Search NASA⌕ Search

Engineering topics

Lee S Mason

Publications and source records attributed to Lee S Mason.

Compass Final Report: Nuclear Electric Propulsion (NEP)-Chemical Vehicle 1.2

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 waiting for a ‘cheap’ return. The total mission time results in over a 1000-day mission duration (about 3 years). Given the current experience level of only one year on the International Space Station (ISS), it of interest to reduce that time to only two years, thus reducing risk and minimizing required Mars surface infrastructure. The Phase 1.1 Study goal was stated as follows, “Determine the feasibility of a two-year roundtrip class Mars mission concept of operation that enables boots on Mars no later than 2036.” While the Phase1 study did show feasibility for the NEP-Chemical option, the 2036 Opposition opportunity was found to stress the schedule due to proposed technology development schedules. A 2039 Opposition (which requires even more energy than the 2036 case) was chosen as representative for Phase 1.2. Phase 1.2 also sought to further refine the concept, building on the feasibility, but addressing several challenges brought by the red team and habitat team. Given the date of 2039, nearer term technologies, primarily nuclear thermal and nuclear electric were deemed as the most viable for these missions. As will be shown, the energy required to perform such a mission in only two years (for the 2039 opportunity at least) is about three times that of the three-year conjunction mission. The rocket equation shows that this mission would then require several times the propellant of the three-year mission unless the specific impulse (ISP) of the propulsion system can be increased. Based on lunar needs, a limit of five Space Launch System (SLS) launchers with 8.4m fairings was imposed for the piloted transportation portion of the mission, limiting the size of the system. When using nuclear electric propulsion, the main limiting factor was packaging the required radiator area. The higher Isp nuclear electric propulsion (NEP) system option is described herein but with a twist: in order to keep the size of radiators packageable in one SLS and use proven reactor power system technology (~1200K reactor outlet temperature and superalloy-class Brayton) the NEP system had to be combined with a chemical propulsion system. This combination of electric propulsion and high thrust chemical was found to be useful in previous design studies combining solar electric propulsion (SEP) and chemical propulsion. Such a combination allowed the low-thrust system to provide significant change in velocity (∆V) during the interplanetary portions of the mission, thereby notably reducing the ∆V required by the high thrust system to capture and depart from the Mars gravity well. Here the high thrust ‘impulsive’ system is more efficient due to the Oberth Effect. A plethora of trades, both at the mission and system level, as well as the subsystem level were performed to develop these vehicle concepts. An entire family of NEP-Chemical transportation vehicles is described herein. The main driver and the primary focus was the piloted vehicle but additional concepts for cargo were performed using the same ‘building blocks’ in order to reduce costs and provide commonality.

Nuclear Power↗

Comparison of Energy Conversion Technologies for Space Nuclear Power Systems

A key element of space nuclear power systems is the energy conversion subsystem that converts the nuclear heat into electrical power. Nuclear systems provide a favorable option for missions that require long-duration power in hostile space environments where sunlight for solar power is absent or limited. There are two primary nuclear power technology options: (1) radioisotope power systems (RPSs) utilize the natural decay heat from 238Pu to generate electric power levels up to about 1 kW and (2) fission power systems (FPSs) rely on a sustained fission reaction of 235U and offer the potential to supply electric power from kilowatts to megawatts. Example missions utilizing nuclear power include Mars science rovers (e.g., Curiosity, Mars 2020), lunar and Mars surface landers, crewed surface outposts, deep space planetary orbiters, Ocean World science landers, and robotic space probes that utilize nuclear electric propulsion. This report examines the energy conversion technology options that can be used with RPSs and FPSs, and provides an assessment of their relative performance.

Lee S Mason↗

Current Status of NASA's Fission Surface Power Project

Small nuclear fission systems are powerful and could enable robust space operations for planetary habitation and exploration. On Earth, unless disrupted by storms or grid problems, electrical power for most people is no further than an outlet away. However, the solar system does not provide such easy access to electricity as we know it. Astronauts could take advantage of a reliable power supply to explore both the Moon and Mars. The system will need to be lightweight and capable of running regardless of its location, the weather, or available sunlight and other natural resources. NASA’s Fission Surface Power (FSP) project expands on the efforts of the agency’s Kilopower project, which ended in 2018. Currently, NASA is working with the US Department of Energy and industry to design a fission power system that would provide at least 40 kilowatts of power – enough to continuously run 30 households for ten years. A future lunar demonstration will pave the way for sustainable operations and even base camps on the Moon and Mars. This manuscript will showcase the current state of the FSP project, technical goals and accomplishments, future plans, and how this technology paves the way for exciting future applications.

Nuclear↗