Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “launch”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 217 records · Page 12
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2021

Operational Modal Analysis of the Space Launch System Mobile Launcher on the Crawler Transporter ISVV-010 Rollout

NASA is developing an expendable heavy lift launch vehicle capability, the Space Launch System, to support lunar and deep space exploration. To support this capability, an updated ground infrastructure is required including modifying an existing Mobile Launcher system. The Mobile Launcher is a very large heavy beam/truss steel structure designed to support the Space Launch System during its buildup and integration in the Vehicle Assembly Building, transportation between the Vehicle Assembly Building and launch pad 39B by the Crawler Transporter, and provides the launch platform at the launch pad. As part of the Verification and Validation of the Mobile Launcher and Crawler Transporter, two rollouts of the Mobile Launcher transported by the Crawler Transporter, Integrated System Verification and Validation (ISVV) 005 and 010, have been performed to demonstrate the Crawler Transporter’s ability to transport the Mobile Launcher. ISVV-005 occurred in September 2018 and ISVV-010 occurred in late June 2019. ISVV-005 and ISVV-010 also provided the opportunity to gather data that can be used identify the Mobile Launcher on the Crawler Transporter rollout modal characteristics and refine the estimates of the Artemis I integrated launch vehicle rollout forcing functions. While the rollout environment has historically produced relatively small launch vehicle structural loads for the Saturn/Apollo and Space Shuttle programs in comparison to launch and ascent loads, these relatively small structural loads are inputs to structural fatigue analyses. The same holds true for the Space Launch System. Because the rollout forces acting on the Mobile Launcher and the Crawler Transporter are not directly measurable, Operational Modal Analysis techniques, instead of traditional Experimental Modal Analysis techniques, provide an empirical means to identify the Mobile Launcher on the Crawler Transporter rollout modal characteristics. The ISVV-010 rollout modal characteristics provide important supplemental modal information, which along with the Mobile Launcher modal test that was performed in June 2019 immediately prior to ISVV-010 rollout, combine to reduce uncertainty in the test correlated Mobile Launcher on the Crawler Transporter finite element model. A well test correlated finite element model will play a key role in the Building Block approach the Space Launch System program has implemented as part of its certification process for the Artemis I flight and in refining the Artemis I rollout forcing functions. At the time of the ISVV-005 rollout in September 2018, the Mobile Launcher was still undergoing construction, and therefore its modal characteristics are not directly comparable to those of the Mobile Launcher during the June 2019 Mobile Launcher modal test and subsequent ISVV-010 rollout. Hence the ISVV-005 rollout modal characteristics will not be looked at in this paper. This paper will briefly describe the Mobile Launcher and Crawler Transporter physical characteristics, ISVV-010 rollout data collection, the challenges in implementing Operational Modal Analysis techniques due in part to the Crawler Transporter harmonics, and how these challenges were overcome to obtain the ISVV-010 Mobile Launcher on the Crawler Transporter rollout modal characteristics.

Apollo↗
NASA NTRS2009

ATK Launch Vehicle (ALV-X1) Liftoff Acoustic Environments: Prediction vs. Measurement

The ATK Launch Vehicle (ALV-X1) provided an opportunity to measure liftoff acoustic noise data. NASA Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) engineers were interested in the ALV-X1 launch because the First Stage motor and launch pad conditions, including a relativity short deflector ducting, provide a potential analogue to future Ares I launches. This paper presents the measured liftoff acoustics on the vehicle and tower. Those measured results are compared to predictions based upon the method described in NASA SP-8072 "Acoustic Loads Generated by the Propulsion System" and the Vehicle Acoustic Environment Prediction Program (VAEPP) which was developed by MSFC acoustics engineers. One-third octave band sound pressure levels will be presented. This data is useful for the ALV-X1 in validating the pre-launch environments and loads predictions. Additionally, the ALV-X1 liftoff data can be scaled to define liftoff environments for the NASA Constellation program Ares vehicles. Vehicle liftoff noise is caused by the supersonic jet flow interaction with surrounding atmosphere or more simply, jet noise. As the vehicle's First Stage motor is ignited, an acoustic noise field is generated by the exhaust. This noise field persists due to the supersonic jet noise and reflections from the launch pad and tower, then changes as the vehicle begins to liftoff from the launch pad. Depending on launch pad and adjacent tower configurations, the liftoff noise is generally very high near the nozzle exit and decreases rapidly away from the nozzle. The liftoff acoustic time range of interest is typically 0 to 20 seconds after ignition. The exhaust plume thermo-fluid mechanics generates sound at approx.10 Hz to 20 kHz. Liftoff acoustic noise is usually the most severe dynamic environment for a launch vehicle or payload in the mid to high frequency range (approx.50 to 2000 Hz). This noise environment can induce high-level vibrations along the external surfaces of the vehicle and surrounding launch facility structures. The acoustic pressure fluctuations will induce severe vibrations in relatively large lightweight structures. Consequently, there is the potential for failure of the structure or attached electrical components. Due to these potential failures, the liftoff acoustic noise is one of the noise source inputs used to determine the vibro-acoustic qualification environment for a launch vehicle and its components.

