Institution
ASRC Aerospace Corporation
About: ASRC Aerospace Corporation is a based out in . It is known for research contribution in the topics: In situ resource utilization & Propulsion. The organization has 194 authors who have published 404 publications receiving 4748 citations.
Papers published on a yearly basis
Papers
More filters
••
22 Jun 2009TL;DR: In this paper, the effects of ice contamination on aerodynamic performance at various points in time throughout an icing encounter were investigated with both a 1.5 and a 6 ft chord airfoil.
Abstract: This paper describes a study performed to investigate how aerodynamic performance degradation progresses with time throughout an exposure to icing conditions. It is one of the first documented studies of the effects of ice contamination on aerodynamic performance at various points in time throughout an icing encounter. Both a 1.5 and 6 ft chord, two-dimensional, NACA-23012 airfoils were subjected to icing conditions in the NASA Icing Research Tunnel for varying lengths of time. At the end of each run, lift, drag, and pitching moment measurements were made. Measurements with the 1.5 ft chord model showed that maximum lift and pitching moment degraded more rapidly early in the exposure and degraded more slowly as time progressed. Drag for the 1.5 ft chord model degraded more linearly with time, although drag for very short exposure durations was slightly higher than expected. Only drag measurements were made with the 6 ft chord airfoil. Here, drag for the long exposures was higher than expected. Novel comparison of drag measurements versus an icing scaling parameter, accumulation parameter times collection efficiency was used to compare the data from the two different size model. The comparisons provided a means of assessing the level of fidelity needed for accurate icing simulation.
7 citations
•
01 Mar 2011TL;DR: In this article, the results from a validation study undertaken as a part of the NASA s fundamental aeronautics initiative on high altitude emissions in order to assess the accuracy of several atomization models used in both non-superheat and superheat spray calculations are presented.
Abstract: The paper presents the results from a validation study undertaken as a part of the NASA s fundamental aeronautics initiative on high altitude emissions in order to assess the accuracy of several atomization models used in both non-superheat and superheat spray calculations. As a part of this investigation we have undertaken the validation based on four different cases to investigate the spray characteristics of (1) a flashing jet generated by the sudden release of pressurized R134A from cylindrical nozzle, (2) a liquid jet atomizing in a subsonic cross flow, (3) a Parker-Hannifin pressure swirl atomizer, and (4) a single-element Lean Direct Injector (LDI) combustor experiment. These cases were chosen because of their importance in some aerospace applications. The validation is based on some 3D and axisymmetric calculations involving both reacting and non-reacting sprays. In general, the predicted results provide reasonable agreement for both mean droplet sizes (D32) and average droplet velocities but mostly underestimate the droplets sizes in the inner radial region of a cylindrical jet.
7 citations
••
04 Jan 2010TL;DR: In this paper, a hot supersonic jet in cross-flow was used to validate CFD turbulence modeling relevant to the Orion Launch Abort Vehicle (LAV) in the event of a catastrophic failure during the vehicle s ascent.
Abstract: NASA s next manned launch platform for missions to the moon and Mars are the Orion and Ares systems. Many critical aspects of the launch system performance are being verified using computational fluid dynamics (CFD) predictions. The Orion Launch Abort Vehicle (LAV) consists of a tower mounted tractor rocket tasked with carrying the Crew Module (CM) safely away from the launch vehicle in the event of a catastrophic failure during the vehicle s ascent. Some of the predictions involving the launch abort system flow fields produced conflicting results, which required further investigation through ground test experiments. Ground tests were performed to acquire data from a hot supersonic jet in cross-flow for the purpose of validating CFD turbulence modeling relevant to the Orion Launch Abort Vehicle (LAV). Both 2-component axial plane Particle Image Velocimetry (PIV) and 3-component cross-stream Stereo Particle Image Velocimetry (SPIV) measurements were obtained on a model of an Abort Motor (AM). Actual flight conditions could not be simulated on the ground, so the highest temperature and pressure conditions that could be safely used in the test facility (nozzle pressure ratio 28.5 and a nozzle temperature ratio of 3) were used for the validation tests. These conditions are significantly different from those of the flight vehicle, but were sufficiently high enough to begin addressing turbulence modeling issues that predicated the need for the validation tests.
7 citations
••
11 Jul 20107 citations
••
24 Sep 2007TL;DR: A publicly available database regarding supercooled large droplet ice accretions has been developed in NASA Glenn's Icing Research Tunnel as mentioned in this paper, which is used to validate and verify the extension of the ice accretion code, LEWICE, into the SLD realm.
Abstract: A unique, publicly available database regarding supercooled large droplet ice accretions has been developed in NASA Glenn's Icing Research Tunnel Identical cloud and flight conditions were generated for five different airfoil models The models chosen represent a variety of aircraft types from the horizontal stabilizer of a large trans-port aircraft to the wings of regional, business, and general aviation aircraft In addition to the standard documentation methods of 2D ice shape tracing and imagery, ice mass measurements were also taken This database will also be used to validate and verify the extension of the ice accretion code, LEWICE, into the SLD realm
7 citations
Authors
Showing all 194 results
Name | H-index | Papers | Citations |
---|---|---|---|
Daniel A. Herman | 20 | 73 | 1076 |
Christopher D. Immer | 18 | 46 | 801 |
Jonathan A. DeCastro | 17 | 59 | 898 |
John E. Lane | 17 | 79 | 1128 |
Paul E. Hintze | 15 | 62 | 922 |
Dorothy Lukco | 13 | 41 | 546 |
Abbas Khavaran | 13 | 33 | 592 |
Stephen A. Perusich | 13 | 32 | 630 |
Steve Trigwell | 13 | 34 | 545 |
Sam Lee | 11 | 21 | 427 |
Carl W. Chang | 10 | 24 | 350 |
Deborah L. Waters | 10 | 37 | 284 |
Ryan D. May | 10 | 28 | 474 |
Changlie Wey | 10 | 12 | 372 |
Takahisa Kobayashi | 10 | 11 | 656 |