Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “thrust vector control”

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.

At least 145 records · Page 8
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2015

A Vehicle Management End-to-End Testing and Analysis Platform for Validation of Mission and Fault Management Algorithms to Reduce Risk for NASA's Space Launch System

The engineering development of the new Space Launch System (SLS) launch vehicle requires cross discipline teams with extensive knowledge of launch vehicle subsystems, information theory, and autonomous algorithms dealing with all operations from pre-launch through on orbit operations. The characteristics of these spacecraft systems must be matched with the autonomous algorithm monitoring and mitigation capabilities for accurate control and response to abnormal conditions throughout all vehicle mission flight phases, including precipitating safing actions and crew aborts. This presents a large and complex system engineering challenge, which is being addressed in part by focusing on the specific subsystems involved in the handling of off-nominal mission and fault tolerance with response management. Using traditional model based system and software engineering design principles from the Unified Modeling Language (UML) and Systems Modeling Language (SysML), the Mission and Fault Management (M&FM) algorithms for the vehicle are crafted and vetted in specialized Integrated Development Teams (IDTs) composed of multiple development disciplines such as Systems Engineering (SE), Flight Software (FSW), Safety and Mission Assurance (S&MA) and the major subsystems and vehicle elements such as Main Propulsion Systems (MPS), boosters, avionics, Guidance, Navigation, and Control (GNC), Thrust Vector Control (TVC), and liquid engines. These model based algorithms and their development lifecycle from inception through Flight Software certification are an important focus of this development effort to further insure reliable detection and response to off-nominal vehicle states during all phases of vehicle operation from pre-launch through end of flight. NASA formed a dedicated M&FM team for addressing fault management early in the development lifecycle for the SLS initiative. As part of the development of the M&FM capabilities, this team has developed a dedicated testbed that integrates specific M&FM algorithms, specialized nominal and off-nominal test cases, and vendor-supplied physics-based launch vehicle subsystem models. Additionally, the team has developed processes for implementing and validating these algorithms for concept validation and risk reduction for the SLS program. The flexibility of the Vehicle Management End-to-end Testbed (VMET) enables thorough testing of the M&FM algorithms by providing configurable suites of both nominal and off-nominal test cases to validate the developed algorithms utilizing actual subsystem models such as MPS. The intent of VMET is to validate the M&FM algorithms and substantiate them with performance baselines for each of the target vehicle subsystems in an independent platform exterior to the flight software development infrastructure and its related testing entities. In any software development process there is inherent risk in the interpretation and implementation of concepts into software through requirements and test cases into flight software compounded with potential human errors throughout the development lifecycle. Risk reduction is addressed by the M&FM analysis group working with other organizations such as S&MA, Structures and Environments, GNC, Orion, the Crew Office, Flight Operations, and Ground Operations by assessing performance of the M&FM algorithms in terms of their ability to reduce Loss of Mission and Loss of Crew probabilities. In addition, through state machine and diagnostic modeling, analysis efforts investigate a broader suite of failure effects and associated detection and responses that can be tested in VMET to ensure that failures can be detected, and confirm that responses do not create additional risks or cause undesired states through interactive dynamic effects with other algorithms and systems. VMET further contributes to risk reduction by prototyping and exercising the M&FM algorithms early in their implementation and without any inherent hindrances such as meeting FSW processor scheduling constraints due to their target platform - ARINC 653 partitioned OS, resource limitations, and other factors related to integration with other subsystems not directly involved with M&FM such as telemetry packing and processing. The baseline plan for use of VMET encompasses testing the original M&FM algorithms coded in the same C++ language and state machine architectural concepts as that used by Flight Software. This enables the development of performance standards and test cases to characterize the M&FM algorithms and sets a benchmark from which to measure the effectiveness of M&FM algorithms performance in the FSW development and test processes.

Trevino, Luis↗
NASA NTRS1993

Robust nonlinear control of vectored thrust aircraft

An interdisciplinary program in robust control for nonlinear systems with applications to a variety of engineering problems is outlined. Major emphasis will be placed on flight control, with both experimental and analytical studies. This program builds on recent new results in control theory for stability, stabilization, robust stability, robust performance, synthesis, and model reduction in a unified framework using Linear Fractional Transformations (LFT's), Linear Matrix Inequalities (LMI's), and the structured singular value micron. Most of these new advances have been accomplished by the Caltech controls group independently or in collaboration with researchers in other institutions. These recent results offer a new and remarkably unified framework for all aspects of robust control, but what is particularly important for this program is that they also have important implications for system identification and control of nonlinear systems. This combines well with Caltech's expertise in nonlinear control theory, both in geometric methods and methods for systems with constraints and saturations.

