Ground Testing Technical Committee GTTC Newsletter July 2011

Ground Testing Technical Committee

GTTC Newsletter

July 2011

Issue No. 32 Summer 2011


https://info.aiaa.org/tac/ASG/GTTC/default.aspx P a g e | 1

GTTC Chairman’s Message

Thank you for picking up the 32nd edition of the Ground Test Technical

Committee (GTTC) Newsletter. This newsletter is utilized to keep the AIAA

members and others informed on the GTTC activities, membership, and the

activities of the membership organizations. I hope that you will find that it

serves its purpose well. Special thanks go to the newsletter editor, Tony Skaff, of Sierra Lobo, Inc.

The GTTC meetings at the 47th AIAA/ASME/SAE/ASEE Joint Propulsion Conference and Exhibit will be busy as usual

with general meetings of the entire GTTC, subcommittee meetings, working group meetings, and many technical sessions.

We like to say we put the “T” in TC, so try to come to our technical sessions to see what kinds of testing activities are

being presented and documented. The technical sessions are listed in the conference program as GT-1 through GT-5, and

19 papers are to be presented in them. We utilize our working groups to prepare testing methodology documentation for

publication by AIAA. All are welcome to attend the working group meetings and actively participate in this process.

It is not all work and no play as at the last summer meeting in Chicago we attended a Cubs baseball game. That went so

well that we will attend a Padres game as a group while we are in San Diego. We also are taking a field trip to Triumph

Aerospace Systems to see their strain gage balance fabrication and calibration capabilities and to the San Diego Air &

Space Technology Low Speed Wind Tunnel for a tour.

We will be selecting new members for the GTTC at the upcoming Aerospace Sciences Meeting in Nashville, TN, during

January. If you are interested in becoming a GTTC member, applications can be input through the AIAA web site,

www.aiaa.org. We are particularly looking for people with a propulsion ground testing background.

I hope you enjoy this issue of the GTTC newsletter. We are always looking for ways to improve the GTTC and our

overall value to the aerospace community. Your ideas and participation are greatly appreciated. If you have questions or

want information about the GTTC, you can contact me directly at [email protected] or by phone at 770-494-4158. If

you have an opportunity, check out our website linked off the AIAA Technical Committees page on the AIAA web site

(www.aiaa.org).

Thank you,

Joe Patrick

GTTC Chairman

http://www.aiaa.org/

mailto:[email protected]



About the GTTC

The GTTC is one of more than 60 technical committees

sponsored by the American Institute of Aeronautics and

Astronautics (AIAA). It is made up of approximately 50

professionals working in various areas of the ground

testing world.

Our membership addresses important technical issues

that affect ground testing through several means,

including the development of guides and standards,

dissemination of information through technical sessions

at conferences, and the development and sponsorship of

short courses.

The GTTC also participates in Congressional Visits Day,

which is a vital tool for making sure that aeronautics and

space-related research and testing is supported at

required levels.

One of the primary functions of every technical

committee is the sponsorship and development of

conferences and technical sessions. The GTTC supports

two conferences each year. Every January, the GTTC

meets at the Aerospace Sciences Meeting, where we

sponsor several technical sessions (typically a dozen or

more). In the summer, the GTTC alternates between the

Joint Propulsion Conference (odd-numbered years) and

the Advanced Measurement Technology and Ground

Testing Conference (even-numbered years).

GTTC Working Groups

Flow Quality Working Group

Chair: Iwan Philipsen

Vice-Chair: Dale Belter

Model Attitude and Deformation Working Group

Chair: Stewart Lumb

Vice-Chair: Joe Norris

Wind Tunnel Database Working Group

Chair: Jeff Haas

Vice-Chair: Richard White

Ground Test Technical Committee (GTTC)

Chair: Joe Patrick

Vice-Chair: Ray Castner

Secretary: Steve Dunn

Steering Subcommittee

Chair: Joe Patrick

Vice Chair: Ray Castner

Membership Subcommittee

Chair: Ray Castner

Vice Chair: Steve Dunn

Aerodynamics Subcommittee

Chair: Vic Canacci

Vice Chair: Jerry Kegelman

Propulsion Subcommittee

Chair: King Molder

Vice Chair: Mike Wrenn

Awards Subcommittee

Chair: Joe Norris

Vice-Chair: Wink Baker

Conferences Subcommittee

Chair: Amber Favaregh

Vice Chair: Tom Wayman

Publications Subcommittee

Chair: Julien Weiss

Vice-Chair: Oliver Leembruggen

Standards Subcommittee

Chair: Doyle Veazey

Vice Chair: Rich White

Education and Student Activities Subcommittee

Chair: Stewart Lumb

Vice Chair: Justin Smith

GTTC Subcommittees



Turbine-Based Combined Cycle Engine Large-

Scale Inlet Mode Transition Experiment

By Christine Pastor and Scott Williamson

To date, the problem of Turbine Based Combined Cycle

(TBCC) mode transition has not been addressed in any

serious fashion for a hypersonic vehicle utilizing this

type of high-performance propulsion system. Successful

demonstration of mode transition will provide enabling

technology for the development of future hypersonic

cruise and space access vehicles. Experimental

demonstrations of the process are necessary to provide

the confidence necessary to undertake a major combined

cycle propulsion system development program.

Hypersonic propulsion research has been a major focus

of the NASA Aeronautics program for many years. In

the area of hypersonic inlet design, programs such as the

sidewall compression inlet research performed at the

NASA Langley Research Center, the NASA Mach 5

Inlet program tested at the NASA Glenn Research

Center (GRC) 10’x10’ Supersonic Wind Tunnel (SWT),

the National Aerospace Plane (NASP) program, and

several other high-speed cruise and space access designs

by industry have addressed the problems of inlet design

for hypersonic propulsion systems.

