Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Rocket Trajectories”

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 289 records · Page 16

Propulsion Technology Assessment: Science and Enabling Technologies to Explore the Interstellar Medium

Led by the Keck Institute for Space Studies at the California Institute of Technology, the Advanced Concepts Office at NASA's George C. Marshall Space Flight Center conducted a study to assess what low-thrust advanced propulsion system candidates, existing and near term, could deliver a small, Voyager-like satellite to our solar system's heliopause, approximately 100 AU from the center of the sun, within 10 years and within a 2025-2035 launch window. The advanced propulsion system trade study consisted of three candidates, including a Magnetically Shielded Miniature (MaSMi) Hall thruster, a solar sail and an electric sail. Two aerial densities, and thus characteristic accelerations, 0.426 mm/sq s and 0.664 mm/sq s were analyzed for the solar sail option in order understand the impact of near and long term development of this technology. Similarly, two characteristic accelerations, 1 mm/s2 and 2 mm/sq s, were also analyzed for the electric sail option in addition to tether quantities of 10 and 20, respectively, and individual tether length of 20 km. A second analysis was conducted to determine what existing solid rocket motor kick stage(s) would be required to provide additional thrust at various points in the trajectory, assuming an earth departure characteristic energy capability provided by a Space Launch System (SLS) Block 1B vehicle architecture carrying an 8.4 meter payload fairing. Two trajectory profiles were considered, including an escape trajectory using a Jupiter gravity assist (E-Ju), and an escape trajectory first performing a Jupiter gravity assist followed by an Oberth maneuver around the sun and an optional Saturn gravity assist (E-Ju-Su-Sa). The Oberth maneuver would need to be performed very close to the sun, wherein this study assumed a perihelion distance of approximately 11 solar radii, or 0.05 AU, away from the surface. The heat shield technology required to perform this type of ambitious maneuver was assumed to be similar to that of NASA's Solar Probe Plus mission, which is slated to launch in July 2018. With respect to a SLS Block 1B earth departure characteristic energy capability of 100 km2/sq s for the E-Ju trajectory option, results indicated that compared to having no advanced propulsion system onboard, both the MaSMi Hall thruster and solar sail options subtract approximately 8 to 10 years from the total trip time while the electric sail outperforms all options by subtracting up to 20 years. With respect to an average kick stage velocity capability of 2.5 to 3.5 km/s at perihelion, the most sensitive segment of the E-Ju-Su-Sa trajectory option, results indicated that both the MaSMi Hall thrust and solar sail options only subtract 1 to 3 years from the total trip time whereas the electric sail again outperforms all other options by subtracting up to 5 years. In other words, if the Technology Readiness Level of an electric sail could be increased in time, this propulsion technology could not only enable a satellite to reach 100 AU in 10 years but it could potentially do so even faster. Completing such an ambitious mission in that short of a timespan would be very attractive to many as it would be well within the average career span of any of those involved.

Hopkins, Randall C.↗

Artemis CubeSats Help Advance Exploration of the Moon, Mars, and Beyond

On April 1, NASA launched the Artemis II mission – the first crewed mission of the Artemis campaign. The nine-day lunar flyby launched on the agency’s SLS (Space Launch System) rocket and had four astronauts test the Orion spacecraft in high Earth orbit and in deep space. Four 12U CubeSats also launched on the mission, housed within the SLS’s Orion stage adapter (OSA). The spacecraft were deployed approximately five-and-a-half hours into the flight, following Orion separation and departure from SLS, as the SLS interim cryogenic propulsion stage (ICPS) and the attached OSA were in a high Earth orbit on an atmospheric disposal trajectory. All four CubeSats were successfully deployed from the launch vehicle. Deployment statuses of the spacecraft, along with updates about the SLS rocket and Artemis missions, are reported in this paper. The paper will also discuss opportunities for CubeSat payloads on future Artemis missions.