Houston, Janice↗
NASA NTRS2009

NASA Manned Launch Vehicle Lightning Protection Development

Historically, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) relied heavily on lightning avoidance to protect launch vehicles and crew from lightning effects. As NASA transitions from the Space Shuttle to the new Constellation family of launch vehicles and spacecraft, NASA engineers are imposing design and construction standards on the spacecraft and launch vehicles to withstand both the direct and indirect effects of lightning. A review of current Space Shuttle lightning constraints and protection methodology will be presented, as well as a historical review of Space Shuttle lightning requirements and design. The Space Shuttle lightning requirements document, NSTS 07636, Lightning Protection, Test and Analysis Requirements, (originally published as document number JSC 07636, Lightning Protection Criteria Document) was developed in response to the Apollo 12 lightning event and other experiences with NASA and the Department of Defense launch vehicles. This document defined the lightning environment, vehicle protection requirements, and design guidelines for meeting the requirements. The criteria developed in JSC 07636 were a precursor to the Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) lightning standards. These SAE standards, along with Radio Technical Commission for Aeronautics (RTCA) DO-160, Environmental Conditions and Test Procedures for Airborne Equipment, are the basis for the current Constellation lightning design requirements. The development and derivation of these requirements will be presented. As budget and schedule constraints hampered lightning protection design and verification efforts, the Space Shuttle elements waived the design requirements and relied on lightning avoidance in the form of launch commit criteria (LCC) constraints and a catenary wire system for lightning protection at the launch pads. A better understanding of the lightning environment has highlighted the vulnerability of the protection schemes and associated risk to the vehicle, which has resulted in lost launch opportunities and increased expenditures in manpower to assess Space Shuttle vehicle health and safety after lightning events at the launch pad. Because of high-percentage launch availability and long-term on-pad requirements, LCC constraints are no longer considered feasible. The Constellation vehicles must be designed to withstand direct and indirect effects of lightning. A review of the vehicle design and potential concerns will be presented as well as the new catenary lightning protection system for the launch pad. This system is required to protect the Constellation vehicles during launch processing when vehicle lightning effects protection might be compromised by such items as umbilical connections and open access hatches.

McCollum, Matthew B.↗
NASA NTRS2019

Potential Improvements to the Nuclear Safety and Launch Approval Process for Nuclear Reactors Utilized for Space Power and Propulsion Applications