Concept Space Access Design

These prior research efforts were generally limited to

only high-speed conditions and did not fully cover the

entire flight regime. While previous programs have

provided detailed designs for the ramjet/scramjet inlet,

no large-scale effort has previously addressed the split-

flow problem of the hybrid (over/under) inlet design in

any great detail.

The current test series at the GRC 10’x10’ Supersonic

Wind Tunnel is the turbine-based Combined Cycle

Engine Large-Scale Inlet Mode Transition Experiment

(CCE-LIMX) project. TBCC systems are of interest for

the first stage of a two-stage-to-orbit vehicle. For this

test, the CCE-LIMX test bed has a common inlet that

supplies flow to a turbine engine and a dual-mode ramjet

engine in an over/under configuration. The turbine

engine provides thrust from take-off to Mach 4. at which

speed the turbine engine shuts down and the ramjet /

scramjet engine develops full thrust to accelerate the

vehicle to the staging speed of Mach 7. The CCE-LIMX

test bed will be a tool to investigate integrated

propulsion system and controls technology objectives.

The main objectives of the tests are to demonstrate

turbine-based combined-cycle mode-transition and to

build an experimental database for physics-based

modeling. The near term emphasis is to understand,

demonstrate, and control the mode transition between

the low speed turbine engine and the dual mode

ram/scramjet engine for a relevant TBCC over/under

propulsion configuration. Four phases of testing are

planned.

Phase (1) Characterize the CCE-LIMX isolated inlet

performance, operability, and stability: Cold pipes and

mass flow plugs are used to simulate engine

backpressures for both the low-speed and high-speed

flow paths. The process of switching the flow from the

turbine to the dual-mode ramjet engine is known as inlet

mode-transition. The CCE-LIMX inlet is a two-

dimensional design in which inlet mode-transition

occurs through the rotation of a splitter cowl. Fully

closing the splitter cowl “cocoons” the turbine engine.

The CCE-LIMX model was designed to match engine

requirements while maintaining both high performance

and stability. Open-loop controlled mode transition

sequences will also be demonstrated.

Phase (2) Collect inlet dynamics using system

identification techniques: Using flow perturbation with

high-speed valves, the dynamic behavior of the inlet will

be documented primarily with high-response pressure

transducers. This test phase will provide the data needed

to develop the closed loop propulsion system controller.



Phase (3) Implement an inlet control system to

demonstrate mode-transition scenarios using the cold

pipe and mass flow plugs installed in both flow paths.

Using the data from Phases 1 and 2, a closed-loop

control system will be demonstrated for specific mode

transition scenarios for the relevant split flow path

environment.

Phase (4) Demonstrate integrated inlet/turbine engine

operation through mode-transition: After installing a

small-diameter supersonic turbine engine and a Single

Expansion Ramp Nozzle (SERN), both the inlet and

engine will be controlled through a transition at Mach 3

flight speed.

The GRC 10’x10’ wind tunnel provides a unique

capability with propulsion focus to accommodate the

complex requirements of this technically challenging

system integration effort. On March 7, 2011, Phase 1

testing of the CCE-LIMX in the GRC 10’x10’ wind

tunnel began and continues with the planned completion

of Phase 2 testing at the end of September 2011. This

test activity is providing a critical database on this

TBCC configuration and will serve to demonstrate the

controlled mode transition, which is required by an

advanced air-breathing propulsion system to enable

hypersonic flight.

CCE-LIMX Model Installed in GRC 10’x10’ SWT

By Philip Lorenz III

Imagine a lightweight and powerful precision-guided

bomb that would enable an F-15E Strike Eagle fighter

pilot to find and destroy a moving enemy target under

challenging conditions – like during a powerful dust

storm at night with anti-aircraft rounds being launched.

And in case that first bomb fails to take out the target,

several more of these 250-pound class destructors are

available on the aircraft to finish the job.

AEDC engineers are helping to ensure Raytheon’s Small

Diameter Bomb (SDB) II is just what the warfighter

ordered. Store separation and aerodynamic testing of a

1/20th scale model of the weapon and F-15E is ongoing

in Arnold’s 4-foot transonic wind tunnel.

Dr. Andrew Frits, Raytheon project engineer, said

AEDC is the logical choice when his company wants to

conduct complex store separation testing on products

like the SDB II.

“There are advantages of coming to AEDC, most of it is

the experience-base and the fact that they’ve done so

much validation on the F-15E with other rounds

[stores],” he said. “We consider AEDC to be the

Cadillac of wind tunnel testing. You go there if you

have something that needs to be done right; testing that

carries a lot of complexity. Another thing, too, is AEDC

actually has the F-15E parent model as well.”

Ensuring the effective and efficient ejection and

trajectory of a weapon or other store from an aircraft in

flight to an enemy target is imperative to the safety of

the pilot, aircraft, and the success of the mission.

According to Dr. Frits, wind tunnel testing is critical to

the success of the Small Diameter Bomb II program and

paves the way for a safe, effective, and less costly flight

test campaign.

“[The] SDB II is the next generation air-to-ground

weapon,” he said. “It is designed to hit vehicles, trucks,

tanks [and] those types of things, either moving or not

moving in adverse weather conditions.

AEDC Team Puts New Small Diameter

Bomb to the Test



“It has a very advanced tri-mode seeker. It’s a fully

networked weapon with a full data link capability so it

will be able to communicate with launch platforms and

off-platform targeting groups.”

