NASA/TM2012-217271

Simulation of a Cold Gas Thruster

System and Test Data Correlation
Daniel M. Hauser and Frank D. Quinn
Glenn Research Center, Cleveland, Ohio

February 2012

AIAA20115769

NASA STI Program . . . in Profile

Since its founding, NASA has been dedicated to the

advancement of aeronautics and space science. The
NASA Scientific and Technical Information (STI)
program plays a key part in helping NASA maintain
this important role.
The NASA STI Program operates under the auspices
of the Agency Chief Information Officer. It collects,
organizes, provides for archiving, and disseminates
NASAs STI. The NASA STI program provides access
to the NASA Aeronautics and Space Database and
its public interface, the NASA Technical Reports
Server, thus providing one of the largest collections
of aeronautical and space science STI in the world.
Results are published in both non-NASA channels
and by NASA in the NASA STI Report Series, which
includes the following report types:

TECHNICAL PUBLICATION. Reports of
completed research or a major significant phase
of research that present the results of NASA
programs and include extensive data or theoretical
analysis. Includes compilations of significant
scientific and technical data and information
deemed to be of continuing reference value.
NASA counterpart of peer-reviewed formal
professional papers but has less stringent
limitations on manuscript length and extent of
graphic presentations.

TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM. Scientific
and technical findings that are preliminary or
of specialized interest, e.g., quick release
reports, working papers, and bibliographies that
contain minimal annotation. Does not contain
extensive analysis.

CONTRACTOR REPORT. Scientific and
technical findings by NASA-sponsored
contractors and grantees.

CONFERENCE PUBLICATION. Collected

papers from scientific and technical
conferences, symposia, seminars, or other
meetings sponsored or cosponsored by NASA.
SPECIAL PUBLICATION. Scientific,
technical, or historical information from
NASA programs, projects, and missions, often
concerned with subjects having substantial
public interest.
TECHNICAL TRANSLATION. Englishlanguage translations of foreign scientific and
technical material pertinent to NASAs mission.

Specialized services also include creating custom

thesauri, building customized databases, organizing
and publishing research results.
For more information about the NASA STI
program, see the following:

Access the NASA STI program home page at

http://www.sti.nasa.gov
E-mail your question via the Internet to help@
sti.nasa.gov
Fax your question to the NASA STI Help Desk
at 4437575803
Telephone the NASA STI Help Desk at
4437575802
Write to:
NASA Center for AeroSpace Information (CASI)
7115 Standard Drive
Hanover, MD 210761320

NASA/TM2012-217271

Simulation of a Cold Gas Thruster

System and Test Data Correlation
Daniel M. Hauser and Frank D. Quinn
Glenn Research Center, Cleveland, Ohio

Prepared for the

47th Joint Propulsion Conference and Exhibit
cosponsored by the AIAA, ASME, SAE, and ASEE
San Diego, California, July 31August 3, 2011

National Aeronautics and

Space Administration
Glenn Research Center
Cleveland, Ohio 44135

February 2012

AIAA20115769

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank Brian Reed of the NASA Glenn Research Centers Propulsion Branch for providing access to the
AA-1 system design and test data. The authors would also like to acknowledge Steve Grasl, Antony Skaff, Terry Hui and the rest
of the staff at Sierra Lobo, Inc., of Milan, Ohio, who integrated and conducting the testing of the AA-1 developmental hardware.

This report contains preliminary findings,

subject to revision as analysis proceeds.

Trade names and trademarks are used in this report for identification
only. Their usage does not constitute an official endorsement,
either expressed or implied, by the National Aeronautics and
Space Administration.
Level of Review: This material has been technically reviewed by technical management.

Available from
NASA Center for Aerospace Information
7115 Standard Drive
Hanover, MD 210761320

National Technical Information Service

5301 Shawnee Road
Alexandria, VA 22312

Available electronically at http://www.sti.nasa.gov

Simulation of a Cold Gas Thruster System

and Test Data Correlation
Daniel M. Hauser and Frank D. Quinn
National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Glenn Research Center
Cleveland, Ohio 44135

Abstract
During developmental testing of the Ascent Abort 1 (AA-1) cold gas thruster system, unexpected
behavior was detected. Upon further review the design as it existed may not have met the requirements.
To determine the best approach for modifying the design, the system was modeled with a dynamic fluid
analysis tool (EASY5). The system model consisted of the nitrogen storage tank, pressure regulator,
thruster valve, nozzle, and the associated interconnecting line lengths. The regulator and thruster valves
were modeled using a combination of the fluid and mechanical modules available in EASY5. The
simulation results were then compared against actual system test data. The simulation results exhibited
behaviors similar to the test results, such as the pressure regulators response to thruster firings. Potential
design solutions were investigated using the analytical model parameters, including increasing the volume
downstream of the regulator and increasing the orifice area. Both were shown to improve the regulator
response.