This study examines potential improvements that could be made to the nuclear safety and launch approval process for fission reactors to reduce the associated uncertainties in cost and schedule while continuing to ensure public safety and environmental protection. It concentrates on the launch approval and mission safety of fission power and propulsion applications of nuclear energy. Improvements to the launch approval process for radioisotope power systems (RPSs) are being considered elsewhere but are acknowledged throughout the report. The study considered technical, process, and organizational improvements to the launch approval processes. The study exclusively evaluated reactors that would not be started up prior to achieving a “sufficiently high orbit,” per United Nations (UN) Resolution 47/68.Potential criticality accidents were considered that could occur during a launch failure or abort or during reentry. Numerous scenarios were examined that might involve one or more Earth flybys as well as potential transportation missions that could intentionally return an active, or previously active fission reactor to Earth orbit. The Study Group was guided in its deliberations according to a number of fundamental principles. These included the paramount importance of adequate and appropriate levels of public safety and environmental protection as well as the importance of the inclusion of independent scientific, engineering, and safety reviews of the applications and proposals as a critical part of the process. Also considered was the need for the development of launch approval processes that might be different, depending upon the source of the application for launch approval, whether it be derived as a governmental launch, a commercial launch, or a hybrid/combination of the two. It is clear that all launches of nuclear reactors into space should have similar safety requirements; however, the safety review effort and the details of the analysis that are required should be commensurate with the potential hazards and the actual risk, which may differ based on the reactor design and its intended purpose. Finally, the study aimed at ensuring that whatever processes and procedures are developed should maximize the sufficiency, simplicity, and transparency of the processes. The Study Group reached five Conclusions and makes thirteen Recommendations. The Conclusions and Recommendations presented here are extensions of those presented previously in other studies. This report attempts to add specificity to the actions that need to be taken in order to move forward with successful space fission reactor programs. Without action to address the perceived and real problems in the launch approval process, designers and mission managers will be reluctant to commit the resources necessary to make space fission reactors a reality.

Camp, Allen↗
NASA NTRS2017

Much Lower Launch Costs Make Resupply Cheaper than Recycling for Space Life Support

The development of commercial launch vehicles by SpaceX has greatly reduced the cost of launching mass to Low Earth Orbit (LEO). Reusable launch vehicles may further reduce the launch cost per kilogram. The new low launch cost makes open loop life support much cheaper than before. Open loop systems resupply water and oxygen in tanks for crew use and provide disposable lithium hydroxide (LiOH) in canisters to remove carbon dioxide. Short human space missions such as Apollo and shuttle have used open loop life support, but the long duration International Space Station (ISS) recycles water and oxygen and removes carbon dioxide with a regenerative molecular sieve. These ISS regenerative and recycling life support systems have significantly reduced the total launch mass needed for life support. But, since the development cost of recycling systems is much higher than the cost of tanks and canisters, the relative cost savings have been much less than the launch mass savings. The Life Cycle Cost (LCC) includes development, launch, and operations. If another space station was built in LEO, resupply life support would be much cheaper than the current recycling systems. The mission most favorable to recycling would be a long term lunar base, since the resupply mass would be large, the proximity to Earth would reduce the need for recycling reliability and spares, and the launch cost would be much higher than for LEO due to the need for lunar transit and descent propulsion systems. For a ten-year lunar base, the new low launch costs make resupply cheaper than recycling systems similar to ISS life support.

launch costs↗
NASA NTRS1989

Low Earth Orbit Raider (LER) winged air launch vehicle concept

The need to launch small payloads into low earth orbit has increased dramatically during the past several years. The Low Earth orbit Raider (LER) is an answer to this need. The LER is an air-launched, winged vehicle designed to carry a 1500 pound payload into a 250 nautical mile orbit. The LER is launched from the back of a 747-100B at 35,000 feet and a Mach number of 0.8. Three staged solid propellant motors offer safe ground and flight handling, reliable operation, and decreased fabrication cost. The wing provides lift for 747 separation and during the first stage burn. Also, aerodynamic controls are provided to simplify first stage maneuvers. The air-launch concept offers many advantages to the consumer compared to conventional methods. Launching at 35,000 feet lowers atmospheric drag and other loads on the vehicle considerably. Since the 747 is a mobile launch pad, flexibility in orbit selection and launch time is unparalleled. Even polar orbits are accessible with a decreased payload. Most importantly, the LER launch service can come to the customer, satellites and experiments need not be transported to ground based launch facilities. The LER is designed to offer increased consumer freedom at a lower cost over existing launch systems. Simplistic design emphasizing reliability at low cost allows for the light payloads of the LER.

