Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Power Tower”

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.

244 records · Page 14
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2018

Microgravity Experiments of Solid Waste Conversion into Useful Commodities

This Summer I participated in two projects at Kennedy Space Center in Cape Canaveral, Florida. The projects focus on the NASA's Deep Space Gateway applications for future Mars travel. All of these projects use recycling technology to use resources found on Earth and on other planets for fuel and other environmental applications. The first project I took the lead on is “Plasma Arc Gasification.” Plasma is a high temperature and very efficient way to process waste to create usable byproducts. The plasma chamber in temperature is comparable to that of the sun and this energy will help create an environment in which the waste can be recycled properly for not only plant support, but also for possible fuel application as well. I preformed the tests in a quartz tube, which is used to hold the waste (cotton, plastics, nylon, paper and a human waste simulant) and the waste is then combusted using O2 (present in air) into gases such as H2, H2O, CH4 and CO2. I determined which gases are present using a Fourier-transform infrared spectroscopy (FTIR) machine, which analyzes the peaks of the gases using liquid nitrogen. Problems arose in the beginning from the reactor emitting electromagnetic waves (EMI) that interfered with the technology of the experiment, specifically the thermocouples. This was solved through multiple tests with the positioning of the thermocouple power supply further away from the plasma reactor. I worked with another intern, Daniel Santander, who developed a space plant chamber which uses CO2 and H2O (harvested from the plasma reactor) to grow plants in space. The chamber possess a CO2 monitor, which controls the amount of gas that enters the chamber, along with a water integration system to supply the amount of water needed for proper plan growth. This technology will then be used for plant growth in space for the Astronauts on future space flights and possibly on the International Space Station (ISS). The second project I worked on is the “Orbital Syngas / Commodity Augmentation Reactor (OSCAR)” which focuses on the issues experienced in long-duration space flight regarding waste disposal. In previous space flight missions, waste was stored on board and returned to Earth for disposal. This technique is not applicable to long space flight missions to Mars due to the rocket being months away from Earth. OSCAR is using microgravity waste disposal techniques to produce fuels from the recycled waste. The waste is converted to syngas through a thermal degradation process. This process helps create an environmentally friendly way to dispose and reuse trash on board the space craft. Currently waste is being tested in the form of cotton and plastics. OSCAR is designed as a microgravity reactor that is currently being tested in a drop tower rig at Glenn Research Center. I helped design the 3D model for the insulation that will line the reactor. The first few trials, I dissolved the plastic of the mold in acetone. This method worked, but was very costly. I then received a silicone material to construct the mold from Swamp Works here at Kennedy. Through multiple trials with the silicone, this method worked best for developing the end pieces of the insulation for the chamber.

Plasma↗
NASA NTRS2004

Microgravity Spray Cooling Research for High Powered Laser Applications

An extremely powerful laser is being developed at Goddard Space Flight Center for use on a satellite. This laser has several potential applications. One application is to use it for upper atmosphere weather research. In this case, the laser would reflect off aerosols in the upper atmosphere and bounce back to the satellite, where the aerosol velocities could be calculated and thus the upper atmosphere weather patterns could be monitored. A second application would be for the US. Air Force, which wants to use the laser strategically as a weapon for satellite defense. The Air Force fears that in the coming years as more and more nations gain limited space capabilities that American satellites may become targets, and the laser could protect the satellites. Regardless of the ultimate application, however, a critical step along the way to putting the laser in space is finding a way to efficiently cool it. While operating the laser becomes very hot and must be cooled to prevent overheating. On earth, this is accomplished by simply running cool tap water over the laser to keep it cool. But on a satellite, this is too inefficient. This would require too much water mass to be practical. Instead, we are investigating spray cooling as a means to cool the laser in microgravity. Spray cooling requires much less volume of fluid, and thus could be suitable for use on a satellite. We have inherited a 2.2 second Drop Tower rig to conduct our research with. In our experiments, water is pressurized with a compressed air tank and sprayed through a nozzle onto our test plate. We can vary the pressure applied to the water and the temperature of the plate before an experiment trial. The whole process takes place in simulated microgravity in the 2.2 second Drop Tower, and a high speed video camera records the spray as it hits the plate. We have made much progress in the past few weeks on these experiments. The rig originally did not have the capability to heat the test plate, but I did some heat transfer calculations and picked out a heater to order for the rig. I learned QBasic programming language to change the operating code for our drops, allowing us to rapidly cycle the spray nozzle open and closed to study the effects. We have derived an equation for flow rate vs. pressure for our experiment. We have recorded several videos of drops at different pressures, some with heated test plate and some without, and have noticed substantial differences in the liquid behavior. I have also changed the computer program to write a file with temperature vs. time profiles for the test plate, and once the necessary thermocouple comes in (it was ordered last week), we will have temperature profiles to accompany the videos. Once we have these temperature profiles to go with the videos, we will be able to see how the temperature is affected by the spray at different pressures, and how the spray changes its behavior once as the plate changes from hot to cool. With quantitative temperature data, we can then mathematically model the heat transfer from the plate to the cooling spray. Finally, we can look at the differences between trials in microgravity and those in normal earth gravity.