1.0

Introduction and Background

The Ascent Abort 1 (AA-1) test vehicle was part of the Orion flight test program conceived of to
verify the launch abort system (LAS). The AA-1 flight was to demonstrate the LAS performance during
abort at maximum dynamic pressure. The AA-1 Reaction Control System (RCS) was to be used to
provide roll control to the boilerplate Crew Module (CM) during descent, to determine the response of the
main parachutes to torque. The AA-1 RCS was also to demonstrate a roll control algorithm to position the
CM for landing and provide rate damping as needed. The AA-1 RCS was designed to use non-flight
components with no heritage to the production vehicle. A developmental test was performed on the RCS
system in February 2010. During the testing, the regulator experienced significant pressure undershoot
and overshoot when the thruster valve was cycled open and closed. Un-commanded closure of the thruster
valve was detected and attributed to the pressure undershoot. The closing time of the thruster valve
appeared to be pulse length dependent.

2.0

AA-1 Reaction Control System Developmental Test

A developmental test of the AA-1 RCS cold gas system was constructed to demonstrate performance
of the design. A simplified schematic of the flight RCS system can be seen in Figure 1. The black lines
indicate the hardware that was included in the developmental test. The test system consisted of four
nitrogen propellant tanks pressurized to 3600 psig for a total of 400 lb of nitrogen. A regulator was used
to reduce the pressure to 600 psig. Further downstream was a relief valve set at 900 psig, and the thruster
valve with an attached nozzle, designed to generate 150 lb thrust at sea level. The thruster valve was a
solenoid pilot operated valve. The piloted valve was configured in a manner that requires a differential
pressure across the valve for it to stay open. The system was designed with the expectation that the
thruster valve could be commanded open and closed for various pulse lengths. Not shown on the
schematic is the tank isolation valve and instrumentation. Testing consisted of filling, nominal and
emergency blow down operations.

NASA/TM2012-217271

Figure 1.AA-1 RCS Schematic. Black lines represent hardware included in developmental test.

During the testing of nominal operations the system experienced a large drop and rise in regulator
outlet pressure when the thruster valve was opened and closed. In some instances the thruster valve was
also shown to close momentarily after the dip in pressure. Another finding was that the valve opening and
closing times seemed to be dependent on the thruster valve pulse length. To illustrate the behavior two
plots of the test data are presented in Figures 2 and 3.
Figure 2 shows two short (400 ms) pulses followed by one longer pulse (2500 ms). The plots show
the regulator inlet and outlet pressure, the command signal to the thruster valve and thruster chamber
pressure. Notice that the thruster valve response time for opening is consistent for the three pulses shown.
However, the valve closure is nearly immediate for the long pulse whereas it is significantly longer for the
two short pulses. Notice that when the regulator outlet overshoot reaches the 1000 psi level the relief
valve opens and the pressure drops to near the set point. These characteristics are common throughout the
data collected.
As the regulator inlet pressure decreased the response deteriorated further as shown in Figure 3.
Shown is a 1500 ms commanded pulse followed by a series of 400 ms pulses separated by 100 ms.
During the first pulse shown in Figure 3 the valve opens and closes with similar timing as the long pulses
shown in Figure 2. However the valve momentarily closes immediately after opening as determined by
the thruster chamber pressure. Also notice that the thruster valve does not respond to the short pulse
commands until the third closing command.

NASA/TM2012-217271

Figure 2.AA-1 Developmental Test Results. Typical behavior with short and long pulses

Figure 3.AA-1 Developmental Test Results Examples of erratic behavior at lower supply pressures.

NASA/TM2012-217271

Figure 4.Overall system model.

