SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “interpretable machine learning”

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 NTRSDate not supplied

Access to Space for NASA Small Sats: Current and Future Needs

Small spacecraft technology advancements have fundamentally shifted how NASA’s Science Mission Directorate (SMD) executes science investigations. To support this approach, the SMD Rideshare Office (SRO) was established in 2020 to lead the definition and implementation of a directorate-wide rideshare strategy. Serving as the central point of contact for coordinating compatible NASA payloads with launch opportunities, the SRO maximizes science, exploration, and technology return on investment by enabling rideshare or other access to space opportunities for small spacecraft on SMD primary mission launches, VADR commercial launch procurements, and other government agency launch opportunities. As NASA seeks to reduce costs and increase the rate of discovery, small satellites and multi manifest access to space have become integral to achieving the agency’s strategic vision. While NASA has created the above-mentioned mechanisms to expand access to space and achieve lower launch costs for its small satellites, many factors have limited full exploit of the opportunity these mechanisms can bring. NASA continues to evolve its mission cultures and technical requirements to adapt and take advantage of burgeoning commercial launch and rideshare advancements. To do so NASA requires collaboration with small satellite manufacturers, principal investigators, and commercial industry partners. Current needs include technical development and design of structurally robust spacecraft buses capable of withstanding varied launch loads, which will increase rideshare interchangeability and versatility. Further, instrument and spacecraft designs must also evolve to handle diverse launch environments and loads factors, while reducing reliance on complex purge and cleanliness constraints, sensitivities to silicones and hydrocarbons, and magnetic requirements. Continued maturation of small and medium launch providers in the near-term is also essential to drive down costs through competition. The current mission selection cadence often complicates the ability to synchronize multiple missions on a single launch. Future needs can include affordable space maneuverability options such as enhanced spacecraft propulsion systems and unique orbital maneuvering capabilities for our individual smallsats or constellations. These emerging capabilities offer a path to unique science orbits for NASA small satellites, but only under the condition that their cost remains affordable and competitive to accommodate inherently smaller mission budgets. Additionally, the projected surge of multiple SMD small satellites launching simultaneously and to unique deep space science orbits necessitates evaluation of expanding deep space communications capabilities. This presentation provides a comprehensive overview of NASA SMD’s access to space landscape and offers further unique insights and discussion, backed by NASA rideshare experiences and lessons learned, on the current and future developments required to unleash the full potential of rideshare opportunities.

Rideshare↗

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 NTRS2006

Nitrile/Buna N Material Failure Assessment for an O-Ring used on the Gaseous Hydrogen Flow Control Valve (FCV) of the Space Shuttle Main Engine

After the rollout of Space Shuttle Discovery in April 2005 in preparation for return-to-flight, there was a failure of the Orbiter (OV-103) helium signature leak test in the gaseous hydrogen (GH2) system. Leakage was attributed to the Flow Control Valve (FCV) in Main Engine 3. The FCV determined to be the source of the leak for OV-103 is designated as LV-58. The nitrile/Buna N rubber O-ring seal was removed from LV-58, and failure analysis indicated radial cracks providing leak paths in one quadrant. Cracks were eventually found in 6 of 9 FCV O-rings among the three Shuttle Orbiters, though none were as severe as those for LV-58, OV-103. Testing by EM10 at MSFC on all 9 FCV O- rings included: laser dimensional, Shore A hardness and properties from a dynamic mechanical analyzer (DMA) and an Instron tensile machine. The following test data was obtained on the cracked quadrant of the LV-58, OV-103 O-ring: (1) the estimated compression set was only 9.5%, compared to none for the rest of the O-ring; (2) Shore A hardness for the O.D. was higher by almost 4 durometer points than for the rest of the O-ring; and (3) DMA data showed that the storage/elastic modulus E was almost 25% lower than for the rest of the O-ring. Of the 8 FCV O-rings tested on an Instron, 4 yielded tensile strengths that were below the MIL spec requirement of 1350 psi-a likely influence of rubber cracking. Comparisons were made between values of modulus determined by DNA (elastic) and Instron (Young s). Each nitrile/Buna N O-ring used in the FCV conforms to the MIL-P-25732C specification. A number of such O-rings taken from shelf storage at MSFC and Kennedy Space Center (KSC) were used to generate a reference curve of DMA glass transition temperature (Tg) vs. shelf storage time ranging from 8 to 26 years. A similar reference curve of TGA onset temperature (of rubber weight loss) vs. shelf storage time was also generated. The DMA and TGA data for the used FCV O-rings were compared to the reference curves. Correlations were also made between the DMA modulus (at 22 C) and Shore A hardness for all 9 of the FCV O-rings used among the three Shuttle Orbiters. The radial cracking in the FCV O-rings was determined to be due to ozone attack, as nitrile/Buna N rubber is susceptible to such attack. Nitrile/Buna N material under MIL-P25732C should be used in a hydraulic fluid environment to help protect it from cracking. However, the FCV O-rings were used in an air only environment. The FCV design has as much as a 9-mil gap that allows the O.D. of the O-ring to be directly exposed to ozone, pressurized air and some elevated temperatures, accelerating the weathering process that leads to O-ring cracking. Space Shuttle flights will likely not continue past 2010. Therefore, Shuttle management decided to continue using the nitrile/Buna N material for the FCVs, but have each O-ring replaced after 3 years to minimize any chances for crack initiation.