Dr. Frits said work on the system has provided a weapon

that is currently in the midst of the engineering,

manufacturing, and development (EMD) phase. He said

a considerable effort went into preparing the weapon

system for the current phase of wind tunnel testing at

AEDC.

“We designed a weapon that safely separates from the

aircraft,” he said. “You won’t have any trouble of it

accidently coming back up and hitting the airplane.

“This wind tunnel test supports a flight clearance

recommendation for the full operational weapon

envelope on the F-15E. The data from this test will help

determine what additional flight test points need to be

gathered, then the flight test data along with wind tunnel

and computational fluid dynamics data, will be used to

determine the separation envelope.”

Adam Plondke, the ATA test project engineer, said the

project’s first phase was to conduct free stream testing of

the bomb, which is still in EMD phase.

“This was just the SDB II model by itself in the tunnel,

there was no aircraft present,” he explained. “We go

through a whole array of store attitudes in the tunnel,

which gives us a database of forces and moments the

store will see at these various orientations in the pure

free stream flow field by itself.”

The next phase involved the use of a captive trajectory

system (CTS) to put the bomb, mounted on a sting,

through a computer-generated series of attitudes

simulating the store deploying from the aircraft.

“With a computer, we simulate the ejector pistons

pushing on the store and the forces and moments that our

internal balance measures."

Plondke said, “This data will then be used to calculate

where the store would move next.”

The CTS allows the testers to put the SDB II model

through a full range of simulated release conditions,

including ejector and control forces as well as G-forces,

due to pull-up or push-down maneuvers of both the store

and the plane.

The system also simulates how the airflow interactions

between the aircraft and other airborne stores, including

conformal fuel tanks, other weapons, and sensors affect

the SDB II as it drops away from the aircraft. This

includes subjecting the weapon and aircraft models to a

variety of attitudes of pitch, roll, and yaw configurations.

“We do the first part of the trajectory with the fins

stowed,” Dr. Frits explained. “Then, in a tactical

trajectory – at some point shortly after the weapon

deploys – the fins will deploy, changing the

aerodynamic characteristics of our weapon, and then we

can begin steering it if we need to.”

The third phase of the test at AEDC involves a grid

survey approach in which SDB II aerodynamic loads are

measured at a pre-determined array of store positions

and attitudes. The information from this testing is used

to create a database of the spatial variation of the loads

in proximity to the F-15E.

“Our primary goal there is we want to just collect

enough data that we can build a model of the

aerodynamics of the system,” Dr. Frits said. “And from

there we get nice sets of clean data at various different

orientations, and we can build a nice computer model of

the aerodynamics at any given angular orientation

relative to the aircraft.”

David Anderson, ATA test project engineer, inspects the

1/20-scale models of an F-15E Strike Eagle aircraft and a

sting-mounted Small Diameter Bomb (SDB II), during a

break in the ongoing store separation test for the new

weapon’s development phase trials in the aerodynamic

wind tunnel 4T of the Propulsion Wind Tunnel (PWT)

facility. The test marks the second time the SDB II has

been tested at Arnold.



Automatic Balance Calibration System with

Combined Loadings

Model Flow Control and Propulsion

Simulation System for the NASA Langley

Research Center National Transonic

Facility

By Shinji Nagai

JAXA is currently validating an automatic balance

calibration system with combined loadings. Since there

are a huge number of combination patterns for the six-

component loads, it previously took nearly one month to

perform a calibration. In contrast, with this equipment,

the calibration can be completed in a few days.

Electrical actuators allow combined patterns of the six-

component loads to be applied fully automatically, even

24 hours a day. Still, the design emphasizes operating

safety and simplicity.

The calibration body displaced by the deformation of the

balance can be repositioned with high accuracy to

maintain the direction of each loading. The control

accuracy for the position and angle are ±0.01 mm or less

and ±0.001° or less, respectively. With this control

mechanism, we can expect to realize balance calibration

with accuracy and efficiency of the highest level in the

world. The maximum load of normal force is 1 ton, and

the calibration accuracy is 0.1 % of full scale. Almost

all balances used in JAXA’s wind tunnels can be

calibrated.

One special feature of JAXA’s automatic balance

calibration system is its high-accuracy temperature

control capabilities. Since the balance output also drifts

according to temperature, the temperature of the entire

equipment is strictly controlled. In addition, the

temperature of the balance itself can be controlled within

a range of 10 to 50°C. It is possible to calibrate a

balance at conditions near those of actual wind tunnel

tests in the JAXA 2m × 2m continuous transonic wind

tunnel.

This article was written based on an article in JAXA’s

publication “Sora to Sora,” which can be downloaded

from http://www.ard.jaxa.jp/eng/info/prm/0index.html.

Combined Loading Apparatus of the JAXA Automatic

Balance Calibration System

By Roman Paryz

Active flow control continues to be a fertile research

field that holds promise to enhance the aerodynamic

performance of conventional aircraft and enable the

development of unconventional vehicles. A wide variety

of active flow control techniques are being pursued,

ranging from direct boundary layer manipulation using

steady or pulsed blowing methodologies, to indirect

methods including induced plasma flows near a surface.

Computational Fluid Dynamic (CFD) methods are

maturing to the point that they are being used as tools to

improve and optimize flow control techniques on

realistic configurations. CFD methods require further

refinement and validation when dealing with active flow

concepts at the very high lift coefficients that they can

produce. An industry effort has begun to highlight the

developing database that can be used for CFD

validation. As with most publically available active

flow control datasets, one shortfall that still remains is

the lack of data at realistic Reynolds numbers and data

for Reynolds number effects, thereby limiting the

scalability of the flow control techniques to flight

conditions.

http://www.ard.jaxa.jp/eng/info/prm/0index.html



Supersonic Combustor/Afterburner

Facility Study

System Flow Setup

To address this overarching need, a research project was

begun in 2009 to develop a capability to test active flow

control concepts and propulsion simulations at high

Reynolds numbers in the National Transonic Facility

(NTF) at the NASA Langley Research Center. This

technique focused on the use of semi-span models due to

their increased model size and relative ease of routing

high-pressure air to the model.

