Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “model uncertainty”

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 NTRS2000

Trapped Radiation Model Uncertainties: Model-Data and Model-Model Comparisons

The standard AP8 and AE8 models for predicting trapped proton and electron environments have been compared with several sets of flight data to evaluate model uncertainties. Model comparisons are made with flux and dose measurements made on various U.S. low-Earth orbit satellites (APEX, CRRES, DMSP. LDEF, NOAA) and Space Shuttle flights, on Russian satellites (Photon-8, Cosmos-1887, Cosmos-2044), and on the Russian Mir space station. This report gives the details of the model-data comparisons -- summary results in terms of empirical model uncertainty factors that can be applied for spacecraft design applications are given in a companion report. The results of model-model comparisons are also presented from standard AP8 and AE8 model predictions compared with the European Space Agency versions of AP8 and AE8 and with Russian trapped radiation models.

Armstrong, T. W.↗
NASA NTRS2000

Trapped Radiation Model Uncertainties: Model-Data and Model-Model Comparisons

The standard AP8 and AE8 models for predicting trapped proton and electron environments have been compared with several sets of flight data to evaluate model uncertainties. Model comparisons are made with flux and dose measurements made on various U.S. low-Earth orbit satellites (APEX, CRRES, DMSP, LDEF, NOAA) and Space Shuttle flights, on Russian satellites (Photon-8, Cosmos-1887, Cosmos-2044), and on the Russian Mir Space Station. This report gives the details of the model-data comparisons-summary results in terms of empirical model uncertainty factors that can be applied for spacecraft design applications are given in a combination report. The results of model-model comparisons are also presented from standard AP8 and AE8 model predictions compared with the European Space Agency versions of AP8 and AE8 and with Russian-trapped radiation models.

Armstrong, T. W.↗
NASA NTRS1994

Flight Dynamics and Control of Elastic Hypersonic Vehicles Uncertainty Modeling

It has been shown previously that hypersonic air-breathing aircraft exhibit strong aeroelastic/aeropropulsive dynamic interactions. To investigate these, especially from the perspective of the vehicle dynamics and control, analytical expressions for key stability derivatives were derived, and an analysis of the dynamics was performed. In this paper, the important issue of model uncertainty, and the appropriate forms for representing this uncertainty, is addressed. It is shown that the methods suggested in the literature for analyzing the robustness of multivariable feedback systems, which as a prerequisite to their application assume particular forms of model uncertainty, can be difficult to apply on real atmospheric flight vehicles. Also, the extent to which available methods are conservative is demonstrated for this class of vehicle dynamics.

Chavez, Frank R.↗
NASA NTRS2020

Genetic Algorithm for Optimization of Neural Networks for Bayesian Inference of Model Uncertainty

The objective of this work was to develop a genetic optimization algorithm that can design a neural network capable of producing uncertainty estimates along with predictions. This algorithm is necessary because the inclusion of uncertainty modeling in a neural network greatly complicates the network’s design space, making the development of a converging model extremely difficult and time consuming. The genetic algorithm presented in this work uses a number of value ranges for various configurable neural network parameters to create a randomly generated population of network architectures. The initially generated population is then evolved over the course of several generations, with the best performing models breeding to produce novel network configurations. Mutations are randomly applied to the network designs to facilitate the development of adaptations beneficial to the task being performed. An experiment was conducted to validate the proposed algorithm, in which the genetic optimizer was tasked with producing a neural network capable of predicting the sound pressure level (SPL) resulting from jet-surface interaction (JSI) noise. The data used for this task was generated at the NASA Glenn Research Center in the Aero-Acoustic Propulsion Laboratory. Starting with an initial population size of 35 randomly generated networks, and evolved over the course of 10 generations, the genetic algorithm produced a design able to predict SPL as a result of JSI noise within 0.272 dB, on average.

Genetic algorithm↗
NASA NTRS1998

Development of the X-33 Aerodynamic Uncertainty Model

An aerodynamic uncertainty model for the X-33 single-stage-to-orbit demonstrator aircraft has been developed at NASA Dryden Flight Research Center. The model is based on comparisons of historical flight test estimates to preflight wind-tunnel and analysis code predictions of vehicle aerodynamics documented during six lifting-body aircraft and the Space Shuttle Orbiter flight programs. The lifting-body and Orbiter data were used to define an appropriate uncertainty magnitude in the subsonic and supersonic flight regions, and the Orbiter data were used to extend the database to hypersonic Mach numbers. The uncertainty data consist of increments or percentage variations in the important aerodynamic coefficients and derivatives as a function of Mach number along a nominal trajectory. The uncertainty models will be used to perform linear analysis of the X-33 flight control system and Monte Carlo mission simulation studies. Because the X-33 aerodynamic uncertainty model was developed exclusively using historical data rather than X-33 specific characteristics, the model may be useful for other lifting-body studies.

