NASA NTRS · 20260008402
The source did not provide an abstract. Follow the original record for more information.
Krishnan Swaminathan Gopalan, Lauren Abbott, Justin Haskins. Overview of Radiation Modeling in NASA’s ESM Project. https://ntrs.nasa.gov/citations/20260008402
Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.
KEEP EXPLORING
The Entry Systems Modeling project (ESM) is supported by both the NASA Space Technology and the Science Mission Directorates and focuses on developing simulation tools and validated models for characterizing the performance of entry systems tailored to planetary destinations across the Solar System. ESM is organized into six technical capability areas that together address all relevant factors related to spacecraft entry, as well as some aspects of descent: Thermal Protection System (TPS) Materials; Aerothermodynamics; Entry & Descent Vehicle Dynamics; Guidance, Navigation, and Control; Vehicle Systems Analysis; and Advanced Tools and Numerical Methods. Development within the capability areas is undertaken explicitly with a focus on transition and infusion to science missions, human exploration missions, and commercial space activities. The present talk details developments that specifically impact science missions, including simulation tool capabilities that aid in mission design and model development to understand entry system performance at a given destination. Examples of the successful infusion and transition of such project outcomes to science missions also are provided. Several simulation tool development efforts within ESM have resulted in new design capabilities for missions. One such outcome is improved toolsets for mission trajectory and concept of operations design. Specifically, an initiative to couple a leading tool for entry, ascent/descent, and orbital trajectory optimization (Program to Optimize Simulated Trajectories II or POST2) to those used within the Agency for interplanetary trajectory optimization (Copernicus and Monte) has made substantial progress, with the outcomes to date promising to allow efficient trajectory optimization across mission phases. Additionally, toolchains for the evaluation of vehicle performance during entry and descent have been developed that allow assessment of multi-dimensional aeroheating on detailed vehicle geometries, characterization of deployment and inflation of parachutes, and assessment of vehicle dynamic stability during descent. These capabilities are achieved by coupling diverse sets of physics together – material response, computational fluid dynamics, radiation, and vehicle dynamics – to suitably describe complex entry and descent phenomena. Several model development and validation efforts for specific destinations and entry regimes also are underway within the ESM project. For instance, new experimental capabilities to validate radiation models at low densities/high altitudes recently have been established with project support, specifically the Low-Density Shock Tube (LDST) at the NASA Ames Research Center Electric Arc Shock Tube (EAST) facility. The LDST is being leveraged to develop improved models of shock layer kinetics and radiation in Titan atmospheres, while future studies will be conducted in the LDST and the existing high velocity shock tube to provide validation data for radiation models of Venus, Ice Giants, and Mars atmospheres. Models describing the aerothermal and thermo-structural performance of Thermal Protection System (TPS) materials has been another focus, with multiscale modeling activities on-going for the two leading TPS materials applicable to a range of entry conditions and science missions: the Phenolic-Impregnated Carbon Ablator (PICA) and woven materials like 3D Mid-Density Carbon Phenolic (3MDCP). A continual effort is made to infuse and transition outcomes from ESM simulation tool and model development activities into relevant science missions. Significant progress has been made on this front, with missions such as Dragonfly, DAVINCI, and Mars Missions benefitting from project outcomes. The groundwork also is being laid to provide insights into forward looking missions to Gas/Ice Giants as well as for potential sample returns.
More than 110 papers were presented at this Symposium, sponsored by the U.S. Air Force Phillips Laboratory, the University of Houston-Clear Lake, and NASA JSC. The technical areas covered were Intelligent Systems, Automation and Robotics, Human Factors and Life Sciences, and Environmental Interactions. The U.S. Air Force and NASA programmatic overviews and panel discussions were also held in each technical area. These proceedings, along with the comments and suggestions made by the panelists and keynote speakers, will be used in assessing the progress made in joint USAF/NASA projects and activities. Furthermore, future collaborative/joint programs will also be identified. The symposium proceedings includes papers covering various disciplines presented by experts from NASA, the Air Force, universities, and industry.
This project employs equivalent system mass (ESM) analyses to evaluate and compare state-of-the-art spacecraft CO2 removal systems. The ESM methodology converts sizing characteristics such as volume, power, and cooling requirements into a unified metric of mass, allowing for simple quantitative comparison of equipment impacts on a system level. Comparison of six high TRL technologies – the Carbon Dioxide Removal System (CDRS), Thermal Amine Scrubber (TAS), Carbon Dioxide Removal Assembly (CDRA), Four-Bed CO2 Scrubber (4BCO2), CO2 and Humidity Control Swing Bed (CHC), and the Carbon Dioxide Removal by Ionic Liquid Sorbent (CDRILS) – was achieved using an existing ESM spreadsheet tool that formerly ranked such technologies for consideration on Gateway. Fidelity of the tool was increased through revision with the most up-to-date sizing and performance data for each technology. ESM values were then estimated using NASA-supplied Lunar, Martian, and low-Earth orbit habitat infrastructure costs. This paper details the ESM approach used, lists major performance variables for each CO2 removal option, and summarizes conclusions of the technology comparison. The results are intended to act as a guide to assist programs in their selection of CO2 technologies best suited for a specific vehicle or mission.