To achieve this capability, a dual channel high-pressure

air system consisting of two independently controllable

high-pressure air lines has been designed, manufactured,

and installed into NTF. Each line has the capability to

reduce the incoming, dry 2,000 psig air to 800-1,275

psig for the high flow line and 300-800 psig for the low

flow line. The high flow line provides 0.1-20.0 lbm/sec

and the low flow line delivers 0.1-8.0 lbm/sec to the

model. The high and low flow lines use five (5) and one

(1) micron filters, respectively, to ensure a clean air

supply to the model. These air lines enter the NTF shell

separately and route to the Sidewall Model Support

System (SMSS), which uses either the NTF114S or the

NTF117S five component balance. The air supply lines

are routed through the center of the balance through

concentric bellows to an interface within the model.

Incorporated into the air delivery system is a fast acting

model protection system. The isolation and vent system

can be adjusted for maximum internal pressures that

vary from 400 to 1,200 psig to match the design pressure

limits of any given wind tunnel model. In the event of

an inadvertent pressure spike, the model over-pressure

protection system automatically isolates and vents the

wind tunnel model and provides a command to shut

down and vent the high-pressure air delivery system.

This isolation and venting of the wind tunnel model has

a reaction time of one second or less. The ventilation

valves can also be used to pre-condition the air

temperature of the system, efficiently allowing this

procedure to occur while the wind tunnel is being

brought onto condition.

To verify and validate the air station test envelope, a

standard calibration Dual Aerodynamic Nozzle (DAN)

model was developed. This model uses Stratford

calibration nozzles having known thrust characteristics

mounted to a NACA 0018 symmetrical airfoil structure.

The maximum flow rate for either leg occurs at the

lowest free stream Mach number and highest free stream

static pressure. The internal model pressure was limited

to 1,200 psig, based on the high pressure limit of the air

station piping system. The maximum mass flow rate for

the high mass flow leg was 20 lbm/sec. System

validations and DAN model testing were completed in

December 2010.

Stratford Nozzle Modeling

To validate the new air system for circulation control

model testing, a proof of concept test was performed

using the FASTMAC (Fundamental Aerodynamic

Subsonic Transonic Modular Active Control) model.

This model was designed and developed in conjunction

with the air system design and development. This test

acquired force, moment, and surface pressure data at

both cruise and takeoff/landing speeds for a variety of

conditions using circulation control concepts. It

evaluated a simplified high-lift system comprised of a

blown short-chord hinged flap, and a leading edge slat at

Mach = 0.20 and explored the drag reduction potential of

the blown flap in the stowed cruise position at transonic

speeds up to Mach = 0.88. This FASTMAC test is the

initial installment to develop a public dataset for

evaluating CFD simulation and design codes at flight

Reynolds numbers. Reynolds number effects represent a

key parameter in scaling circulation control concepts to

flight vehicles. The FASTMAC test was completed in

April 2011. The NASA researchers were very happy

with the results obtained and this FASTMAC test has

served as the pathfinder / risk reduction effort for future

testing.



New Model Support System for JAXA’s 1

m x 1m Supersonic Wind Tunnel

Supersonic Combustor/Afterburner

Facility Testing

Submitted by Scott Meyer

On July 6, 2011, at the High Pressure Lab of the Zucrow

Complex, Adam Trebs with JP Kirkegaard achieved

ignition and sustained combustion for the first time in

the Supersonic Combustor/Afterburner facility. The

facility is designed modularly to facilitate rapid

configuration changes. The initial test campaign will

use this capability to vary the velocity profile

approaching a ramp-type injector as part of a study of

viscous effects within the combustion field downstream

of an axial vortex generator. This study will yield

insights into scramjet combustor scaling and behavior

through flight profile. The combustor entrance flow is

13 lbm/s at Mach 2 at a total temperature of 900F and a

static pressure of 19 psia using a blend of hydrogen and

silane as fuel. The High Pressure Lab’s facilities for

conducting large combustion component tests provides

unique capability for this sort of examination; the facility

has the capacity to generate measurable velocity profiles

varying from much smaller than to larger than the

injector. Adam Trebs is a PhD student under the

tutelage of Professors Stephen Heister and William

Anderson.

Supersonic Combustor/Afterburner Facility Testing

By Shinji Nagai

JAXA replaced the model support system of the 1 m by

1 m blowdown supersonic wind tunnel. The old model

support consisted of a strut heaved by a hydraulic

actuator and a sting pod with a linkage for changing

pitch angle. Skillful workers previously set the roll angle

on the model by tightening 11 M12 bolts of the ring

wedge in the sting pod.

The new model support system is driven by three

electric motors for pitch angle, roll angle, and height,

independently. Since blowdown wind tunnels have a

limited duration time, sweep tests of angle of attack are

usually conducted rather than pitch and pause tests. For

this reason, noises from the operating motors are

suppressed within DC 1 μV and AC 5 μV at the level of

non amplified signals.

The old taper joint stings were abandoned and replaced

to flange joint stings. It becomes easier to attach and

detach the sting between high Mach number tests

accompanied by large starting/stopping loads. The

model support is designed to withstand both 3 tons of

normal force and 1.5 tons of side force at the center of

the side window of the test section.

