Search NASASearch

Engineering topics

Steven R Oleson

Publications and source records attributed to Steven R Oleson.

Beamed Energy and Communications Optical Node (BEACON) Demonstrator

Due to long shadow periods (2 weeks or greater) on the south pole, concepts to raise solar arrays to a sufficient height at specific locations have shown the capability to provide power to surface users for much longer periods. Such a tower can also provide a 3rd Generation Partnership Project (3GPP) service for users up to 10 km away, dependent on terrain. An option to deliver power, albeit with low efficiency, using a laser beam coupled with the tower height could provide mobile and fixed users power during darkness, reducing their battery requirements. A demonstration of these technologies in the lunar environment is crucial to support future Artemis campaigns as well as potential emerging lunar infrastructures. A demonstrator design of a 15 m deployed boomon the south pole has been shown to enable both the gathering of kilowatts of power and the provision of 3GPP relay and backhaul given an appropriate lunar location. Using a laser to send power to a photovoltaic receiver has been proposed to transmit electrical power on the moon, particularly for applications such as powering a rover in near-polar permanently shadowed regions (PSR) where solar power is not available. In this work, the Compass team performed a conceptual engineering design study of a near-term laser surface-to-surface power beaming and relay station using a tower to simultaneously carry the power source (Vertical Solar Array Technologies (VSAT)[1]), the 3GPP relay antenna, and the laser telescope.

Deployable solar array tower laser beamed power 3G

Combined 1-MW Solar Electric and Chemical Propulsion for Crewed Mars Missions

The current Moon to Mars Architecture defines functional capabilities that are essential to achieving NASA’s specific exploration goals and objectives. The transportation system goals and objectives or functional capabilities do not prescribe a solution, leaving an open tradespace to be explored. NASA is working to identify power and propulsion technologies that enable feasible transportation options for crewed missions to Mars. During NASA’s Strategic Analysis Cycle 2021 (SAC21), nuclear enabled spacecraft concepts were analyzed for moderate duration 850-day Earth-Mars roundtrip mission2. During SAC22, the transportation tradespace was expanded to understand the feasibility of using different propulsion systems for crewed Mars missions using a moderate duration reference mission as a comparison point. This paper explores the mission analysis performed for a conceptual MW-class hybrid Solar Electric Propulsion (SEP)-chemical propulsion system (SEP-Chem) spacecraft optimized for an 850-day crewed Mars mission for the 2039 opportunity.

SEP-Chem

Mission Incredible: A Titan Sample Return Using In-Situ Propellants

An analysis of the use of in-situ volatile propellants for a sample return mission from Titan shows that this mission should be feasible. Such a mission would be invaluable for its science return, and its contribution to our understanding the origins of organic compounds in the solar system and our place in the universe.

Titan

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

Compass Final Report: Venus Bridge Orbiter and Surface Study (V-BOSS)

The Venus Bridge Orbiter and Surface Study (V-BOSS) Compass concurrent engineering design team study shows that new, high-priority Venus science can be achieved using a linked Orbiter + Surface Element (Lander) mission concept within a $200M cost cap with assumptions. This is feasible through optimizing investment in early technologies and platforms, such as the Long-Lived In-Situ Solar System Explorer (LLISSE), leveraging known and flight-ready technology, and the overall use of simple, small, robust systems in innovative approaches to Venus exploration. This architecture allows a range of science investigations through modification of Orbiter-Lander platforms in this study through choice of other instruments (often sensors), science themes, or operational modes. In particular, a fundamental strength of this approach is to provide science not available in other ways by using simplified architectures including rugged systems operable in-situ on the Venus surface. Such investigations would be pathfinders for more complex, and more expensive, future missions. Additionally, the results of this study can be used to further champion the need, value and return of early investment technology programs for the hard problem of in-situ investigations at Venus.

