Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Multi-Utility Analysis”

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.

Framework for Shared Drinking Water Risk Assessment

Risk assessment plays a vital role in protecting our nation's critical infrastructure. Traditionally, such assessments have been conducted as a singular activity confined to the boarders of a particular asset or utility with little external sharing of information. In contrast other domains, e.g., disaster preparedness, cyber security, food-borne hazards, have demonstrated the benefits of sharing data, experiences and lessons learned in assessing and managing risk. Here we explore the concept of a Shared Risk Framework (SRF) in the context of critical infrastructure assessments. In this exploration, key elements of an SRF are introduced and initial instantiations demonstrated by way of three water utility assessments. Results from these three demonstrations were then combined with results from four other risk assessments developed using a different risk assessment application by a different set of analysts. Through this comparison we were able to explore potential challenges and benefits from implementation of a SRF. Challenges included both the capacity and interest of local utilities to conduct a shared risk assessment; particularly, wide scale adoption of any SRF will require a clear demonstration that such an effort supports the basic mission of the utility, adds benefit to the utility, and protects utility data from unintended access or misuse. In terms of benefits, anonymous sharing of results among utilities could provide the added benefits of recognizing and correcting bias; identifying ‘unknown, unknowns’; assisting self-assessment and benchmarking for the local utility; and providing a basis for treating shared assets and/or threats across multiple utilities.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗

Aeroelastic Modeling of X-56A Stiff-Wing Configuration Flight Test Data

Aeroelastic stability and control derivatives for the X-56A Multi-Utility Technology Testbed (MUTT), in the stiff-wing configuration, were estimated from flight test data using the output-error method. Practical aspects of the analysis are discussed. The orthogonal phase-optimized multisine inputs provided excellent data information for aeroelastic modeling. Consistent parameter estimates were determined using output error in both the frequency and time domains. The frequency domain analysis converged faster and was less sensitive to starting values for the model parameters, which was useful for determining the aeroelastic model structure and obtaining starting values for the time domain analysis. Including a modal description of the structure from a finite element model reduced the complexity of the estimation problem and improved the modeling results. Effects of reducing the model order on the short period stability and control derivatives were investigated.

Grauer, Jared A.↗

Creating a Test-Validated Finite-Element Model of the X-56A Aircraft Structure

Small modeling errors in a finite-element model will eventually induce errors in the structural flexibility and mass, thus propagating into unpredictable errors in the unsteady aerodynamics and the control law design. One of the primary objectives of the X-56A Multi-Utility Technology Testbed aircraft is the flight demonstration of active flutter suppression and, therefore, in this study, the identification of the primary and secondary modes for the structural model tuning based on the flutter analysis of the X-56A aircraft. The ground-vibration test-validated structural dynamic finite-element model of the X-56A aircraft is created in this study. The structural dynamic finite-element model of the X-56A aircraft is improved using a model-tuning tool. In this study, two different weight configurations of the X-56A aircraft have been improved in a single optimization run. Frequency and the cross-orthogonality (mode shape) matrix were the primary focus for improvement, whereas other properties such as c.g. location, total weight, and off-diagonal terms of the mass orthogonality matrix were used as constraints. The end result was an improved structural dynamic finite-element model configuration for the X-56A aircraft. Improved frequencies and mode shapes in this study increased average flutter speeds of the X-56A aircraft by 7.6% compared to the baseline model.

ground vibration test↗

Follow on Research for Multi-Utility Technology Test Bed Aircraft at NASA Dryden Flight Research Center (FY13 Progress Report)

Modern aircraft employ a significant fraction of their weight in composite materials to reduce weight and improve performance. Aircraft aeroservoelastic models are typically characterized by significant levels of model parameter uncertainty due to the composite manufacturing process. Small modeling errors in the finite element model will eventually induce errors in the structural flexibility and mass, thus propagating into unpredictable errors in the unsteady aerodynamics and the control law design. One of the primary objectives of Multi Utility Technology Test-bed (MUTT) aircraft is the flight demonstration of active flutter suppression, and therefore in this study, the identification of the primary and secondary modes for the structural model tuning based on the flutter analysis of MUTT aircraft. The ground vibration test-validated structural dynamic finite element model of the MUTT aircraft is created in this study. The structural dynamic finite element model of MUTT aircraft is improved using the in-house Multi-disciplinary Design, Analysis, and Optimization tool. In this study, two different weight configurations of MUTT aircraft have been improved simultaneously in a single model tuning procedure.

