The electronics box is mounted inside the Faraday cage created by the spacecraft bus module. The DSS head with its 32- deg square FOV is mounted on the instrument module with its boresight along the spacecraft X axis, nearly aligned with the Sun during observations. Adcole has designed the DSS calibration parameters so that the accuracy is 0.24 arcminutes within 10 deg of the boresight, and diminishes to 3 arcminutes as the Sun moves towards the edges of its FOV . This DSS calibration scheme provides higher accuracy attitude determination over the range of the instrument calibration maneuvers.

Morgenstern, Wendy M.↗

NASA NTRS2006

Analysis of ISS Plasma Interaction

To date, the International Space Station (ISS) has been one of the largest objects flown in lower earth orbit (LEO). The ISS utilizes high voltage solar arrays (160V) that are negatively grounded leading to pressurized elements that can float negatively with respect to the plasma. Because laboratory measurements indicate a dielectric breakdown potential difference of 80V, arcing could occur on the ISS structure. To overcome the possibility of arcing and clamp the potential of the structure, two Plasma Contactor Units (PCUs) were designed, built, and flown. Also a limited amount of measurements of the floating potential for the present ISS configuration were made by a Floating Potential Probe (FPP), indicating a minimum potential of 24 Volts at the measurement location. A predictive tool, the ISS Plasma Interaction Model (PIM) has been developed accounting for the solar array electron collection, solar array mast wire and effective conductive area on the structure. The model has been used for predictions of the present ISS configuration. The conductive area has been inferred based on available floating potential measurements. Analysis of FPP and PCU data indicated distribution of the conductive area along the Russian segment of the ISS structure. A significant input to PIM is the plasma environment. The International Reference Ionosphere (IRI 2001) was initially used to obtain plasma temperature and density values. However, IRI provides mean parameters, leading to difficulties in interpretation of on-orbit data, especially at eclipse exit where maximum charging can occur. This limits our predicative capability. Satellite and Incoherent Scatter Radar (ISR) data of plasma parameters have also been collected. Approximately 130,000 electron temperature (Te) and density (Ne) pairs for typical ISS eclipse exit conditions have been extracted from the reduced Langmuir probe data flown aboard the NASA DE-2 satellite. Additionally, another 18,000 Te and Ne pairs of ISR data from several radar locations around the globe were used to assure consistency of the satellite data. PIM predictions for ISS charging made with this data correlated very well with FPP data, indicating that the general physics of spacecraft charging with high voltage solar arrays have been captured. The predictions also provided the probabilities of occurrences for ISS charging. These probabilities give a numerical measure of the number of times when the ISS will approach or exceed the vehicle plasma hazard conditions for each configuration. In this paper we shall present the interaction mechanisms between the ISS and the surrounding plasma and give an overview of the PIM components. PIM predictions are compared with available data followed by a discussion of the variability of plasma parameters and the conductive area on the ISS. The ISS PIM will be further tested and verified as data from the Floating Potential Measurement Unit become available, and construction of the ISS continues.

Reddell, Brandon↗

NASA NTRS1991

Neuroendocrine abnormalities in patients with traumatic brain injury

This article provides an overview of hypothalamic and pituitary alterations in brain trauma, including the incidence of hypothalamic-pituitary damage, injury mechanisms, features of the hypothalamic-pituitary defects, and major hypothalamic-pituitary disturbances in brain trauma. While hypothalamic-pituitary lesions have been commonly described at postmortem examination, only a limited number of clinical cases of traumatic hypothalamic-pituitary dysfunction have been reported, probably because head injury of sufficient severity to cause hypothalamic and pituitary damage usually leads to early death. With the improvement in rescue measures, an increasing number of severely head-injured patients with hypothalamic-pituitary dysfunction will survive to be seen by clinicians. Patterns of endocrine abnormalities following brain trauma vary depending on whether the injury site is in the hypothalamus, the anterior or posterior pituitary, or the upper or lower portion of the pituitary stalk. Injury predominantly to the hypothalamus can produce dissociated ACTH-cortisol levels with no response to insulin-induced hypoglycemia and a limited or failed metopirone test, hypothyroxinemia with a preserved thyroid-stimulating hormone response to thyrotropin-releasing hormone, low gonadotropin levels with a normal response to gonadotropin-releasing hormone, a variable growth hormone (GH) level with a paradoxical rise in GH after glucose loading, hyperprolactinemia, the syndrome of inappropriate ADH secretion (SIADH), temporary or permanent diabetes insipidus (DI), disturbed glucose metabolism, and loss of body temperature control. Severe damage to the lower pituitary stalk or anterior lobe can cause low basal levels of all anterior pituitary hormones and eliminate responses to their releasing factors. Only a few cases showed typical features of hypothalamic or pituitary dysfunction. Most severe injuries are sufficient to damage both structures and produce a mixed endocrine picture. Increased intracranial pressure, which releases vasopressin by altering normal hypothalamic anatomy, may represent a unique type of stress to neuroendocrine systems and may contribute to adrenal secretion by a mechanism that requires intact brainstem function. Endocrine function should be monitored in brain-injured patients with basilar skull fractures and protracted posttraumatic amnesia, and patients with SIADH or DI should be closely monitored for other endocrine abnormalities.