Russell Lane↗

Artemis CubeSats Help Advance Exploration of the Moon, Mars, and Beyond

On April 1, NASA launched the Artemis II mission – the first crewed mission of the Artemis campaign. The nine-day lunar flyby launched on the agency’s SLS (Space Launch System) rocket and had four astronauts test the Orion spacecraft in high Earth orbit and in deep space. Four 12U CubeSats also launched on the mission, housed within the SLS’s Orion stage adapter (OSA). The spacecraft were deployed approximately five-and-a-half hours into the flight, following Orion separation and departure from SLS, as the SLS interim cryogenic propulsion stage (ICPS) and the attached OSA were in a high Earth orbit on an atmospheric disposal trajectory. All four CubeSats were successfully deployed from the launch vehicle. Deployment statuses of the spacecraft, along with updates about the SLS rocket and Artemis missions, are reported in this paper. The paper will also discuss opportunities for CubeSat payloads on future Artemis missions.

David Hitt↗

NASA’s SLS (Space Launch System) Rocket Ready for Artemis II Lunar Mission

In early 2026, NASA will launch the Artemis II mission, an approximately 10-day long lunar mission that will fly three NASA astronauts and one CSA (Canadian Space Agency) astronaut on a free-return trajectory around the Moon, following a one-day checkout of their Orion spacecraft in Earth orbit. The mission will be the first to launch astronauts aboard NASA’s Orion spacecraft and on top of the agency’s SLS (Space Launch System) rocket. The mission will also deploy four 12U CubeSats as secondary payloads from the Orion stage adapter, following Orion separation and departure. The payloads, developed by four of NASA’s international partners, will perform a variety of science and technology investigations. The SLS and Orion for the mission are currently stacked in the Vehicle Assembly Building (VAB) at NASA’s Kennedy Space Center in Florida and are undergoing final preparations to rollout to Launch Pad 39B for a tanking test before launch. In addition to preparations for the Artemis II mission, significant progress is being made on the SLS for the Artemis III mission, which is targeted to return astronauts to the lunar surface no later than 2029. Major components of the core stage and solid rocket boosters are already at NASA Kennedy undergoing build-up for the mission. Data from the Artemis II launch and mission, as well as progress to subsequent missions, as available, will be presented.

Bruce R Askins↗

NASA’s SLS (Space Launch System) Rocket Ready for Artemis II Lunar Mission

In early 2026, NASA will launch the Artemis II mission, an approximately 10-day long lunar mission that will fly three NASA astronauts and one CSA (Canadian Space Agency) astronaut on a free-return trajectory around the Moon, following a one-day checkout of their Orion spacecraft in Earth orbit. The mission will be the first to launch astronauts aboard NASA’s Orion spacecraft and on top of the agency’s SLS (Space Launch System) rocket. The mission will also deploy four 12U CubeSats as secondary payloads from the Orion stage adapter, following Orion separation and departure. The payloads, developed by four of NASA’s international partners, will perform a variety of science and technology investigations. The SLS and Orion for the mission are currently stacked in the Vehicle Assembly Building (VAB) at NASA’s Kennedy Space Center in Florida and are undergoing final preparations to rollout to Launch Pad 39B for a tanking test before launch. In addition to preparations for the Artemis II mission, significant progress is being made on the SLS for the Artemis III mission, which is targeted to return astronauts to the lunar surface no later than 2029. Major components of the core stage and solid rocket boosters are already at NASA Kennedy undergoing build-up for the mission. Data from the Artemis II launch and mission, as well as progress to subsequent missions, as available, will be presented.

