Engineering topics
Publications and source records attributed to Lee Mason.
This is a compilation of NASA Glenn presentation materials as part of the NASA Glenn/Korea Aerospace Research Institute Technical Interchange Meeting in August, 2024. NASA presentations cover Artemis, engines, cryogenic fluid management, microgravity and ISS sciences, extreme materials, and power.
A focus of NASA’s Moon-to-Mars objectives is the development of the infrastructure on the lunar surface that will be needed to support broader lunar surface operations. This infrastructure is intended to support both United States and international partners to expand human presence on the lunar surface. As this lunar infrastructure is designed and established, it will be critical to ensure that the various hardware elements work together to both enable the capabilities and to avoid unintended actions. NASA’s Glenn Research Center (GRC) is establishing ground-based testing and emulation facilities to mimic the lunar environment that the surface power and communications infrastructure will operate in. These facilities are intended to represent power and communications providers, users, and interfaces to ensure that systems operate as intended to support the lunar economy. They will empower industry to rapidly evaluate new technologies under realistic conditions. In 2023 GRC is opening a new, state-of-the-art, Aerospace Communications Facility featuring hardware-in-the-loop and ground-to-orbit testbeds. The Multiple Asset Testbed for Research in Innovative Communications Systems (MATRICS) capability will emulate the lunar communications environment, enabling validation of mission concepts and technologies to reduce risk through performance and operations testing, training, and uncover potential issues in compatibility among communication systems providers and users. In addition to the communications testbed, GRC is also developing a full-scale power grid to reduce lunar mission risk. The Adaptable Surface Power Integration and Research (ASPIRE) project aims to reduce mission and hardware risk via high-fidelity integrated testing and pave the way for commercially supplied utility power on the lunar surface. The facility will be scalable and highly adaptable and will be available to NASA, Industry, Academia, and International Partners. ASPIRE will allow developers to integrate and demonstrate their power solutions in a relevant environment, and it will be able to characterize the lunar power performance in representative mission contexts.
The purpose of this handbook is to facilitate a repeatable and robust process that promotes clear and effective interfaces between activities and stakeholders focused on meeting nuclear flight safety requirements for missions utilizing space nuclear systems (SNS), within the context of NASA’s broader nuclear-related activities and interfaces. NPR 8715.26, Nuclear Flight Safety, requires that the NASA project manager “incorporate nuclear flight safety considerations starting with program or project formulation through the point at which the SNS or other radioactive material no longer has the potential to affect Earth’s biosphere.” NASA’s use of SNS inherently involves partnering with other stakeholders to conduct a range of related activities that interface with nuclear flight safety. From a categorical perspective these include: (i) meeting the authorities and licensing requirements for possession and use of nuclear material, as governed by other Federal authorities; (ii) conducting National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) activities for nuclear-enabled missions; (iii) meeting Federal nuclear launch authorization requirements; (iv) conducting radiological contingency planning activities, including those associated with international commitments; (v) performing risk communication and public outreach activities; and (vi) ensuring decommissioning and disposal strategies reflect National policies and interests. It is the intent of this handbook to promote an effective interface between nuclear flight safety and these interrelated categorical activities. In addition to activities undertaken with partnering agencies, there are individual nuclear-related activities and programs that have a nexus to nuclear flight safety, and these include: (i) applicable NASA Standing Review Boards; (ii) the US Department of Energy nuclear safety activities conducted in partnership with NASA under Memoranda of Understanding; (iii) the Department of Defense’s Range Safety activities; (iv) NASA’s general involvement in interagency and international dialogues regarding nuclear safety; (v) the NASA-administered Interagency Nuclear Safety Review Board; (vi) NASA’s program and project governance activities and nuclear-specific Technical Discipline Team activities under the Office of the Chief Engineer; and others. It is the intent of this handbook to promote effective leveraging of these additional interrelated organizational activities, as appropriate.