3.0

Modeling Approach

In response to the unexpected results exhibited by the system during testing, a dynamic model of the
system was created with the following goals:

Determine the cause of the regulator pressure undershoot and overshoot

Determine the cause of the thruster valve closing during the thruster valve firings
Determine the cause of the irregular closing times of the thruster valve
Determine the effectiveness of different design solutions to normalize operation.

The software tool used to model the system was MSC EASY5, a dynamic fluid/mechanical systems
modeler. The majority of the components used in the model were built using components in the Gas
Dynamics Library (GD) of the EASY5 modeling tool. An overall view of the model can be seen below in
Figure 4. The regulator and thruster valve were modeled using a mix of fluid and mechanical components
as explained in the following sections. The regulator and thruster valve supply lines included a transient
momentum pipe and a generic loss component to account for the losses associated with the bends and
fittings. The thruster nozzle was modeled with a generic EASY5 nozzle component that calculates the
mass flow rate based on the upstream pressure and temperature.

3.1

Regulator Model

The regulator used in the AA-1 test is a direct acting regulator loaded with a fixed spring. The
pressure in the sense volume, connected to the downstream pressure, acts against the spring to close the
poppet against its seat as it approaches the set pressure. A schematic representation of the functional
components in the regulator can be seen in Figure 5. The pressure forces acting on the poppet were
assumed to be balanced and therefore cancelled each other out.
Previous regulator studies in the literature accounted for an additional flow force acting on the
regulator poppet (Refs. 1, 2, and 3). The flow force accounts for the uneven pressure acting on the
different areas of the poppet. The flow force is typically found by measuring the force at various inlet
pressures and poppet positions during a test. Unfortunately, the regulator poppet geometry used in the two
previous studies was different than the geometry of the poppet being used in this study. It was decided not
to include a flow force in the model since its application would have been arbitrary and would have no
basis for its determination.

NASA/TM2012-217271

Poppet
Valve Seat

Flow

Nomenclature
P = pressure
Subscripts
u = upstream
s = sensing volume
d = downstream

Pu
Sense
Orifice

Pd

Pd

Sense
Volume

Flow

PS

Figure 5.Regulator schematic.

Figure 6.Regulator model.

The EASY5 model of the regulator can be seen in Figure 6. A single acting cylinder was used to
model the variable volume of the sense chamber and the poppet position. The regulator flow resistance
was modeled with the variable orifice component. The orifice area is based on the poppet position and
determined using a look-up table. The volume and piston areas of the regulator were determined from
drawings supplied by the regulator manufacturer. An orifice was used to model the complicated flow
passage connecting the sense volume to the regulator outlet. Since the orifice area was not known, it was
varied within the model until the undershoot and overshoot behavior approximated the test results
The regulator poppet force balance equation is shown below in the following equation.

NASA/TM2012-217271

m p x p = Fs K s x p + Fs, p f s f d x p
Where xp , xp , xp is the regulator poppet acceleration, velocity, and position respectively, mp is the poppet
mass, Fs is the force acting on the sensing area due to the pressure in the sensing volume. Ks and Fs,p are
the spring rate and spring preload, fs and fd are the static and dynamic friction coefficients.
The static friction and dynamic friction coefficients were varied in the simulation model and were not
shown to have a significant effect on the response as most of the damping is a result of the pneumatic
process occurring in the regulator (Ref. 2).

3.2

Thruster Valve Model

The normally closed thruster valve uses upstream pressure in the sensing volume in conjunction with
a spring to hold the poppet closed. The closing force on the poppet is opposed by main valve inlet and
outlet pressures acting on the poppet. A small direct acting solenoid valve controls a path between the
sensing volume and the valve outlet. Similarly a path between the valve inlet and the sensing volume is
controlled by a fixed sense orifice. When the solenoid valve is initially opened the gas leaves the sense
volume reducing the closing force sufficiently for the valve to open. When the solenoid valve is closed,
the pressure in the sense volume increases closing the poppet. A schematic of the thruster valve can be
seen in Figure 7.
The EASY5 model of the thruster valve can be seen in Figure 8. Similar to the regulator the poppet
was modeled by a single acting cylinder with a spring. In this case, the spring acts to extend piston. Gain
factors representing the poppet area acted upon were applied to the inlet and outlet pressures with the
resulting forces being summed and applied to the cylinder.
The main valve was modeled using a variable area orifice where the effective flow area was
determined using the poppet position and a look-up table. Flow into and out of the valve was modeled by
orifices. The solenoid orifice area was provided by a time dependent lookup table to simulate operating
sequences. The sensing volume and pressure areas were determined from drawings supplied by the
thruster valve vender.

