Mars environmental survey probe aerobrake preliminary design study
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Tauber, M.↗
Engineering topics
Henline, W.
Publications and source records attributed to Henline, W..
MESUR probe aerobrake preliminary design study
Aerobrake design for the Mars Environmental Survey (MESUR) vehicles is considered which is intended for both a nominal entry velocity of 7 km/sec and a high-speed case of 9 km/sec. Topics discussed include the entry environment, the thermal protection requirements for several types of heat shield materials, the structural design of the aeroshell, and the total aerobrake masses and mass fractions. For the nominal 7 km/sec entry, a silicone elastometric charring ablator, SLA-561, was found to be the lightest heat shield material. For the 7 km/sec entry, the mass fraction of the aerobrake was 13.2 percent. For the 9 km/sec entry, the heat shield consisted of the medium-density ablator AVCOAT-5026; SLA-561 was used on part of the conical skirt. The aerobrake mass fraction in this case was 18 percent. It is recommended that separate aerobrakes be designed for probes entering at 7 and 9 km/sec.
Tauber, M.↗
Aerobrake design studies for manned Mars missions
The dimensions of aerobrakes and associated heat shields are calculated as a fraction of the vehicle mass required for a high-velocity manned Mars entry. The entry speed and deceleration limit are assumed to be 8.6 km/sec and 5 earth g, respectively, to consider vehicles with low lift-drag ratio (L/D) and ballistic coefficients of 100 and 200 kg/sq m, as well as a vehicle with a medium L/D and a ballistic coefficient of 375 kg/sq m. The aerobrake mass plus the heat shield divided by an optimized, blunt-shaped vehicle's total mass is 15 and 13 percent for ballistic coefficients of 100 and 200 kg/sq m, respectively. For a winged vehicle the mass fraction is 17 percent because the higher ballistic coefficient requires more thermal protection to account for the greater temperatures generated. It is concluded that aerobraking is more efficient than propulsive braking because the mass fraction for a propulsive system would be 4 or 5 times greater than those calculated for aerobraking.
Tauber, M.↗