SATPC0034169 Tab 07 SOW_Redacted.pdf

SoW: Developing a Physics-Informed Particle Impact Ignition Model for High-Pressure Oxidizing Environments – Year 2

Edgerton Career Development Professor of Aeronautics and Astronautics, MIT

1. Objective/Requirements The overall scope of the assessment is to develop an experimentally calibrated tool to predict a priori whether a given system is susceptible to catastrophic failures via particle impact (PI) based on expected operating conditions (gas temperature, pressure, concentration, flow rate), materials (composition, properties, particle features), and component geometry. This tool will accelerate design of new components, assessments of existing hardware, and dispositioning of anomalies. Calibration and validation of the model will require PI testing with in situ diagnostics and complementary simulations on subset of key engineering materials (IN718, M400, 316L, 6061, Ti64, Zr). The project outcome will be a predictive tool for assessing the risk of PI for idealized geometries (spherical particles) in realistic environments.

MIT will support all three of the assessment tasks.

Task 1: Assess particle/target interactions (coefficient of restitution, ignition, kindling) using instrumented particle impact rigs while systematically varying key parameters (materials, particle size, environment, target configuration).

• MIT will implement Laser-induced particle impact testing (LIPIT) inside a GOX pressure vessel to perform systematic PI experiments in which the following variables are independently adjusted: strike velocity, particle material, particle diameter, target material, angle of incidence, oxygen pressure, substrate temperature

• MIT will assess the impact behaviors (coefficient of restitution, penetration, particle ignition, kindling) as functions of these variables

• Materials of interest: IN718, M400, 316L, 6061, Ti64

• To assess particle ignition behaviors, MIT will launch different materials (IN718, M400, 316L, 6061, Ti64) at 2 inert targets with disparate mechanical properties – sapphire (hard), Ni200 (soft)

• To assess kindling behaviors, MIT will launch different materials at flammable targets (316L, IN718, 6061) over range of velocities and configurations.

Task 2: Determine key field variables (temperature, strain, stress) in particle impacts using Multiphysics finite element and hydrocode simulations validated through comparison with experimental measurements and observations.

• LIPIT + WSTF PI experiments will reveal trends in ignition behaviors for different material combinations and impact conditions.

• Particle/target combinations considered will be down-selected from experimental results.

• MIT will complement experiments with numerical modeling to determine whether particle ignition results from specific thermochemical or thermomechanical phenomena (e.g., incipient melting of particle or target, rupture of native oxide on particle, etc.)

• MIT will use experimentally-validated FEA (ABAQUS) + hydrocode (CTH) modeling tools to compute temperature, stress, strain fields in a single particle impact as a function of time.

• MIT will then use modeling tools (FACTSAGE, COMSOL) + theory to compute kindling of burning particle to target.

Task 3: Determine key field variables (temperature, strain, stress) in particle impacts using Multiphysics finite element and hydrocode simulations validated through comparison with experimental measurements and observations.

• MIT will investigate PI and kindling with multi-phase particulate. Work will use same tools as Task 2.

• MIT will advise on testing at NASA WSTF in support of modeling activities.

2. Characteristics, Scope, and Specs MIT shall perform the following duties:

o Provide general technical input during all team meetings o Provide input on particle impact failure modes and root causes o Review available test data o Provide input on test materials and methods to anchor models o Provide LIPIT testing as associated analysis o Develop predictive models o Review and provide inputs to assessment documentation including the

Stakeholder Briefing and Final Report.

o Visit test facility(ies) to support test design and verification (maximum of one trip each per year to either WSTF, LaRC, or MSFC) o Participate in weekly team meetings (1-2 hours per week) o Participate in Technical Interchange Meetings (1-2 days) o Participate in Stakeholder Briefing (1-2 hours)

3. Restrictions on Publishing MIT can publish data related to this assessment with the exception of proprietary data related to proprietary particle impact data and information that is restricted by International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR) and/or Export Administration Regulations (EAR). All documentation (e.g. manuscripts, presentations, etc.) resulting from this effort shall be reviewed (within 60 days of submission) by , , and , and approved for the presence of confidential or proprietary material prior to publication.

4. Place of Performance Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT gas turbine laboratory, MIT Institute for Solider Nanotechnologies, Cordero Lab)

5. Period of Performance Work shall be performed from authority to proceed through February 2025.

6. Schedule Task Description Start End

1.1 Laser-induced particle impact testing

1.1.1 Commissioning of GOX LIPIT rig 2/25/2024 3/24/2024

1.1.2 GOX LIPIT testing at MIT 2/25/2024 6/9/2024

1.1.3 Analysis of GOX LIPIT experiments 2/25/2024 7/23/2024

2.1 Numerical modeling of individual particle impacts

2.1.1 Review + analysis of WSTF test data 2/25/2024 10/25/2024

2.1.2 Simulate particle impact (LIPIT + PIT) 2/25/2024 11/15/2024

2.1.3 Simulate kindling behaviors (LIPIT + PIT) 2/25/2024 9/1/2024

3.1 Analysis of multi-phase particulate impact

3.1.1 Simulate impact + kindling of multi-phase particulate 2/25/2024 7/1/2024

7.

Pr oj ec t M ile st on es a nd D el iv er ab le s

M ile st on e

D es cr ip tio n

D el iv er ab le s D at e

Te ch ni ca l I nt er ch an ge M ee tin g #2

(W

ST

F)

R ec om m en da tio ns fo r f in al te st a pp ro ac h 3/

/2

M id -p oi nt

R ev ie w

(M

IT

R ev ie w M

IT

/W

ST

F te st p ro gr es s 7/

1/

C om pl et e

Ta sk

.1 ep or tin g on te st d at a in G

O X a tm os ph er e

7/

/2

C om pl et e Ta sk or tin g on m od el in g of

P I + k in dl in g

/1 5/

C om pl et e Ta sk or t o n an al ys is o f m ul ti-ph as e

PI

si m s 7/

1/

Te ch ni ca l I nt er ch an ge M ee tin g #2

(M

IT

R ep or t o n ex pe rim en ta l r es ul ts /p la n in te gr at ed m od el

/re co m m en da tio ns fo r w or k in o pt io n ye ar s

8/

/2

A nn ua l r ep or t

1.

St ak eh ol de r B rie fin g Sl id es

2.

A nn ua l r ep or t i np ut s

/1 /2

Test Data Reports shall include test conditions, configurations, and key results

Mid-point Review Slides shall be provided in powerpoint format per the NESC Assessment team template (to be provided by NASA). The slides shall include an update on progress of the models and usage plan and shall provide an overview of the accomplishments to-date, a description of remaining activities, and an estimated progress at completion of the effort.

Model drafts shall be described and/or demonstrated to the assessment team via Microsoft Teams in such a format as to be understood and reviewed by the NESC Assessment Team.

A Usage Plan draft shall be sent, in Microsoft Word format, to all NESC Assessment Team members for review.

Final Models shall be provided to the NESC Assessment Team for review and will be considered “Approved” with concurrence from

The Stakeholder Briefing is the final presentation for the work conducted under this assessment.

An overview of the models and usage plan shall be provided in powerpoint per the NESC Stakeholder Briefing template (to be provided by NASA) for inclusion in the compiled Stakeholder Briefing package.

The NESC Final Report is a word document intended to capture the details of an NESC Assessment. Final Reports Inputs shall be provided, in Microsoft Word per the NESC Final Report template (to be provided by NASA). Specific content of the report is to be determined during the assessment activity. At a minimum, inputs shall include details of the approach taken for each model, the results of the model, and a detailed description of model capabilities.