Feaux, Karl↗
NASA NTRS1993

Advanced transportation system study: Manned launch vehicle concepts for two way transportation system payloads to LEO

The purpose of the Advanced Transportation System Study (ATSS) task area 1 study effort is to examine manned launch vehicle booster concepts and two-way cargo transfer and return vehicle concepts to determine which of the many proposed concepts best meets NASA's needs for two-way transportation to low earth orbit. The study identified specific configurations of the normally unmanned, expendable launch vehicles (such as the National Launch System family) necessary to fly manned payloads. These launch vehicle configurations were then analyzed to determine the integrated booster/spacecraft performance, operations, reliability, and cost characteristics for the payload delivery and return mission. Design impacts to the expendable launch vehicles which would be required to perform the manned payload delivery mission were also identified. These impacts included the implications of applying NASA's man-rating requirements, as well as any mission or payload unique impacts. The booster concepts evaluated included the National Launch System (NLS) family of expendable vehicles and several variations of the NLS reference configurations to deliver larger manned payload concepts (such as the crew logistics vehicle (CLV) proposed by NASA JSC). Advanced, clean sheet concepts such as an F-1A engine derived liquid rocket booster (LRB), the single stage to orbit rocket, and a NASP-derived aerospace plane were also included in the study effort. Existing expendable launch vehicles such as the Titan 4, Ariane 5, Energia, and Proton were also examined. Although several manned payload concepts were considered in the analyses, the reference manned payload was the NASA Langley Research Center's HL-20 version of the personnel launch system (PLS). A scaled up version of the PLS for combined crew/cargo delivery capability, the HL-42 configuration, was also included in the analyses of cargo transfer and return vehicle (CTRV) booster concepts. In addition to strictly manned payloads, two-way cargo transportation systems (CTRV's) were also examined. The study provided detailed design and analysis of the performance, reliability, and operations of these concepts. The study analyzed these concepts as unique systems and also analyzed several combined CTRV/booster configurations as integrated launch systems (such as for launch abort analyses). Included in the set of CTRV concepts analyzed were the medium CTRV, the integral CTRV (in both a pressurized and unpressurized configuration), the winged CTRV, and an attached cargo carrier for the PLS system known as the PLS caboose.

Duffy, James B.↗
NASA NTRS1998

Monitoring Direct Effects of Delta, Atlas, and Titan Launches from Cape Canaveral Air Station

Launches of Delta, Atlas, and Titan rockets from Cape Canaveral Air Station (CCAS) have potential environmental effects that could arise from direct impacts of the launch exhaust (e.g., blast, heat), deposition of exhaust products of the solid rocket motors (hydrogen chloride, aluminum oxide), or other effects such as noise. Here we: 1) review previous reports, environmental assessments, and environmental impact statements for Delta, Atlas, and Titan vehicles and pad areas to clarity the magnitude of potential impacts; 2) summarize observed effects of 15 Delta, 22 Atlas, and 8 Titan launches; and 3) develop a spatial database of the distribution of effects from individual launches and cumulative effects of launches. The review of previous studies indicated that impacts from these launches can occur from the launch exhaust heat, deposition of exhaust products from the solid rocket motors, and noise. The principal effluents from solid rocket motors are hydrogen chloride (HCl), aluminum oxide (Al2O3), water (H2O), hydrogen (H2), carbon monoxide (CO), and carbon dioxide (CO2). The exhaust plume interacts with the launch complex structure and water deluge system to generate a launch cloud. Fall out or rain out of material from this cloud can produce localized effects from acid or particulate deposition. Delta, Atlas, and Titan launch vehicles differ in the number and size of solid rocket boosters and in the amount of deluge water used. All are smaller and use less water than the Space Shuttle. Acid deposition can cause damage to plants and animals exposed to it, acidify surface water and soil, and cause long-term changes to community composition and structure from repeated exposure. The magnitude of these effects depends on the intensity and frequency of acid deposition.

