Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “X-59”

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 NTRS2020

Recommendations for Using Noise Monitors to Estimate Noise Exposure During X-59 Community Tests

A low fidelity simulation approach is used to explore how to place and use noise monitors during X-59 QueSST community tests, where people’s annoyance to the noise produced by the X-59 aircraft will be gathered. Several recommendations are provided including: 1) the desired number of sparsely spaced noise monitor sites within the survey area, 2) whether to group and average measurements across multiple noise monitors located at a site, 3) what spacing should be used if grouped noise monitors are used, 4) an approach to mitigate ambient noise contamination at the measurement sites, 5) a method to combine empirical and predicted dose estimates to provide a single dose estimate for respondents, and 6) assessing how changes in turbulence intensity and array configuration affect dose uncertainty. To make these recommendations, the error that is expected when fitting contrived, smoothly varying sonic boom “reference exposure surfaces” is studied when a spatially sparse and scattered set of samples is used as responses for the fit. The reference exposure surfaces mimic the sonic boom exposure at ground level that might be expected in the X-59 survey area in the absence of atmospheric turbulence, ambient noise, and other localized effects. The spatial extent of these surfaces varies and is representative of the different survey area sizes that might be expected during future X-59 community overflight tests. These contrived reference surfaces are sampled, and those reference samples are then perturbed to mimic atmospheric turbulence, ambient noise and other localized effects that might affect noise monitor measurements within overflown communities. Two different surface fitting methods are investigated when fitting these perturbed samples to approximate the reference surface. The first method uses interpolation between the perturbed data at the scattered sites to compute the fit. The second method fits a polynomial surface model to the perturbed data using ordinary least squares regression analysis. For both fitting methods, the root mean square fit error is computed from the pointwise difference between the fit surface and the reference surface as the count and configuration of the sites is varied while also averaging the error across many different realizations of both the smooth variation of the reference exposure surface and the random, localized perturbations at the sample sites. Different site configurations are compared using this error statistic to make the recommendations noted above. Additionally, the two fitting approaches (interpolation vs linear regression) are compared based on the fit error observed in these simulations. These analyses, comparisons, and recommendations should inform future decisions on the noise monitor placement and the methods used to analyze the noise monitor data that is collected during X-59 community overflights.

sonic boom↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Simulations of X-59 Low-Booms Propagated Through Measured Atmospheric Profiles in Galveston, Texas

During NASA’s Quiet Supersonic Flights 2018 (QSF18) test, residents of Galveston, Texas and surrounding communities were exposed to low amplitude sonic booms for a community noise survey. Despite the flight test lasting only 11 days, substantial weather variability occurred including snow and record high temperatures. Similar atmospheric variability could occur in future community noise flight tests with the X-59 Quiet Supersonic Technology aircraft that is currently being constructed. X-59 is designed to have a Stevens Mark VII Perceived Level (PL) of 75 dB in a standard atmosphere. In this work, X-59’s low-boom performance in real atmospheres was tested by using NASA’s PCBoom code to simulate propagation of its nearfield pressure through the atmospheric profiles measured during QSF18. Results indicate undertrack booms would not exceed 75 PLdB in these atmospheres. A range of about 8.5 PLdB between the loudest and quietest undertrack boom was observed indicating adjustments to the X-59 flight condition may be needed to achieve target loudness levels during future sonic boom community noise surveys. Attenuation rate, ray tube area, path length and other quantities throughout propagation of the loudest and quietest booms are presented, which indicate humidity differences below 15kft were a primary driver of the PL differences.

sonic boom↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

LBFD X-59 Propulsion Overview

The LBFD X-59 Propulsion Overview is prepared in support of a panel session at the 2026 AIAA Aviation Conference. The overview covers highlights of the X-59 propulsion system, a short history of propulsion testing at NASA GRC, A summary of X-59 ground testing, a summary of X-59 flight testing, and finally some lessons learned.