The ranges of pitch and roll angle are ±15 and ±185

degrees, respectively. The three servo motors and a

harmonic drive speed reducer give us precise control of

model attitude. Control accuracies in pitch and roll

angle are 0.03 and 0.1 degree, respectively. Pitch angle

is directly measured by an arc shape linear encoder

inside the strut with an accuracy of 0.01 degree.

By combination of pitch and roll angle motion, it

becomes possible to conduct sweep tests of angle of

attack with constant side slip angles. The rotation center

of pitch angle motion is also easily programmed by

combination of heaving motion. A unique uncertainty

identification method is proposed by changing model

height because uncertainty of supersonic wind tunnel

testing is dominated by the tunnel flow uniformity, as

shown in the JA article: Shinji Nagai and Hidetoshi

Iijima, “Uncertainty Identification of Supersonic Wind

Tunnel Testing,” Journal of Aircraft, Vol. 48, No.2,

2011, pp.567-577.



NASA Ames Mitsubishi Restoration Project The figure shows the model support cart, which was

moved 2 m downstream from the tunnel running position

in order to fit the model. By replacement of the

hydraulic power to electric power, maintenance time and

effort, and above all, work safety are drastically

improved.

The New Model Support System of the JAXA 1m x 1m

Supersonic Wind Tunnel

Submitted by Steven Buchholz

In the spring of 2009, funding to NASA’s Aeronautics

Test Program (ATP) became available through the

American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA).

NASA Ames proposed using these funds for a project to

provide new Make Up Air (MUA) pumping capability at

the Unitary Plan Wind Tunnels (UPWT).

The MUA supports operations of the UPWT that went

into service in 1955 and originally comprised 3 tunnels

circuits: 11x11 Ft Transonic, and 9x7 Ft and 8x7 Ft

Supersonic. All three tunnels are variable Mach and

pressure facilities.

The existing MUA consists of a 15,000 HP motor, Clark

Brothers 2-stage Compressor and Farrel Gearbox. The

drive motor was salvaged from the Ames 16 Ft tunnel

and originally went into service December 3, 1941. It

has never been rewound but the stator was re-wedged

entirely in 1996. Major components are no longer

available and replacement parts need to be

manufactured. The equipment is decades past their

design life yet still run 2 shifts/day. This is a single

point failure waiting to happen.

A trade study was completed by Jacobs Engineering to

determine the best option for improving the MUA

pumping capability. The three options included the

following:

Move the existing Mitsubishi Heavy Industry (MHI)

compressor that was installed as part of the 12-Foot

Restoration Project in 1994. This compressor had been

sitting idle for three years, since December of 2006,

when an arc flash in the substation damaged the power

cables to the 12–Foot. The MHI was disabled and sat

idle for a significant period of time but had less than

2,000 hours of operation.

Purchase a new compressor identical to the MHI and

install it at the UPWT site.

Activate the MHI in place, run it remotely, and utilize an

existing 36-inch tie line between the 12-Foot and

Unitary MUA.



Upgrade to the High Pressure Air System

for Jet Simulation Testing at the LaRC

UPWT

Due to cost and risk factors, the 3rd option was selected.

Specifically, restore and reactivate the MHI in place to

support UPWT operations performance specifications

drafted to meet all the original design criteria for the 12-

Foot at an initial cost estimate of $15M. The budgeted

funding from ATP was $9M.

The project defined nine work packages that need to be

addressed by the reactivation project. They were as

follows: Restore electrical power by running new cables

from National Full Scale Complex (NFAC) substation to

the 12-foot. Restore the MUA tie line between the

Unitary valve yard and the 12-Foot MUA. Determine

the health of the MHI compressor and its subsystems

and restore them to operating conditions. Update the

control system so it is compatible with the existing

Unitary Distributed Control System (DCS) and can be

networked with the Unitary Auxiliaries DCS. Update

the capacity of the MUA dryer system to meet the

moisture requirements for supersonic airflow and

improved cycle time. Restore the cooling tower to

return the system to service the MHI. Check and

calibrate the existing equipment health monitoring

sensors and electronics and restore the system

monitoring and shutdown functions. Make required

modifications and construct piping and valves to connect

the MUA tie line to the Unitary piping. Complete an

initial compressor performance test to assess the

condition of the MHI once power has been restored.

Since the machinery was nonoperational for three years,

there was a Pandora’s Box of surprises in store for the

restoration crew. The first major issue was 10 inches of

standing water found in the inlet. After disassembling

the compressor inlet piping, the project team found

severe corrosion on the bell housing and aluminum first

stage. Also there was extensive impact damage to the

leading edge of the impeller. With these revelations, the

initial performance test could not be completed.

Additionally, only three of the nine electrical feeds were

still good. More water was found in the compressor

bearing lubrication system oil tank. The control system

hard drive failed along with the process logic control to

reload the program and was too old to repair.

The damage to the impeller wasn’t as severe as

originally anticipated. It could be repaired in place so it

did not require Mitsubishi to repair or replace the

original. The inlet house was completely rebuilt with a

sloped roof to shed rain and a heater to prevent

condensation. All electrical feeds were replaced and

new power cables were laid from the National Full Scale

Facility substation to the MHI. The control system had

to be completely rebuilt to bring it up to the current

operating system in the UPWT.

The work packages now are complete. The entire

system is currently going through subsystem checkout in

preparation for Integrated System Test (IST). The MHI

is expected to be fully operation by September of this

year. It will be used to augment and/or replace the

current Unitary MUA pumping capabilities and

potentially improve efficiency of operations at the

UPWT.

