Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Graphical model selection”

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.

149 records · Page 9

Software Testbed for Developing and Evaluating Integrated Autonomous Subsystems

To implement fault tolerant autonomy in future space systems, it will be necessary to integrate planning, adaptive control, and state estimation subsystems. However, integrating these subsystems is difficult, time-consuming, and error-prone. This paper describes Intelliface/ADAPT, a software testbed that helps researchers develop and test alternative strategies for integrating planning, execution, and diagnosis subsystems more quickly and easily. The testbed's architecture, graphical data displays, and implementations of the integrated subsystems support easy plug and play of alternate components to support research and development in fault-tolerant control of autonomous vehicles and operations support systems. Intelliface/ADAPT controls NASA's Advanced Diagnostics and Prognostics Testbed (ADAPT), which comprises batteries, electrical loads (fans, pumps, and lights), relays, circuit breakers, invertors, and sensors. During plan execution, an experimentor can inject faults into the ADAPT testbed by tripping circuit breakers, changing fan speed settings, and closing valves to restrict fluid flow. The diagnostic subsystem, based on NASA's Hybrid Diagnosis Engine (HyDE), detects and isolates these faults to determine the new state of the plant, ADAPT. Intelliface/ADAPT then updates its model of the ADAPT system's resources and determines whether the current plan can be executed using the reduced resources. If not, the planning subsystem generates a new plan that reschedules tasks, reconfigures ADAPT, and reassigns the use of ADAPT resources as needed to work around the fault. The resource model, planning domain model, and planning goals are expressed using NASA's Action Notation Modeling Language (ANML). Parts of the ANML model are generated automatically, and other parts are constructed by hand using the Planning Model Integrated Development Environment, a visual Eclipse-based IDE that accelerates ANML model development. Because native ANML planners are currently under development and not yet sufficiently capable, the ANML model is translated into the New Domain Definition Language (NDDL) and sent to NASA's EUROPA planning system for plan generation. The adaptive controller executes the new plan, using augmented, hierarchical finite state machines to select and sequence actions based on the state of the ADAPT system. Real-time sensor data, commands, and plans are displayed in information-dense arrays of timelines and graphs that zoom and scroll in unison. A dynamic schematic display uses color to show the real-time fault state and utilization of the system components and resources. An execution manager coordinates the activities of the other subsystems. The subsystems are integrated using the Internet Communications Engine (ICE). an object-oriented toolkit for building distributed applications.

Testbed↗

The Pursuit of K: Reflections on the Current State-of-the-Art in Stress Intensity Factor Solutions for Practical Aerospace Applications

