Architecture Study for a Fuel Depot Supplied from Lunar Resources
No abstract available
Engineering topics
Publications and source records attributed to Perrin, Thomas M..
No abstract available
This architecture study sought to determine the optimum architecture for a fuel depot supplied from lunar assets. Four factors - the location of propellant processing (on the Moon or on the depot), the depot location (on the Moon, L1, GEO, or LEO), the propellant transfer location (L1, GEO, or LEO), and the propellant transfer method (bulk fuel or canister exchange) were combined to identify 18 candidate architectures. Two design reference missions (DRMs) - a commercial satellite servicing mission and a Government cargo mission to Mars - created demand for propellants, while a propellant delivery DRM examined supply issues. The study concluded Earth-Moon L1 is the best location for an orbiting depot. For all architectures, propellant boiloff was less than anticipated, and was far overshadowed by delta-v requirements and resulting fuel consumption. Bulk transfer is the most flexible for both the supplier and customer. However, since canister exchange bypasses the transfer of bulk cryogens and necessary chilldown losses, canister exchange shows promise and merits further investigation. Overall, this work indicates propellant consumption and loss is an essential factor in assessing fuel depot architectures.
Heretofore, discussions of space fuel depots assumed the depots would be supplied from Earth. However, the confirmation of deposits of water ice at the lunar poles in 2009 suggests the possibility of supplying a space depot with liquid hydrogen/liquid oxygen produced from lunar ice. This architecture study sought to determine the optimum architecture for a fuel depot supplied from lunar resources. Four factors - the location of propellant processing (on the Moon or on the depot), the location of the depot (on the Moon, or at L1, GEO, or LEO), the location of propellant transfer (L1, GEO, or LEO), and the method of propellant transfer (bulk fuel or canister exchange) were combined to identify 18 potential architectures. Two design reference missions (DRMs) - a satellite servicing mission and a cargo mission to Mars - were used to create demand for propellants, while a third DRM - a propellant delivery mission - was used to examine supply issues. The architectures were depicted graphically in a network diagram with individual segments representing the movement of propellant from the Moon to the depot, and from the depot to the customer.
Heretofore, discussions of space fuel depots assumed the depots would be supplied from Earth. However, the confirmation of deposits of water ice at the lunar poles in 2009 suggests the possibility of supplying a space depot with liquid hydrogen/liquid oxygen produced from lunar ice. This architecture study sought to determine the optimum architecture for a fuel depot supplied from lunar resources. Four factors - the location of propellant processing (on the Moon or on the depot), the location of the depot (on the Moon or in cislunar space), and if in cislunar space, where (LEO, GEO, or Earth-Moon L1), and the method of propellant transfer (bulk fuel or canister exchange) were combined to identify 18 potential architectures. Two design reference missions (DRMs) - a satellite servicing mission and a cargo mission to Mars - were used to create demand for propellants, while a third DRM - a propellant delivery mission - was used to examine supply issues. The architectures were depicted graphically in a network diagram with individual segments representing the movement of propellant from the Moon to the depot, and from the depot to the customer