Zivich, Chad P.↗
NASA NTRS1993

Preliminary SP-100/Stirling heat exchanger designs

Analytic modeling of several heat exchanger concepts to couple the SP-100 nuclear reactor primary lithium loop and the Space Stirling Power Convertor (SSPC) was performed. Four 25 kWe SSPC's are used to produce the required 100 kW of electrical power. This design work focused on the interface between a single SSPC and the primary lithium loop. Manifolding to separate and collect the four channel flow was not modeled. This work modeled two separate types of heat exchanger interfaces (conductive coupling and radiative coupling) to explore their relative advantages and disadvantages. The minimum mass design of the conductively coupled concepts was 18 kg or 0.73 kg/kWe for a single 25 kWe convertor. The minimum mass radiatively coupled concept was 41 kg or 1.64 kg/kWe. The direct conduction heat exchanger provides a lighter weight system because of its ability to operate the Stirling convertor evaporator at higher heat fluxes than those attainable by the radiatively coupled systems. Additionally the conductively coupled concepts had relatively small volumes and provide potentially simpler assembly. Their disadvantages were the tight tolerances and material joining problems associated with this refractory to superalloy interface. The advantages of the radiatively coupled designs were the minimal material interface problems.

Schmitz, Paul↗
NASA NTRS1997

Real Time Quantitative 3-D Imaging of Diffusion Flame Species

A low-gravity environment, in space or ground-based facilities such as drop towers, provides a unique setting for study of combustion mechanisms. Understanding the physical phenomena controlling the ignition and spread of flames in microgravity has importance for space safety as well as better characterization of dynamical and chemical combustion processes which are normally masked by buoyancy and other gravity-related effects. Even the use of so-called 'limiting cases' or the construction of 1-D or 2-D models and experiments fail to make the analysis of combustion simultaneously simple and accurate. Ideally, to bridge the gap between chemistry and fluid mechanics in microgravity combustion, species concentrations and temperature profiles are needed throughout the flame. However, restrictions associated with performing measurements in reduced gravity, especially size and weight considerations, have generally limited microgravity combustion studies to the capture of flame emissions on film or video laser Schlieren imaging and (intrusive) temperature measurements using thermocouples. Given the development of detailed theoretical models, more sophisticated studies are needed to provide the kind of quantitative data necessary to characterize the properties of microgravity combustion processes as well as provide accurate feedback to improve the predictive capabilities of the computational models. While there have been a myriad of fluid mechanical visualization studies in microgravity combustion, little experimental work has been completed to obtain reactant and product concentrations within a microgravity flame. This is largely due to the fact that traditional sampling methods (quenching microprobes using GC and/or mass spec analysis) are too heavy, slow, and cumbersome for microgravity experiments. Non-intrusive optical spectroscopic techniques have - up until now - also required excessively bulky, power hungry equipment. However, with the advent of near-IR diode lasers, the possibility now exists to obtain reactant and product concentrations and temperatures non-intrusively in microgravity combustion studies. Over the past ten years, Southwest Sciences has focused its research on the high sensitivity, quantitative detection of gas phase species using diode lasers. Our research approach combines three innovations in an experimental system resulting in a new capability for nonintrusive measurement of major combustion species. FM spectroscopy or high frequency Wavelength Modulation Spectroscopy (WMS) have recently been applied to sensitive absorption measurements at Southwest Sciences and in other laboratories using GaAlAs or InGaAsP diode lasers in the visible or near-infrared as well as lead-salt lasers in the mid-infrared spectral region. Because these lasers exhibit essentially no source noise at the high detection frequencies employed with this technique, the achievement of sensitivity approaching the detector shot noise limit is possible.

