Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Space Flight Hardware”

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 19 records
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2013

Movable Ground Based Recovery System for Reuseable Space Flight Hardware

A reusable space flight launch system is configured to eliminate complex descent and landing systems from the space flight hardware and move them to maneuverable ground based systems. Precision landing of the reusable space flight hardware is enabled using a simple, light weight aerodynamic device on board the flight hardware such as a parachute, and one or more translating ground based vehicles such as a hovercraft that include active speed, orientation and directional control. The ground based vehicle maneuvers itself into position beneath the descending flight hardware, matching its speed and direction and captures the flight hardware. The ground based vehicle will contain propulsion, command and GN&C functionality as well as space flight hardware landing cushioning and retaining hardware. The ground based vehicle propulsion system enables longitudinal and transverse maneuverability independent of its physical heading.

Sarver, George L.↗
NASA NTRS1993

Capabilities and constraints of typical space flight hardware

The Space Experiments Division is in the business of performing ground based low gravity testing and designing experiment hardware for space flight on the Space Shuttle and in the future, Space Station Freedom. As witnessed in combustion work, the reduction of gravity brings forward previously negligible processes and parameters. In a similar manner, the design of experiments for microgravity operation aboard the Space Shuttle must consider parameters that are often not factors for laboratory hardware.

Koudelka, John M.↗
NASA NTRS2000

Development of a Methodology to Conduct Usability Evaluation for Hand Tools that May Reduce the Amount of Small Parts that are Dropped During Installation while Processing Space Flight Hardware

Foreign object debris (FOD) is an important concern while processing space flight hardware. FOD can be defined as "The debris that is left in or around flight hardware, where it could cause damage to that flight hardware," (United Space Alliance, 2000). Just one small screw left unintentionally in the wrong place could delay a launch schedule while it is retrieved, increase the cost of processing, or cause a potentially fatal accident. At this time, there is not a single solution to help reduce the number of dropped parts such as screws, bolts, nuts, and washers during installation. Most of the effort is currently focused on training employees and on capturing the parts once they are dropped. Advances in ergonomics and hand tool design suggest that a solution may be possible, in the form of specialty hand tools, which secure the small parts while they are being handled. To assist in the development of these new advances, a test methodology was developed to conduct a usability evaluation of hand tools, while performing tasks with risk of creating FOD. The methodology also includes hardware in the form of a testing board and the small parts that can be installed onto the board during a test. The usability of new hand tools was determined based on efficiency and the number of dropped parts. To validate the methodology, participants were tested while performing a task that is representative of the type of work that may be done when processing space flight hardware. Test participants installed small parts using their hands and two commercially available tools. The participants were from three groups: (1) students, (2) engineers / managers and (3) technicians. The test was conducted to evaluate the differences in performance when using the three installation methods, as well as the difference in performance of the three participant groups.

Miller, Darcy↗
NASA NTRS2018

Organic Biomarker-Based Assays to Evaluate Total Bioburden and Organic Compounds on Space Flight Hardware

Meeting planetary protection (PP) requirements for space flight hardware may involve bioburden reduction by dry heat microbial reduction (DHMR). The NASA standard assay to demonstrate the reduction of organisms involves the swabbing of surfaces, heat shock of the extracted samples, plating of the samples on Trypticase Soy Agar (TSA), and counting colony forming units after an incubation period. The standard assay uses enumeration of heat tolerant spore-formers as a proxy for total bioburden and is generally expected to provide a lower limit. We suggest that a better estimate of the total bioburden could be obtained through sampling and analysis of organic biomarkers. As biological organisms are fundamentally organic in chemistry (i.e. carbon containing materials) it is important to characterize the biomarker compounds that are released from organisms that 1) exist on flight hardware before microbial reduction and 2) left behind from the killed organisms following microbial reduction.

Locke, Darren R.↗
NASA NTRS2020

Micro Raman Spectroscopy for Characterizing Molecular Contamination on Space Flight Hardware

In the field of contamination control,many unknowns exist. Often, contamination control engineers have to utilize multiple spectroscopic, macroscopic, and microscopic tools to identify contamination sources when there is a potential contamination exposure to space flight hardware. Understanding the chemical composition of the molecular contamination provides an opportunity for contamination control engineers to determine if this contamination is problematic or benign. In this study, an existing witness plate program for monitoring space flight hardware during the assembly, integration, and testing phases is coupled with micro Raman spectroscopy analysis. The main goal of this study is to determine the limitations, reproducibility, and throughput of micro Raman spectroscopy for characterizing molecular contamination. Micro Raman Spectroscopy will be an additional tool used by contamination control engineers to monitor the cleanliness of space flight hardware.