AS

Sense
Orifice

Flow

Poppet
Au
Pu

Nomenclature
A = area
P = pressure

PS

Ad

Valve Seat

Pd

Subscripts
u = upstream
s = sensing volume
d = downstream
(Chamber Pressure)

Figure 7.Thruster valve schematic.

NASA/TM2012-217271

Pilot Solenoid
Valve

Figure 8.Thruster valve model.

The upstream and downstream pressure forces were included in the force acting on the poppet. The
poppet acceleration can then be calculated through the following equation after accounting for the static
and dynamic friction as well as the inertia or poppet mass.
x p =

Fd + Fu Fs K s x p + Fs, p f s f d x p
mp

Where Fd, Fu, and Fs are the pressure forces acting on the downstream, upstream and sense pressure areas,
xp , xp , xp are the valve poppet acceleration, velocity, and position respectively, mp is the poppet mass, Ks
and Fs,p are the spring rate and spring preload fs and fd are the static and dynamic friction coefficients.

4.0

Simulation Results

Simulations were run in EASY5 with short segments of thruster firing profiles conducted during
testing. The thruster valve was commanded open (2.0 sec) and closed (3.57 sec) in the simulation by
adjusting the pilot valve orifice area via the time based look-up table. A comparison of the simulated
regulator outlet pressure with the test data can be seen in Figure 9. The simulation is of a long thruster
firing of 1.6 sec. The regulator outlet pressure experiences a large undershoot when the thruster valve is
opened. Similar behavior is seen as the thruster valve is commanded closed, the downstream pressure
overshoots to a pressure close to or above the relief valve set pressure. It should be noted that the relief

NASA/TM2012-217271

valve is not part of the model. The measured steady state pressure at the high flow rate is less than the
steady state pressure in the simulation. One explanation for this difference is due to the flow force not
being included in the model. As discussed previously in Section 3.0 the flow force can become significant
and lower or raise the regulator steady state outlet pressure.
A plot of the simulation thruster chamber pressure (Pd) is shown against the measured chamber
pressure during tests in Figure 10. The chamber pressure increases after the valve is opened but then
decreases tracking the regulator outlet pressure. The thruster pressure drops momentarily to 14.7 psia
indicating that the valve closes. The valve is commanded closed at 3.57 sec and closes within 40 ms. The
measured steady state pressure at the high flow rate is less than the simulated pressure because the model
was tuned to approximate both the undershoot and overshoot sacrificing the steady state accuracy.
A plot of the poppet positions of both the regulator and the thruster valve relative to each other is can
be seen in Figure 11. Notice that the thruster valve opens and closes before the regulator poppet starts to
move. This suggest that the response time of the regulator needs to be improved or the gas stored
downstream of the regulator needs to be increased enough to allow the regulator extra time to react before
the thruster valve closes. A plot of the thruster valve inlet, outlet and sense pressures can be seen in
Figure 12. Note that at two points in time the flow reverses through the pilot valve, as determined by the
downstream pressure being higher than the sense pressure. This occurs when the thruster valve first
opens, at the 2.1 and 2.27 sec on the timeline.

1100
Measured Test Data

1000

Simulation Results

900

Regulator Outlet Pressure (PSIA)

Regulator overshoots after

thruster valve is closed

800
700
600
500
Regulator outlet pressure droops
after thruster valve is opened

400
300
200
2

2.2

2.4

2.6

2.8

3.2

3.4

3.6

Time, (seconds)
Figure 9.Regulator outlet pressure, test versus simulation.

NASA/TM2012-217271

3.8

700

600

Thruster Pressure (PSIA)

500

400
Measured Test Data
300

Simulation Results

200

100
Valve closes due to regulator
pressure droop
0
2

2.2

2.4

2.6

2.8

3.2

3.4

3.6

3.8

0.2

0.02

Thruster Valve Position

Regulator Position

0.16

0.016

0.12

0.012

0.08

0.008

0.04

0.004

2.05

2.1

2.15 2.2 2.25

Time, (seconds)

2.3

2.35

2.4

Regulator Position (inches)

Thruster Position (inches)

Time, (seconds)
Figure 10.Thruster chamber pressure, test versus simulation.