Venus Bridge

Titan Turtle: NIAC Phase II Design for a Submersible Vehicle for Titan Exploration

Conceptual designs for a submersible vehicle for exploration of the hydrocarbon seas of Saturn’s moon Titan were done by the NASA Glenn COMPASS systems engineering team, as part of the NASA’s Innovative Advanced Concepts (NIAC) program. The efforts investigated what approaches and technologies would allow exploration below the surface of the low temperature (–180 °C) hydrocarbon seas of Titan. The Phase-II design refined the design concepts, looking at a smaller design supported by an orbital relay, the “Titan Turtle”. The phase-II project resulted in a smaller vehicle using an orbiter supported relay/navigation link to eliminate the requirement for a large phased-array antenna. Eliminating the DTE communications requirement also reduced the associated high power required by the communications system.

Steven R Oleson

Proposal for a Sample Return from Titan

We propose to explore a Titan sample return mission using in-situ volatile propellants available on its surface. Titan is unique in the outer solar system in that it is the only moon with a thick atmosphere, andthe only body in the solar system outside the Earth with liquid seas on its surface. The Titanian oceans, however, are seas of liquid hydrocarbons, and the rocks on the surface are solid water ice. Many studies of space development emphasize use of the in-situ resources to eliminate the requirement to launch propellants from Earth. With water, liquid methane,and ethane easily available, Titan is a rocket scientist’s dream for propellants.

Titan

A Comparative Assessment of Evolvable Martian ISRU Propellant Production for Future Human Missions

In 2022, NASA released its “Moon to Mars Strategy and Objectives Development” document, containing top-level goals and objectives designed to create a blueprint for sustained human presence and exploration throughout the solar system. One objective in this “blueprint” calls for the demonstration of “…Mars ISRU capabilities to support an initial human Mars exploration campaign.” NASA is looking at both the benefits and liens of this concept, as one of several trade space aspects under consideration, for inclusion in the overall architecture of the human exploration of Mars. This paper summarizes results from a series of Martian ISRU-focused trade studies from 2023 and 2024. These studies cover five different approaches to providing propellants for returning crew and equipment from the surface of Mars, using several different combinations of propellants delivered (from Earth) and produced from Martian feedstock material. For comparison purposes, the same ISRU infrastructure elements were used across all options wherever possible. The equipment mass, power, operational complexity, and time needed to produce some or all of these propellants have been quantified and compared when used in a common mission scenario. Analysis results for each option are discussed. Performance parameters for these options are compared side-by-side and observations made, including the positive and negative aspects of each case. The possibility of evolving from a simpler ISRU case to more complex cases that would potentially lead to more sustainable operations are also discussed. While no single case emerged as “better” in all aspects when compared to the others, there are distinct advantages and disadvantages that did emerge when comparing the results generated from a common set of assumptions for all cases. Consequently, specific mission objectives may determine which of these advantages or disadvantages are important for choosing among the cases that could benefit any particular mission or campaign.

Mars

A Comparative Assessment of Evolvable Martian ISRU Propellant Production for Future Human Missions

In 2022, NASA released its “Moon to Mars Strategy and Objectives Development” document, containing top-level goals and objectives designed to create a blueprint for sustained human presence and exploration throughout the solar system. One objective in this “blueprint” calls for the demonstration of “…Mars ISRU capabilities to support an initial human Mars exploration campaign.” NASA is looking at both the benefits and liens of this concept, as one of several trade space aspects under consideration, for inclusion in the overall architecture of the human exploration of Mars. This paper summarizes results from a series of Martian ISRU-focused trade studies from 2023 and 2024. These studies cover five different approaches to providing propellants for returning crew and equipment from the surface of Mars, using several different combinations of propellants delivered (from Earth) and produced from Martian feedstock material. For comparison purposes, the same ISRU infrastructure elements were used across all options wherever possible. The equipment mass, power, operational complexity, and time needed to produce some or all of these propellants have been quantified and compared when used in a common mission scenario. Analysis results for each option are discussed. Performance parameters for these options are compared side-by-side and observations made, including the positive and negative aspects of each case. The possibility of evolving from a simpler ISRU case to more complex cases that would potentially lead to more sustainable operations are also discussed. While no single case emerged as “better” in all aspects when compared to the others, there are distinct advantages and disadvantages that did emerge when comparing the results generated from a common set of assumptions for all cases. Consequently, specific mission objectives may determine which of these advantages or disadvantages are important for choosing among the cases that could benefit any particular mission or campaign.

Propellant