Kane, Daniel J.↗
NASA NTRS1997

Effects of Fuel Preheat on Soot Formation in Microgravity Laminar Diffusion Flames

Nonbuoyant flames offer themselves as an attractive and promising platform to gain a better understanding of soot mechanisms. The effects of buoyancy can be eliminated temporarily in drop towers which sustain brief intervals of reduced gravity-typically lower than 10(exp -3)g- extending up to several seconds at a time. Microgravity facilities have been employed to show that nonbuoyant flames are longer, wider and sootier than their normal-gravity counterparts. Sunderland et al. recently verified the existence of smoke point in laminar nonbuoyant flames. As reported, microgravity flames operating above their smoke point displayed a blunt tip and much broader soot-containing regimes in comparison to their buoyant counterparts. Mortazavi et al. established that residence times in microgravity laminar jet diffusion flames with Re=0(100) tend to be proportional to burner diameter and inversely proportional to burner exit velocity. This offers the capability to alter residence times in nonbuoyant laminar jet diffusion flames when varying the burner exit diameters and velocities. Megaridis et al. presented a quantitative definition of the soot-field structure within laminar microgravity jet diffusion flames which operated well above their smoke point. The experimental methodology involved a full-field laser-light extinction technique and jet diffusion flames of nitrogen-diluted (50% vol.) acetylene fuel burning in quiescent air at atmospheric pressure. The work was conducted at the 2.2s drop tower of the NASA Lewis Research Center (NASA-LeRC). Parallel work on 1-g flames was also presented in (6) to facilitate comparisons on the effect of gravity on the soot fields. As reported, the soot spatial distributions in 0-g flames did not change in a detectable manner after 1s within a typical 2.2s experiment. During that period, the soot field was shown to sustain a pronounced annular structure throughout the luminous nonbuoyant-flame zone. The maximum soot volume fraction measured at 0-g was nearly a factor of two higher than that at 1-g, thus confirming the enhanced sooting tendency of nonbuoyant flames. Greenberg and Ku presented a similar study and reported trends that matched those of for the 50% (vol.) nitrogen-diluted acetylene fuel. Furthermore, they examined pure acetylene flames and reported similar trends with respect to the influence of gravity on maximum soot volume fractions and flame cross-section-averaged soot loadings. Both studies clearly demonstrated the improved spatial resolution of microgravity flames compared to their normal-gravity counterparts. The current study evaluates the influence of moderate fuel preheat on soot formation within 0-g laminar gas jet diffusion flames. While fuel temperature variations have little influence on residence times in 1-g, they have a much more significant effect in 0-g. The primary objective of this program is to quantify this effect and its consequences on sooting by comparing soot volume fraction distributions under preheated and unpreheated-fuel conditions. Furthermore, the current work aims at expanding the limited soot database available for nonbuoyant flames. Soot fields in such flames can be used to perform additional tests of recently developed soot sub-models which have the potential to become powerful predicting tools in combustion design.

Konsur, Bogdan↗
NASA NTRS2016

NASA's Hydrogen Outpost: The Rocket Systems Area at Plum Brook Station

"There was pretty much a general knowledge about hydrogen and its capabilities," recalled former researcher Robert Graham. "The question was, could you use it in a rocket engine? Do we have the technology to handle it? How will it cool? Will it produce so much heat release that we can't cool the engine? These were the questions that we had to address." The National Aeronautics and Space Administration's (NASA) Glenn Research Center, referred to historically as the Lewis Research Center, made a concerted effort to answer these and related questions in the 1950s and 1960s. The center played a critical role transforming hydrogen's theoretical potential into a flight-ready propellant. Since then NASA has utilized liquid hydrogen to send humans and robots to the Moon, propel dozens of spacecraft across the universe, orbit scores of satellite systems, and power 135 space shuttle flights. Rocket pioneers had recognized hydrogen's potential early on, but its extremely low boiling temperature and low density made it impracticable as a fuel. The Lewis laboratory first demonstrated that liquid hydrogen could be safely utilized in rocket and aircraft propulsion systems, then perfected techniques to store, pump, and cleanly burn the fuel, as well as use it to cool the engine. The Rocket Systems Area at Lewis's remote testing area, Plum Brook Station, played a little known, but important role in the center's hydrogen research efforts. This publication focuses on the activities at the Rocket Systems Area, but it also discusses hydrogen's role in NASA's space program and Lewis's overall hydrogen work. The Rocket Systems Area included nine physically modest test sites and three test stands dedicated to liquid-hydrogen-related research. In 1962 Cleveland Plain Dealer reporter Karl Abram claimed, "The rocket facility looks more like a petroleum refinery. Its test rigs sprout pipes, valves and tanks. During the night test runs, excess hydrogen is burned from special stacks in the best Oklahoma oil field tradition." Besides the Rocket Systems Area, Plum Brook Station also included a nuclear test reactor, a large vacuum tank, a hypersonic wind tunnel, and a full-scale upper-stage rocket stand. The Rocket Systems Area operated from 1961 until NASA shut down all of Plum Brook in 1974. The center reopened Plum Brook in the late 1980s and continues to use several test facilities. The Rocket Systems Area, however, was not restored. Today Plum Brook resembles a nature preserve more than an oil refinery. Lush fields and forests separate the large test facilities. Until recently, the abandoned Rocket Systems Area structures and equipment were visible amongst the greenery. These space-age ruins, particularly the three towers, stood as silent sentinels over the sparsely populated reservation. Few knew the story of these mysterious facilities when NASA removed them in the late 2000s.