Doyle, John C.↗
NASA NTRS1995

Multiaxis Thrust-Vectoring Characteristics of a Model Representative of the F-18 High-Alpha Research Vehicle at Angles of Attack From 0 deg to 70 deg

An investigation was conducted in the Langley 16-Foot Transonic Tunnel to determine the multiaxis thrust-vectoring characteristics of the F-18 High-Alpha Research Vehicle (HARV). A wingtip supported, partially metric, 0.10-scale jet-effects model of an F-18 prototype aircraft was modified with hardware to simulate the thrust-vectoring control system of the HARV. Testing was conducted at free-stream Mach numbers ranging from 0.30 to 0.70, at angles of attack from O' to 70', and at nozzle pressure ratios from 1.0 to approximately 5.0. Results indicate that the thrust-vectoring control system of the HARV can successfully generate multiaxis thrust-vectoring forces and moments. During vectoring, resultant thrust vector angles were always less than the corresponding geometric vane deflection angle and were accompanied by large thrust losses. Significant external flow effects that were dependent on Mach number and angle of attack were noted during vectoring operation. Comparisons of the aerodynamic and propulsive control capabilities of the HARV configuration indicate that substantial gains in controllability are provided by the multiaxis thrust-vectoring control system.

Asbury, Scott C.↗
NASA NTRS1985

The Solid Rocket Booster Auxiliary Power Unit: Meeting the Challenge

The thrust vector control systems of the solid rocket boosters are turbine-powered, electrically controlled hydraulic systems which function through hydraulic actuators to gimbal the nozzles of the solid rocket boosters and provide vehicle steering for the Space Shuttle. Turbine power for the thrust vector control systems is provided through hydrazine fueled auxiliary power units which drive the hydraulic pumps. The solid rocket booster auxiliary power unit resulted from trade studies which indicated significant advantages would result if an existing engine could be found to meet the program goal of 20 missions reusability and adapted to meet the seawater environments associated with ocean landings. During its maturation, the auxiliary power unit underwent many design iterations and provided its flight worthiness through full qualification programs both as a component and as part of the thrust vector control system. More significant, the auxiliary power unit has successfully completed six Shuttle missions.

Hughes, R. W.↗
NASA NTRS1966

Study of vortex valve for medium temperature solid propellants

Fluid state vortex valve secondary injection control system shows considerable promise for future application to solid propellant rocket engine thrust vector control. The single axis injection system tested would be capable of providing secondary injection thrust vector control using 2000 deg F gas.

Holt, W. D.↗
NASA NTRS1980

Attitude control study for a large flexible spacecraft using a Solar Electric Propulsion System (SEPS)

The attitude control performance of the solar electric propulsion system (SEPS) was evaluated. A thrust vector control system for powered flight control was examined along with a gas jet reaction control system, and a reaction wheel system, both of which have been proposed for nonpowered flight control. Comprehensive computer simulations of each control system were made and evaluated using a 30 mode spacecraft model. Results obtained indicate that thrust vector control and reaction wheel systems offer acceptable smooth proportional control. The gas jet control system is shown to be risky for a flexible structure such as SEPS, and is therefore, not recommended as a primary control method.

Tolivar, A. F.↗
NASA NTRS2010

Preliminary Design of the Guidance, Navigation, and Control System of the Altair Lunar Lander