The elastic stress intensity factor (SIF, commonly denoted as K) is the foundation of practical fracture mechanics (FM) analysis for aircraft structures. This single parameter describes the first-order effects of stress magnitude and distribution as well as the geometry of both structure/component and crack. Hence, the calculation of K is often the most significant step in fatigue analysis based on FM. This presentation will provide several reflections on the current state-of-the-art in SIF solution methods used for practical aerospace applications, including a brief historical perspective, descriptions of some recent and ongoing advances, and comments on some remaining challenges. Newman and Raju made significant early contributions to practical structural analysis by developing closed-form SIF equations for surface and corner cracks in simplified geometries, often based on empirical fits of finite element (FE) solutions. Those solutions (and others like them) were sometimes revised as new analyses were conducted or limitations discovered. The foundational solutions have exhibited striking longevity, despite the relatively "coarse" FE models employed many decades ago. However, in recent years, the accumulation of different generations of solutions for the same nominal geometry has led to some confusion (which solution is correct?), and steady increases in computational capabilities have facilitated the discovery of inaccuracies in some (not all!) of the legacy solutions. Some examples of problems and solutions are presented and discussed, including the challenge of maintaining consistency with legacy design applications. As computational power has increased, the prospect of calculating large numbers of SIF solutions for specific complex geometries with advanced numerical methods has grown more attractive. Fawaz and Andersson, for example, have been generating literally millions of new SIF solutions for different combinations of multiple cracks under simplified loading schemes using p-version FE methods. These data are invaluable, but questions remain about their practical use, because the tabular databases of key results needed to support practical life analysis can occupy gigabytes of storage for only a few classes of geometries. The prospect of using such advanced numerical methods to calculate in real time only those K solutions actually needed to support a specific crack growth analysis is also tempting, but the stark reality is that the computational cost is still so high that the approach is not practical except for specific, critical application problems. Some thoughts are offered about alternative paradigms. Compounding approaches are some of the earliest building blocks of SIF development for more complex geometries. These approaches are especially attractive because of their very low computational cost and their conceptual robustness; they are, in some ways, an intriguing contrast and complement to the brute-force numerical methods. In recent years, researchers at NRC-Canada have published remarkable results showing how compounding approaches can be used to generate accurate solutions for very difficult problems. Examples are provided of some successes--and some limitations--using this approach. These closed-form, tabulated numerical, and compounding approaches have typically been used for simple remote loading with simple load paths to the crack. However, many significant cracks occur in complex stress gradient fields. This is a job for weight function (WF) methods, where the arbitrary stress distribution on the crack plane in the corresponding uncracked body (typically determined using FE methods) is used to determine K. Several significant recent advances in WF methods and solutions are highlighted here. Fueled by advanced 3D numerical methods, many new solutions have been generated for classic geometries such as surface and corner cracks with wide ranges of geometrical validity. A new WF formulation has also be developed for part-through cracks considering the arbitrary stress gradients in all directions in the crack plane (so-called bivariant solutions). Basic WF methods have recently been combined with analytical expressions for crack plane stresses to develop a large family of accurate SIF solutions for corner, surface, and through cracks at internal or external notches with very wide ranges of shapes, sizes, acuities, and offsets. Finally, WF solutions are much faster than FE or boundary element solutions, but can still be much slower than simple closed-form solutions, especially for bivariant solutions that can require 2D numerical integration. Novel pre-integration and dynamic tabular methods have been developed that substantially increase the speed of these advanced WF solutions. The practical utility of advanced SIF methods, including both WF and direct numerical methods, is greatly enhanced if the FM life analysis can be directly and efficiently linked with digital models of the actual structure or component (e.g., FE models for stress analysis). Two recent advances of this type will be described. One approach directly interfaces the FM life analysis with the FE model of the uncracked component (including stress results). Through a powerful graphical user interface, simplified FM life models can be constructed (and visualized) directly on the component model, with the computer collecting the geometry and stress gradient information needed for the life calculation. An even more powerful paradigm uses expert logic to automatically build an optimum simple fracture model at any and every desired location in the component model, perform the life calculation, and even generate fatigue crack growth life contour maps, all with minimal user intervention. This paradigm has also been extended to the automatic calculation of fracture risk, considering uncertainty or variability in key input parameters such as initial crack size or location. Another new integrated approach links the engineering life analysis, the component model, and a 3D numerical fracture analysis built with the same component model to generate a table of SIF values at a specific location that can then be employed efficiently to perform the life calculation. Some attention must be given to verification and validation (V&V) issues and challenges: how good are these SIF solutions, how good is good enough, and does anyone believe the life answer? It is important to think critically about the different sources of error or uncertainty and to perform V&V in a hierarchal, building-block manner. Some accuracy issues for SIF solutions, for example, may actually involve independent material behavior issues, such as constraint loss effects for crack fronts near component surfaces, and can be a source of confusion. Recommendations are proposed for improved V&V approaches. This presentation will briefly but critically survey the range of issues and advances mentioned above, with a particular view towards assembling an integrated approach that combines different methods to create practical tools for real-world design and analysis problems. Examples will be selectively drawn from the recent literature, from recent enhancements in the NASGRO and DARWIN computer codes, and from previously unpublished research