Rocket Systems↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Modeling and Simulation of Tank Pressure Control using Zero-Boil Off Active Thermal Control for LOXSAT Technology Demonstration Mission

To-date, research and modeling of cryogenic fluid management technologies (CFM) for spaceflight has been limited to ground tests, short-duration zero-g simulations (e.g. drop towers), and small-scale experiments on-orbit. There has not been a large-scale flight demonstration of a flight-like system. As future NASA missions to take humans further from Earth will require large, in-space cryogenic propulsion vehicles, it is imperative to begin collecting flight data for these systems to accurately model and design future vehicles. To meet this goal, NASA awarded tipping point technology demonstration awards to Eta Space, Lockheed Martin, Space Exploration Technologies (SpaceX), and United Launch Alliance (ULA) to demonstrate on-orbit storage and transfer of cryogenic propellant. For its award, Eta Space is developing LOXSAT-1. It is a small satellite that will be launched on a Rocket Lab Electron rocket. The spacecraft consists of a Rocket Lab Photon spacecraft bus with a primary payload of a spherical liquid oxygen (LOX) storage tank with thermodynamic control systems. The primary objective of the mission is to demonstrate zero-boil-off storage of liquid oxygen. To accomplish this objective, the payload is equipped with an active thermal control system fluid loop that consists of propellant management device (PMD), positive-displacement pump, heat exchanger connected to a cryocooler, and a spray bar mixing injector. When the fluid loop is operating, fluid is drawn from the tank by the PMD and pumped through the heat exchanger, lowering the fluid temperature below the fluid temperature in the tank. This subcooled liquid is then injected back into the tank through the spray bar. The subcooled injected liquid has two effects. If it is sprayed into the ullage space, the injected liquid will form into jets or droplets and exchange heat with the ullage gas. This will cool and condense the gas, reducing the pressure in the tank. Additionally, the liquid that is not sprayed through the ullage, as well as any remaining liquid spray from the ullage, will rejoin the liquid mass of the tank, lowering the bulk temperature of the liquid. These combines effects provide for zero-boil off pressure control by lowering the tank pressure and the liquid saturation pressure simultaneously, ensuring the liquid stays subcooled. To model these complex mechanics and predict the performance of the active thermal control system, NASA is providing Eta Space with 3 parallel models of the tank. The approach of providing 3 different models allows for cross-checking and comparisons between the three to better understand how different modeling assumptions and selection semi-empirical factors affects the modeling result. Additionally, developing 3 models provides three different schemes for numerical simulation, providing confidence that results depict real physical phenomenon and not numerical quirks of the program. Within the tank thermodynamics, there are two primary areas of heat transfer we concern ourselves with: the heat transfer between the ullage space and the droplet spray, and between the ullage space and bulk liquid. For the droplet heat transfer, there are multiple sets of assumptions that can be made and correlations that can be used. Currently, two working models - the TankSIM model and Easy5 model – provide for an overview of the different approaches available. The TankSIM model and Easy5 model use two different models for droplet heating and evaporation that illustrate how the models use different types of mechanisms to arrive at the same answer. For the TankSIM model, droplets are treated as spheres of constant radius. Heat is transferred from the ullage to the droplet and warms the droplet until it reaches saturation, then the droplet begins evaporating and reducing its radius and mass. To calculate the heat transfer coefficient between the droplet and ullage, the Ranz-Marshall correlation is used. To determine the number of droplets in the ullage, a resident mass approach is used. This approach averages the number of droplets such that residuals at the start-up and shut-off of the spray bar cancel out. This same approach is used in the Easy5 model. The GFSSP model implements a linked list to track individual droplet “nodes” within the model. For the Easy5 model, the droplet is assumed to have an interface at a temperature equal to the saturation temperature corresponding to the pressure of the gas phase. The heat transfer from the gas to the interface and the interface to the droplet bulk is then calculated, and the net mass transfer between the droplet and interface is determined by performing an energy balance across the interface. For the gas side of the interface, the Ranz-Marshall correlation is used. For the liquid side of the interface, a variety of correlations were tried, including Kronig and Brink (1950) and effective conductivity models. As a result of these assumptions, the Easy5 model currently predicts faster depressurization, as at saturated vapor conditions, the heat transfer coeffect on the liquid side for the Easy5 model is greater than the heat transfer coefficient predicted by Ranz-Marshall used in the TankSIM code. This greater heat flux translates into faster condensation of the saturated ullage gas. At the bulk liquid to ullage interface, the models are in much closer agreement. Both models model the ullage as a sphere centered within the bulk liquid in the tank, and both use the energy-jumping boundary condition to model heat and mass transfer across the interface. There are slight differences in how the interface temperature is calculated, however. The Easy5 model assumes the temperature of the interface is equal to the saturation temperature associated with the pressure of the gas phase. The TankSIM model calculates this temperature with Alabovskii’s equation, which provides a correction factor for interface temperatures. Analysis tasks are focused on determining rates of depressurization within the tank during active cooling operation. To maintain net positive suction head at the pump inlet, the tank pressure cannot fall faster than the saturation pressure associated with the temperature of the bulk liquid. Additionally, there is interest in analyzing the performance of the loop at different pump speeds and cryocooler input powers. Adjusting the flowrate affects both the performance of the heat exchanger between the cryocooler and pumped liquid, and the heat transfer between the droplet spray and the ullage. Ideally, a pump speed and cryocooler power can be selected that will allow the tank to operate in zero-boil-off mode with a very narrow range of storage pressure.