multi-utility technology test bed aircraft↗

Design, Fabrication, Testing and Validation of a Ruggedized Fiber Optic Sensing System (FOSS) for Launch Application

Fiber-optic sensors based on fiber Bragg grating (FBG) is desirable for structural health monitoring and is used for various aerospace applications such as measuring strain and temperature, where a single optical fiber can multiplex hundreds of FBG sensors. The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Armstrong Flight Research Center (AFRC) (Edwards, California) has been developing an optical fiber-based sensing suite called Fiber Optics Sensing System (FOSS) over the past two decades. Successful strain monitoring flight demonstrations such as the NASA Ikhana (General Atomics, San Diego, California) remotely piloted aircraft and the X-56A Multi-Utility Technology Testbed (Lockheed Martin Corporation, Bethesda, Maryland) remotely piloted subscale aircraft have been performed. Interest in adapting fiber-optic sensors for aerospace applications has led to commissioning the development of a ruggedized FOSS system for spaceflight through the NASA Launch Services Program (LSP) at the NASA Kennedy Space Center (KSC) (Merritt Island, Florida). In this paper, a ruggedized FOSS suitable for a launch environment is discussed in detail. Thermal analysis and enclosure design will be discussed as well as environmental testing such as shock, random vibration, thermal vacuum, and electromagnetic interference/electromagnetic compatibility (EMI/EMC). With all relevant environmental testing completed, a ruggedized FOSS unit has successfully passed all testing and is now deemed space-launch ready.

Allen R. Parker, Jr↗

System Identification of Flexible Aircraft: Lessons Learned from the X-56A Phase 1 Flight Tests

The X-56A Multi-Utility Technology Testbed (MUTT) is a subscale airplane that was de-signed as an experimental flight research platform for improving aeroelastic modeling and control technologies. The Phase 1 flight tests, conducted from 2017 to 2019 at the NASA Arm-strong Flight Research Center (AFRC), included 39 flights and approximately 1000 research maneuvers, some of which demonstrated stable closed-loop flight beyond the open-loop flutter speed. This paper summarizes the system identification effort to extract nondimensional stability and control derivatives from the flight test data for constructing aeroelastic models of the flight dynamics. Topics discussed include instrumentation, experiment design, model postulation and reduction, parameter estimation, and others. Throughout the paper, unique challenges for the identification of flexible aircraft, practical aspects of the analysis, and lessons learned are presented.

Jared A Grauer↗

Creating a Test Validated Structural Dynamic Finite Element Model of the Multi-Utility Technology Test Bed Aircraft

Small modeling errors in the finite element model will eventually induce errors in the structural flexibility and mass, thus propagating into unpredictable errors in the unsteady aerodynamics and the control law design. One of the primary objectives of Multi Utility Technology Test Bed, X-56A, aircraft is the flight demonstration of active flutter suppression, and therefore in this study, the identification of the primary and secondary modes for the structural model tuning based on the flutter analysis of X-56A. The ground vibration test validated structural dynamic finite element model of the X-56A is created in this study. The structural dynamic finite element model of the X-56A is improved using a model tuning tool. In this study, two different weight configurations of the X-56A have been improved in a single optimization run.

structural dynamic model tuning↗

Creating a Test Validated Structural Dynamic Finite Element Model of the X-56A Aircraft

Small modeling errors in the finite element model will eventually induce errors in the structural flexibility and mass, thus propagating into unpredictable errors in the unsteady aerodynamics and the control law design. One of the primary objectives of the Multi Utility Technology Test-bed, X-56A aircraft, is the flight demonstration of active flutter suppression, and therefore in this study, the identification of the primary and secondary modes for the structural model tuning based on the flutter analysis of the X-56A aircraft. The ground vibration test-validated structural dynamic finite element model of the X-56A aircraft is created in this study. The structural dynamic finite element model of the X-56A aircraft is improved using a model tuning tool. In this study, two different weight configurations of the X-56A aircraft have been improved in a single optimization run. Frequency and the cross-orthogonality (mode shape) matrix were the primary focus for improvement, while other properties such as center of gravity location, total weight, and offdiagonal terms of the mass orthogonality matrix were used as constraints. The end result was a more improved and desirable structural dynamic finite element model configuration for the X-56A aircraft. Improved frequencies and mode shapes in this study increased average flutter speeds of the X-56A aircraft by 7.6% compared to the baseline model.

ground vibration test↗