Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “fly gen”

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.

5 records
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2021

Google/Makani Energy Kite Modeling (CRADA CRD-18-00569 Final Report)

In support of Makani’s energy kite development program, Makani engaged with NREL to develop, verify, and document a multiphysics engineering model of a megawatt-scale tethered energy kite (named KiteFAST). After the original development of KiteFAST was completed, Makani further engaged NREL to develop a software enhancement of KiteFAST to enable the dynamics modeling of an energy kite tethered to a floating offshore platform (named KiteFAST-OS). Before this project, the capability to model the aero-hydro-servo-elastic dynamics of an airborne wind energy (AWE) system with electricity generation on the flying device (fly gen) and crosswind flight operation did not exist. Such physics-based modeling capability is needed for loads analysis, structural design, and certification of energy kites. Throughout the project, an exclusive license kept KiteFAST and KiteFAST-OS available only to Makani, NREL, and its counterparts. With the ending of Makani, the KiteFAST and KiteFAST-OS software were merged into a single code base (named KiteFAST), the exclusive license was terminated, and the source code, documentation, and example models were released publicly.

17 WIND ENERGY↗
NASA NTRS2009

Verification and Validation of Adaptive and Intelligent Systems with Flight Test Results

F-15 IFCS project goals are: a) Demonstrate Control Approaches that can Efficiently Optimize Aircraft Performance in both Normal and Failure Conditions [A] & [B] failures. b) Advance Neural Network-Based Flight Control Technology for New Aerospace Systems Designs with a Pilot in the Loop. Gen II objectives include; a) Implement and Fly a Direct Adaptive Neural Network Based Flight Controller; b) Demonstrate the Ability of the System to Adapt to Simulated System Failures: 1) Suppress Transients Associated with Failure; 2) Re-Establish Sufficient Control and Handling of Vehicle for Safe Recovery. c) Provide Flight Experience for Development of Verification and Validation Processes for Flight Critical Neural Network Software.

Burken, John J.↗
NASA NTRS2011

Flying Unmanned Aircraft: A Pilot's Perspective

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) is pioneering various Unmanned Aircraft System (UAS) technologies and procedures which may enable routine access to the National Airspace System (NAS), with an aim for Next Gen NAS. These tools will aid in the development of technologies and integrated capabilities that will enable high value missions for science, security, and defense, and open the door to low-cost, extreme-duration, stratospheric flight. A century of aviation evolution has resulted in accepted standards and best practices in the design of human-machine interfaces, the displays and controls of which serve to optimize safe and efficient flight operations and situational awareness. The current proliferation of non-standard, aircraft-specific flight crew interfaces in UAS, coupled with the inherent limitations of operating UAS without in-situ sensory input and feedback (aural, visual, and vestibular cues), has increased the risk of mishaps associated with the design of the "cockpit." The examples of current non- or sub- standard design features range from "annoying" and "inefficient", to those that are difficult to manipulate or interpret in a timely manner, as well as to those that are "burdensome" and "unsafe." A concerted effort is required to establish best practices and standards for the human-machine interfaces, for the pilot as well as the air traffic controller. In addition, roles, responsibilities, knowledge, and skill sets are subject to redefining the terms, "pilot" and "air traffic controller", with respect to operating UAS, especially in the Next-Gen NAS. The knowledge, skill sets, training, and qualification standards for UAS operations must be established, and reflect the aircraft-specific human-machine interfaces and control methods. NASA s recent experiences flying its MQ-9 Ikhana in the NAS for extended duration, has enabled both NASA and the FAA to realize the full potential for UAS, as well as understand the implications of current limitations. Ikhana is a Predator-B/Reaper UAS, built by General Atomics, Aeronautical Systems, Inc., and modified for research. Since 2007, the aircraft has been flown seasonally with a wing-mounted pod containing an infrared scanner, utilized to provide real-time wildfire geo-location data to various fire-fighting agencies in the western U.S. The multi-agency effort included an extensive process to obtain flight clearance from the FAA to operate under special provisions, given that UAS in general do not fully comply with current airspace regulations (e.g. sense-and-avoid requirements).

Pestana, Mark E.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Overview of the Dragonfly Entry Aerosciences Measurements (DrEAM) Suite