CraigMcClung, R.↗

Peak Wind Tool for General Forecasting

The expected peak wind speed of the day is an important forecast element in the 45th Weather Squadron's (45 WS) daily 24-Hour and Weekly Planning Forecasts. The forecasts are used for ground and space launch operations at the Kennedy Space Center (KSC) and Cape Canaveral Air Force Station (CCAFS). The 45 WS also issues wind advisories for KSC/CCAFS when they expect wind gusts to meet or exceed 25 kt, 35 kt and 50 kt thresholds at any level from the surface to 300 ft. The 45 WS forecasters have indicated peak wind speeds are challenging to forecast, particularly in the cool season months of October - April. In Phase I of this task, the Applied Meteorology Unit (AMU) developed a tool to help the 45 WS forecast non-convective winds at KSC/CCAFS for the 24-hour period of 0800 to 0800 local time. The tool was delivered as a Microsoft Excel graphical user interface (GUI). The GUI displayed the forecast of peak wind speed, 5-minute average wind speed at the time of the peak wind, timing of the peak wind and probability the peak speed would meet or exceed 25 kt, 35 kt and 50 kt. For the current task (Phase II ), the 45 WS requested additional observations be used for the creation of the forecast equations by expanding the period of record (POR). Additional parameters were evaluated as predictors, including wind speeds between 500 ft and 3000 ft, static stability classification, Bulk Richardson Number, mixing depth, vertical wind shear, temperature inversion strength and depth and wind direction. Using a verification data set, the AMU compared the performance of the Phase I and II prediction methods. Just as in Phase I, the tool was delivered as a Microsoft Excel GUI. The 45 WS requested the tool also be available in the Meteorological Interactive Data Display System (MIDDS). The AMU first expanded the POR by two years by adding tower observations, surface observations and CCAFS (XMR) soundings for the cool season months of March 2007 to April 2009. The POR was expanded again by six years, from October 1996 to April 2002, by interpolating 1000-ft sounding data to 100-ft increments. The Phase II developmental data set included observations for the cool season months of October 1996 to February 2007. The AMU calculated 68 candidate predictors from the XMR soundings, to include 19 stability parameters, 48 wind speed parameters and one wind shear parameter. Each day in the data set was stratified by synoptic weather pattern, low-level wind direction, precipitation and Richardson Number, for a total of 60 stratification methods. Linear regression equations, using the 68 predictors and 60 stratification methods, were created for the tool's three forecast parameters: the highest peak wind speed of the day (PWSD), 5-minute average speed at the same time (A WSD), and timing of the PWSD. For PWSD and A WSD, 30 Phase II methods were selected for evaluation in the verification data set. For timing of the PWSD, 12 Phase\I methods were selected for evaluation. The verification data set contained observations for the cool season months of March 2007 to April 2009. The data set was used to compare the Phase I and II forecast methods to climatology, model forecast winds and wind advisories issued by the 45 WS. The model forecast winds were derived from the 0000 and 1200 UTC runs of the 12-km North American Mesoscale (MesoNAM) model. The forecast methods that performed the best in the verification data set were selected for the Phase II version of the tool. For PWSD and A WSD, linear regression equations based on MesoNAM forecasts performed significantly better than the Phase I and II methods. For timing of the PWSD, none of the methods performed significantly bener than climatology. The AMU then developed the Microsoft Excel and MIDDS GUls. The GUIs display the forecasts for PWSD, AWSD and the probability the PWSD will meet or exceed 25 kt, 35 kt and 50 kt. Since none of the prediction methods for timing of the PWSD performed significantly better thanlimatology, the tool no longer displays this predictand. The Excel and MIDDS GUIs display forecasts for Day-I to Day-3 and Day-I to Day-5, respectively. The Excel GUI uses MesoNAM forecasts as input, while the MIDDS GUI uses input from the MesoNAM and Global Forecast System model. Based on feedback from the 45 WS, the AMU added the daily average wind speed from 30 ft to 60 ft to the tool, which is one of the parameters in the 24-Hour and Weekly Planning Forecasts issued by the 45 WS. In addition, the AMU expanded the MIDDS GUI to include forecasts out to Day-7.