Schmalzer, Paul A.↗
NASA NTRS1999

Advanced Electric Propulsion for RLV Launched Geosynchronous Spacecraft

Solar Electric Propulsion (SEP) when used for station keeping and final orbit insertion has been shown to increase a geostationary satellite's payload when launched by existing expendable launch vehicles. In the case of reusable launch vehicles or expendable launch vehicles where an upper stage is an expensive option, this methodology can be modified by using the existing on-board apogee chemical system to perform a perigee burn and then letting the electric propulsion system complete the transfer to geostationary orbit. The elimination of upper stages using on-board chemical and electric propulsion systems was thus examined for GEO spacecraft. Launch vehicle step-down from an Atlas IIAR to a Delta 7920 (no upper stage) was achieved using expanded on-board chemical tanks, 40 kW payload power for electric propulsion, and a 60 day elliptical to GEO SEP orbit insertion. Optimal combined chemical and electric trajectories were found using SEPSPOT. While Hall and ion thrusters provided launch vehicle step-down and even more payload for longer insertion times, NH3 arcjets had insufficient performance to allow launch vehicle step-down. Degradation levels were only 5% to 7% for launch step-down cases using advanced solar arrays. Results were parameterized to allow comparisons for future reusable launch vehicles. Results showed that for an 8 W/kg initial power/launch mass power density spacecraft, 50% to 100% more payload can be launched using this method.

Oleson, Steven↗
NASA NTRS2002

Space Ops 2002: Bringing Space Operations into the 21st Century. Track 3: Operations, Mission Planning and Control. 2nd Generation Reusable Launch Vehicle-Concepts for Flight Operations

With the successful implementation of the International Space Station (ISS), the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) enters a new era of opportunity for scientific research. The ISS provides a working laboratory in space, with tremendous capabilities for scientific research. Utilization of these capabilities requires a launch system capable of routinely transporting crew and logistics to/from the ISS, as well as supporting ISS assembly and maintenance tasks. The Space Shuttle serves as NASA's launch system for performing these functions. The Space Shuttle also serves as NASA's launch system for supporting other science and servicing missions that require a human presence in space. The Space Shuttle provides proof that reusable launch vehicles are technically and physically implementable. However, a couple of problems faced by NASA are the prohibitive cost of operating and maintaining the Space Shuttle and its relative inability to support high launch rates. The 2nd Generation Reusable Launch Vehicle (2nd Gen RLV) is NASA's solution to this problem. The 2nd Gen RLV will provide a robust launch system with increased safety, improved reliability and performance, and less cost. The improved performance and reduced costs of the 2nd Gen RLV will free up resources currently spent on launch services. These resource savings can then be applied to scientific research, which in turn can be supported by the higher launch rate capability of the 2nd Gen RLV. The result is a win - win situation for science and NASA. While meeting NASA's needs, the 2nd Gen RLV also provides the United States aerospace industry with a commercially viable launch capability. One of the keys to achieving the goals of the 2nd Gen RLV is to develop and implement new technologies and processes in the area of flight operations. NASA's experience in operating the Space Shuttle and the ISS has brought to light several areas where automation can be used to augment or eliminate functions performed by crew and ground controllers. This experience has also identified the need for new approaches to staffing and training for both crew and ground controllers. This paper provides a brief overview of the mission capabilities provided by the 2nd Gen RLV, a description of NASA's approach to developing the 2nd Gen RLV, a discussion of operations concepts, and a list of challenges to implementing those concepts.

Hagopian, Jeff↗
NASA NTRS2003

High Altitude Launch for a Practical SSTO

Existing engineering materials allow the construction of towers to heights of many kilometers. Orbital launch from a high altitude has significant advantages over sea-level launch due to the reduced atmospheric pressure, resulting in lower atmospheric drag on the vehicle and allowing higher rocket engine performance. High-altitude launch sites are particularly advantageous for single-stage to orbit (SSTO) vehicles, where the payload is typically 2% of the initial launch mass. An earlier paper enumerated some of the advantages of high altitude launch of SSTO vehicles. In this paper, we calculate launch trajectories for a candidate SSTO vehicle, and calculate the advantage of launch at launch altitudes 5 to 25 kilometer altitudes above sea level. The performance increase can be directly translated into increased payload capability to orbit, ranging from 5 to 20% increase in the mass to orbit. For a candidate vehicle with an initial payload fraction of 2% of gross lift-off weight, this corresponds to 31% increase in payload (for 5-km launch altitude) to 122% additional payload (for 25-km launch altitude).