Many previous studies have examined sending crews to and from Mars. The most economical involved a ‘conjunction’ class whereby the crew spends around 500 days on Mars surface waiting for a ‘cheap’ return. The total mission time results in a mission duration around 3 years. Given the current demonstrated crew maximum of a 1 year stint on ISS, it is interesting to look at reducing that time to only two years, thus reducing risk and minimizing time in the Martian System. In order to meet such a short mission an ‘opposition’ class Mars mission (which includes a Venus flyby) was chosen. The energy required to perform such a mission in only two years (for the 2036 opportunity at least) is about three times that of the 3 year conjunction mission. The rocket equation clearly shows that this mission would then require several times the propellant of the three-year mission unless the Isp of the propulsion system can be increased. Electric propulsion can provide the 3-10x improvement in Isp but even with a nuclear reactor power levels could approach 10 MWe. As an alternative, a smaller reactor (1.5 MWe class) joined together with a chemical stage was found to allow for using each propulsion system to its best advantage: low thrust in interplanetary space and chemical in the gravity wells of Earth and Mars. Indeed, the use of high Isp, low thrust during the interplanetary leg of the journey’s reduced the required capture/departure ∆Vs by 5-10X. Lowering the NEP power also allowed fitting the power system into a single SLS launch – which limited the radiator area to ~ 2500m^2. For the first look a reactor using fuels created by the SP-100 program with a limit of ~1200K was assumed. Starting in the ‘Lunar Gateway’ also allowed for use of commercial tankers to fuel the vehicle in a relative benign place. A top level summary of the mission design, concept of operations, as well as a conceptual point design of the vehicle is described.
Under the Mars Transportation Assessment Study, NASA and DOE are performing analyses and generating concepts for crewed Nuclear Electric Propulsion (NEP) missions to Mars. This paper presents the results of trade studies and concept development for the nuclear electric power system, consisting of the fission reactor, radiation shielding, power conversion, heat rejection and power management & distribution (PMAD). The nuclear power team completed trade studies to evaluate different reactor and power conversion technologies and developed preliminary concepts for the crew shielding, waste heat radiators, and PMAD. The initial results suggest that a modified terrestrial microreactor combined with supercritical CO2 Brayton conversion could be used to perform the crew and cargo missions with satisfactory performance and modest risk.
NASA has considered Nuclear Electric Propulsion (NEP) for high ∆V missions since the late 1950s, but the current technology readiness level of the requisite power-train needs to be raised for such a mission. The powertrain includes reactor, power conversion, power management, electric propulsion, and thermal management components that must be integrated to minimize system a (kg/kWe) and to finalize a propulsion system architecture within the 2025-2027 timeframe requires advancing these component technologies to technology readiness level (TRL) 5 and Advancement Degree of Difficulty (AD2) 3 in an expeditious manner with minimal risks. This paper will only address the power conversion (heat to electric) components of that system. Based on both internal and industry studies, a primary conclusion of this work is that a single-spool supercritical Xe-He radial flux Brayton heat engine combined with a permanent magnet synchronous alternator can potentially be developed with the least technical risk to meet the technology readiness schedule and required NEP system performance metrics.
A U.S. governmental interagency space reactor standards working group (SWG) was convened to address the limited availability of voluntary consensus standards currently in place specifically for space nuclear reactor design and safety. The SWG focused on reviewing existing standards, assessing agency needs, specifying gaps that could be addressed by new standards, and prioritizing those gaps through consensus group deliberations. The SWG identified a series of findings and recommendations relative to the development of space reactor standards, including moving three specific high-priority gap items to be pursued through a consensus standards development process: Safety and Risk Analysis Methods for Space Reactors, Testing Requirements for Space Reactors, including Facility Requirements, and Safe Operating Practices for Space Reactors.
Continuous power at the kilowatt level will be imperative for future lunar users including crew infrastructure, future science, and in-situ resource utilization (ISRU). The Compass Team explored both 10 kWe and 40 kWe concepts, assuming planned lander and rover capabilities. Both concepts found that a crew pressurized rover chassis, repurposed for deploying reactor power components, could place a fission surface power system (FSPS) at least one km from users. While the 10 kWe fission power system (FPS) could be deployed as a single unit, the 40 kWe system was too large and had to be deployed in multiple trips with the same rover. Key technologies and design approaches included a high-assay low-enriched uranium (HALEU), yttrium hydride (YH) moderated heat pipe reactor, Stirling convertors, deployable radiators based on International Space Station (ISS) designs, and power conversion/transmission at ±2800 VDC for a one km remote distance.
To assess ‘quick’ missions to Mars, a study was performed to determine the feasibility of a two-year roundtrip class mission concept of operation that enables boots on Mars in the 2030s. After performing a Phase 1.1 2036 Mars opposition design case, the more difficult 2039 opposition design was pursued. This Phase 1.2 also sought to further refine the concept, building on feasibility, and addressing several challenges brought by independent team reviews. Given the date of 2039, nearer-term technologies, primarily nuclear thermal and nuclear electric were deemed as the most viable for these missions. This paper explores a nuclear electric and chemical combined propulsion approach to achieve the desired mission timeline.