Mitsubishi Compressor

Regeneration Air Dryer



Upgrade to the High Pressure Air System

for Jet Simulation Testing at the LaRC

UPWT

Validation of SLI’s Fuel Cell Powered UUV

Section at Sierra Lobo Test Facility (SLTF)

Submitted by Jerome Kegelman

The NASA Langley Research Center Unitary Plan Wind

Tunnel (UPWT) is a closed-circuit, continuous flow,

variable pressure, supersonic tunnel with two test

sections that are nominally 4-ft by 4-ft and 7 feet in

length. The high pressure air system (HPA) used for jet

simulation testing has recently been upgraded in test

section 2 (Mach number range of 2.36 to 4.63) to

provide higher pressures, temperatures, and increased

mass flow compared to the previous system. The HPA

system was designed to supply high pressure air to

models at the following conditions:

50 psia to 3800 psia

75°F to 275°F

0.02 lbm/s to 30 lbm/s

The HPA system is currently undergoing tests to

determine its operating map. Since inception, it has

already been used for a few research test programs. An

example photograph from one of the tests shows the

Supersonic Retro-Propulsion model installed in the test

section. This test program was reported on in the

following reference.

Berry, S. A., et.al., Supersonic Retro-Propulsion

Experimental Results from the NASA Langley

Unitary Plan Wind Tunnel,” AIAA Paper 2011 –

3489, June 2011

Jet Simulation Testing

By Steve Grasl

Sierra Lobo, Inc. (SLI) in Milan, OH, has completed its

validation of a fuel cell powered Unmanned Underwater

Vehicle section for future naval capabilities for the

Office of Naval Research in its Liquid Hydrogen and

Liquid Oxygen test area (SLTF). The power section

system was designed and fabricated by Sierra Lobo

engineers. The SLTF was also used to flight qualify

Sierra Lobo’s Cryo-Tracker® System with liquid

hydrogen and liquid oxygen. The SLTF will be used

later this year to continue development of Sierra Lobo’s

Thermoacoustic Stirling Heat Engine (TASHE) for the

Densified Propellant Management System (DPMS™)

and for a Venus lander power and cooling duplex

demonstrator.

Other recent tests include liquid hydrogen internal

combustion engine truck testing for the U.S. Army,

Cryocooler testing for the AFRL, and a pressure

reduction system blow down test intended to simulate a

Roll Control System (RCS) similar in concept to what

was planned for the Ascent Abort Crew Module (CM)

on the Orion spacecraft for NASA Glenn Research

Center.

For further information, contact Tony Skaff at

[email protected].

Fuel Cell UUV Testing




Liquid Hydrogen Gauging Tests

Successfully Completed

Multilayer Insulation/Broad Area Cooling

(MLI/BAC) Shield Venting Test Readiness

Review Completed

Submitted by Helmut Bamberger

A series of liquid hydrogen tests of two propellant

gauging technologies were successfully conducted from

April 18-29, 2011, at the NASA GRC Creek Road

cryogenic test facility known as Small Multi-Purpose

Research Facility. The gauges tested were the Radio

Frequency Mass Gauge (RFMG) and the Pressure-

Volume-Temperature (PVT) gauge. Both gauges are

being developed in-house as potential technologies for

measuring the quantity of cryogenic propellant in tanks

while in low-gravity. The tests were conducted using a

54" diameter spherical aluminum flight weight tank

suspended inside a large vacuum chamber as the test

article. This was the first set of liquid hydrogen tests at

the facility since relocating to Creek Road, and

represented a milestone achievement in itself. Four

separate liquid hydrogen fill and drain cycles were

completed, and both the RFMG and PVT technologies

were tested in parallel. A quick look at the test data

showed excellent results, which will be more thoroughly

analyzed over the next few months. Funding and support

for these tests is provided by the NASA Enabling

Technology Development and Demonstration program,

through the Cryogenic Fluid Management project.

Liquid Hydrogen Gauging Test Configuration

Submitted by Helmut Bamberger

As the environmental pressure decreases to space

vacuum during a launch vehicle’s ascent, adequate

venting of the interlayer space of the MLI system on a

cryogenic propellant tank will be important to quickly

achieve maximum insulation performance on orbit. The

presence of a BAC shield within the MLI blanket may

influence the venting of the interstitial gas in the MLI,

and the shield may itself experience flexing which could

compromise its performance. A test program is planned

at the Creek Road Cryogenic Complex Small Multi-

Purpose Research Facility (SMiRF) to investigate the

structural issues related to venting of an integrated

BAC/MLI system. Test hardware is in the final stages

of build up, and the SMiRF has been modified for the

test with the inclusion of a new pump down throttling

valve added to the vacuum train. A test readiness review

was held on June 29, 2011, to review the facility and

hardware status. Reviewers had several minor

comments which will be incorporated into the test.

Check out and test operations are planned to begin in the

next several weeks. Test results will provide insight into

structural issues associated with venting an integrated

MLI/BAC system, and will provide guidance into future

testing. This work is supported by the Cryogenic

Propellant Storage and Transfer project under the

Exploration Technology Development and

Demonstration Program.

MLI/BAC Configuration



Membership Activities

2011 AIAA Ground Test Award

Plum Brook Station’s B-2 Facility

Completes C.R.E.S.T. Testing

Submitted by Victor Canacci

The Plum Brook Station B-2 chamber is the 3rd largest

in NASA’s inventory and the only chamber in the world

capable of producing on-orbit conditions while

supporting engine testing for upper stage vehicles. The

facility recently completed testing of the Cosmic Ray

Electron Synchrotron Telescope (C.R.E.S.T.)