Landis, Geoffrey A.↗
NASA NTRS2010

Space Shuttle Day-of-Launch Trajectory Design and Verification

A top priority of any launch vehicle is to insert as much mass into the desired orbit as possible. This requirement must be traded against vehicle capability in terms of dynamic control, thermal constraints, and structural margins. The vehicle is certified to a specific structural envelope which will yield certain performance characteristics of mass to orbit. Some envelopes cannot be certified generically and must be checked with each mission design. The most sensitive envelopes require an assessment on the day-of-launch. To further minimize vehicle loads while maximizing vehicle performance, a day-of-launch trajectory can be designed. This design is optimized according to that day s wind and atmospheric conditions, which will increase the probability of launch. The day-of-launch trajectory verification is critical to the vehicle's safety. The Day-Of-Launch I-Load Uplink (DOLILU) is the process by which the Space Shuttle Program redesigns the vehicle steering commands to fit that day's environmental conditions and then rigorously verifies the integrated vehicle trajectory's loads, controls, and performance. The Shuttle methodology is very similar to other United States unmanned launch vehicles. By extension, this method would be similar to the methods employed for any future NASA launch vehicles. This presentation will provide an overview of the Shuttle's day-of-launch trajectory optimization and verification as an example of a more generic application of dayof- launch design and validation.

Harrington, Brian E.↗
NASA NTRS2010

Ensuring Safe Exploration: Ares Launch Vehicle Integrated Vehicle Ground Vibration Testing

Integrated vehicle ground vibration testing (IVGVT) will be a vital component for ensuring the safety of NASA's next generation of exploration vehicles to send human beings to the Moon and beyond. A ground vibration test (GVT) measures the fundamental dynamic characteristics of launch vehicles during various phases of flight. The Ares Flight & Integrated Test Office (FITO) will be leading the IVGVT for the Ares I crew launch vehicle at Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) from 2012 to 2014 using Test Stand (TS) 4550. MSFC conducted similar GVT for the Saturn V and Space Shuttle vehicles. FITO is responsible for performing the IVGVT on the Ares I crew launch vehicle, which will lift the Orion crew exploration vehicle to low Earth orbit, and the Ares V cargo launch vehicle, which can launch the lunar lander into orbit and send the combined Orionilander vehicles toward the Moon. Ares V consists of a six-engine core stage with two solid rocket boosters and an Earth departure stage (EDS). The same engine will power the EDS and the Ares I second stage. For the Ares IVGVT, the current plan is to test six configurations in three unique test positions inside TS 4550. Position 1 represents the entire launch stack at liftoff (using inert first stage segments). Position 2 consists of the entire launch stack at first stage burn-out (using empty first stage segments). Four Ares I second stage test configurations will be tested in Position 3, consisting of the Upper Stage and Orion crew module in four nominal conditions: J-2X engine ignition, post Launch Abort System (LAS) jettison, critical slosh mass, and J-2X burn-out. Because of long disuse, TS 4550 is being repaired and reactivated to conduct the Ares I IVGVT. The Shuttle-era platforms have been removed and are being replaced with mast climbers that provide ready access to the test articles and can be moved easily to support different positions within the test stand. The electrical power distribution system for TS 4550 was upgraded. Two new cranes will help move test articles at the test stand and at the Redstone Arsenal railhead where first stage segments will be received in 2011. The Hydrodynamic Support systems (HDSs) used for Saturn and Shuttle have been disassembled and evaluated for use during IVGVT. Analyses indicate that the 45-year-old HDSs can be refurbished to support the Ares I IVGVT. An alternate concept for a pneumatic suspension system is also being explored. A decision on which suspension system configuration to use for IVGVT will be made in 2010. In the next three years, the team will complete the updates to TS 4550, upgrade the test and data collection equipment, and finalize the configurations of the test articles to be used in the IVGVT. With NASA's GVT capabilities reestablished, the FITO team will be well positioned to perform similar work on Ares V, the largest exploration launch vehicle NASA has ever built. The GVT effort continues NASA's 50-year commitment to using testing and data analysis for safer, more reliable launch vehicles.