Doug Wingard↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Engineering the Interface: Advanced Surface Technologies for Lunar Dust Management and Equipment Longevity

Through the Artemis program, NASA intends to develop a sustainable human foothold on the Moon, ultimately paving the way for crewed exploration of Mars. The Moon's hostile environment poses numerous obstacles, including exposure to radiation, temperature extremes, micrometeoroid threats, and particularly the persistent problem of lunar dust. Lunar dust impacts nearly every aspect of surface operations through adhesion and abrasion mechanisms, with contamination from anthropogenic activities (landing, rovers) far outweighing natural phenomena. Multiple adhesion pathways contribute to surface contamination in the lunar environment, including van der Waals forces, electrostatic forces, chemical reaction, and magnetic forces from elemental iron deposits. Sharp asperities from micrometeoroid bombardment and atmospheric absence increase interaction potential and enable mechanical interlocking. Low cohesion between dust particles exacerbates these challenges, as minimal interaction potential between dust and nearby surfaces overcomes particle cohesion, causing contamination. Lunar dust adhesion mitigation technologies can be categorized as either active, requiring external energy, or passive, relying on intrinsic material properties. Ultrasonic and electrodynamic technologies have been developed to the highest technology readiness level for active approaches. Passive strategies primarily focus on surface chemistry and topography modifications. At NASA Langley Research Center, approaches include surface migration agents to reduce surface energy, topographical modification using laser ablation patterning, and tailored surface conductivity to reduce intrinsic adhesion force. Performance has been evaluated using custom-built ultrasonic and centrifuge instruments. Plume-surface interactions from lunar landers can propel micrometer-sized particles at velocities up to 1000 m s-1.8 These particles pose risks to landers, habitats and infrastructure, leading to erosion, degradation, and reduced component lifespan. A panel recovered from Surveyor III was determined to have been severely abraded because of lunar dust displaced from the Apollo 12 lunar module that landed 160 m away. The performance of metallic surfaces has been evaluated via high velocity single particle impact using the laser-induced project impact test (LIPIT) facility at the University of Utah. Peridynamics modeling, a form of continuum mechanics that uses a nonlocal approach enabling greater simulation capabilities of crack initiation and fracture, has also been utilized to gain greater insight into material response during impact events. Lunar dust contamination challenges extend to power generation systems and moving equipment. Cables, rotation stages, and other mechanisms may experience limited range of motion and reduced lifetime due to dust infiltration. NASA Langley Research Center has evaluated traditional aerospace alloys, softgoods, wear resistant ceramics, and several polymer and polymer composite materials. Test methods have included traditional techniques like Taber abrasion testing, as well as designed test configurations developed in the DUSTE (dust, ultraviolet radiation, and space thermal environmental) chamber that reproduce mechanism functions in operational environment. Beyond laboratory experiments, several flight experiments have been conducted. Materials were exposed to the low Earth orbit environment on the Materials International Space Station Experiment (MISSE) and to the lunar surface environment through the Aegis Aerospace Regolith Adherence Characterization (RAC) payload and the Honeybee Robotics PlanetVac payload. Determining lunar dust's impact on surface exploration and habitation requires comprehensive experimental and computational capabilities combined with lessons learned from initial lunar activities. Identifying the greatest environmental challenges and developing mitigation technologies provides the clearest path toward successfully, expeditiously, and efficaciously completing NASA's mission. This presentation will discuss ongoing efforts at NASA Langley Research Center and collaborator contributions to these critical objectives.