Cobleigh, Brent R.↗
NASA NTRS1996

Uncertainty Modeling for Structural Control Analysis and Synthesis

The development of an accurate model of uncertainties for the control of structures that undergo a change in operational environment, based solely on modeling and experimentation in the original environment is studied. The application used throughout this work is the development of an on-orbit uncertainty model based on ground modeling and experimentation. A ground based uncertainty model consisting of mean errors and bounds on critical structural parameters is developed. The uncertainty model is created using multiple data sets to observe all relevant uncertainties in the system. The Discrete Extended Kalman Filter is used as an identification/parameter estimation method for each data set, in addition to providing a covariance matrix which aids in the development of the uncertainty model. Once ground based modal uncertainties have been developed, they are localized to specific degrees of freedom in the form of mass and stiffness uncertainties. Two techniques are presented: a matrix method which develops the mass and stiffness uncertainties in a mathematical manner; and a sensitivity method which assumes a form for the mass and stiffness uncertainties in macroelements and scaling factors. This form allows the derivation of mass and stiffness uncertainties in a more physical manner. The mass and stiffness uncertainties of the ground based system are then mapped onto the on-orbit system, and projected to create an analogous on-orbit uncertainty model in the form of mean errors and bounds on critical parameters. The Middeck Active Control Experiment is introduced as experimental verification for the localization and projection methods developed. In addition, closed loop results from on-orbit operations of the experiment verify the use of the uncertainty model for control analysis and synthesis in space.

Campbell, Mark E.↗
NASA NTRS2001

Aeroservoelastic Uncertainty Model Identification from Flight Data

Uncertainty modeling is a critical element in the estimation of robust stability margins for stability boundary prediction and robust flight control system development. There has been a serious deficiency to date in aeroservoelastic data analysis with attention to uncertainty modeling. Uncertainty can be estimated from flight data using both parametric and nonparametric identification techniques. The model validation problem addressed in this paper is to identify aeroservoelastic models with associated uncertainty structures from a limited amount of controlled excitation inputs over an extensive flight envelope. The challenge to this problem is to update analytical models from flight data estimates while also deriving non-conservative uncertainty descriptions consistent with the flight data. Multisine control surface command inputs and control system feedbacks are used as signals in a wavelet-based modal parameter estimation procedure for model updates. Transfer function estimates are incorporated in a robust minimax estimation scheme to get input-output parameters and error bounds consistent with the data and model structure. Uncertainty estimates derived from the data in this manner provide an appropriate and relevant representation for model development and robust stability analysis. This model-plus-uncertainty identification procedure is applied to aeroservoelastic flight data from the NASA Dryden Flight Research Center F-18 Systems Research Aircraft.

Brenner, Martin J.↗
NASA NTRS1996

Validation of an Experimentally Derived Uncertainty Model

The results show that uncertainty models can be obtained directly from system identification data by using a minimum norm model validation approach. The error between the test data and an analytical nominal model is modeled as a combination of unstructured additive and structured input multiplicative uncertainty. Robust controllers which use the experimentally derived uncertainty model show significant stability and performance improvements over controllers designed with assumed ad hoc uncertainty levels. Use of the identified uncertainty model also allowed a strong correlation between design predictions and experimental results.

Lim, K. B.↗
NASA NTRS2022

Uncertainty Models for the Hybrid Parametric Variation Method of Uncertainty Quantification; Analysis