Aerodynamic↗
NASA NTRS2020

Multiple Shaker Placement for Ground Vibration Test of X-59 Aircraft Using Topology Optimization

A multiple shaker placement methodology is developed and tested using a topology optimization technique. Current multiple shaker placement methodology requires optimum accelerometer placement and optimum single-shaker placement techniques. The proposed methodology is tested using a finite element model of the X-59 Low Boom Flight Demonstrator aircraft. The effective independence and the driving point acceleration transfer function (DPATF) methods are used for the accelerometer placement study. In this study, four shakers are used to excite each mode more effectively during the ground vibration test; all the modes of interest thus are separated into four groups. Each shaker takes care of a separate group of modes. Grouping the modes of interest is performed utilizing topology optimization. The number of modes for each group therefore will be automatically decided during grouping. For each group of modes, perform the following two steps to determine optimal location of four shakers: 1) At each accelerometer location, compare the magnitude of DPATF values at natural frequencies, select the minimum value, and make a vector with these minimum values of the DPATF magnitudes for each group; and 2) Select the degrees of freedom corresponding to the maximum value of this vector. The objective function value is the maximum value of the vector with minimum value of the magnitude of the superposed acceleration transfer function. This objective function value is maximized by changing the modes for each group. Forty accelerometers are enough to have good correlation between mode shapes obtained from the reduced order model and the simulated ground vibration test.

Optimization Analysis↗
NASA NTRS2019

Minimizing Sonic Boom Through Simulation-Based Design: The X-59 Airplane

One of NASA’s six Strategic Thrusts for aeronautics is “Innovation in Commercial Supersonic Aircraft,” with a vision of fast air travel widely available to the traveling public. Future supersonic aircraft will be efficient, affordable, and environmentally responsible, generating an acceptable level of en-route noise (sonic booms). The first major step is the ongoing construction of the new X-59 Quiet SuperSonic Technology X-plane to demonstrate technologies that reduce sonic booms to gentle thumps. By using highresolution Cart3D computational fluid dynamics simulations, the shape of the aircraft can be designed to control the non-linear interactions of shock waves to reduce the sonic boom noise on the ground to within outdoor ambient levels, thereby enabling supersonic overland flight.

Nemec, Marian↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Estimating the Noise Floor of Sonic Boom Metrics Across the USA

NASA is building the X-59 Quiet Supersonic Technology aircraft to produce low noise sonic booms for a series of community noise surveys across the USA. Survey participants will rate their perception of the low booms from supersonic X-59 flyovers. Several noise metrics are proposed to quantify the noise dose: A-, B-, D-, E-weighted Sound Exposure Level, Stevens Perceived Level, and Indoor Sonic Boom Annoyance Predictor. Sparse measurements across the survey area will be used to estimate community noise exposure. The level of these low booms may be comparable to the ambient noise level in some locations, leading to uncertainty in noise exposure estimations. This uncertainty may necessitate increased reliance on sonic boom propagation predictions for exposure estimation. Low-boom signal to ambient noise ratio is one way to quantify uncertainty in measured sonic boom levels. An empirical relationship between A-weighted ambient level and sonic boom metric levels is used in conjunction with the National Park Service’s L50 SPL map to estimate sonic boom metric ambient levels across the USA. The estimate of ambient sonic boom metric levels will aid in X-59 test planning and execution.

sonic boom↗
NASA NTRS2019

Statistical Modeling of Quiet Sonic Boom Community Response Survey Data

The existing ban on commercial supersonic flight overland is largely due to the effects of loud and startling sonic booms on communities. NASA is planning a nationwide campaign of community response surveys using the experimental X-59 Quiet SuperSonic Technology (X-59 QueSST) aircraft to understand how communities perceive the sounds of quiet supersonic flight. The X-59 community response survey data will be presented to noise regulators, who are considering replacing the ban with a noise-based certification limit so quiet supersonic vehicles can fly over land. In this document, we use pilot community response survey data to explore and assess multiple approaches to statistically model the dose-response relationship between single-event sonic boom sound exposure and human annoyance. The models have two primary functions—estimating two types of quantities that support setting regulations and experimental design of future surveys.