Barrett, Joe H., III↗

Clearance Analysis of CTC2 (on ELC4) to S-TRRJ HRS Radiator Rotation Envelope

In response to the planned retirement of the Space Shuttle Program, International Space Station (ISS) management began stockpiling spare parts on the ISS. Many of the larger orbital replacement units were stored on the Expedite the Processing of Experiments to Space Station (EXPRESS) Logistics Carriers (ELCs) mounted on the end of the S3 and P3 truss segments, immediately outboard of the Thermal Radiator Rotary Joints (TRRJs) and their attached radiators. In an August 2009 computer-aided design (CAD) assessment, it was determined that mounting the Cargo Transport Container (CTC) 2 on the inboard face of ELC4 as planned would create insufficient clearance between the CTC2 and the rotational envelope of the radiators when the TRRJs were rotated to a gamma angle of 35.0 degrees. The true clearance would depend on how the Unpressurized Cargo Carrier Attachment System (UCCAS) was mounted to the S3 truss and how the ELC4 was attached to it. If the plane of the UCCAS attachment points were tilted even slightly inboard, it would significantly change the clearance between CTC2 and the Starboard TRRJ (S-TRRJ) radiators. Additionally, since CTC2 would be covered in multilayer insulation (MLI), the true outer profile of CTC2 was not captured in the CAD models used for the clearance assessment. It was possible that, even if the S-TRRJ radiators cleared CTC2, they could snag the MLI covering. In the fall of 2010, the Image Science and Analysis Group (ISAG) was asked to perform an on-orbit clearance analysis to determine the location of CTC2 on ELC4 and the S-TRRJ radiators at the angle of closest approach so that a positive clearance could be assured. To provide the measurements as quickly as possible to aid in the assessment, it was decided that the clearance analysis would be broken into two phases. Phase I: The location and orientation of the UCCAS fittings, which support and hold the ELC4 in place, would be measured relative to the ISS Analytical Coordinate System (ISSACS) as defined by nine preexisting Space Vision System (SVS) targets affixed to the forward/zenith side of the S1 and S3 truss segments. The location of the outboard edge of the S-TRRJ radiator would also be measured when positioned at the angle of closest approach to CTC2 (gamma = 35.0 degrees). This data would allow the Digital Pre-Assembly Group to predict how the ELC4 would sit on the UCCAS and how that would translate into the clearance between CTC2 and the S-TRRJ radiators. Phase II: After the ELC4 was delivered and installed into the UCCAS, the position of the CTC2 mounting plate on the inboard face of ELC4, would be measured in the ISSACS coordinate system relative to the SVS control points used in Phase I. Although CTC2 would not yet be mounted on ELC4, the working envelope of CTC2 could be mathematically added to the measured position of ELC4 to produce a best estimate for CTC2's mounted location. Comparing CTC2's best estimated location to the S-TRRJ radiator (measured in Phase I); relative to the ISSACS coordinate system, would provide a direct measurement of the expected clearance. Due to the impending delivery of ELC4 (scheduled for January 2011), planning for the Phase I clearance analysis began immediately. Using the Dynamic Onboard Ubiquitous Graphics (DOUG) program, ISAG designed a way to acquire images of the SVS control points on truss segments S1 and S3, the aft facing edge of the S-TRRJ Heat Rejection Subsystem (HRS) radiator, and the three UCCAS latch mechanisms mounted on the zenith face of the S3 truss using the Space Station Remote Manipulator System (SSRMS). To minimize the number of SSRMS movements, the Special Purpose Dexterous Manipulator (SPDM) would be attached to the SSRMS. This would make it possible to park the SPDM in one position and acquire multiple images by changing the viewing orientation of the SPDM body cameras using the pan/tilt units on which they are mounted. Using this implementation concept, ISAG identified four SSRMS/SPDM positions from which the majority of the needed imagery could be acquired. Five additional images would be acquired using the CP-3 external ISS camera mounted on the S1 truss immediately inboard of ELC4. Based on a photogrammetric simulation, it was estimated that the measured location of the HRS radiator and UCCAS latch points would be accurate to about 0.3 in. in each of the three axes relative to ISSACS. Working with ROBO, ISAG collected 78 images of the ISS December 29, 2010. From this imagery, the best 40 were selected for use in the analysis process. The images were radiometrically enhanced to improve color and contrast and loaded into the FotoG analysis software along with the camera parameters and control data, which consisted of the coordinates for the nine SVS targets on the S1 and S3 trusses in the ISSACS coordinate system.