Surface Engineering↗

NASA NTRS1985

Workshop on Advances in NASA-Relevant, Minimally Invasive Instrumentation

The purpose of this meeting is to highlight those advances in instrumentation and methodology that can be applied to the medical problems that will be encountered as the duration of manned space missions is extended. Information on work that is presently being done by NASA as well as other approaches in which NASA is not participating will be exchanged. The NASA-sponsored efforts that will be discussed are part of the overall Space Medicine Program that has been undertaken by NASA to address the medical problems of manned spaceflight. These problems include those that have been observed in the past as well as those which are anticipated as missions become longer, traverse different orbits, or are in any way different. This conference is arranged in order to address the types of instrumentation that might be used in several major medical problem areas. Instrumentation that will help in the cardiovascular, musculoskeletal, and psychological areas, among others will be presented. Interest lies in identifying instrumentation which will help in learning more about ourselves through experiments performed directly on humans. Great emphasis is placed on non-invasive approaches, although every substantial program basic to animal research will be needed in the foreseeable future. Space Medicine is a rather small affair in what is primarily an engineering organization. Space Medicine is conducted throughout NASA by a very small skeleton staff at the headquarters office in Washington and by our various field centers. These centers include the Johnson Space Center in Houston, Texas, the Ames Research Center in Moffett Field, California, the Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena, California, the Kennedy Space Center in Florida, and the Langley Research Center in Hampton, Virginia. Throughout these various centers, work is conducted in-house by NASA's own staff scientists, physicians, and engineers. In addition, various universities, industries, and other government laboratories perform research that cannot be effectively carried out in-house. At the moment, approximately 50% of the work is performed in-house and 50% is extramural. The area of bioinstrumentation pervades every one of our problem areas. In each, equipment or procedures are being developed that will allow more clinical work to be done in a ground-based or spacecraft setting. Although work of this kind goes on throughout the NASA organization and through its grants and contracts in the community at large, the major thrust of it is concentrated at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory which plays a lead role in this type of research and acts as the lead center in bioinstrumentation for NASA. It is recognized that there is much additional research being pursued in this area which would be potentially valuable to NASA and could, with some stimulation from, be made more applicable to NASA's needs. It is hoped, therefore, that the proceedings of this conference will be used as the basis for developing research strategies to be used as a road map to point the way in which NASA's own sponsored program should proceed over the course of the next three years. Additionally, it is hoped that the conference will highlight additional areas in which NASA should be involved either in-house or through the sponsorship of non-NASA scientists. NASA would also like to get an idea of which areas should be emphasized or perhaps de-emphasized among those that it is currently pursuing. In considering these questions, the discussion should concern itself not so much with whether a particular procedure or piece of equipment would work in a spacecraft, but rather, with whether the procedures that are advocated are at the state-of-the-art or beyond the state-of-the-art and whether they hold promise of giving additional insight into the problems to be confronted as humans venture into space for longer and longer periods of time.

Source record↗

NASA NTRS2014

High Efficiency Centrifugal Compressor for Rotorcraft Applications

The report "High Efficiency Centrifugal Compressor for Rotorcraft Applications" documents the work conducted at UTRC under the NRA Contract NNC08CB03C, with cost share 2/3 NASA, and 1/3 UTRC, that has been extended to 4.5 years. The purpose of this effort was to identify key technical barriers to advancing the state-of-the-art of small centrifugal compressor stages; to delineate the measurements required to provide insight into the flow physics of the technical barriers; to design, fabricate, install, and test a state-of-the-art research compressor that is representative of the rear stage of an axial-centrifugal aero-engine; and to acquire detailed aerodynamic performance and research quality data to clarify flow physics and to establish detailed data sets for future application. The design activity centered on meeting the goal set outlined in the NASA solicitation-the design target was to increase efficiency at higher work factor, while also reducing the maximum diameter of the stage. To fit within the existing Small Engine Components Test Facility at NASA Glenn Research Center (GRC) and to facilitate component re-use, certain key design parameters were fixed by UTRC, including impeller tip diameter, impeller rotational speed, and impeller inlet hub and shroud radii. This report describes the design effort of the High Efficiency Centrifugal Compressor stage (HECC) and delineation of measurements, fabrication of the compressor, and the initial tests that were performed. A new High-Efficiency Centrifugal Compressor stage with a very challenging reduction in radius ratio was successfully designed, fabricated and installed at GRC. The testing was successful, with no mechanical problems and the running clearances were achieved without impeller rubs. Overall, measured pressure ratio of 4.68, work factor of 0.81, and at design exit corrected flow rate of 3 lbm/s met the target requirements. Polytropic efficiency of 85.5 percent and stall margin of 7.5 percent were measured at design flow rate and speed. The measured efficiency and stall margin were lower than pre-test CFD predictions by 2.4 percentage points (pt) and 4.5 pt, respectively. Initial impressions from the experimental data indicated that the loss in the efficiency and stall margin can be attributed to a design shortfall in the impeller. However, detailed investigation of experimental data and post-test CFD simulations of higher fidelity than pre-test CFD, and in particular the unsteady CFD simulations and the assessment with a wider range of turbulence models, have indicated that the loss in efficiency is most likely due to the impact of unfavorable unsteady impeller/diffuser interactions induced by diffuser vanes, an impeller/diffuser corrected flow-rate mismatch (and associated incidence levels), and, potentially, flow separation in the radial-to-axial bend. An experimental program with a vaneless diffuser is recommended to evaluate this observation. A subsequent redesign of the diffuser (and the radial-to-axial bend) is also recommended. The diffuser needs to be redesigned to eliminate the mismatching of the impeller and the diffuser, targeting a slightly higher flow capacity. Furthermore, diffuser vanes need to be adjusted to align the incidence angles, to optimize the splitter vane location (both radially and circumferentially), and to minimize the unsteady interactions with the impeller. The radial-to-axial bend needs to be redesigned to eliminate, or at least minimize, the flow separation at the inner wall, and its impact on the flow in the diffuser upstream. Lessons were also learned in terms of CFD methodology and the importance of unsteady CFD simulations for centrifugal compressors was highlighted. Inconsistencies in the implementation of a widely used two-equation turbulence model were identified and corrections are recommended. It was also observed that unsteady simulations for centrifugal compressors require significantly longer integration times than what is current practice in industry.

Gorazd Medic↗