Guidance, Navigation, and Control (GN&C) is the measurement and control of spacecraft position, velocity, and attitude in support of mission objectives. This paper provides an overview of a preliminary design of the GN&C system of the Lunar Lander Altair. Key functions performed by the GN&C system in various mission phases will first be described. A set of placeholder GN&C sensors that is needed to support these functions is next described. To meet Crew safety requirements, there must be high degrees of redundancy in the selected sensor configuration. Two sets of thrusters, one on the Ascent Module (AM) and the other on the Descent Module (DM), will be used by the GN&C system. The DM thrusters will be used, among other purposes, to perform course correction burns during the Trans-lunar Coast. The AM thrusters will be used, among other purposes, to perform precise angular and translational controls of the ascent module in order to dock the ascent module with Orion. Navigation is the process of measurement and control of the spacecraft's "state" (both the position and velocity vectors of the spacecraft). Tracking data from the Earth-Based Ground System (tracking antennas) as well as data from onboard optical sensors will be used to estimate the vehicle state. A driving navigation requirement is to land Altair on the Moon with a landing accuracy that is better than 1 km (radial 95%). Preliminary performance of the Altair GN&C design, relative to this and other navigation requirements, will be given. Guidance is the onboard process that uses the estimated state vector, crew inputs, and pre-computed reference trajectories to guide both the rotational and the translational motions of the spacecraft during powered flight phases. Design objectives of reference trajectories for various mission phases vary. For example, the reference trajectory for the descent "approach" phase (the last 3-4 minutes before touchdown) will sacrifice fuel utilization efficiency in order to provide landing site visibility for both the crew and the terrain hazard detection sensor system. One output of Guidance is the steering angle commands sent to the 2 degree-of-freedom (dof) gimbal actuation system of the descent engine. The engine gimbal actuation system is controlled by a Thrust Vector Control algorithm that is designed taking into account the large quantities of sloshing liquids in tanks mounted on Altair. In this early design phase of Altair, the GN&C system is described only briefly in this paper and the emphasis is on the GN&C architecture (that is still evolving). Multiple companion papers will provide details that are related to navigation, optical navigation, guidance, fuel sloshing, rendezvous and docking, machine-pilot interactions, and others. The similarities and differences of GN&C designs for Lunar and Mars landers are briefly compared.

Lee, Allan Y.↗
NASA NTRS1989

Electric auxiliary power unit for Shuttle evolution

The Space Shuttle Orbiter currently uses three hydrazine fueled auxiliary power units (APUs) to provide hydraulic power for the vehicle aerodynamic surface controls, main engine thrust vector control, landing gear, steering, and brakes. Electric auxiliary power units have been proposed as possible replacements to the hydrazine auxiliary power units. Along with the potential advantages, this paper describes an Electric APU configuration and addresses the technical issues and risks associated with the subsystem components. Additionally, characteristics of an Electric APU compared to the existing APU and the direction of future study with respect to the Electric APU is suggested.

Meyer, Doug↗
NASA NTRS1989

Liquid Rocket Booster (LRB) for the Space Transportion System (STS) systems study. Appendix D: Trade study summary for the liquid rocket booster

Trade studies plans for a number of elements in the Liquid Rocket Booster (LRB) component of the Space Transportation System (STS) are given in viewgraph form. Some of the elements covered include: avionics/flight control; avionics architecture; thrust vector control studies; engine control electronics; liquid rocket propellants; propellant pressurization systems; recoverable spacecraft; cryogenic tanks; and spacecraft construction materials.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS1994

Multi-application controls: Robust nonlinear multivariable aerospace controls applications

This viewgraph presentation describes the general methodology used to apply Honywell's Multi-Application Control (MACH) and the specific application to the F-18 High Angle-of-Attack Research Vehicle (HARV) including piloted simulation handling qualities evaluation. The general steps include insertion of modeling data for geometry and mass properties, aerodynamics, propulsion data and assumptions, requirements and specifications, e.g. definition of control variables, handling qualities, stability margins and statements for bandwidth, control power, priorities, position and rate limits. The specific steps include choice of independent variables for least squares fits to aerodynamic and propulsion data, modifications to the management of the controls with regard to integrator windup and actuation limiting and priorities, e.g. pitch priority over roll, and command limiting to prevent departures and/or undesirable inertial coupling or inability to recover to a stable trim condition. The HARV control problem is characterized by significant nonlinearities and multivariable interactions in the low speed, high angle-of-attack, high angular rate flight regime. Systematic approaches to the control of vehicle motions modeled with coupled nonlinear equations of motion have been developed. This paper will discuss the dynamic inversion approach which explicity accounts for nonlinearities in the control design. Multiple control effectors (including aerodynamic control surfaces and thrust vectoring control) and sensors are used to control the motions of the vehicles in several degrees-of-freedom. Several maneuvers will be used to illustrate performance of MACH in the high angle-of-attack flight regime. Analytical methods for assessing the robust performance of the multivariable control system in the presence of math modeling uncertainty, disturbances, and commands have reached a high level of maturity. The structured singular value (mu) frequency response methodology is presented as a method for analyzing robust performance and the mu-synthesis method will be presented as a method for synthesizing a robust control system. The paper concludes with the author's expectations regarding future applications of robust nonlinear multivariable controls.