Bruce Askins↗

The effect of normal atmospheric variability on Space Shuttle Orbiter entry performance

The Space Shuttle Orbiter is controlled during entry by a combination of aerodynamic surfaces composed of elevons, a body flap, and a rudder that flares as a speedbrake, and a reaction control system that uses 16 small rocket thrusters. To determine the effects of realistic atmospheric density variations on reentry, a series of Monte Carlo trajectories were generated for each season. The performance parameters analyzed include maximum hinge moments experienced by the aerodynamic control surfaces, the maximum deflections experienced by the aerodynamic control surfaces, a range of angle-of-sideslip values, maximum dynamic pressure, maximum stagnation point heat rate, and state conditions at touchdown. The results of the investigation indicate that the Orbiter guidance and control systems could tolerate atmospheric variability without failures in the control system hardware.

Powell, R. W.↗

Conceptual analysis of a lunar base transportation system

Important to the planning for a lunar base is the development of transportation requirements for the establishment and maintenance of that base. This was accomplished as part of a lunar base systems assessment study conducted by the NASA Langley Research Center in conjunction with the NASA Johnson Space Center. Lunar base parameters are presented using a baseline lunar facility concept and timeline of developmental phases. Masses for habitation and scientific modules, power systems, life support systems, and thermal control systems were generated, assuming space station technology as a starting point. The masses were manifested by grouping various systems into cargo missions and interspersing manned flights consistent with construction and base maintenance timelines. A computer program that sizes the orbital transfer vehicles (OTV's), lunar landers, lunar ascenders, and the manned capsules was developed. This program consists of an interative technique to solve the rocket equation successively for each velocity correction (delta V) in a mission. The delta V values reflect integrated trajectory values and include gravity losses. As the program computed fuel masses, it matched structural masses from General Dynamics' modular space-based OTV design. Variables in the study included the operation mode (i.e., expendable vs. reusable and single-stage vs. two-stage OTV's), cryogenic specific impulse, reflecting different levels of engine technology, and aerobraking vs. all-propulsive return to Earth orbit. The use of lunar-derived oxygen was also examined for its general impact. For each combination of factors, the low-Earth orbit (LEO) stack masses and Earth-to-orbit (ETO) lift requirements are summarized by individual mission and totaled for the developmental phase. In addition to these discrete data, trends in the variation of study parameters are presented.

Hoy, Trevor D.↗

Gigatraj: An Atmospheric Trajectory Model

Atmospheric trajectory models have a long history of success in tracking air motions in the lower stratosphere and upper troposphere over periods of up to a few days. Parcels have been traced backwards from observations to identify whatever phenomena (strong convection, volcanic eruptions, rocket launches, etc.) put their signature on them. Parcels have also been initialized at a known event and traced forward to examine their subsequent physical and chemical evolution. We describe a new trajectory model, "gigatraj," that aims to increase exibility by (a) making it straightforward to use new meteorological data sources, including those not based on regular latitude-longitude grids; (b) enabling a run-time choice of vertical coordinate system for kinematic and/or quasi-isentropic calculations; (c) allowing for the output of arbitrary meteorological products, selectable by the user and interpolated to the parcels' locations and times. The model can be run in a serial or parallel processing environment, so that large numbers of parcels can be traced in a reasonable time. Information is presented on model accuracy and performance. The former is demonstrated by runs using both test-pattern winds (comparing expected paths with actual output) and real-world winds (comparing forward and backward runs to characterize how well parcels retrace their paths). Sample cases are also shown, including a reverse domain lling (RDF) calculation illustrating a tropopause fold event. Model output can be displayed using the new Visualization And Lagrangian dynamics Immersive eXtended Reality (VALIXR) system, and an example will be shown. In addition, we describe work to incorporate a version of gigatraj into the Goddard Earth Observing System (GEOS) of NASA's Global Modeling and Assimilation O ce (GMAO) at Goddard Space Flight Center. This enables trajectory calculations to be performed within the running GEOS model at the latter's native time resolution, instead of using the winds from every few hours. It also provides access to all of GEOS's internal variables as they are calculated. This module may be useful, for example, for tracking rapid chemical changes in a Lagrangian framework.

dynamics↗

Robotic Planetary Science Missions Enabled with Small NTR Engine/Stage Technologies

