Search NASA⌕ Search

Engineering topics

Emily L Judd

Publications and source records attributed to Emily L Judd.

12 records
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2018

Mega-Drivers to Inform NASA Space Technology Strategic Planning

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Space Technology Mission Directorate (STMD) has been developing a new Strategic Framework to guide investment prioritization and communication of STMD strategic goals to stakeholders. STMD’s analysis of global trends identified four overarching drivers which are anticipated to shape the needs of civilian space research for years to come. These Mega-Drivers form the foundation of the Strategic Framework. The Increasing Access Mega-Driver reflects the increase in the availability of launch options, more capable propulsion systems, access to planetary surfaces, and the introduction of new platforms to enable exploration, science, and commercial activities. Accelerating Pace of Discovery reflects the exploration of more remote and challenging destinations, drives increased demand for improved abilities to communicate and process large datasets. The Democratization of Space reflects the broadening participation in the space industry, from governments to private investors to citizens. Growing Utilization of Space reflects space market diversification and growth. This paper will further describe the observable trends that inform each of these Mega Drivers, as well as the interrelationships between them within STMD’s new Strategic Framework.

Melanie L Grande↗
NASA NTRS2018

Strategic Framework for NASA’s Space Technology Mission Directorate

In October 2016, NASA’s Space Technology Mission Directorate (STMD) began adopting a new strategic framework that focuses investment prioritization and communication on impacts, outcomes, and challenges. The structure of the framework has been modeled after one successfully pioneered by NASA’s Aeronautics Research Mission Directorate over the past five years, incorporating lessons learned and changes where appropriate. The Framework is driven by two major factors: (a) dialogue with the community and (b) analysis of the overarching trends shaping the course of civilian space research. These factors are captured in the Framework as Mega-Drivers, which represent major axes of change within the space industry and are characterized by a collection of industry trends and projections. In response to these Mega-Drivers, STMD has developed its understanding of the vision for the future of civilian space relative to STMD space research, captured in five Strategic Thrusts that represent the major lines of investment within STMD’s portfolio. Within each of these Strategic Thrusts, multiple measurable, community-level goals have been established that STMD chooses to pursue as part of a joint effort across the community. STMD chose these goals based upon their potential impact, refers to them as Outcomes within the Framework. These outcomes are decomposed into the products and/or capabilities that will be delivered by STMD, represented in the framework as Technical Challenges. This paper will further describe the framework structure and the progress that has been in defining each of the above elements to date.

Kevin D Earle↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Parametric Cost Analysis of Refueling Options in Cis-Lunar Space

Over the next several years NASA intends to develop and maintain a sustained human presence in cis-lunar space and on the surface of the moon. The sustained lunar presence will then serve as a stepping stone to human Mars missions. To propel the spacecraft taking humans and cargo to and from the lunar surface and to and from Mars will require on the order of hundreds of tons of propellant. Expendable, one-time use refueling elements maybe more cost effective for smaller campaigns, but as the propellant requirement grows, so does the cost benefit of reusable systems. This paper will analyze the cost of several different architectures for delivering propellant to cislunar space to determine the conditions in which each architecture is likely to be more cost effective. The first architecture relies on expendable elements for propellant delivery while the second one reuses every element including launch vehicle stages. In addition to these two basic approaches, trades will analyze alterations to the architectures such as mission design, level of thermal control, and the incorporation of buses,tugs, and depots, each with different propellants, sizes, and reusability assumptions.

Paul D Friz↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Cost Breakeven Analysis of Lunar In-Situ Propellant Production for Human Missions to the Moon and Mars

NASA is preparing to return humans to the lunar surface as a first step to a human exploration campaign of Mars. Both a sustained lunar campaign and a campaign of missions to Mars will require tens to hundreds of tonnes of propellant. Although this propellant could be delivered from Earth, an alternative approach is to use the potentially vast quantities of lunar ice to enable in-situ propellant production on the lunar surface. This study evaluates the cost breakeven for using lunar-derived propellants, as opposed to those delivered from Earth, in support of an extended human exploration campaign with both a multi-year presence on the Moon as well as multiple crewed missions to Mars. In so doing, the value of lunar propellant production is considered in the context of future exploration priorities, addressing the question: over what range of human missions to the lunar surface and Mars does in-situ propellant production trade favorably with propellant delivery from Earth on the basis of cost? The results of this analysis show that the magnitude and duration of the lunar campaign, more so than the Mars campaign, drive the breakeven and that without long lifetime ISRU systems, with greater than 5 years of autonomous operation before replacement, the demand in cis-lunar space for a Mars campaign favors propellant delivery from Earth.