Tuma, M. L.↗
NASA NTRS2010

A Dual Launch Robotic and Human Lunar Mission Architecture

This paper describes a comprehensive lunar exploration architecture developed by Marshall Space Flight Center's Advanced Concepts Office that features a science-based surface exploration strategy and a transportation architecture that uses two launches of a heavy lift launch vehicle to deliver human and robotic mission systems to the moon. The principal advantage of the dual launch lunar mission strategy is the reduced cost and risk resulting from the development of just one launch vehicle system. The dual launch lunar mission architecture may also enhance opportunities for commercial and international partnerships by using expendable launch vehicle services for robotic missions or development of surface exploration elements. Furthermore, this architecture is particularly suited to the integration of robotic and human exploration to maximize science return. For surface operations, an innovative dual-mode rover is presented that is capable of performing robotic science exploration as well as transporting human crew conducting surface exploration. The dual-mode rover can be deployed to the lunar surface to perform precursor science activities, collect samples, scout potential crew landing sites, and meet the crew at a designated landing site. With this approach, the crew is able to evaluate the robotically collected samples to select the best samples for return to Earth to maximize the scientific value. The rovers can continue robotic exploration after the crew leaves the lunar surface. The transportation system for the dual launch mission architecture uses a lunar-orbit-rendezvous strategy. Two heavy lift launch vehicles depart from Earth within a six hour period to transport the lunar lander and crew elements separately to lunar orbit. In lunar orbit, the crew transfer vehicle docks with the lander and the crew boards the lander for descent to the surface. After the surface mission, the crew returns to the orbiting transfer vehicle for the return to the Earth. This paper describes a complete transportation architecture including the analysis of transportation element options and sensitivities including: transportation element mass to surface landed mass; lander propellant options; and mission crew size. Based on this analysis, initial design concepts for the launch vehicle, crew module and lunar lander are presented. The paper also describes how the dual launch lunar mission architecture would fit into a more general overarching human space exploration philosophy that would allow expanded application of mission transportation elements for missions beyond the Earth-moon realm.

Jones, David L.↗
NASA NTRS2011

ELaNa - Educational Launch of Nanosatellite Enhance Education Through Space Flight

One of NASA's missions is to attract and retain students in the science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) disciplines. Creating missions or programs to achieve this important goal helps strengthen NASA and the nation's future work force as well as engage and inspire Americans and the rest of the world. During the last three years, in an attempt to revitalize educational space flight, NASA generated a new and exciting initiative. This initiative, NASA's Educational Launch of Nanosatellite (ELaNa), is now fully operational and producing exciting results. Nanosatellites are small secondary satellite payloads called CubeSats. One of the challenges that the CubeSat community faced over the past few years was the lack of rides into space. Students were building CubeSats but they just sat on the shelf until an opportunity arose. In some cases, these opportunities never developed and so the CubeSat never made it to orbit. The ELaNa initiative is changing this by providing sustainable launch opportunities for educational CubeSats. Across America, these CubeSats are currently being built by students in high school all the way through graduate school. Now students know that if they build their CubeSat, submit their proposal and are selected for an ELaNa mission, they will have the opportunity to fly their satellite. ELaNa missions are the first educational cargo to be carried on expendable launch vehicles (ELY) for NASA's Launch Services Program (LSP). The first ELaNa CubeSats were slated to begin their journey to orbit in February 2011 with NASA's Glory mission. Due to an anomaly with the launch vehicle, ELaNa II and Glory failed to reach orbit. This first ELaNa mission was comprised of three IU CubeSats built by students at Montana State University (Explorer Prime Flight 1), the University of Colorado (HERMES), and Kentucky Space, a consortium of state universities (KySat). The interface between the launch vehicle and the CubeSat, the Poly-Picosatellite Orbital Deployer (P-POD), was developed and built by students at California Polytechnic State University (Cal Poly). Integrating a P-POD on a NASA ELV was not an easy task. The creation of new processes and requirements as well as numerous reviews and approvals were necessary within NASA before the first ELaNa mission could be attached to a NASA launch vehicle (LV). One of the key objectives placed on an ELaNa mission is that the CubeSat and PPOD does not increase the baseline risk to the primary mission and launch vehicle. The ELaNa missions achieve this objective by placing a rigorous management and engineering process on both the LV and CubeSat teams. So, what is the future of ELaNa? Currently there are 16 P-POD missions manifested across four launch vehicles to support educational CubeSats selected under the NASA CubeSat Initiative. From this initiative, a rigorous selection process produced 22-student CubeSat missions that are scheduled to fly before the end of 2012. For the initiative to continue, organizations need to submit proposals to the annual CubeSat initiative call so they have the opportunity to be manifested and launched.