Cameron J. Hines↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Modeling and Simulation of Tank Pressure Control using Zero-Boil Off Active Thermal Control for LOXSAT Technology Demonstration Mission

To-date, research and modeling of cryogenic fluid management technologies (CFM) for spaceflight has been limited to ground tests, short-duration zero-g simulations (e.g. drop towers), and small-scale experiments on-orbit. There has not been a large-scale flight demonstration of a flight-like system. As future NASA missions to take humans further from Earth will require large, in-space cryogenic propulsion vehicles, it is imperative to begin collecting flight data for these systems to accurately model and design future vehicles. To meet this goal, NASA awarded tipping point technology demonstration awards to Eta Space, Lockheed Martin, Space Exploration Technologies (SpaceX), and United Launch Alliance (ULA) to demonstrate on-orbit storage and transfer of cryogenic propellant. For its award, Eta Space is developing LOXSAT-1. It is a small satellite that will be launched on a Rocket Lab Electron rocket. The spacecraft consists of a Rocket Lab Photon spacecraft bus with a primary payload of a spherical liquid oxygen (LOX) storage tank with thermodynamic control systems. The primary objective of the mission is to demonstrate zero-boil-off storage of liquid oxygen. To accomplish this objective, the payload is equipped with an active thermal control system fluid loop that consists of propellant management device (PMD), positive-displacement pump, heat exchanger connected to a cryocooler, and a spray bar mixing injector. When the fluid loop is operating, fluid is drawn from the tank by the PMD and pumped through the heat exchanger, lowering the fluid temperature below the fluid temperature in the tank. This subcooled liquid is then injected back into the tank through the spray bar. The subcooled injected liquid has two effects. If it is sprayed into the ullage space, the injected liquid will form into jets or droplets and exchange heat with the ullage gas. This will cool and condense the gas, reducing the pressure in the tank. Additionally, the liquid that is not sprayed through the ullage, as well as any remaining liquid spray from the ullage, will rejoin the liquid mass of the tank, lowering the bulk temperature of the liquid. These combines effects provide for zero-boil off pressure control by lowering the tank pressure and the liquid saturation pressure simultaneously, ensuring the liquid stays subcooled. To model these complex mechanics and predict the performance of the active thermal control system, NASA is providing Eta Space with 3 parallel models of the tank. The approach of providing 3 different models allows for cross-checking and comparisons between the three to better understand how different modeling assumptions and selection semi-empirical factors affects the modeling result. Additionally, developing 3 models provides three different schemes for numerical simulation, providing confidence that results depict real physical phenomenon and not numerical quirks of the program. Within the tank thermodynamics, there are two primary areas of heat transfer we concern ourselves with: the heat transfer between the ullage space and the droplet spray, and between the ullage space and bulk liquid. For the droplet heat transfer, there are multiple sets of assumptions that can be made and correlations that can be used. Currently, two working models - the TankSIM model and Easy5 model – provide for an overview of the different approaches available. The TankSIM model and Easy5 model use two different models for droplet heating and evaporation that illustrate how the models use different types of mechanisms to arrive at the same answer. For the TankSIM model, droplets are treated as spheres of constant radius. Heat is transferred from the ullage to the droplet and warms the droplet until it reaches saturation, then the droplet begins evaporating and reducing its radius and mass. To calculate the heat transfer coefficient between the droplet and ullage, the Ranz-Marshall correlation is used. To determine the number of droplets in the ullage, a resident mass approach is used. This approach averages the number of droplets such that residuals at the start-up and shut-off of the spray bar cancel out. This same approach is used in the Easy5 model. The GFSSP model implements a linked list to track individual droplet “nodes” within the model. For the Easy5 model, the droplet is assumed to have an interface at a temperature equal to the saturation temperature corresponding to the pressure of the gas phase. The heat transfer from the gas to the interface and the interface to the droplet bulk is then calculated, and the net mass transfer between the droplet and interface is determined by performing an energy balance across the interface. For the gas side of the interface, the Ranz-Marshall correlation is used. For the liquid side of the interface, a variety of correlations were tried, including Kronig and Brink (1950) and effective conductivity models. As a result of these assumptions, the Easy5 model currently predicts faster depressurization, as at saturated vapor conditions, the heat transfer coeffect on the liquid side for the Easy5 model is greater than the heat transfer coefficient predicted by Ranz-Marshall used in the TankSIM code. This greater heat flux translates into faster condensation of the saturated ullage gas. At the bulk liquid to ullage interface, the models are in much closer agreement. Both models model the ullage as a sphere centered within the bulk liquid in the tank, and both use the energy-jumping boundary condition to model heat and mass transfer across the interface. There are slight differences in how the interface temperature is calculated, however. The Easy5 model assumes the temperature of the interface is equal to the saturation temperature associated with the pressure of the gas phase. The TankSIM model calculates this temperature with Alabovskii’s equation, which provides a correction factor for interface temperatures. Analysis tasks are focused on determining rates of depressurization within the tank during active cooling operation. To maintain net positive suction head at the pump inlet, the tank pressure cannot fall faster than the saturation pressure associated with the temperature of the bulk liquid. Additionally, there is interest in analyzing the performance of the loop at different pump speeds and cryocooler input powers. Adjusting the flowrate affects both the performance of the heat exchanger between the cryocooler and pumped liquid, and the heat transfer between the droplet spray and the ullage. Ideally, a pump speed and cryocooler power can be selected that will allow the tank to operate in zero-boil-off mode with a very narrow range of storage pressure.