Enns, Dale F.↗
NASA NTRS2010

SCI Hazard Report Methodology

This slide presentation reviews the methodology in creating a Source Control Item (SCI) Hazard Report (HR). The SCI HR provides a system safety risk assessment for the following Ares I Upper Stage Production Contract (USPC) components (1) Pyro Separation Systems (2) Main Propulsion System (3) Reaction and Roll Control Systems (4) Thrust Vector Control System and (5) Ullage Settling Motor System components.

Mitchell, Michael S.↗
NASA NTRS2014

NASA Marshall Space Flight Center Controls Systems Design and Analysis Branch

Marshall Space Flight Center maintains a critical national capability in the analysis of launch vehicle flight dynamics and flight certification of GN&C algorithms. MSFC analysts are domain experts in the areas of flexible-body dynamics and control-structure interaction, thrust vector control, sloshing propellant dynamics, and advanced statistical methods. Marshall's modeling and simulation expertise has supported manned spaceflight for over 50 years. Marshall's unparalleled capability in launch vehicle guidance, navigation, and control technology stems from its rich heritage in developing, integrating, and testing launch vehicle GN&C systems dating to the early Mercury‐Redstone and Saturn vehicles. The Marshall team is continuously developing novel methods for design, including advanced techniques for large‐scale optimization and analysis.

Gilligan, Eric↗
NASA NTRS2016

Modeling in the State Flow Environment to Support Launch Vehicle Verification Testing for Mission and Fault Management Algorithms in the NASA Space Launch System

Analysis methods and testing processes are essential activities in the engineering development and verification of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration's (NASA) new Space Launch System (SLS). Central to mission success is reliable verification of the Mission and Fault Management (M&FM) algorithms for the SLS launch vehicle (LV) flight software. This is particularly difficult because M&FM algorithms integrate and operate LV subsystems, which consist of diverse forms of hardware and software themselves, with equally diverse integration from the engineering disciplines of LV subsystems. M&FM operation of SLS requires a changing mix of LV automation. During pre-launch the LV is primarily operated by the Kennedy Space Center (KSC) Ground Systems Development and Operations (GSDO) organization with some LV automation of time-critical functions, and much more autonomous LV operations during ascent that have crucial interactions with the Orion crew capsule, its astronauts, and with mission controllers at the Johnson Space Center. M&FM algorithms must perform all nominal mission commanding via the flight computer to control LV states from pre-launch through disposal and also address failure conditions by initiating autonomous or commanded aborts (crew capsule escape from the failing LV), redundancy management of failing subsystems and components, and safing actions to reduce or prevent threats to ground systems and crew. To address the criticality of the verification testing of these algorithms, the NASA M&FM team has utilized the State Flow environment6 (SFE) with its existing Vehicle Management End-to-End Testbed (VMET) platform which also hosts vendor-supplied physics-based LV subsystem models. The human-derived M&FM algorithms are designed and vetted in Integrated Development Teams composed of design and development disciplines such as Systems Engineering, Flight Software (FSW), Safety and Mission Assurance (S&MA) and major subsystems and vehicle elements such as Main Propulsion Systems (MPS), boosters, avionics, Guidance, Navigation, and Control (GN&C), Thrust Vector Control (TVC), liquid engines, and the astronaut crew office. Since the algorithms are realized using model-based engineering (MBE) methods from a hybrid of the Unified Modeling Language (UML) and Systems Modeling Language (SysML), SFE methods are a natural fit to provide an in depth analysis of the interactive behavior of these algorithms with the SLS LV subsystem models. For this, the M&FM algorithms and the SLS LV subsystem models are modeled using constructs provided by Matlab which also enables modeling of the accompanying interfaces providing greater flexibility for integrated testing and analysis, which helps forecast expected behavior in forward VMET integrated testing activities. In VMET, the M&FM algorithms are prototyped and implemented using the same C++ programming language and similar state machine architectural concepts used by the FSW group. Due to the interactive complexity of the algorithms, VMET testing thus far has verified all the individual M&FM subsystem algorithms with select subsystem vendor models but is steadily progressing to assessing the interactive behavior of these algorithms with LV subsystems, as represented by subsystem models. The novel SFE applications has proven to be useful for quick look analysis into early integrated system behavior and assessment of the M&FM algorithms with the modeled LV subsystems. This early MBE analysis generates vital insight into the integrated system behaviors, algorithm sensitivities, design issues, and has aided in the debugging of the M&FM algorithms well before full testing can begin in more expensive, higher fidelity but more arduous environments such as VMET, FSW testing, and the Systems Integration Lab7 (SIL). SFE has exhibited both expected and unexpected behaviors in nominal and off nominal test cases prior to full VMET testing. In many findings, these behavioral characteristics were used to correct the M&FM algorithms, enable better test coverage, and develop more effective test cases for each of the LV subsystems. This has improved the fidelity of testing and planning for the next generation of M&FM algorithms as the SLS program evolves from non-crewed to crewed flight, impacting subsystem configurations and the M&FM algorithms that control them. SFE analysis has improved robustness and reliability of the M&FM algorithms by revealing implementation errors and documentation inconsistencies. It is also improving planning efficiency for future VMET testing of the M&FM algorithms hosted in the LV flight computers, further reducing risk for the SLS launch infrastructure, the SLS LV, and most importantly the crew.