Skrobot, Garrett Lee↗
NASA NTRS2009

Vibro-Acoustic Analysis of NASA's Space Shuttle Launch Pad 39A Flame Trench Wall

A vital element to NASA's manned space flight launch operations is the Kennedy Space Center Launch Complex 39's launch pads A and B. Originally designed and constructed In the 1960s for the Saturn V rockets used for the Apollo missions, these pads were modified above grade to support Space Shuttle missions. But below grade, each of the pad's original walls (including a 42 feet deep, 58 feet wide, and 450 feet long tunnel designed to deflect flames and exhaust gases, the flame trench) remained unchanged. On May 31, 2008 during the launch of STS-124, over 3500 of the. 22000 interlocking refractory bricks that lined east wall of the flame trench, protecting the pad structure were liberated from pad 39A. The STS-124 launch anomaly spawned an agency-wide initiative to determine the failure root cause, to assess the impact of debris on vehicle and ground support equipment safety, and to prescribe corrective action. The investigation encompassed radar imaging, infrared video review, debris transport mechanism analysis using computational fluid dynamics, destructive testing, and non-destructive evaluation, including vibroacoustic analysis, in order to validate the corrective action. The primary focus of this paper is on the analytic approach, including static, modal, and vibro-acoustic analysis, required to certify the corrective action, and ensure Integrity and operational reliability for future launches. Due to the absence of instrumentation (including pressure transducers, acoustic pressure sensors, and accelerometers) in the flame trench, defining an accurate acoustic signature of the launch environment during shuttle main engine/solid rocket booster Ignition and vehicle ascent posed a significant challenge. Details of the analysis, including the derivation of launch environments, the finite element approach taken, and analysistest/ launch data correlation are discussed. Data obtained from the recent launch of STS-126 from Pad 39A was instrumental in validating the design analysis philosophies outlined in this paper.

Margasahayam, Ravi N.↗
NASA NTRS2007

KSC Vertical Launch Site Evaluation

RS&H was tasked to evaluate the potential available launch sites for a combined two user launch pad. The Launch sites were to be contained entirely within current Kennedy Space Center property lines. The user launch vehicles to be used for evaluation are in the one million pounds of first stage thrust range. Additionally a second evaluation criterion was added early on in the study. A single user launch site was to be evaluated for a two million pound first stage thrust vehicle. Both scenarios were to be included in the report. To provide fidelity to the study criteria, a specific launch vehicle in the one million pound thrust range was chosen as a guide post or straw-man launch vehicle. The RpK K-1 vehicle is a current Commercial Orbital Transportation System (COTS), contract awardee along with the SpaceX Falcon 9 vehicle. SpaceX, at the time of writing, is planning to launch COTS and possibly other payloads from Cx-40 on Cape Canaveral Air Force Station property. RpK has yet to declare a specific launch site as their east coast US launch location. As such it was deemed appropriate that RpK's vehicle requirements be used as conceptual criteria. For the purposes of this study those criteria were marginally generalized to make them less specifiC.

Phillips, Lynne V.↗
NASA NTRS2003

High Altitude Launch for a Practical SSTO

Existing engineering materials allow the construction of towers to heights of many kilometers. Orbital launch from a high altitude has significant advantages over sea-level launch due to the reduced atmospheric pressure, resulting in lower atmospheric drag on the vehicle and allowing higher rocket engine performance. high-altitude launch sites are particularly advantageous for single-stage to orbit (SSTO) vehicles, where the payload is typically 2% of the initial launch mass. An earlier paper enumerated some of the advantages of high altitude launch of SSTO vehicles. In this paper, we calculate launch trajectories for a candidate SSTO vehicle, and calculate the advantage of launch at launch altitudes 5 to 25 kilometer altitudes above sea level. The performance increase can be directly translated in to increased payload capability to orbit, ranging from 5 to 20% increase in the mass to orbit. For a candidate vehicle with an initial payload fraction of 2% of gross lift-off weight, this corresponds to 31 % increase in payload (for 5-km launch altitude) to 122% additional payload (for 25-km launch altitude).

Landis, Geoffrey A.↗