The high specific impulse (Isp) and engine thrust-to-weight ratio of liquid hydrogen (LH2)-cooled nuclear thermal rocket (NTR) engines makes them ideal for upper stage applications to difficult robotic planetary science missions. A small 15 thousand pound force (klbf) NTR engine using a uranium-zirconium-niobium 'ternary carbide' fuel (Isp approximately 960 seconds at approximately 3025K) developed in the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS) is examined and its use on an expendable injection stage is shown to provide major increases in payload delivered to the outer planets (Saturn, Uranus, Neptune and Pluto). Using a single 'Titan IV-class' launch vehicle, with a lift capability to low Earth orbit (LEO) of approximately 20 metric tons (t), an expendable NTR upper stage can inject two Pluto 'Fast Flyby' spacecraft (PFF/SC) plus support equipment-combined mass of approximately 508 kg--on high energy, '6.5-9.2 year' direct trajectory missions to Pluto. A conventional chemical propulsion mission would use a liquid oxygen (LOX)/LH2 'Centaur' upper stage and two solid rocket 'kick motors' to inject a single PFF/SC on the same Titan IV launch vehicle. For follow on Pluto missions, the NTR injection stage would utilize a Jupiter 'gravity assist' (JGA) maneuver to launch a LOX/liquid methane (CH4) capture stage (Isp approximately 375 seconds) and a Pluto 'orbiter' spacecraft weighing between approximately 167-312 kg. With chemical propulsion, a Pluto orbiter mission is not a viable option because c inadequate delivered mass. Using a 'standardized' NTR injection stage and the same single Titan IV launch scenario, 'direct flight' (no gravity assist) orbiter missions to Saturn, Uranus and Neptune are also enabled with transit times of 2.3, 6.6, and 12.6 years, respectively. Injected mass includes a storable, nitrogen tetroxide/monomethyl hydrazine (N2O4/MMH) capture stage (Isp approximately 330 seconds) and orbiter payloads 340 to 820% larger than that achievable using a LOX/LH2-fueled injection stage. The paper discusses NTR technology and mission characteristics, shows NTR stage and payload accommodations within the 26.2 m long Titan IV payload fairing, and discusses NTR stage performance as a function of assumed cryogenic tank technology.

Borowski, Stanley K.↗

Viking balloon launched decelerator tests

The Viking Project utilized a 16.2M diameter disk-gap-band parachute to successfully land two research spacecraft on the surface of Mars during the summer of 1976. Unique specifications were imposed upon both the decelerator system and the balloon systems which were employed to provide a high altitude launch platform for a rocket powered test vehicle. The performance and stability of the balloon system and the predictability of the test vehicle trajectory offered interesting challenges. Descriptions of the development work for suitable materials, fabrication techniques and peculiarities, and testing requirements for both the decelerator and balloon systems will be presented.

Timmons, J. D.↗

STS-1 operational flight profile. Volume 6: Abort analysis

The abort analysis for the cycle 3 Operational Flight Profile (OFP) for the Space Transportation System 1 Flight (STS-1) is defined, superseding the abort analysis previously presented. Included are the flight description, abort analysis summary, flight design groundrules and constraints, initialization information, general abort description and results, abort solid rocket booster and external tank separation and disposal results, abort monitoring displays and discussion on both ground and onboard trajectory monitoring, abort initialization load summary for the onboard computer, list of the key abort powered flight dispersion analysis.

Source record↗

An inverse dynamics approach to trajectory optimization for an aerospace plane

An inverse dynamics approach for trajectory optimization is proposed. This technique can be useful in many difficult trajectory optimization and control problems. The application of the approach is exemplified by ascent trajectory optimization for an aerospace plane. Both minimum-fuel and minimax types of performance indices are considered. When rocket augmentation is available for ascent, it is shown that accurate orbital insertion can be achieved through the inverse control of the rocket in the presence of disturbances.