C.R.E.S.T. is a combined effort between Indiana,

Chicago, Michigan, Minnesota, Northern Kentucky, and

Penn State Universities designed to measure flux of

primary cosmic ray electrons greater than 1 Tera

electron-volts (TeV). The instrumentation package will

be flown via balloon over Antarctica for six weeks

starting in December of 2011. Testing consisted of

achieving environmental conditions in the chamber of a

vacuum level of 3 Torr, -32 deg C and a 22 degree

incident sun angle. Initial testing indentified a number

of test article anomalies that could have resulted in

failure of the project. These anomalies were corrected

and the test article retested successfully.

C.R.E.S.T. Test Article

B-2 Vacuum Chamber

Aerospace Sciences Meeting, Orlando, Florida

The 49th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting was held

in Orlando, FL, January 4-7, 2011, at the Orlando World

Center Marriott in Lake Buena Vista, FL. The AIAA

Ground Test Technical Committee (GTTC) conducted a

series of sessions and a full slate of meetings and related

activities as a part of this conference. The ground test

sessions consisted of 11 sessions and a total of 34

papers. The GTTC hosted one panel session and four

joint sessions with other technical committees. A total

of 15 meetings were held to conduct the business of the

GTTC during the course of this conference.



The AIAA Ground Test Committee

Congratulates the Outstanding and Best

Paper Award Winners for 2010 - 2011

2011 AIAA Ground Test Award

2011 AIAA Ground Testing Best Paper

Award

2011 AIAA Ground Test Award presented to:

Dr. Michael S. Holden

The GTTC is pleased to present the American Institute

of Aeronautics and Astronautics Ground Testing Award

for 2011 to:

Dr. Michael S. Holden

Vice President, Hypersonics

CUBRC

Buffalo, NY

“For unique contributions in the development and

construction of hypervelocity ground test facilities and

their application to experimental research over a wide

range of problems in hypersonic flow.”

The award will be presented on 3 August 2011 at the

Awards Luncheon during the 47th

AIAA/ASME/SAE/ASEE Joint Propulsion conference

being held 31 July - 3 August 2011 in San Diego, CA.

Congratulations Dr. Holden!

The Ground Test Award is given to an individual or

team that has made significant contributions to the field

of ground testing in the aerodynamic and propulsion

disciplines during their careers. Recipients are selected

based on several criteria including: excellence in

technical or managerial ground testing, participation in

professional societies, authoring publications and papers,

and teaching or mentoring activities. Nominations for

the 2012 Ground Test Award close on October 1, 2011.

Simply login to your AIAA account at

http://www.aiaa.org and click “Honors and Awards” to

start a new nomination for the Ground Test Award.

Please contact Joe Norris ([email protected]) for

more information.

The AIAA Ground Testing Technical Committee

annually recognizes several papers from both the

summer and winter GTTC-sponsored conferences. The

GTTC hosts paper sessions in the winter at the AIAA

Aerospace Sciences Meeting and in the summer either at

the Joint Propulsion Conference or Aerodynamics

Measurement and Ground Testing Conference. These

“Outstanding Papers” are reviewed each spring to select

one “Best Paper” for the entire year. The recipient of the

Best Paper Award is recognized during the AIAA

awards luncheon held at the summer conference.

Richard DeLoach and John Micol

of the NASA Langley Research Center

The AIAA Ground Testing Technical Committee is

proud to recognize Richard DeLoach and John Micol of

the NASA Langley Research Center for winning the

2011 AIAA Ground Testing Best Paper Award.

The authors will be recognized at the awards luncheon

on 3 August 2011 during the 47th

AIAA/ASME/SAE/ASEE Joint Propulsion conference

in San Diego, CA. The title of their technical paper is

"Comparison of Resource Requirements for a Wind

Tunnel Test Designed with Conventional vs. Modern

Design of Experiments Methods," AIAA Paper 2011-

1260. Congratulations!

The AIAA Ground Testing Best Paper Award is given

annually to acknowledge authors of exceptional

technical papers that have been presented in GTTC

hosted AIAA conference sessions. The GTTC hosts

sessions in the winter at the AIAA Aerospace Sciences

Meeting and in the summer either at the Joint Propulsion

Conference or Aerodynamics Measurement and Ground

Testing Conference.

http://www.aiaa.org/




2010 – 2011 AIAA Ground Testing

Outstanding Papers

Calendar of Events

Image Based Measurement Techniques of Increased

Complexity for Industrial Propeller Flow

Investigations

Eric W.M. Roosenboom and Andreas Schröder DLR, German Aerospace Center, 37073 Göttingen, Germany

27th AIAA Aerodynamic Measurement Technology and

Ground Testing Conference

28 June – 1 July 2010

Chicago, IL

An experimental comparison of different load tables

for balance calibration

Raymond Bergmann and Iwan Philipsen Instrumentation and Controls Department, German-Dutch

Wind Tunnels, Emmeloord, The Netherlands



28 June – 1 July 2010

Chicago, IL

New Topics in Coherent Anti-Stokes Raman

Scattering Gas-Phase Diagnostics: Femtosecond

Rotational CARS and Electric-Field Measurements

Sean P. Kearney and Justin R. Serrano Engineering Sciences Center, Sandia National Laboratories,

Albuquerque, NM 87185

Walter R. Lempert

Department of Mechanical Engineering, The Ohio State

University, Columbus, OH 43202 Edward V. Barnat

Physical, Chemical and Nano Sciences Center, Sandia

National Laboratories, Albuquerque, NM 87185



28 June – 1 July 2010

Chicago, IL

Comparison of Unsteady Pressure-Sensitive Paint

Measurement Techniques Shuo Fang, Samuel R. Long, Kevin J. Disotell, and

James W. Gregory

The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, 43210

Frank C. Semmelmayer and Robert W. Guyton Air Vehicles Directorate, US Air Force Research Laboratory,