There is some level of uncertainty in every finite element model (FEM), which flows to a level of uncertainty in predicted results. The purpose of uncertainty quantification (UQ) is to provide statistical bounds on prediction accuracy based on model uncertainty. This is distinct from model updating, which attempts to modify models to improve their accuracy. UQ does not improve the accuracy of models, but accepts that the models are inherently inaccurate and attempts to quantify the impact of that inaccuracy on predicted results. Previously, an alternate method for UQ, called the Hybrid Parametric Variation (HPV) method, was applied to Space Launch System (SLS) Hurty/Craig-Bampton (HCB) components to predict system-level statistics for launch vehicle attitude control transfer functions and core stage section loads due to buffet. The HPV method combines a parametric variation of the HCB fixed-interface (FI) modal frequencies with a nonparametric variation (NPV) method that randomly varies the HCB mass and stiffness matrices as Wishart random matrix distributions using random matrix theory (RMT). Alternatively, the most common method for modeling uncertainty in the structural dynamics community is a parametric approach, which varies physical parameters in the model. However, there are several disadvantages associated with the parametric method. Determining a reduced set of parameters that have a significant impact on the system response can be time consuming, and the selected parameter probability distributions are rarely reliably known. Therefore, in practice, the parameters are surrogates for the actual errors, and the link to parameter uncertainty is unknown. Another major drawback is that the uncertainty that can be represented is limited to the form of the nominal FEM. It is the experience of the authors that based on numerous aerospace programs, almost all FEM errors are in form rather than parameter values. This hypothesis is supported by the observation of the authors that it is almost never possible to ‘tune’ a FEM to match modal test results by only modifying model parameters. Model-form uncertainty cannot be directly represented by FEM input parameters nor included in a parametric approach. However, model-form uncertainty can be modeled using RMT, where a probability distribution is developed for the matrix ensemble of interest. The major advantage of the NPV method is that it covers errors in model form. The HPV method anchors uncertainty at the HCB component level to component modal test results by matching the HCB and test modes based on mode descriptions or other methods, and then applying differing levels of frequency variation. The specific variations depend on the confidence to which a component FEM has been validated through modal testing. The NPV method is layered on the frequency variation to match modal test self-orthogonality and cross-orthogonality (XO) results. Once the component uncertainty models are identified, they are assembled, and the uncertainty is propagated to the system level using a Monte Carlo (MC) analysis approach that generates statistics for system-level predictions This provides a UQ method that can be traced to test data, which can be updated as additional data and improved correlated models become available. The purpose of this paper is to collect and present all of the theory for HPV that has been previously published in reports and papers and to present examples of its application. Specifically, component uncertainty models based on the dispersion of corresponding mass and stiffness matrices using proposed test/analysis correlation metrics are investigated. The first example is purely academic so that the true answers are known, and the validity of the HPV method and the corresponding uncertainty models can be determined. The purpose of this paper is to collect and present all of the theory for HPV that has been previously published in reports and papers and to present examples of its application. Specifically, component uncertainty models based on the dispersion of corresponding mass and stiffness matrices using proposed test/analysis correlation metrics are investigated. The first example is purely academic so that the true answers are known, and the validity of the HPV method and the corresponding uncertainty models can be determined. The second example is an application to a component that is design specific to the SLS. Based on this work and other assessments, the HPV method provides another tool to the toolset used for complex system UQ analysis. From experience gathered to date using the HPV method, additional design specific applications must be investigated to provide further confidence in the validity of the HPV method of UQ analysis.

Uncertainty quantification↗
NASA NTRS2000

Evaluation of Trapped Radiation Model Uncertainties for Spacecraft Design

The standard AP8 and AE8 models for predicting trapped proton and electron environments have been compared with several sets of flight data to evaluate model uncertainties. Model comparisons are made with flux, dose, and activation measurements made on various U.S. low-Earth orbit satellites (APEX, CRRES, DMSP. LDEF, NOAA) and Space Shuttle flights, on Russian satellites (Photon-8, Cosmos-1887, Cosmos-2044), and on the Russian Mir space station. This report gives a summary of the model-data given in a companion report. Results from the model comparisons with flight data show, for example, that the AP8 model underpredicts the trapped proton flux at low altitudes by a factor of about two (independent of proton energy and solar cycle conditions), and that the AE8 model overpredict the flux in the outer electron belt be an order of magnitude or more.

Armstrong, T. W.↗
NASA NTRS2000

Evaluation of Trapped Radiation Model Uncertainties for Spacecraft Design

The standard AP8 and AE8 models for predicting trapped proton and electron environments have been compared with several sets of flight data to evaluate model uncertainties. Model comparisons are made with flux, dose, and activation measurements made on various U.S. low-Earth orbit satellites (APEX, CRRES, DMSP, LDEF, NOAA) and Space Shuttle flights, on Russian satellites (Photon-8, Cosmos-1887, Cosmos-2044), and on the Russian Mir Space Station. This report gives a summary of the model-data comparisons-detailed results are given in a companion report. Results from the model comparisons with flic,ht data show, for example, the AP8 model underpredicts the trapped proton flux at low altitudes by a factor of about two (independent of proton energy and solar cycle conditions), and that the AE8 model overpredicts the flux in the outer electron belt by an order of magnitude or more.

Armstrong, T. W.↗
NASA NTRS1999

Uncertainty Modeling Via Frequency Domain Model Validation

Abstract The majority of literature on robust control assumes that a design model is available and that the uncertainty model bounds the actual variations about the nominal model. However, methods for generating accurate design models have not received as much attention in the literature. The influence of the level of accuracy of the uncertainty model on closed loop performance has received even less attention. The research reported herein is an initial step in applying and extending the concept of model validation to the problem of obtaining practical uncertainty models for robust control analysis and design applications. An extension of model validation called 'sequential validation' is presented and applied to a simple spring-mass-damper system to establish the feasibility of the approach and demonstrate the benefits of the new developments.