NASA has considered Nuclear Electric Propulsion (NEP) for high V missions since the late 1950’s, but the current technology readiness level of the requisite powertrain needs to be raised for such a mission. The powertrain includes reactor, power conversion, power management, electric propulsion, and thermal management components that must be integrated to minimize system (kg/kWe) and to finalize a propulsion system architecture within the 2025-2027 timeframe requires advancing these component technologies to technology readiness level (TRL) 5 and Advancement Degree of Difficulty (AD2) 3 in an expeditious manner with minimal risks. This paper will only address the power conversion (heat to electric) components of that system. Based on both internal and industry studies, a primary conclusion of this work is that a single-spool supercritical Xe-He radial flux Brayton heat engine combined with a permanent magnet synchronous alternator can potentially be developed with the least technical risk to meet the technology readiness schedule and required NEP system performance metrics.
Space nuclear reactor technology development and associated approaches to safety have been ongoing for over 60 years. This paper selects functional safety principles associated with space reactors at several points in time since the early 1980s and provides an overview of their general content, similarities, and differences, as well as how they have evolved. It also reflects, where applicable, on how recent Federal policies in the area of space nuclear systems may affect how these safety principles apply to future activities.
The presentation summarizes 60 years of closed Brayton cycle development and testing at Glenn Research Center and the many different space power applications for small Brayton cycle engines that have been studied over the years.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
As part of the 2023 strategic analysis cycle to explore the trade space, the NASA Mars Architecture Team wanted to explore what it takes to produce in situ on Mars many hundreds of tons of propellants for a large all-chemical transportation system. The conceptual operations and design of the LO 2 /LCH 4 in situ resource utilization (ISRU) water acquisition, propellant production and liquification system was assigned to the NASA Compass concurrent engineering team with support from various NASA ISRU, cryogenic fluid management, and surface power experts. The conceptual point design examined one case producing 300 t of LO 2 /LCH 4 from the Mars atmosphere and delivered water in 20 months and storing the liquified propellants in a to-be-reused lander. Several of these large single-stage, all-chemical class large vertical landers would deliver the required ISRU equipment. The required 150 t of water stock for the ISRU system was traded between three options: delivered, pumped from subsurface ice deposits or extracted from surface soils. The large propellant production systems consist of atmospheric CO 2 collection scroll pumps, a combined solid oxide electrolysis and methanation system to convert the CO 2 and water into gaseous O 2 and CH 4 , and various dryers, scrubbers, and separators to remove the excess water, CO 2 and H 2 . The liquefaction system consisted of 90 K cryocoolers to provide cold Ne to the launch vehicle tanks to liquify these CH 4 and O 2 gases and store them as rocket propellants. The systems are deployed using a 6 t (payload) capable chassis derived from conceptual pressurized rover designs. In total, the propellant production and liquefaction systems required three propellant production pallets, two liquefaction pallets, two water tankers, and six 40 kW-fission surface power systems (FSPS) with cabling. All this equipment was found to notionally fit inside two- 75 metric ton payload capacity Mars ascent and landing vehicles (MALV). For the case where 150 t of water delivered from Earth, four cargo MALVs are required for the full system. The same is true when the 150 t of water is extracted through surface mining. For the borehole system, only 3 cargo MALVs are necessary. A comparison of approaches in terms of number of landers, number and type of elements, power and time is made.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
A ‘quick’ Enceladus sample return mission concept was developed based on the scientist recommendations at the recent ‘Accelerating Space Science with Nuclear Technology Workshop’. The Nuclear Electric Propulsion spacecraft assumed a follow-on 40 kWe nuclear reactor using the demonstrated 40 kWe Fission Surface Power system, expected in the early 2030s. The NEP vehicle also utilized a set of NEXT-C ion thrusters as well as planned Artemis commercial launchers. By launching the 40 kW NEP vehicle on a Starship and adding the propellants of 15 tankers, the 27t probe could be sent on a direct trajectory to Saturn (no Earth or Jupiter flybys) where NEP was used for Saturn capture, spiral down, spiral up and return to the Earth. A small lander obtained the surface Enceladus sample. Using the 40 kW NEP provided a round-trip time of only 16.5 years. A second option was more attractive from a science perspective whereby the NEP vehicle would deliver a large, 6t chemical lander to low Enceladus orbit where it would grab and return a sample to Earth (similar to the recent Orbilander design but in reverse). After deploying the lander, the NEP vehicle would stay in Saturn space performing a moon tour by orbiting four more moons and mapping the large moon of Titan. This option took slightly longer (18.5 yrs) due to the chemical return leg limitations. Both options demonstrated the agility, payload capability, and sample return goals the workshop recommended. An all-chemical option with two stages was roughly analyzed but took 21.5 yrs and required a Jupiter gravity assist.