Microscope↗
NASA NTRS2001

Acoustical Testing Laboratory Developed to Support the Low-Noise Design of Microgravity Space Flight Hardware

The NASA John H. Glenn Research Center at Lewis Field has designed and constructed an Acoustical Testing Laboratory to support the low-noise design of microgravity space flight hardware. This new laboratory will provide acoustic emissions testing and noise control services for a variety of customers, particularly for microgravity space flight hardware that must meet International Space Station limits on noise emissions. These limits have been imposed by the space station to support hearing conservation, speech communication, and safety goals as well as to prevent noise-induced vibrations that could impact microgravity research data. The Acoustical Testing Laboratory consists of a 23 by 27 by 20 ft (height) convertible hemi/anechoic chamber and separate sound-attenuating test support enclosure. Absorptive 34-in. fiberglass wedges in the test chamber provide an anechoic environment down to 100 Hz. A spring-isolated floor system affords vibration isolation above 3 Hz. These criteria, along with very low design background levels, will enable the acquisition of accurate and repeatable acoustical measurements on test articles, up to a full space station rack in size, that produce very little noise. Removable floor wedges will allow the test chamber to operate in either a hemi/anechoic or anechoic configuration, depending on the size of the test article and the specific test being conducted. The test support enclosure functions as a control room during normal operations but, alternatively, may be used as a noise-control enclosure for test articles that require the operation of noise-generating test support equipment.

Cooper, Beth A.↗
NASA NTRS2003

Weight and the Future of Space Flight Hardware Cost Modeling

Weight has been used as the primary input variable for cost estimating almost as long as there have been parametric cost models. While there are good reasons for using weight, serious limitations exist. These limitations have been addressed by multi-variable equations and trend analysis in models such as NAFCOM, PRICE, and SEER; however, these models have not be able to address the significant time lags that can occur between the development of similar space flight hardware systems. These time lags make the cost analyst's job difficult because insufficient data exists to perform trend analysis, and the current set of parametric models are not well suited to accommodating process improvements in space flight hardware design, development, build and test. As a result, people of good faith can have serious disagreement over the cost for new systems. To address these shortcomings, new cost modeling approaches are needed. The most promising approach is process based (sometimes called activity) costing. Developing process based models will require a detailed understanding of the functions required to produce space flight hardware combined with innovative approaches to estimating the necessary resources. Particularly challenging will be the lack of data at the process level. One method for developing a model is to combine notional algorithms with a discrete event simulation and model changes to the total cost as perturbations to the program are introduced. Despite these challenges, the potential benefits are such that efforts should be focused on developing process based cost models.

Prince, Frank A.↗
NASA NTRS1986

Low extractable wipers for cleaning space flight hardware

There is a need for low extractable wipers for solvent cleaning of space flight hardware. Soxhlet extraction is the method utilized today by most NASA subcontractors, but there may be alternate methods to achieve the same results. The need for low non-volatile residue materials, the history of soxhlet extraction, and proposed alternate methods are discussed, as well as different types of wipers, test methods, and current standards.

Tijerina, Veronica↗
NASA NTRS1990

Design considerations for space flight hardware

The environmental and design constraints are reviewed along with some insight into the established design and quality assurance practices that apply to low earth orbit (LEO) space flight hardware. It is intended as an introduction for people unfamiliar with space flight considerations. Some basic data and a bibliography are included.

Glover, Daniel↗
NASA NTRS2012

Cumulative Measurement Errors for Dynamic Testing of Space Flight Hardware

Located at the NASA Johnson Space Center in Houston, TX, the Six-Degree-of-Freedom Dynamic Test System (SDTS) is a real-time, six degree-of-freedom, short range motion base simulator originally designed to simulate the relative dynamics of two bodies in space mating together (i.e., docking or berthing). The SDTS has the capability to test full scale docking and berthing systems utilizing a two body dynamic docking simulation for docking operations and a Space Station Remote Manipulator System (SSRMS) simulation for berthing operations. The SDTS can also be used for nonmating applications such as sensors and instruments evaluations requiring proximity or short range motion operations. The motion base is a hydraulic powered Stewart platform, capable of supporting a 3,500 lb payload with a positional accuracy of 0.03 inches. The SDTS is currently being used for the NASA Docking System testing and has been also used by other government agencies. The SDTS is also under consideration for use by commercial companies. Examples of tests include the verification of on-orbit robotic inspection systems, space vehicle assembly procedures and docking/berthing systems. The facility integrates a dynamic simulation of on-orbit spacecraft mating or de-mating using flight-like mechanical interface hardware. A force moment sensor is used for input during the contact phase, thus simulating the contact dynamics. While the verification of flight hardware presents unique challenges, one particular area of interest involves the use of external measurement systems to ensure accurate feedback of dynamic contact. The measurement systems for the test facility have two separate functions. The first is to take static measurements of facility and test hardware to determine both the static and moving frames used in the simulation and control system. The test hardware must be measured after each configuration change to determine both sets of reference frames. The second function is to take dynamic measurements during hardware motion and contact. While performing dynamic testing of an active docking system, researchers found that the data from the motion platform, test hardware and two external measurement systems exhibited frame offsets and rotational errors. While the errors were relatively small when considering the motion scale overall, they substantially exceeded the individual accuracies for each component. After evaluating both the static and dynamic measurements, researchers found that the static measurements introduced significantly more error into the system than the dynamic measurements even though, in theory, the static measurement errors should be smaller than the dynamic. In several cases, the magnitude of the errors varied widely for the static measurements. Upon further investigation, researchers found the larger errors to be a consequence of hardware alignment issues, frame location and measurement technique whereas the smaller errors were dependent on the number of measurement points. This paper details and quantifies the individual and cumulative errors of the docking system and describes methods for reducing the overall measurement error. The overall quality of the dynamic docking tests for flight hardware verification was improved by implementing these error reductions.