Liddle, Donn↗

Selection and Assessment of Predictions of the Mars Pathfinder Landing Site

The successful landing of the Mars Pathfinder spacecraft on Mars allows the review of the process of selecting the landing site and assessing predictions made for the site based on Viking and Earth-based data. Selection of the landing site for Mars Pathfinder was a two-phase process. The first phase took place from October 1993 to June 1994 and involved: initial identification of engineering constraints, definition of environmental conditions at the site for spacecraft design, and evaluation of the scientific potential of different landing sites. This phase culminated with the first "Mars Pathfinder Landing Site Workshop", held at the Lunar and Planetary Institute in Houston, Texas on April 18-19, 1994, in which suggested approaches and landing sites were solicited from the entire scientific community. A preliminary site was selected by the project for design purposes in June 1994. The second phase took place from July 1994 to March 1996 and involved: developing criteria for evaluating site safety using images and remote sensing data, testing of the spacecraft and landing subsystems (with design improvements) to establish quantitative engineering constraints on landing site characteristics, evaluating all potential landing sites on Mars, and certification of the site by the project. This phase included a second open workshop, "Mars Pathfinder Landing Site Workshop II: Characteristics of the Ares Vallis Region and Field Trips in the Channeled Scabland, Washington" held in Spokane and Moses Lake September 24-30, 1995 and formal acceptance of the site by NASA Headquarters. Engineering constraints on Pathfinder landing sites were developed from the initial design of the spacecraft and the entry, descent and landing scenario. The site must be within 5 degrees of the subsolar latitude at the time of landing (15N for maximum solar power and flexible communications with Earth. It also must be below 0 km elevation to enable enough time for the parachute to bring the lander to the proper terminal velocity for landing. The entire landing ellipse, which is 70 km by 200 km due to navigational, ephemeris and atmospheric uncertainties, must be free of steep slopes, scarps and obvious hazards in Viking orbiter images, have acceptable radar reflectivity, moderate rock abundances and have little or no dust. Scientific considerations of the Mars Pathfinder payload and mission indicate that analyses of "grab bag" samples at the mouths of outflow channels can offer a first order assessment of a variety of rock types on Mars. Highland sites offer the advantage of in situ analysis of ancient rocks on Mars that record crustal differentiation and the nature of the early environment. Dark gray sites offer the potential of analyzing unweathered and unoxidized materials. Following a general assessment of the safety of different sites, a preliminary selection of a "grab bag" site was made. This site, Ares Vallis, is near the mouth of an outflow channel that may contain ancient Noachian terrain, Hesperian ridged plains, and reworked channel materials. All potential landing sites on Mars that met basic safety criteria were analyzed in detail. Sites (100 by 200 km target ellipses) were considered safe if they were below 0 km elevation, were free of obvious hazards (high relief surface features) in high-resolution (< 50 m/pixel) Viking orbiter images and had acceptable reflectivity and roughness at radar wavelengths, high thermal inertia, moderate rock abundance, low red to violet ratio, and low albedo. Only 4 sites on Mars met all the above criteria, which included 1995 opposition 3.5 cm delay-Doppler radar data. Complete data were evaluated for 7 sites and the Viking landing sites for comparison for all the above criteria as well as crater abundance, hill and mesa abundance, slopes over meter to kilometer scales, low altitude winds (from global circulation models and slopes), the size-frequency distribution of large rocks, as well as rover trafficability and science potential. Discussion of potential hazards at Ares Vallis using a variety of data sets (including radar) at a second open workshop, indicated this site cannot be shown to be any more hazardous than the Viking landing sites. Field trips to the Channeled Scabland and the Ephrata Fan, analogs for Ares Vallis and the landing site, respectively, provided valuable insight into possible geologic processes and potential surface characteristics. Three sites met all the data requirements and safety criteria for landing Pathfinder. Ares Vallis was selected by the project because it appeared acceptably safe (although it appeared to have greater rock abundances than other sites, its elevation was likely the best known) and offered the prospect of analyzing a variety of rock types expected to be deposited by catastrophic floods, which would enable addressing first-order scientific questions such as differentiation of the crust, the development of weathering