Trevino, Luis↗
NASA NTRS1991

Research flight-control system development for the F-18 high alpha research vehicle

The F-18 high alpha research vehicle was recently modified by adding a thrust vectoring control system. A key element in the modification was the development of a research flight control system integrated with the basic F-18 flight control system. Discussed here are design requirements, system development, and research utility of the resulting configuration as an embedded system for flight research in the high angle of attack regime. Particular emphasis is given to control system modifications and control law features required for high angle of attack flight. Simulation results are used to illustrate some of the thrust vectoring control system capabilities and predicted maneuvering improvements.

Pahle, Joseph W.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Core Stage TVC Systems Engineering Challenges in Reusing Heritage Hardware

The Space Launch System (SLS) Core Stage (CS) Thrust Vector Control (TVC) system is comprised of 8 mechanical feedback Shuttle heritage Type III TVC actuators and four RS-25 engines, each attached to a Shuttle heritage gimbal block/bearing. Two actuators are used to move each engine in two planes perpendicular to one another (i.e., pitch and yaw). The TVC system design leverages hardware from the Space Shuttle program as well as new hardware designed specifically for the Core Stage. The Space Shuttle heritage hardware directly reused on SLS includes the Orbiter TVC hydraulic servo-actuators (with two slight design modifications), the Orbiter hydraulic circulation pumps, the Orbiter gimbal block/bearing, and the Solid Rocket Booster hydraulic pumps. The Core Auxiliary Power Unit (CAPU) is derived from the Orbiter Auxiliary Power Unit (APU). The Orbiter and Solid Rocket Booster APU turbines are powered by hot gas produced by catalyzed hydrazine decomposition. On the SLS Core Stage, the CAPU turbine is spun using cold gas tapped-off from the RS-25 to CS liquid hydrogen autogenous pressurization line. While direct reuse or slight modification of existing hardware may seem to be a triple-win for a program in cost, schedule, and technical risk mitigation, those benefits can only be realized when its degree of application in a new system is carefully and thoughtfully managed. The heritage hardware reuse should be prescribed within the heritage design capability and reuse environments must lie within the envelope of heritage qualification testing. Despite the significant test and flight experience of the Shuttle heritage hardware components, successful integration with the newly designed CS TVC components and incorporation into the stage design proved to be a challenge which required re-qualification of the heritage hardware as well as thorough integrated testing to support flight certification. Examples of the challenges that were overcome include: re-qualifying heritage hardware to survive new shock and vibration environments, certifying performance of extensively modified heritage hardware, regenerating design insight due to lack of available heritage vendor data, showing compliance to modern structural design standards, translation of heritage requirements for analog avionics to modern digital avionics, and interfacing heritage mechanical hardware with newly designed avionics. This paper is the second installment in a seven-paper series surveying the design, engineering, test validation, and flight performance of the Core Stage Thrust Vector Control system. This paper will discuss several engineering challenges encountered during the development process for SLS CS TVC and how they were successfully overcome to reach flight readiness.

Thrust Vector Control↗