Christopher A Jones↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Integrated Trajectory, Habitat, and Logistics Analysis and Trade Study for Human Mars Missions

Environmental Control and Life Support System (ECLSS) architecture selection has profound implications for mission cost and mass extending far beyond the ECLSS itself. Similarly, other mission architecture decisions – particularly involving transportation systems – can influence optimal ECLSS architectures. Loop closure influences requirements for water, oxygen, and other consumables. System maintainability and reliability influences spares mass and risk. System, consumables, and spares mass interact with transportation system architectures and propellant demands and propulsion element sizing. All these interactions with other systems must be considered when evaluating ECLSS options. Analyses that focus only on maximizing ECLSS loop closure – or minimizing ECLSS mass, or minimizing ECLSS life cycle cost – may lead to sub-optimal or even counterproductive system architecture and investment decisions at the mission level. For example, an ECLSS architecture that minimizes ECLSS life cycle cost but results in excessively high logistics mass could lead to significantly increased transportation system costs or make interplanetary transportation infeasible. Increased loop closure could result in higher development costs and higher mass if system/spares mass increases outweigh consumables reduction. In addition, systems mass and consumables mass are not directly comparable and have different impacts on propellant requirements, as consumables mass changes over the course of the mission. This paper presents an integrated analysis examining the overall impact of different ECLSS and transportation architectures on mass for a crewed Mars mission, including the habitat and transportation systems as well as consumables, spares, and propellant. Key observations are discussed, along with opportunities for further sensitivity analysis and model development. Overall, ECLSS development activities must consider their impacts at the mission level, as part of an integrated system, rather than in isolation.

Mars↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

A Parametric Assessment of Lunar and Mars Ascent Vehicle Synergy

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration has long had a focus on the human exploration of space, starting with Earth orbit, progressing to the Moon, and looking forward to Mars and other deep space destinations. With current priorities aiming toward a return to the Lunar surface in 2024 as part of an extended exploration campaign that will prepare the way for the first crewed mission to Mars, it is timely to examine possible commonalities between the Lunar and Martian mission architectures, particularly in the vehicle systems. One area of potential similarity lies within the ascent phase of the missions; at a first look, the initial Artemis missions to return to the Moon and a short-duration surface stay option for a Mars mission appear similar in several regards, especially in regards to the selection of the crew size, duration of crewed flight, and general subsystem functionality. This paper will take a closer look at these similarities as they apply to the respective ascent vehicles for each planetary body and how those similarities could enable synergies between the Lunar and Mars ascent vehicles of both missions.

Human Exploration↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Cost Breakeven Analysis of Lunar In-Situ Propellant Production for Human Missions to the Moon and Mars

NASA is preparing to return humans to the lunar surface as a first step to a human exploration campaign of Mars. Both a sustained lunar campaign and a campaign of missions to Mars will require tens to hundreds of tonnes of propellant. Although this propellant could be delivered from Earth, an alternative approach is to use the potentially vast quantities of lunar ice to enable in-situ propellant production on the lunar surface. This study evaluates the cost breakeven for using lunar-derived propellants, as opposed to those delivered from Earth, in support of an extended human exploration campaign with both a multi-year presence on the Moon as well as multiple crewed missions to Mars. In so doing, the value of lunar propellant production is considered in the context of future exploration priorities, addressing the question: over what range of human missions to the lunar surface and Mars does in-situ propellant production trade favorably with propellant delivery from Earth on the basis of cost? The results of this analysis show that the magnitude and duration of the lunar campaign, more so than the Mars campaign, drive the breakeven and that without long lifetime ISRU systems, with greater than 5 years of autonomous operation before replacement, the demand in cis-lunar space for a Mars campaign favors propellant delivery from Earth.