products, and the nature of the early martian environment and its subsequent evolution. The selection was reviewed by an external board at a number of meetings and accepted, and the site was approved by NASA Headquarters. Data gathered by the Pathfinder lander' and rover provides the opportunity to test the predictions made for the site in the selection process based on remote observations from Earth, orbit, and the surface. The discussion below is taken from Golombek et al. to which the reader is referred for a more complete discussion and a complete list of references, which are omitted here for brevity. Many characteristics of the landing site are consistent with its being shaped and deposited by the Ares and Tiu catastrophic floods. The rocky surface is consistent a depositional plain comprising semi-rounded pebbles, cobbles and tabular boulders (some of which appear imbricated and/or inclined in the direction of flow) that appear similar to depositional plains in terrestrial catastrophic floods. The Twin Peaks appear to be streamlined hills in lander images, which is consistent with interpretations of larger hills in Viking orbiter images of the region that suggest the lander is on the flank of a broad, gentle ridge trending northeast from Twin Peaks. This ridge, which is the rise to the north of the lander, is aligned in the downstream direction from the Ares and Tiu Valles floods, and may be a debris tail deposited in the wake of the Twin Peaks. Channels visible throughout the scene may be a result of late stage drainage. As predicted by delay-Doppler radar measurements and tracking results, the average elevation of the center of the site was about the same as Viking Lander I relative to the 6.1 mbar geoid. The Doppler tracking and two-way ranging estimate for the elevation of the spacecraft is only 45 in lower than the Viking I Lander and within 100 in of that expected, which is within the uncertainties of the measurements. After landing, surface pressures and winds (5-10 m/s) were found to be similar to expectations based on Viking data, although temperatures were about 10 K warmer. The temperature profile below 50 km was also roughly 20 K warmer. As a result, predicted densities were 5% higher near the surface and up to 40% lower at 50 km but within the entry, descent and landing design margins. The populations of craters and small hills and the slopes of the hills measured in high-resolution (38 m/pixel) Viking orbiter images and the radar derived slopes of the landing site are all consistent with observations of these properties in the lander images. A rocky surface was expected from Viking Infra-Red Thermal Mapper (IRTM) observations and comparisons with the Viking landing sites. The observed cumulative fraction of area covered by rocks with diameters greater than 3 cm and heights greater than 0.5 in (potentially hazardous to landing) at Ares is similar to that predicted by IRTM observations and models of Viking lander and Earth analog rock size-frequency distributions. The IRTM prediction postulated an effective thermal inertia of 30 (10(exp -3) cgs units - cal/cubic cm/s(exp 0.5)/K) for the rock population, but we obtain a slightly different effective thermal inertia for the actual rock population. The validity of interpretations of radar echoes prior to landing are supported by a simple radar echo model, an estimate of the reflectivity of the soil from its bulk density, and the fraction of area covered by rocks. In the calculations, the soil produces the quasi-specular echo and the rocks produce the diffuse echo. The derived quasispecular cross section is comparable to the cross-sections and reflectivities reported for 3.5-cm wavelength observations. The model yields a diffuse echo that is modestly larger than the polarized diffuse echo reported for 3.5-cm wavelength observations. At 12.5-cm wavelength, similar rock populations at Ares and the Viking I site were expected because the diffuse echoes are comparable, but the large normal reflectivities suggests that bulk densities of the soils at depth are greater than those at the surface. We also obtain a fine-component inertia near 8.4 which agrees with the fine-component inertia of 8.7 (in 10(exp -3) cgs units) estimated from thermal observations from orbit by the IRTM; for this estimate, we used a bulk thermal inertia of 10.4 for the landing site, an effective thermal inertia near 40 (10(exp -3) cgs units) for the rock population, and a graphical representation of Kieffer's model. Color and albedo data for Ares suggested surfaces of materials at Ares Vallis would be relatively dust free or unweathered prior to landing compared with the materials at the Viking landing sites. This suggestion is supported by the abundance of relatively dark-gray rocks at Ares and their relative rarity at the Viking landing sites, where rocks are commonly coated with bright red dust. Finally, the 40 km long Ephrata Fan of the Channeled Scabland in Washington state, which was deposited where c

Golombek, M. P.↗