Rev 4/2/15 Document Review Criteria for the “Future of Ground Testing” Working Group Draft by Dunn, 4/2/15 I. The focus of this report is ground testing. We will include information on flight testing as it is included in our reference material. We may need an additional effort to beef up the FT info. This is organized in a gap analysis structure: future vision, current state, opportunities and challenges (including “grand challenges”) The first part of this document lists the criteria for review. Please scan these prior to reviewing the paper. This is intended to show the intent of the type of info to be documented. The second part of this document lists topic areas. Please add your comments to each, as applicable. Write as much or as little as you want; we will be combining inputs for each paper. We really want to capture the author’s intent, add anything additional that you feel is important that is not captured by these topic areas. Vision for Experimental Fluid Dynamics – Ground (and Flight, as mentioned) Testing a. Expected/Projected Needs i. Military 1. Fixed wing 2. Rotorcraft 3. UAV/Missile 4. Other ii. Commercial 1. Fixed wing 2. Rotorcraft iii. General Aviation iv. Space transportation delivery and return systems v. Fundamental research b. Capabilities i. Mission-related performance requirements ii. Degree/Mix of Work Done by EFD or CFD iii. Ownership/Stewards and Cost Models iv. Operational Models c. Integration i. Risk Management during Development 1. EFD/CFD tool selection 2. EFD Quality versus Cost 3. CFD Quality versus Cost 4. Tool Interfacing 5. “Good Enough” for ii. Efficient, Cost-effective d. Grand Challenge Problems 1 Rev 4/2/15 II. Current State of EFD a. Performance/Benchmark i. Fundamental Research, Elemental and System ii. Design 1. Conceptual Design 2. Preliminary/Detailed Design 3. Product Validation and Certification b. Capabilities i. Mission area(s) Performance Availability 1. Physical condition a. Good or better condition b. Past design life c. Issues and at risk 2. Capability sustainment efficacy (maintenance, investments, skill management, operations and maintenance processes, budgets and business processes) 3. Improvement and modernization alignment with future market needs 4. Customer focus (for all customers ii. Staffing and Knowledge Management c. Integration i. Computational methods 1. Maturation of computational processes 2. How GT techniques and processes must evolve to support integration ii. Support to flight testing iii. Measurement and instrumentation technologies maturation, including teaming to define needs to measurement developers and producers (again, integrated with CFD and flight test) iv. Government and industry development, proprietary versus open source III. EFD/Ground Testing Technology Gaps and Impediments a. [Note: This is likely a work product from assessing the first two sections. Included to capture anything already identified in the references.] IV. Technology Development Plan a. [Address the gaps] Additional Considerations There will be additional info that doesn’t fit into the above categories and we still need to capture that and then figure out how it fits into our paper. The following is a start at some of this potential info. V. Internal and External Environments a. Interdependencies within the RDT&E process and risks associated with potential loss of GT capabilities 2 Rev 4/2/15 b. b. c. d. e. i. Example: Accepting higher risk by not understanding product performance such that defects appear late in the RDT&E life cycle -- very costly to fix late Facility owner needs and issues i. Mission requirements and priorities ii. Condition of facilities iii. Capability sustainment efficacy (maintenance, investments, skill management, operations and maintenance processes, budgets and business processes iv. Improvement and modernization alignment with future market needs v. Customer focus/service Producer risk management needs and issues i. [Definition note: risk management is the definition of hazards, the probability a hazard will happen, the potential severity/impact when it happens, an initial risk level assessment, development and application of specific mitigators to a high risk hazard, and a reassessment of risk with mitigators in place. Process continues until hazards are well understood and risk levels have been mitigated down to acceptable levels.] ii. Always a trade to define GT and CFD requirements to drive risk down for specific hazards iii. CFD mostly requires validation (typically via GT or FT) iv. GT and CFD also used to define some hazards Economic impacts i. United States, EU and Great Britain, Japan ii. Breakouts based on GDP, jobs, net imports/exports iii. Technology spin-offs, estimate of additional positive impact on GDP Education impact (STEM support, Environmental headwinds and support (in addition to cited above, add geopolitical considerations, overall economic indicators, national and international politics (regulations/laws, taxation, market support or not, more) VI. Needs and Capabilities a. Computational methods i. Code validation ii. Interactive development b. Flight testing investigations c. In service product anomaly investigations d. Measurement and instrumentation technologies development e. Role in RDT&E process, at each stage; percent and relative importance of knowledge gained at each stage; degree of risk identified and managed at each stage for different kinds of systems at different levels of maturation f. Market environment, growing, stagnant/mature, declining, cyclical i. Low/subsonic speed ii. Transonic speed iii. Supersonic speed iv. Hypersonic speed 3 Rev 4/2/15 Document Review Form for Capturing Information from Selected GT References References and reviewers were identified at the SciTech meeting. Each reviewer should use this form – hand or type written – to capture info as a document is reviewed. Send completed reviews to Steve Dunn at steven.c.dunn@nasa.gov. Reviewer: ____________________________________ Reference Document Title: _________________________________________________________ Date of Review: ________________ Please fill in each topic area, as applicable (add space as needed): I. Vision for Experimental Fluid Dynamics – Ground (and Flight, as mentioned) Testing a. List/describe future technologies/configurations in terms of Expected/Projected Needs b. What capabilities will be needed and how will they need to work and be managed? c. Integration of CFD and Ground/Flight Testing (includes risk management during research and product development) d. Grand Challenge Problems 4 Rev 4/2/15 II. Current State of EFD a. Performance/Benchmark – types of capabilities/test techniques, where it works best, best practices, how do we know b. Capabilities i. Mission area(s) Performance Availability (strengths and weaknesses associated with condition, investments, capability sustainment, reliability, customer focus/satisfaction) ii. Staffing and knowledge management c. Integration i. Computational methods 1. Maturation of computational processes 2. How GT techniques and processes must evolve to support integration 5 Rev 4/2/15 ii. Support to flight testing iii. Measurement and instrumentation technologies maturation, including teaming to define needs to measurement developers and producers (again, integrated with CFD and flight test) iv. Government and industry development, proprietary versus open source III. EFD/Ground Testing Technology Gaps and Impediments a. [Note: This is likely a work product from assessing the first two sections. Included to capture anything already identified in the references.] 6 Rev 4/2/15 IV. Technology Development Plan a. [Address the gaps – include anything already identified in the references.] Additional Considerations There will be additional info that doesn’t fit into the above categories and we still need to capture that and then figure out how it fits into our paper. The following is a start at some of this potential info. V. Internal and External Environments VII. Needs and Capabilities (not covered above) 7