Lu, Ping↗

Ascent Guidance Comparisons

This paper contains results from ascent guidance studies conducted at the NASA Marshall Space Flight Center. The studies include investigation of different guidance schemes for a variety of potential launch vehicles. Criteria of a successful ascent guidance scheme are low operations cost, satisfaction of load indicator constraints, and maximization of performance. Results show that open-loop designs as a function of altitude or velocity are preferable to designs that are functions of time. Optimized open-loop trajectories can increase performance while maintaining load indicators within limits. Closed-loop atmospheric schemes that involve linear tangent steering or feedback of velocity terms for trajectory modification did not yield any improvement. Early release of vacuum closed-loop guidance, including use during solid rocket booster operation, yields some improvements. Evaluation of a closed-loop optimization scheme for flying through the atmosphere shows no advantages over open-loop optimization. Dispersion study results for several potential guidance schemes and launch vehicles are included in the paper and are not a discriminator between guidance schemes. The primary cost driver is mission operations philosophy, not choice of guidance scheme. More autonomous guidance schemes can help in movement towards a philosophy that would reduce operations costs.

Hanson, John M.↗

Telemetry Boards Interpret Rocket, Airplane Engine Data

For all the data gathered by the space shuttle while in orbit, NASA engineers are just as concerned about the information it generates on the ground. From the moment the shuttle s wheels touch the runway to the break of its electrical umbilical cord at 0.4 seconds before its next launch, sensors feed streams of data about the status of the vehicle and its various systems to Kennedy Space Center s shuttle crews. Even while the shuttle orbiter is refitted in Kennedy s orbiter processing facility, engineers constantly monitor everything from power levels to the testing of the mechanical arm in the orbiter s payload bay. On the launch pad and up until liftoff, the Launch Control Center, attached to the large Vehicle Assembly Building, screens all of the shuttle s vital data. (Once the shuttle clears its launch tower, this responsibility shifts to Mission Control at Johnson Space Center, with Kennedy in a backup role.) Ground systems for satellite launches also generate significant amounts of data. At Cape Canaveral Air Force Station, across the Banana River from Kennedy s location on Merritt Island, Florida, NASA rockets carrying precious satellite payloads into space flood the Launch Vehicle Data Center with sensor information on temperature, speed, trajectory, and vibration. The remote measurement and transmission of systems data called telemetry is essential to ensuring the safe and successful launch of the Agency s space missions. When a launch is unsuccessful, as it was for this year s Orbiting Carbon Observatory satellite, telemetry data also provides valuable clues as to what went wrong and how to remedy any problems for future attempts. All of this information is streamed from sensors in the form of binary code: strings of ones and zeros. One small company has partnered with NASA to provide technology that renders raw telemetry data intelligible not only for Agency engineers, but also for those in the private sector.

Source record↗

Development of Constraint Force Equation Methodology for Application to Multi-Body Dynamics Including Launch Vehicle Stage Seperation

The objective of this report is to develop and implement a physics based method for analysis and simulation of multi-body dynamics including launch vehicle stage separation. The constraint force equation (CFE) methodology discussed in this report provides such a framework for modeling constraint forces and moments acting at joints when the vehicles are still connected. Several stand-alone test cases involving various types of joints were developed to validate the CFE methodology. The results were compared with ADAMS(Registered Trademark) and Autolev, two different industry standard benchmark codes for multi-body dynamic analysis and simulations. However, these two codes are not designed for aerospace flight trajectory simulations. After this validation exercise, the CFE algorithm was implemented in Program to Optimize Simulated Trajectories II (POST2) to provide a capability to simulate end-to-end trajectories of launch vehicles including stage separation. The POST2/CFE methodology was applied to the STS-1 Space Shuttle solid rocket booster (SRB) separation and Hyper-X Research Vehicle (HXRV) separation from the Pegasus booster as a further test and validation for its application to launch vehicle stage separation problems. Finally, to demonstrate end-to-end simulation capability, POST2/CFE was applied to the ascent, orbit insertion, and booster return of a reusable two-stage-to-orbit (TSTO) vehicle concept. With these validation exercises, POST2/CFE software can be used for performing conceptual level end-to-end simulations, including launch vehicle stage separation, for problems similar to those discussed in this report.