zero boil-off↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Modeling and Simulation of Tank Pressure Control using Zero-Boil Off Active Thermal Control for LOXSAT Technology Demonstration Mission

To-date, research and modeling of cryogenic fluid management technologies (CFM) for spaceflight has been limited to ground tests, short-duration zero-g simulations (e.g. drop towers), and small-scale experiments on-orbit. There has not been a large-scale flight demonstration of a flight-like system. As future NASA missions to take humans further from Earth will require large, in-space cryogenic propulsion vehicles, it is imperative to begin collecting flight data for these systems to accurately model and design future vehicles. To meet this goal, NASA awarded tipping point technology demonstration awards to Eta Space, Lockheed Martin, Space Exploration Technologies (SpaceX), and United Launch Alliance (ULA) to demonstrate on-orbit storage and transfer of cryogenic propellant. For its award, Eta Space is developing LOXSAT-1. It is a small satellite that will be launched on a Rocket Lab Electron rocket. The spacecraft consists of a Rocket Lab Photon spacecraft bus with a primary payload of a spherical liquid oxygen (LOX) storage tank with thermodynamic control systems. The primary objective of the mission is to demonstrate zero-boil-off storage of liquid oxygen. To accomplish this objective, the payload is equipped with an active thermal control system fluid loop that consists of propellant management device (PMD), positive-displacement pump, heat exchanger connected to a cryocooler, and a spray bar mixing injector. When the fluid loop is operating, fluid is drawn from the tank by the PMD and pumped through the heat exchanger, lowering the fluid temperature below the fluid temperature in the tank. This subcooled liquid is then injected back into the tank through the spray bar. The subcooled injected liquid has two effects. If it is sprayed into the ullage space, the injected liquid will form into jets or droplets and exchange heat with the ullage gas. This will cool and condense the gas, reducing the pressure in the tank. Additionally, the liquid that is not sprayed through the ullage, as well as any remaining liquid spray from the ullage, will rejoin the liquid mass of the tank, lowering the bulk temperature of the liquid. These combines effects provide for zero-boil off pressure control by lowering the tank pressure and the liquid saturation pressure simultaneously, ensuring the liquid stays subcooled. To model these complex mechanics and predict the performance of the active thermal control system, NASA is providing Eta Space with 3 parallel models of the tank. The approach of providing 3 different models allows for cross-checking and comparisons between the three to better understand how different modeling assumptions and selection semi-empirical factors affects the modeling result. Additionally, developing 3 models provides three different schemes for numerical simulation, providing confidence that results depict real physical phenomenon and not numerical quirks of the program. Within the tank thermodynamics, there are two primary areas of heat transfer we concern ourselves with: the heat transfer between the ullage space and the droplet spray, and between the ullage space and bulk liquid. For the droplet heat transfer, there are multiple sets of assumptions that can be made and correlations that can be used. Currently, two working models - the TankSIM model and Easy5 model – provide for