Winnitoy, Susan↗
NASA NTRS2010

Verification Challenges of Dynamic Testing of Space Flight Hardware

The Six Degree-of-Freedom Dynamic Test System (SDTS) is a test facility at the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Johnson Space Center in Houston, Texas for performing dynamic verification of space structures and hardware. Some examples of past and current tests include the verification of on-orbit robotic inspection systems, space vehicle assembly procedures and docking/berthing systems. The facility is able to integrate a dynamic simulation of on-orbit spacecraft mating or demating using flight-like mechanical interface hardware. A force moment sensor is utilized for input to the simulation during the contact phase, thus simulating the contact dynamics. While the verification of flight hardware presents many unique challenges, one particular area of interest is with respect to the use of external measurement systems to ensure accurate feedback of dynamic contact. There are many commercial off-the-shelf (COTS) measurement systems available on the market, and the test facility measurement systems have evolved over time to include two separate COTS systems. The first system incorporates infra-red sensing cameras, while the second system employs a laser interferometer to determine position and orientation data. The specific technical challenges with the measurement systems in a large dynamic environment include changing thermal and humidity levels, operational area and measurement volume, dynamic tracking, and data synchronization. The facility is located in an expansive high-bay area that is occasionally exposed to outside temperature when large retractable doors at each end of the building are opened. The laser interferometer system, in particular, is vulnerable to the environmental changes in the building. The operational area of the test facility itself is sizeable, ranging from seven meters wide and five meters deep to as much as seven meters high. Both facility measurement systems have desirable measurement volumes and the accuracies vary within the respective volumes. In addition, because this is a dynamic facility with a moving test bed, direct line-of-sight may not be available at all times between the measurement sensors and the tracking targets. Finally, the feedback data from the active test bed along with the two external measurement systems must be synchronized to allow for data correlation. To ensure the desired accuracy and resolution of these systems, calibration of the systems must be performed regularly. New innovations in sensor technology itself are periodically incorporated into the facility s overall measurement scheme. In addressing the challenges of the measurement systems, the facility is able to provide essential position and orientation data to verify the dynamic performance of space flight hardware.

Winnitoy, Susan↗
NASA NTRS2002

Physics of Colloids in Space: Flight Hardware Operations on ISS

The Physics of Colloids in Space (PCS) experiment was launched on Space Shuttle STS-100 in April 2001 and integrated into EXpedite the PRocess of Experiments to Space Station Rack 2 on the International Space Station (ISS). This microgravity fluid physics investigation is being conducted in the ISS U.S. Lab 'Destiny' Module over a period of approximately thirteen months during the ISS assembly period from flight 6A through flight 9A. PCS is gathering data on the basic physical properties of simple colloidal suspensions by studying the structures that form. A colloid is a micron or submicron particle, be it solid, liquid, or gas. A colloidal suspension consists of these fine particles suspended in another medium. Common colloidal suspensions include paints, milk, salad dressings, cosmetics, and aerosols. Though these products are routinely produced and used, we still have much to learn about their behavior as well as the underlying properties of colloids in general. The long-term goal of the PCS investigation is to learn how to steer the growth of colloidal structures to create new materials. This experiment is the first part of a two-stage investigation conceived by Professor David Weitz of Harvard University (the Principal Investigator) along with Professor Peter Pusey of the University of Edinburgh (the Co-Investigator). This paper describes the flight hardware, experiment operations, and initial science findings of the first fluid physics payload to be conducted on ISS: The Physics of Colloids in Space.