NASA Program Space Physiology and Countermeasures↗

NASA NTRS2021

LOFTID Heat Flux Gauge Calibration: What is Truth?

The Low-Earth Orbit Flight Test of an Inflatable Decelerator (LOFTID) is a demonstration of Hypersonic Inflatable Aerodynamic Decelerator (HIAD) technology, which may enable the delivery of heavy payloads to Mars, Venus, and Titan, as well as return to Earth. Unlike rigid aeroshells that are constrained by the size of the rocket’s shroud, inflatable aeroshells can be deployed to a much larger scale, thus allowing a spacecraft to begin its deceleration earlier and experience less heating. On LOFTID, there will be 4 total heat flux gauges (HFG) with a range of 70 W/cm2 and 1 radiometer with a range of 3 W/cm2, arranged as shown in Fig. 1. Both the radiometer and total HFGs are Schmidt-Boelter gauges purchased from an external vendor. Radiative calibrations were performed in-house at NASA Ames’ Sensors and TPS Advanced Research Laboratories (STAR Labs) before and after environmental testing to investigate how the testing affected the sensors' response. Additional rounds of radiative calibration at STAR Labs were also performed in order to investigate the large uncertainties associated with these tests. For example, a survey of multiple calibration facilities concluded that the uncertainty within a given facility was +/-3% [1]. An additional NIST study that calibrated heat flux gauges at 7 different facilities also found the variation in calibration coefficients to be up to ~3% within a given facility, but up to 15% between facilities, suggesting systematic differences between test setups [2]. Finally, the response of heat flux gauges to radiative versus convective heat flux has shown to differ by up to 20% [3],[4]. Because the heat flux gauges on LOFTID will predominantly experience convective heat flux during flight, a convective calibration study was performed at Boeing's Large-Core Arc Tunnel (LCAT) facility. Radiative Calibration Procedure The calibrations performed at STAR Labs utilize a quartz lamp bank (QLB) that provides a maximum heat flux of 50 W/cm2, which bounds the expected LOFTID flight environment. The calibration involves exposing a water-cooled Gardon gauge (reference) and then the unit-under-test (UUT) to 5 different heat fluxes multiple times for 10 seconds each, and then calculating a linear fit. The test setup is shown in Fig. 2. The total HFGs were calibrated at STAR Labs 3 times, denoted as STAR 1 (before environmental testing), STAR 2 (after protoflight vibration and thermal-vacuum testing), and STAR 3 (no change from previous test). All 8 flight-lot total HFGs showed a decrease in full-scale output from STAR 1 to STAR 2 by between 0.5% and 10. The first portion of this investigation was to determine whether the change could be due to differences in temperature between the two calibration runs. A typical linear fit to the calibration data was performed using Eq. 1 where q’ is the heat flux in W/cm2, c is the calibration coefficient, and mV is the sensor output. To account for temperature, the data were fit to a nonlinear function that included both the sensor output (mV) and the temperature from the thermocouple embedded inside the HFG near the surface (T): q'=mV/(c1* T + c0}. The residuals between the fits and the actual data points were calculated for every point, and proven to be much smaller for the temperature-compensated fits than for the linear fits for all sensors. An example is shown in Fig. 3. When the temperature-compensated fits from STAR 1 were applied to the STAR 2 data, the residuals did not improve, suggesting that the change in sensitivity between these two calibration runs was not due to temperature. A third round of calibration (STAR 3) was conducted to further address the temperature dependence of the total HFGs, and the resulting sensitivities matched closely to STAR 2 (within 2%). Temperature-compensated calibration curves were once again fit to the data. In this case, when the temperature-compensated fits from STAR 3 were applied to STAR 2 data, the residuals between the fits and STAR 2 data were much lower than the residuals due to the linear fits. This suggests that the changes seen between STAR 1 and STAR 2 were likely due to actual changes in the sensors caused by the environmental testing between the two calibrations. A modification of the original calibration process, in which the UUT was exposed to each heat flux for just 3 seconds (instead of 10) to reduce the temperature increase during the test, was additionally performed on several of the HFGs. In general, the sensitivities were 1-1.5% lower than from the 10-second tests, but the temperatures were also significantly lower. When the temperature-compensated fits from the 10-second tests were applied to the 3-second test data, the residuals were greatly improved than when just using the linear fits, further suggesting that the temperature-compensated fits may lead to better accuracy than the linear fits in flight. Convective Calibration The second portion of this study was to create a mapping between the radiative and convective calibration coefficients. The majority of the heating during flight will be convective, so it is important to understand how the HFG response differs under these conditions. However, there are no standardized methods for convective calibration [5]. Because the TPS aerothermal response models were validated at LCAT, the same facility was chosen for convective calibration of two of the total HFGs (Fig. 4). Preliminary results showed that the full-scale output was 3% and 8% higher in convective heat flux as compared to radiative heat flux. However, tunnel variation may have contributed to noise and uncertainty in the measurements, and more testing and analysis remains to be done. Scope of Presentation The presentation will include an overview of the changes seen in HFG calibration before and after environmental testing, differences between radiative and convective calibrations, the modeling work done to aid in understanding the sensor response to varying environments, and recommended future work.

H S Alpert↗