Jasme Lee↗
NASA NTRS2019

Shape Sensing for Wings with Spars and Ribs Using Simulated Strain

Active trim shape control can be used to minimize error between target and actual aircraft trim shape during flight. Trim shape sensing for aircraft during flight is not only important for highly flexible aircraft, such as the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Helios Prototype remotely piloted flying wing aircraft, but also for a delta-wing type aircraft, such as a supersonic commercial transport aircraft. A two-step theory utilizing distributed strain for a real-time shape sensing of a full three-dimensional structure has been introduced previously. This study focuses on the application of the two-step theory to finite element models of a wing with spars and ribs such as the X-59 QueSST aircraft (Lockheed Martin Corporation, Bethesda, Maryland), a tapered wing, a dihedral/anhedral wing, and a stiffened dihedral/anhedral wing. A finely meshed finite element structural model is desired to capture accurate curvature distributions along the neutral axes of the wing cross sections during pre-test analysis for shape sensing of a wing with ribs and spars. The two-step theory used in this study gives excellent deformation correlation with the MSC/NASTRAN (MSC Software, Newport Beach, California) results along the neutral axis for all test cases used in this study except the X-59 QueSST aircraft.

strain↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

TPSAS-NF1676L-33626-DND

NASA is conducting a series of computational experiments to quantify atmospheric effects on low noise sonic booms. In the current study, simulated cruise nearfield pressure data from NASA?s X-59 Quiet Supersonic Technology aircraft was propagated from the aircraft to the ground at four cardinal headings through five years of realistic atmospheric profiles at 30 locations across the eastern USA. Statistical design of experiments was used to select the locations where primary sonic thump carpet widths (CW) and metric levels at the ground were computed. Atmospheric profiles were taken from the Climate Forecast System Reanalysis database, which contains reanalyzed atmospheric profiles four times daily. Decision tree analyses were performed to determine relative importance of predictors for CW and metric levels. Predictors included were latitude, longitude, date, time of day, season, climate, aircraft heading, and ground elevation. Results of this study indicate the propagation resolution needed to adequately characterize the distributions of CW and ground metric data, i.e., necessary separation distance between propagation locations and total number of atmospheres through which to propagate. This resolution will be used for a follow-on study of simulated X-59 carpets across the entire US mainland.

Will Doebler↗
NASA NTRS2018

NASA Armstrong Flight Research Center Summer 2018 Abstracts

Student internships provide the opportunity for students to work side by side with a mentor to contribute to the NASA mission. During Fiscal Year 2018, NASA Armstrong welcomed students from universities in states ranging from Washington to Massachusetts. Student interns were represented in different organizations across NASA Armstrong and supported exciting projects such as SOFIA, X-57 Maxwell, UASNAS, FOSS, X-59 QueSST, TGALS, PRANDTL - M, and PRANDTL-D3c.

internship experience↗
NASA NTRS2020

Independent Analyses of Galveston QSF18 Social Survey

A set of independent analyses was performed of the findings of NASA’s QSF18 data collection exercise in Galveston, TX. These analyses included development of regression-based and other dosage-response relationships between the prevalence of annoyance with low-amplitude sonic booms and Perceived Level measures of single event and cumulative exposure. They also included detailed analyses of the effects of panelist attrition; of participation reminder messages sent to panelists; the ability to determine panelist locations at the time of exposure; and the effects of rattle and vibration on annoyance judgments, among other topics. The report summarizes the implications of its findings for the design of studies of community response to carpet booms created during future deployments of NASA’s X-59 aircraft, and recommends several design measures to improve the efficiency of data collection.

sonic boom↗
NASA NTRS2018

An Investigation of Risk Management Approaches for NASA Piloted X-Plane Projects

NASA is resuming X-plane research. It plans to build a low-boom supersonic flight demonstrator (LBFD), an all-electric general aviation aircraft (X-57), and possibly an ultra-efficient subsonic transport (UEST) demonstrator. In an attempt to define what levels of risk are appropriate in piloted X-plane research, the NASA Office of the Chief Engineer (OCE) evaluated numerous NASA, Department of Defense (DoD), and industry project management and risk assessment tools. Provided are the results of the evaluations of NASA Procedural Requirements (NPR) 7120.5, 7120.8, and 8705.4; Langley Research Center (LaRC) Procedural Requirement (LPR) 7120.5; Dryden (Armstrong) Center Procedures S-002 and X-009; and Military Handbook 516C. Some of these were applied to the LBFD and X-57 aircraft. The impacts on risk of budgeting decisions and specialized flight conditions were also considered. None of the evaluated processes were found to be fully appropriate for governing experimental aircraft projects, but many useful elements were found in some of them.

X-59↗