Pressure (PSIA)

Figure 11.Regulator and valve poppet position during thruster firings.

800
700
600
500
400
300
200
100
0

Thruster Valve Inlet(Pu)

Thruster Valve Outlet(Pd)
Thruster Valve Sensing Volume(Ps)

2.05

2.1

2.15 2.2 2.25

Time, (seconds)

2.3

2.35

2.4

Figure 12.Valve inlet, outlet, and sensing pressure during thruster firings.

NASA/TM2012-217271

5.0

Proposed Design Solutions

Two potential design solutions to reduce the regulator undershoot/overshoot and resulting thruster
valve closing were investigated with the EASY5 system model. One was increasing the volume
downstream of the regulator perhaps by adding an accumulator. Another approach was to decrease the
flow resistance between the regulator sense volume and regulator outlet. These design solutions were
easily investigated using the EASY5 model by increasing the node volume downstream of the regulator
and increasing the diameter of the orifice used to model the flow resistance into the sense volume of the
regulator.
The system volume downstream of the regulator was varied in the simulation to see what impact it had
on the pressure undershoot/overshoot, and resulting thruster valve performance. The as tested volume of
110 in3 was run along with volumes of 1000, 2000, and 5000 in3. A plot showing the regulator outlet
pressure and thruster valve outlet pressure for the various downstream volumes can be seen in Figures 13
and 14 respectively. As volume increased the regulator outlet undershoot and overshoot pressure also
decreased resulting in increasing acceptable thruster pulses. The practical limitations into how much
volume can be added to the system due to weight and volume constraints were not determined.
The effect of changing the regulator sense orifice was accomplished by varying the modeled orifice
diameter. The sense orifice resistance was varied by changing the orifice diameter from the original
0.0052 in. to values of 0.008, 0.01 and 0.02 in. Figures 15 and 16 show the regulator outlet pressure and
thruster valve outlet pressure for the various orifice diameters used in the simulation.
As the orifice diameter increased the regulator response time decreased. The faster response time and
corresponding reduction in regulator pressure undershoot resulted in satisfactory thrust impulses. The
increased volume approach effectively delayed the rate at which the pressure dropped allowing regulator
to recover before the drop in pressure adversely impacted the thruster valve performance. The larger
orifice did nothing to change the rate of pressure drop, but did allow the regulator to respond quickly
enough to provide satisfactory thruster performance.
1100

110 cubic inch

1000 cubic inch
2000 cubic inch
5000 cubic inch

Regulator Outlet Pressure (PSIA)

1000
900
800
700
600
500
400
300
200
2

2.2

2.4

2.6

2.8

3.2

Time (seconds)
Figure 13.Regulator outlet pressure.

NASA/TM2012-217271

10

3.4

3.6

3.8

700

Thruster Pressure (PSIA)

600

500

400

110 cubic inch

1000 cubic inch
2000 cubic inch
5000 cubic inch

300

200

100

0
2

2.2

2.4

2.6

2.8

3.2

3.4

3.6

3.8

3.6

3.8

Time (seconds)
Figure 14.Thruster valve outlet pressure.

1100

0.0052 inch diameter

0.008 inch diameter
0.01 inch diameter
0.02 inch diameter

Regulator Outlet Pressure (PSIA)

1000
900
800
700
600
500
400
300
200
2

2.2

2.4

2.6

2.8

3.2

3.4

Time (seconds)
Figure 15.Regulator outlet pressure.

NASA/TM2012-217271

11

700

Thruster Pressure (PSIA)

600

500

400

0.0052 inch diameter

0.008 inch diameter
0.01 inch diameter
0.02 inch diameter

300

200

100

0
2

2.2

2.4

2.6

2.8

3.2

3.4

3.6

3.8

Time (seconds)
Figure 16.Thruster valve outlet pressure.