Wright-Patterson AFB, OH, 45433



28 June – 1 July 2010

Chicago, IL

Comparative Measurements of Earth and Martian

Entry Environments in the NASA Langley HYMETS

Facility

Scott C. Splinter, Kim S. Bey, and Jeffrey G. Gragg NASA Langley Research Center, Hampton, VA 23681

Amy Brewer Analytical Services and Materials Inc., Hampton, VA 23666

49th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting

including the New Horizons Forum and Aerospace Exposition

4 - 7 January 2011

Orlando, Florida

A Comparison of the Measured and Computed Skin

Friction Distribution on the Common Research

Model

Gregory G. Zilliac, Thomas H. Pulliam, Henry Lee,

Maureen Delgado and Nettie Halcomb NASA Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, CA 94035

Melissa B. Rivers NASA Langley Research Center, Hampton, VA 23681

Jordan Zerr Wichita State University, Wichita, KS 67260



4 - 7 January 2011

Orlando, Florida

Comparison of Resource Requirements for a Wind

Tunnel Test Designed with Conventional vs. Modern

Design of Experiments Methods

Richard DeLoach and John R. Micol NASA Langley Research Center, Hampton, Virginia, 23681



4 - 7 January 2011

Orlando, Florida

2012

Jan 9-12: 50th

AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting and

Exhibit, Nashville, TN

June 25-28: 42nd

AIAA Fluid Dynamics Conference

and Exhibit, New Orleans, LA



Jennifer Allred NASA White Sands 575-524-5316 [email protected]

Wendell Baker Lockheed Martin Aeronautics 817-777-8781 [email protected]

Dale Belter Boeing 206-662-7355 [email protected]

Raymond Bergmann DNW 31 527 24 8532 [email protected]

Guy Boyet ONERA +33-1-46-73-41-14 [email protected]

Steven Buchholz NASA Ames Research Center (650) 604-3519 [email protected]

Victor Canacci Jacobs Sverdrup, GRC 216-433-6222 [email protected]

Ray Castner NASA Glenn Research Center 216-433-5657 [email protected]

Bradley Crawford NASA Langley Research Center 757-864-4549 [email protected]

Bradley DeBlauw UIUC (815) 871-2785 [email protected]

Steven Dunn Jacobs Technology, Inc., ROME Group 757-864-1116 [email protected]

Daniel Ehrlich The Aerospace Corporation 310-336-9249 [email protected]

Amber Favaregh ViGYAN, Inc. 757-864-9397 [email protected]

Sivaram Gogineni Spectral Energies 937-266-9570 [email protected]

Robert Guyton AFRL/RBAX 937-255-4201 [email protected]

Joan Hoopes Orbital Technologies Corporation 608-229-2773 [email protected]

Jerry Kegelman NASA Langley Research Center 757-864-8022 [email protected] Ahmad Farid Khorrami California Institute of Technology 626-395-4795 [email protected]

Konstantinos Kontis The University of Manchester 44-161-3065751 [email protected]

Oliver Leembruggen Jacobs - WPAFB 937-255-2691 [email protected]

Frank Lu UT - Arlington 817-272-2083 [email protected]

Stewart Lumb Boeing Huntington Beach 714-421-1724 [email protected]

Ed Marquart Raytheon Missile Systems 520-545-7879 [email protected]

Bryon Maynard NASA Stennis Space Center 228-688-2619 [email protected]

Scott Meyer Purdue University 765-496-1772 [email protected]

Banjamin Mills Aerospace Testing Alliance, AEDC (931) 454-3345 [email protected]

King Molder McKinley Climatic Lab, Eglin AFB 850-882-4383 [email protected]

Shinji Nagai Japan Aerospace eXploration Agency 81-50-3362-5144 [email protected]

Joseph Norris AEDC White Oak 301-394-6430 [email protected]

Roman Paryz NASA Langley 757-864-7576 [email protected]

Joe Patrick Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Co. 770-494-4158 [email protected]

Ray Rhew NASA Langley 757-864-4705 [email protected]

Dieter Schimanski ETW +49-2203-609154 [email protected]

Stephanie Simerly NASA Glenn Research Center (216) 433-6772 [email protected]

Tony Skaff Sierra Lobo Inc 419-499-9653 ext 103 [email protected]

Justin Smith Sandia National Laboratories 505-845-1134 [email protected]

Johannes van Aken Jacobs Technology, Inc. 650-604-6668 [email protected]

David Van Every Aiolos 416-674-3017 x248 [email protected]

Doyle Veazey ATA 931-454-6704 [email protected]

Vincenzo Verrelli Alliant Tech Systems, GASL, (631) 737-6100 [email protected]

Thomas Wayman Gulfstream Aerospace 912-965-6787 [email protected]

Julien Weiss University of Quebec +1 (514) 396-8886 [email protected]

Eugene Richard White ViGYAN, Inc. 757-865-1400 x202 [email protected]

Curtis Wilson US-Army ARDEC, Picatinny Arsenal 973-724-5862 [email protected]

David Wishart Pratt & Whitney Rocketdyne Space Propulsion 561-796-8438 [email protected]

Michael Wrenn ATA 931-454-7261 [email protected]

GTTC Officers

Chair: Joe Patrick Vice Chair: Ray Castner Secretary: Steve Dunn

AIAA Ground Test Technical Committee Membership














































Ground Testing Technical Committee GTTC Newsletter July 2011

Documents

Transcript of Ground Testing Technical Committee GTTC Newsletter July 2011