Materials subject to cyclic loading have been studied extensively and experimentally determined comparisons of stress to number of cycles are used to estimate fatigue life under various loading scenarios. Fatigue data are traditionally presented in the form of S-N curves. Normally, S-N data are derived from cyclic loading but the S-N results are also applicable to random vibration loading and, to some extent, shock. This paper presents an alternate presentation of fatigue data in terms of input energy and number of cycles to failure. In conjunction with this study, a series of shock tests was conducted on 3D printed cantilever beams using a 6-DOF shaker table. All of the beams were tested to failure at shock levels in the low-cycle fatigue regime. From these data, a nominal fatigue curve in terms of input energy and number of shocks to failure was generated and compared with the theoretical developments.
The relationship between the damage potential of a series of relatively low level shocks and a single high level shock that causes severe damage is complex and depends on many factors. Shock Response Spectra are the standard for describing mechanical shock events for aerospace vehicles, but are only applicable to single shocks. Energy response spectra are applicable to multiple shock events. This paper describes the results of an initial study that sought to gain insight into how energy response spectra of low amplitude shocks relate to energy response spectra of a high amplitude shock in which the component of interest fails. The study showed that maximum energy spectra of low level shocks cannot simply be summed to estimate the energy response spectra of a high level, failure causing single shock. A power law relationship between the energy spectra of a low amplitude shock and the energy spectra of the high amplitude shock was postulated. A range of values of the exponent was empirically determined from test data and found to be consistent with the values typically used in high-cycle fatigue S-N curves.
Before a spacecraft can be considered for launch, it must first survive environmental testing that simulates the launch environment. Typically, these simulations include vibration testing performed using an electro-dynamic shaker. For some spacecraft however, acoustic excitation may provide a more severe loading environment than base shaker excitation. Because this was the case for a Sandia Flight System, it was necessary to perform an acoustic test prior to launch in order to verify survival due to an acoustic environment. Typically, acoustic tests are performed in acoustic chambers, but because of scheduling, transportation, and cleanliness concerns, this was not possible. Instead, the test was performed as a direct field acoustic test (DFAT). This type of test consists of surrounding a test article with a wall of speakers and controlling the acoustic input using control microphones placed around the test item, with a closed-loop control system. Obtaining the desired acoustic input environment - proto-flight random noise input with an overall sound pressure level (OASPL) of 146.7 dB-with this technique presented a challenge due to several factors. An acoustic profile with this high OASPL had not knowingly been obtained using the DFAT technique prior to this test. In addition, the test was performed in a high-bay, where floor space and existing equipment constrained the speaker circle diameter. And finally, the Flight System had to be tested without contamination of the unit, which required a contamination bag enclosure of the test unit. This paper describes in detail the logistics, challenges, and results encountered while performing a high-OASPL, direct-field acoustic test on a contamination-sensitive Flight System in a high-bay environment.