an overview of the different approaches available. The TankSIM model and Easy5 model use two different models for droplet heating and evaporation that illustrate how the models use different types of mechanisms to arrive at the same answer. For the TankSIM model, droplets are treated as spheres of constant radius. Heat is transferred from the ullage to the droplet and warms the droplet until it reaches saturation, then the droplet begins evaporating and reducing its radius and mass. To calculate the heat transfer coefficient between the droplet and ullage, the Ranz-Marshall correlation is used. To determine the number of droplets in the ullage, a resident mass approach is used. This approach averages the number of droplets such that residuals at the start-up and shut-off of the spray bar cancel out. This same approach is used in the Easy5 model. The GFSSP model implements a linked list to track individual droplet “nodes” within the model. For the Easy5 model, the droplet is assumed to have an interface at a temperature equal to the saturation temperature corresponding to the pressure of the gas phase. The heat transfer from the gas to the interface and the interface to the droplet bulk is then calculated, and the net mass transfer between the droplet and interface is determined by performing an energy balance across the interface. For the gas side of the interface, the Ranz-Marshall correlation is used. For the liquid side of the interface, a variety of correlations were tried, including Kronig and Brink (1950) and effective conductivity models. As a result of these assumptions, the Easy5 model currently predicts faster depressurization, as at saturated vapor conditions, the heat transfer coeffect on the liquid side for the Easy5 model is greater than the heat transfer coefficient predicted by Ranz-Marshall used in the TankSIM code. This greater heat flux translates into faster condensation of the saturated ullage gas. At the bulk liquid to ullage interface, the models are in much closer agreement. Both models model the ullage as a sphere centered within the bulk liquid in the tank, and both use the energy-jumping boundary condition to model heat and mass transfer across the interface. There are slight differences in how the interface temperature is calculated, however. The Easy5 model assumes the temperature of the interface is equal to the saturation temperature associated with the pressure of the gas phase. The TankSIM model calculates this temperature with Alabovskii’s equation, which provides a correction factor for interface temperatures. Analysis tasks are focused on determining rates of depressurization within the tank during active cooling operation. To maintain net positive suction head at the pump inlet, the tank pressure cannot fall faster than the saturation pressure associated with the temperature of the bulk liquid. Additionally, there is interest in analyzing the performance of the loop at different pump speeds and cryocooler input powers. Adjusting the flowrate affects both the performance of the heat exchanger between the cryocooler and pumped liquid, and the heat transfer between the droplet spray and the ullage. Ideally, a pump speed and cryocooler power can be selected that will allow the tank to operate in zero-boil-off mode with a very narrow range of storage pressure.

zero boil-off↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Modeling and Simulation of Tank Pressure Control using Zero-Boiloff Active Thermal Control for LOXSAT Technology Demonstration Mission

