Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Simulink model”

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.

147 records · Page 9
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2015

Are We There Yet? Determining the Adequacy of Formalized Requirements and Test Suites

Structural coverage metrics have traditionally categorized code as either covered or uncovered. Recent work presents a stronger notion of coverage, checked coverage, which counts only statements whose execution contributes to an outcome checked by an oracle. While this notion of coverage addresses the adequacy of the oracle, for Model-Based Development of safety critical systems, it is still not enough; we are also interested in how much of the oracle is covered, and whether the values of program variables are masked when the oracle is evaluated. Such information can help system engineers identify missing requirements as well as missing test cases. In this work, we add to the idea of checked coverage an analysis of requirements coverage to help provide insight to engineers as to whether the requirements or the test suite need to be improved. We implement our approach based on a dynamic backward slicing technique and evaluate it on several systems developed in Simulink. The results of our preliminary study show that even for systems with comprehensive test suites and good sets of requirements, our approach can identify cases where more tests or more requirements are needed to improve coverage numbers.

Dynamic Slicing↗
NASA NTRS2013

Distributed Engine Control Empirical/Analytical Verification Tools

NASA's vision for an intelligent engine will be realized with the development of a truly distributed control system featuring highly reliable, modular, and dependable components capable of both surviving the harsh engine operating environment and decentralized functionality. A set of control system verification tools was developed and applied to a C-MAPSS40K engine model, and metrics were established to assess the stability and performance of these control systems on the same platform. A software tool was developed that allows designers to assemble easily a distributed control system in software and immediately assess the overall impacts of the system on the target (simulated) platform, allowing control system designers to converge rapidly on acceptable architectures with consideration to all required hardware elements. The software developed in this program will be installed on a distributed hardware-in-the-loop (DHIL) simulation tool to assist NASA and the Distributed Engine Control Working Group (DECWG) in integrating DCS (distributed engine control systems) components onto existing and next-generation engines.The distributed engine control simulator blockset for MATLAB/Simulink and hardware simulator provides the capability to simulate virtual subcomponents, as well as swap actual subcomponents for hardware-in-the-loop (HIL) analysis. Subcomponents can be the communication network, smart sensor or actuator nodes, or a centralized control system. The distributed engine control blockset for MATLAB/Simulink is a software development tool. The software includes an engine simulation, a communication network simulation, control algorithms, and analysis algorithms set up in a modular environment for rapid simulation of different network architectures; the hardware consists of an embedded device running parts of the CMAPSS engine simulator and controlled through Simulink. The distributed engine control simulation, evaluation, and analysis technology provides unique capabilities to study the effects of a given change to the control system in the context of the distributed paradigm. The simulation tool can support treatment of all components within the control system, both virtual and real; these include communication data network, smart sensor and actuator nodes, centralized control system (FADEC full authority digital engine control), and the aircraft engine itself. The DECsim tool can allow simulation-based prototyping of control laws, control architectures, and decentralization strategies before hardware is integrated into the system. With the configuration specified, the simulator allows a variety of key factors to be systematically assessed. Such factors include control system performance, reliability, weight, and bandwidth utilization.

DeCastro, Jonathan↗
NASA NTRS2016

Applied Time Domain Stability Margin Assessment for Nonlinear Time-Varying Systems

The baseline stability margins for NASA's Space Launch System (SLS) launch vehicle were generated via the classical approach of linearizing the system equations of motion and determining the gain and phase margins from the resulting frequency domain model. To improve the fidelity of the classical methods, the linear frequency domain approach can be extended by replacing static, memoryless nonlinearities with describing functions. This technique, however, does not address the time varying nature of the dynamics of a launch vehicle in flight. An alternative technique for the evaluation of the stability of the nonlinear launch vehicle dynamics along its trajectory is to incrementally adjust the gain and/or time delay in the time domain simulation until the system exhibits unstable behavior. This technique has the added benefit of providing a direct comparison between the time domain and frequency domain tools in support of simulation validation. This technique was implemented by using the Stability Aerospace Vehicle Analysis Tool (SAVANT) computer simulation to evaluate the stability of the SLS system with the Adaptive Augmenting Control (AAC) active and inactive along its ascent trajectory. The gains for which the vehicle maintains apparent time-domain stability defines the gain margins, and the time delay similarly defines the phase margin. This method of extracting the control stability margins from the time-domain simulation is relatively straightforward and the resultant margins can be compared to the linearized system results. The sections herein describe the techniques employed to extract the time-domain margins, compare the results between these nonlinear and the linear methods, and provide explanations for observed discrepancies. The SLS ascent trajectory was simulated with SAVANT and the classical linear stability margins were evaluated at one second intervals. The linear analysis was performed with the AAC algorithm disabled to attain baseline stability margins. At each time point, the system was linearized about the current operating point using Simulink's built-in solver. Each linearized system in time was evaluated for its rigid-body gain margin (high frequency gain margin), rigid-body phase margin, and aero gain margin (low frequency gain margin) for each control axis. Using the stability margins derived from the baseline linearization approach, the time domain derived stability margins were determined by executing time domain simulations in which axis-specific incremental gain and phase adjustments were made to the nominal system about the expected neutral stability point at specific flight times. The baseline stability margin time histories were used to shift the system gain to various values around the zero margin point such that a precise amount of expected gain margin was maintained throughout flight. When assessing the gain margins, the gain was applied starting at the time point under consideration, thereafter following the variation in the margin found in the linear analysis. When assessing the rigid-body phase margin, a constant time delay was applied to the system starting at the time point under consideration. If the baseline stability margins were correctly determined via the linear analysis, the time domain simulation results should contain unstable behavior at certain gain and phase values. Examples will be shown from repeated simulations with variable added gain and phase lag. Faithfulness of margins calculated from the linear analysis to the nonlinear system will be demonstrated.

Kiefer, J. M.↗