Waszak, Martin R.↗
NASA NTRS1994

A Monte Carlo study of photochemical model uncertainties affecting the calculation of subsonic perturbations in the upper troposphere

Monte Carlo methods are frequently applied to the evaluation of uncertainties in models with multiple inputs that themselves have associated imprecisions. In the case of photochemical models used to evaluate changes in O3 or OH, inputs analyzed include rate coefficients measured in the laboratory, and chemical and physical constituents measured in the atmosphere. The Monte Carlo method was used with the 1-dimensional GSFC tropospheric photochemical model to examine uncertainty propagation to calculation of NO(x) and the major oxidants (O3, OH) in the upper troposphere. In all cases chemical kinetics inputs are varied and the NO(x) perturbation of a subsonic fleet is simulated. A series of model runs is used to explore sensitivities of model-computed parameters to other parameters: heterogeneous processes, the uncertainty in upper tropospheric H2O vapor measurements, aircraft emissions at different latitudes.

Thompson, Anne M.↗
NASA NTRS2019

Bayesian Inference and the Effects of Varying Uncertainty Models in Charring Ablator Calibration and Uncertainty Quantification Problems

The Mars Science Laboratory (MSL) vehicle utilized a heat shield constructed from NASA’s Phenolic-Impregnated Carbon Ablator (PICA) material to protect the main structure from the high enthalpy environment encountered during hypersonic atmospheric entry. During the vehicle’s descent through Martian atmosphere, multiple thermocouples embedded within the heat shield captured in-depth material temperature data that allow for studies to be conducted on current material response reconstruction tools. In the present work, material temperature data obtained from thermocouples within the MISP-4 plug (MEDLI (Mars Science Laboratory Entry, Descent, and Landing Instrument) Integrated Sensor Plug) are utilized in the calibration of Theoretical Ablative Composite for Open Testing (TACOT) model parameters in conjunction with NASA’s Porous material Analysis Toolbox (PATO) through Bayesian inference where uncertainty due to parametric, modeling, and experimental sources is simultaneously quantified. Prior to the study, a sensitivity analysis is performed through computation of the robust Sobol indices in an effort to study the relationship between input space and model response and to reduce the dimensionality of the statistical inverse problem. The Bayesian inference methodology necessitates an a-priori choice to be made for the uncertainty model for which numerous possibilities are available. Across most works, however, only basic additive or multiplicative models are utilized with pre-defined magnitudes of uncertainty based on a-priori knowledge or to-be-calibrated multipliers of static covariance matrix structures. The present effort explores the effects of informed uncertainty models, ones with temporal dependence that are simultaneously calibrated through Bayesian inference, on calibrated results for parameters that make up the uncertain input space.

Sensitivity Analysis↗
NASA NTRS1989

Uncertainty modelling for the control of an active structure

Two approaches to uncertainty modeling of a precision active truss structure for control design are presented. The first approach is based on the H(infinity) optimal control theory, which is used for robust control design with an additive uncertainty model. It is designed to provide vibration suppression to selected modes of the structure at the accelerometer locations. The uncertainty model can be used as an adjustable design parameter which will enable a study of the trade-offs between performance and robust stability. The second approach is based on mu-synthesis. Although the structured singular value can be used to analyze the robustness of any type of uncertainty, there exist difficulties in synthesis if the uncertainty block contains both real and complex variations. Mu-synthesis techniques do not allow for real-parameter variations in the synthesis procedure. The use of a complex variation description enclosing the real variation is suggested.

Blackwood, G. H.↗
NASA NTRS1993

Parametric uncertainty modeling for application to robust control

Viewgraphs and a paper on parametric uncertainty modeling for application to robust control are included. Advanced robust control system analysis and design is based on the availability of an uncertainty description which separates the uncertain system elements from the nominal system. Although this modeling structure is relatively straightforward to obtain for multiple unstructured uncertainties modeled throughout the system, it is difficult to formulate for many problems involving real parameter variations. Furthermore, it is difficult to ensure that the uncertainty model is formulated such that the dimension of the resulting model is minimal. A procedure for obtaining an uncertainty model for real uncertain parameter problems in which the uncertain parameters can be represented in a multilinear form is presented. Furthermore, the procedure is formulated such that the resulting uncertainty model is minimal (or near minimal) relative to a given state space realization of the system. The approach is demonstrated for a multivariable third-order example problem having four uncertain parameters.

Belcastro, Christine M.↗