To-date, research and modeling of cryogenic fluid management technologies (CFM) for spaceflight has been limited to ground tests, short-duration zero-g simulations (e.g. drop towers), and small-scale experiments on-orbit. There has not been a large-scale flight demonstration of a flight-like system. As future NASA missions to take humans further from Earth will require large, in-space cryogenic propulsion vehicles, it is imperative to begin collecting flight data for these systems to accurately model and design future vehicles. To meet this goal, NASA awarded tipping point technology demonstration awards to Eta Space, Lockheed Martin, Space Exploration Technologies (SpaceX), and United Launch Alliance (ULA) to demonstrate on-orbit storage and transfer of cryogenic propellant. For its award, Eta Space is developing LOXSAT-1. It is a small satellite that will be launched on a Rocket Lab Electron rocket. The spacecraft consists of a Rocket Lab Photon spacecraft bus with a primary payload of a spherical liquid oxygen (LOX) storage tank with thermodynamic control systems. The primary objective of the mission is to demonstrate zero-boil-off storage of liquid oxygen. To accomplish this objective, the payload is equipped with an active thermal control system fluid loop that consists of propellant management device (PMD), positive-displacement pump, heat exchanger connected to a cryocooler, and a spray bar mixing injector. When the fluid loop is operating, fluid is drawn from the tank by the PMD and pumped through the heat exchanger, lowering the fluid temperature below the fluid temperature in the tank. This subcooled liquid is then injected back into the tank through the spray bar. The subcooled injected liquid has two effects. If it is sprayed into the ullage space, the injected liquid will form into jets or droplets and exchange heat with the ullage gas. This will cool and condense the gas, reducing the pressure in the tank. Additionally, the liquid that is not sprayed through the ullage, as well as any remaining liquid spray from the ullage, will rejoin the liquid mass of the tank, lowering the bulk temperature of the liquid. These combines effects provide for zero-boil off pressure control by lowering the tank pressure and the liquid saturation pressure simultaneously, ensuring the liquid stays subcooled. To model these complex mechanics and predict the performance of the active thermal control system, NASA is providing Eta Space with 3 parallel models of the tank. The approach of providing 3 different models allows for cross-checking and comparisons between the three to better understand how different modeling assumptions and selection semi-empirical factors affects the modeling result. Additionally, developing 3 models provides three different schemes for numerical simulation, providing confidence that results depict real physical phenomenon and not numerical quirks of the program. Within the tank thermodynamics, there are two primary areas of heat transfer we concern ourselves with: the heat transfer between the ullage space and the droplet spray, and between the ullage space and bulk liquid. For the droplet heat transfer, there are multiple sets of assumptions that can be made and correlations that can be used. Currently, two working models - the TankSIM model and Easy5 model – provide for an overview of the different approaches available. The TankSIM model and Easy5 model use two different models for droplet heating and evaporation that illustrate how the models use different types of mechanisms to arrive at the same answer. For the TankSIM model, droplets are treated as spheres of constant radius. Heat is transferred from the ullage to the droplet and warms the droplet until it reaches saturation, then the droplet begins evaporating and reducing its radius and mass. To calculate the heat transfer coefficient between the droplet and ullage, the Ranz-Marshall correlation is used. To determine the number of droplets in the ullage, a resident mass approach is used. This approach averages the number of droplets such that residuals at the start-up and shut-off of the spray bar cancel out. This same approach is used in the Easy5 model. The GFSSP model implements a linked list to track individual droplet “nodes” within the model. For the Easy5 model, the droplet is assumed to have an interface at a temperature equal to the saturation temperature corresponding to the pressure of the gas phase. The heat transfer from the gas to the interface and the interface to the droplet bulk is then calculated, and the net mass transfer between the droplet and interface is determined by performing an energy balance across the interface. For the gas side of the interface, the Ranz-Marshall correlation is used. For the liquid side of the interface, a variety of correlations were tried, including Kronig and Brink (1950) and effective conductivity models. As a result of these assumptions, the Easy5 model currently predicts faster depressurization, as at saturated vapor conditions, the heat transfer coeffect on the liquid side for the Easy5 model is greater than the heat transfer coefficient predicted by Ranz-Marshall used in the TankSIM code. This greater heat flux translates into faster condensation of the saturated ullage gas. At the bulk liquid to ullage interface, the models are in much closer agreement. Both models model the ullage as a sphere centered within the bulk liquid in the tank, and both use the energy-jumping boundary condition to model heat and mass transfer across the interface. There are slight differences in how the interface temperature is calculated, however. The Easy5 model assumes the temperature of the interface is equal to the saturation temperature associated with the pressure of the gas phase. The TankSIM model calculates this temperature with Alabovskii’s equation, which provides a correction factor for interface temperatures. Analysis tasks are focused on determining rates of depressurization within the tank during active cooling operation. To maintain net positive suction head at the pump inlet, the tank pressure cannot fall faster than the saturation pressure associated with the temperature of the bulk liquid. Additionally, there is interest in analyzing the performance of the loop at different pump speeds and cryocooler input powers. Adjusting the flowrate affects both the performance of the heat exchanger between the cryocooler and pumped liquid, and the heat transfer between the droplet spray and the ullage. Ideally, a pump speed and cryocooler power can be selected that will allow the tank to operate in zero-boil-off mode with a very narrow range of storage pressure.

zero boil-off↗