Christopher A. Jones↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Integrated Trajectory, Habitat, and Logistics Analysis and Trade Study for Human Mars Missions

Environmental Control and Life Support System (ECLSS) architecture selection has profound implications for mission cost and mass extending far beyond the ECLSS itself. Similarly, other mission architecture decisions – particularly involving transportation systems – can influence optimal ECLSS architectures. Loop closure influences requirements for water, oxygen, and other consumables. System maintainability and reliability influences spares mass and risk. System, consumables, and spares mass interact with transportation system architectures, including propellant demands and propulsion element sizing. All these interactions with other systems must be considered when evaluating ECLSS options. Analyses that focus only on maximizing ECLSS loop closure – or minimizing ECLSS mass, or minimizing ECLSS life cycle cost – may lead to sub-optimal or even counterproductive system architecture and investment decisions at the mission level. For example, an ECLSS architecture that minimizes ECLSS life cycle cost but results in excessively high logistics mass could lead to significantly increased transportation system costs or make interplanetary transportation infeasible. Increased loop closure could result in higher development costs and higher mass if system/spares mass increases outweigh consumables reduction. In addition, systems mass and consumables mass are not directly comparable and have different impacts on propellant requirements, as consumables mass changes over the course of the mission. This paper presents an integrated analysis examining the overall impact of different ECLSS and transportation architectures on Earth departure mass for a crewed Mars mission, including the habitat and transportation systems as well as consumables, spares, and propellant. Key observations are discussed, along with opportunities for further sensitivity analysis and model development. Overall, ECLSS development activities must consider their impacts at the mission level, as part of an integrated system, rather than in isolation.

Mars↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Integrated Crewed Mars Mission Analysis, Part II: The Trajectory Strikes Back

Crewed missions to Mars present a challenging problem involving strong interactions between a variety of spacecraft systems. Design and architecture decisions made by one system can have powerful implications for another. Siloed subsystem development and optimization efforts are unlikely to generate optimal results for the integrated system and may lead to counterproductive investments at the mission and system level. Mismatched assumptions between different subsystems can also negatively impact the final result. Integrated systems analysis, trade studies, and sensitivity analysis are a critical element of successful Mars mission design. Previous work examined the linkages between Environmental Control and Life Support System (ECLSS) loop closure, food water content, spares Probability of Sufficiency (POS), and other factors by performing an integrated mass and cost assessment of a variety of Mars habitat and transportation system designs. This paper expands upon that work by evaluating the impact of mission duration, trajectory, and propulsion technology alongside key habitat variables. Transportation system and trajectory design decisions have enormous impacts on overall system mass, and the impacts of those decisions are themselves sensitive to the mass of the habitat that is being transported. This paper examines a variety of mission cases and evaluates total departure mass for each case. An estimate of relative costs for specific cases is also provided. The results are discussed, with an emphasis on the sensitivity of mass, cost, and other figures of merit to key parameters. Interactions and dependencies between various decisions, particularly those that relate to technology investments, are also highlighted. Overall, the various elements, systems, and subsystems required to support human spaceflight should not be optimized and evaluated in isolation, but instead should be analyzed as part of an integrated system. This paper demonstrates how integrated analysis can improve system understanding and lead to more optimal and effective crewed exploration systems.

Human Spaceflight↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Communication Delays, Disruptions, and Blackouts for Crewed Mars Missions

As NASA continues to develop the Moon2Mars campaign, there are a number of challenges that must be addressed to execute a successful crewed mission to Mars. One of those challenges is delays, disruptions, and blackouts that crew will experience during their mission to Mars, and that is the challenge evaluated in this paper. Our analysis showed that communication delays will vary from 0 to 22 minutes over the course of a mission, peaking while the crew is at or just departed from Mars. The disruptions occur in a similar time frame and can last for several days up to several months, depending on the solar disturbance sensitivity of the communication band being used. The delays and disruptions will have an impact on crewed Mars missions, and determining mitigations is future work to be informed by this analysis.

Katherine T McBrayer↗