Doherty, Michael P.↗
NASA NTRS1993

Plasma arc welding repair of space flight hardware

A technique to weld repair the main combustion chamber of Space Shuttle Main Engines has been developed. The technique uses the plasma arc welding process and active cooling to seal cracks and pinholes in the hot-gas wall of the main combustion chamber liner. The liner hot-gas wall is made of NARloy-Z, a copper alloy previously thought to be unweldable using conventional arc welding processes. The process must provide extensive heat input to melt the high conductivity NARloy-Z while protecting the delicate structure of the surrounding material. The higher energy density of the plasma arc process provides the necessary heat input while active water cooling protects the surrounding structure. The welding process is precisely controlled using a computerized robotic welding system.

Hoffman, David S.↗
NASA NTRS2016

Electrical, Electronic, and Electromechanical (EEE) Parts Management and Control Requirements for Space Flight Hardware and Critical Ground Support Equipment...aka... The NASA EEE Parts Standard, NASA-STD 8739.10

Describes development and content of a new NASA Standard for Electrical Electronic and Electromechanical (EEE) parts. This Standard reflects current practices, instead of changing them. Most NASA Centers utilize local documents, but there is minimal consistency across the Agency. A gap analysis clearly shows the differences that exist among the different centers and with respect to the NASA Parts Policy. Once approved, the new standard can be referenced in contracts and agreements with organizations outside of NASA.

Electronic↗
NASA NTRS1990

Random vibration analysis of space flight hardware using NASTRAN

During liftoff and ascent flight phases, the Space Transportation System (STS) and payloads are exposed to the random acoustic environment produced by engine exhaust plumes and aerodynamic disturbances. The analysis of payloads for randomly fluctuating loads is usually carried out using the Miles' relationship. This approximation technique computes an equivalent load factor as a function of the natural frequency of the structure, the power spectral density of the excitation, and the magnification factor at resonance. Due to the assumptions inherent in Miles' equation, random load factors are often over-estimated by this approach. In such cases, the estimates can be refined using alternate techniques such as time domain simulations or frequency domain spectral analysis. Described here is the use of NASTRAN to compute more realistic random load factors through spectral analysis. The procedure is illustrated using Spacelab Life Sciences (SLS-1) payloads and certain unique features of this problem are described. The solutions are compared with Miles' results in order to establish trends at over or under prediction.

Thampi, S. K.↗
NASA NTRS1993

Plasma arc welding repair of space flight hardware

Repair and refurbishment of flight and test hardware can extend the useful life of very expensive components. A technique to weld repair the main combustion chamber of space shuttle main engines has been developed. The technique uses the plasma arc welding process and active cooling to seal cracks and pinholes in the hot-gas wall of the main combustion chamber liner. The liner hot-gas wall is made of NARloyZ, a copper alloy previously thought to be unweldable using conventional arc welding processes. The process must provide extensive heat input to melt the high conductivity NARloyZ while protecting the delicate structure of the surrounding material. The higher energy density of the plasma arc process provides the necessary heat input while active water cooling protects the surrounding structure. The welding process is precisely controlled using a computerized robotic welding system.

Hoffman, David S.↗
NASA NTRS2005

Environmental Conditions for Space Flight Hardware: A Survey

Interest in generalization of the physical environment experienced by NASA hardware from the natural Earth environment (on the launch pad), man-made environment on Earth (storage acceptance an d qualification testing), the launch environment, and the space environment, is ed to find commonality among our hardware in an effort to reduce cost and complexity. NASA is entering a period of increase in its number of planetary missions and it is important to understand how our qualification requirements will evolve with and track these new environments. Environmental conditions are described for NASA projects in several ways for the different periods of the mission life cycle. At the beginning, the mission manager defines survivability requirements based on the mission length, orbit, launch date, launch vehicle, and other factors . such as the use of reactor engines. Margins are then applied to these values (temperature extremes, vibration extremes, radiation tolerances, etc,) and a new set of conditions is generalized for design requirements. Mission assurance documents will then assign an additional margin for reliability, and a third set of values is provided for during testing. A fourth set of environmental condition values may evolve intermittently from heritage hardware that has been tested to a level beyond the actual mission requirement. These various sets of environment figures can make it quite confusing and difficult to capture common hardware environmental requirements. Environmental requirement information can be found in a wide variety of places. The most obvious is with the individual projects. We can easily get answers to questions about temperature extremes being used and radiation tolerance goals, but it is more difficult to map the answers to the process that created these requirements: for design, for qualification, and for actual environment with no margin applied. Not everyone assigned to a NASA project may have that kind of insight, as many have only the environmental requirement numbers needed to do their jobs but do not necessarily have a programmatic-level understanding of how all of the environmental requirements fit together.

Plante, Jeannette↗