6.0

Conclusion

The value of system level developmental testing is illustrated by this investigation of the test results.
Models generated using EASY5 provide insight to the component interaction and system level
performance. The simulation of the cold gas thruster system compared well with the test data. The
fluid/mechanical model of the thruster valve contained enough fidelity to predict the momentarily closing
of the valve as a result of the regulator pressure undershoot. The regulator pressure undershoot was
determined to be the primary cause of the momentarily closing of the thruster valve. The simulation
provided an ideal tool for investigating design modifications for improved performance. The simulation
predicted that increasing the regulator downstream volume and/or decreasing the regulator sense flow
restriction would reduce the regulator outlet pressure undershoot enough to prevent the momentarily
closing of the thruster valve.

References
1. Dustin, M.O., Analog Computer Study of Design Parameter Effects on the Stability of a DirectActing Gas Pressure Regulator, NASA TN D-6267, 1971.
2. Nabi, A., Wacholder, E., Dayan, J., Dynamic Model for a Dome-Loaded Pressure Regulator, Trans.
ASME, 122, 2000, p.290.
3. Andersen B. W., The Analysis and Design of Pneumatic System, John Wiley and Sons, Inc, 1967.

NASA/TM2012-217271

12

Form Approved
OMB No. 0704-0188

REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE

The public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 1 hour per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the
data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this
burden, to Department of Defense, Washington Headquarters Services, Directorate for Information Operations and Reports (0704-0188), 1215 Jefferson Davis Highway, Suite 1204, Arlington, VA 22202-4302.
Respondents should be aware that notwithstanding any other provision of law, no person shall be subject to any penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information if it does not display a currently valid OMB
control number.
PLEASE DO NOT RETURN YOUR FORM TO THE ABOVE ADDRESS.

1. REPORT DATE (DD-MM-YYYY)

2. REPORT TYPE

01-02-2012

Technical Memorandum

3. DATES COVERED (From - To)

5a. CONTRACT NUMBER

4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE

Simulation of a Cold Gas Thruster System and Test Data Correlation

5b. GRANT NUMBER
5c. PROGRAM ELEMENT NUMBER
5d. PROJECT NUMBER

6. AUTHOR(S)

Hauser, Daniel, M.; Quinn, Frank, D.

5e. TASK NUMBER
5f. WORK UNIT NUMBER

WBS 644423.06.032.01.03
7. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES)

8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION
REPORT NUMBER

National Aeronautics and Space Administration

John H. Glenn Research Center at Lewis Field
Cleveland, Ohio 44135-3191

E-18027

9. SPONSORING/MONITORING AGENCY NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES)

10. SPONSORING/MONITOR'S
ACRONYM(S)

National Aeronautics and Space Administration

Washington, DC 20546-0001

NASA
11. SPONSORING/MONITORING
REPORT NUMBER

NASA/TM-2012-217271
12. DISTRIBUTION/AVAILABILITY STATEMENT

Unclassified-Unlimited
Subject Category: 34
Available electronically at http://www.sti.nasa.gov
This publication is available from the NASA Center for AeroSpace Information, 443-757-5802
13. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES

14. ABSTRACT

During developmental testing of the Ascent Abort 1 (AA-1) cold gas thruster system, unexpected behavior was detected. Upon further
review the design as it existed may not have met the requirements. To determine the best approach for modifying the design, the system was
modeled with a dynamic fluid analysis tool (EASY5). The system model consisted of the nitrogen storage tank, pressure regulator, thruster
valve, nozzle, and the associated interconnecting line lengths. The regulator and thruster valves were modeled using a combination of the
fluid and mechanical modules available in EASY5. The simulation results were then compared against actual system test data. The
simulation results exhibited behaviors similar to the test results, such as the pressure regulators response to thruster firings. Potential design
solutions were investigated using the analytical model parameters, including increasing the volume downstream of the regulator and
increasing the orifice area. Both were shown to improve the regulator response.
15. SUBJECT TERMS

Regulator; Valve; Simulation; Cold gas propulsion system

16. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF:
a. REPORT

b. ABSTRACT

17. LIMITATION OF
ABSTRACT
c. THIS
PAGE

UU

18. NUMBER
OF
PAGES

20

19a. NAME OF RESPONSIBLE PERSON

STI Help Desk (email:help@sti.nasa.gov)

19b. TELEPHONE NUMBER (include area code)

443-757-5802
Standard Form 298 (Rev. 8-98)
Prescribed by ANSI Std. Z39-18