NASA Ames and Langley arepartnering with DLR to propose acomprehensive instrumentation suite known as the Dragonfly Entry Aerosciences Meas-urements (DrEAM). DrEAM being the first competed mission to fly EDL instrumentation as part of NASA’s Engineering Science Investigation (ESI).DrEAM will provide key aerothermodynamicdata and performance analysisfor Dragonfly’s forebody and backshell therma lprotection system (TPS),and also includes a DLR-provided Data Acquisition System(DAS).Titan’s atmosphere predominantly consists of nitro-gen (~98% by mole) with small amounts of methane(~2% by mole)and other trace gases. CN is a strong ra-diator and is found in nonequilibriumconcentrationsfor Titan entry. The accurate modeling of nonequilibrium CN radiation has proven to be a difficult task. Prompted by the Huygensmission, many experimental campaigns and analyses were performed to better understand the aerothermal environments experience by the probe dur-ing Titan entry[1].However, the Huygens probe carried no heatshieldinstrumentation. Therefore,the DrEAM instrumentation suite will significantly advance the state-of-the-art not only by documenting theenviron-ment and performance of Dragonfly’sentry system but also by making keymeasurements in Titan’s atmos-phere for thefirst time, thus providing new benchmark dataapplicable to entry science more generally. Current Measurement Goals: Aerothermal envi-ronments and TPS responsewill be measured using sen-sors similarto the Mars Entry, Descent, and Landing In-strumentation2 (MEDLI2) Integrated Sensor Plug(MISP) and the COMbined Aerothermaland Radiome-ter Sensor (COMARS)suite[2], with the latter supplied by DLR.For MEDLI2, MISP usedembedded thermo-couples (TCs) todirectly measure in-depth temperature of theTPS at several locations,which can also be used to infer surface environmentsvia inverse analysis. For DrEAM, the MISPstyle plugswill be known as Drag-onfly Sensors for Aero-Thermal Reconstruction (Drag-STR)plugs. On Schiaparelli, the COMARSsuite in-cludedthree total surface-mounted heatflux sensors, three pressure sensors, and one radiometer. For DrEAM, the COMARS package will be known as COmbined Sensor System for Titan Atmosphere (COSSTA). Atmospheric density measurements and capsuleaerodynamic data will be obtained throughthe onboard Inertial Measurement Unit (IMU),supple-mented by pressure transducers similar tothose used by the MEDLI Mars Entry AtmosphericData System (MEADS).The DrEAM pressure sensors will be known as Dragonfly Atmospheric Flight Transducers(DrAFT) Both DragSTR and DrAFThave flight heritagefrom MISP and MEADS on the MSLand Mars 2020mis-sions, and the COMARS suite successfullyflew on the ESA Schiaparelli EDMlander. A preliminary layout of the sensors is shown in Fig. 1. Because Dragonflyuses the same aeroshell provider (i.e., LockheedMartin) and materials for the TPS,with what are expected to be sim-ilar thicknesses as MSL and Mars 2020on both the heat shield and backshell, theDrEAMinstrumentation will look to utilize the same techniques and processes as de-veloped byMEDLI and MEDLI2for vehicle integra-tion. This commonality alsoenables DrEAMto lever-age the extensiveground test qualifications performed forMEDLI and MEDLI2 and claim substantial heritagefor this system.

A Brandis↗
NASA NTRS1996

Analysis of Apollo 8 Photography and Visual Observations

Apollo 8 was launched from Cape Kennedy, Fla., at 7 :50 a.m., e.s.t., on December 21, 1968. Two hours 50 minutes later, translunar injection was performed; and astronauts Col. Frank Borman, the commander; Capt. James A. Lovell, Jr., the command module pilot; and Maj. (now Lt. Col.) William A. Anders, the lunar module pilot, were on their way to the Moon. The spacecraft was placed in an elliptical lunar orbit at 69 hours 8 minutes after liftoff. After flying two elliptical orbits of 168.5 by 60 nautical miles with an inclination of 12° to the Equator, the spacecraft was placed in a nearly circular orbit of 59.7 by 60.7 nautical miles, in which it remained for eight orbits. At 89 hours 19 minutes, trans earth injection was performed from behind the Moon. A nearly flawless mission was completed on the morning of December 27 when splashdown occurred in the Pacific Ocean after a total elapsed time of 147 hours. Lt. Gen. Sam C. Phillips, the Director of the Apollo Program, announced that such a mission was being considered at a press conference on August 19, 1968. Formal announcement that NASA was preparing Apollo 8 for an orbital flight around the Moon was released to the press on November 12, 1968. The primary purpose of this mission was to further progress toward the goal of landing men on the Moon by gaining operational experience and testing the Apolio systems. However, a great effort was also made to accomplish worthwhile scientific tasks with photography and visual observations by the astronauts. In planning the scientific tasks to be attempted on this mission, it was obvious that one of the prime tasks should be photography of the lunar surface. Such photography would furnish valuable information on the following : 1. Approach topography and landmarks for the early Apollo landings 2. The scientific merit and the roughness of areas for possible follow-on Apollo landings 3. The broad structure and characteristics of the lunar surface During the orbital part of the mission, a major portion of the lunar far side would be in sunlight. Although almost all of the far side of the Moon has been photographed by the automated Lunar Orbiter spacecraft, the photography generally was made with the spacecraft relatively far from the Moon, limiting the Lunar Orbiter photographs to an average resolution of approximately 100 meters. Thus, Apollo photographs of the far side would have much better resolution than existing pictures. Finally, it was recognized that contamination, both as it relates to window fogging (which did occur) and to contamination clouds around t he spacecraft, should be studied for both scientific and operational interests.

Richard J. Allenby↗