Pamadi, Bandu N.↗

Progress Report on Mars Pathfinder Project Approach

Mars Pathfinder, launching on December 2, 1996 and landing on Mars on July 4, 1997, will demonstrate a low-cost delivery system to the surface of Mars. Historically, spacecraft that orbit or land on a distant body carry massive amounts of fuel for braking at the planet. Pathfinder requires fuel only to navigate to Mars; the spacecraft aerobrakes into the Mars atmosphere directly from Earth-Mars transfer trajectory, deploys a parachute at 10 km above the surface and, within 100 m of the surface, fires solid rockets for final braking prior to deployment of airbags that cushion touchdown. After landing, petals open to upright the lander, followed by deployment of a small rover and several science instruments.

Mars↗

Inviscid and Viscous CFD Analysis of Booster Separation for the Space Launch System Vehicle

This paper presents details of Computational Fluid Dynamic (CFD) simulations of the Space Launch System during solid-rocket booster separation using the Cart3D inviscid and Overflow viscous CFD codes. The discussion addresses the use of multiple data sources of computational aerodynamics, experimental aerodynamics, and trajectory simulations for this critical phase of flight. Comparisons are shown between Cart3D simulations and a wind tunnel test performed at NASA Langley Research Center's Unitary Plan Wind Tunnel, and further comparisons are shown between Cart3D and viscous Overflow solutions for the flight vehicle. The Space Launch System (SLS) is a new exploration-class launch vehicle currently in development that includes two Solid Rocket Boosters (SRBs) modified from Space Shuttle hardware. These SRBs must separate from the SLS core during a phase of flight where aerodynamic loads are nontrivial. The main challenges for creating a separation aerodynamic database are the large number of independent variables (including orientation of the core, relative position and orientation of the boosters, and rocket thrust levels) and the complex flow caused by exhaust plumes of the booster separation motors (BSMs), which are small rockets designed to push the boosters away from the core by firing partially in the direction opposite to the motion of the vehicle.

Viscous↗

Analysis of Launch Vehicle Liftoff Debris: Historical Perspective from Space Shuttle and Application to Artemis I

Human exploration-class launch vehicles are inherently prone to debris due to the extreme environments generated during pre-launch operations, liftoff, and flight. The use of cryogenic propellants often requires thermal protection system (TPS) coatings, typically foam, to maintain the propellant conditions in the tank and prevent an accumulation ice on the external surface of the vehicle. Some ice growth is to be expected at umbilical interfaces, vents, flanges, or brackets where it is difficult to apply TPS. This ice may come loose at any time due to wind on the launch pad, structural vibration and acoustics after rocket ignition, or aerodynamic forces during flight. This phenomena is especially apparent on vehicles with no TPS, such as the Saturn V rockets used in the Apollo Program, see Figure 1. During propellant tanking, the thermal contraction of the underlying substrate may generate cracks in the TPS (Figure 1). Chunks of TPS can release due to the expansion of ingested gas from cryopumping or from aerodynamic forces if the crack creates an offset surface. Most foams will also have a certain amount of “popcorning” where small pieces of foam will pop off during flight because of the differential between the static surface pressure and the pressure of the gas trapped in the foam cell structure. There are a number of other coating or closeout materials that may be shed from the vehicle and become debris. During pre-launch operations and liftoff, the vehicle may also be exposed to debris originating from the launch pad or ground support equipment. This debris is separate from foreign object debris, or FOD, which is not intended to be present and is strictly controlled through operations and maintenance procedures. In this case, debris is generated from hardware and materials that are necessary for launch and are subject to the intense vibration, acoustics, and direct plume impingement of the launch environment. Examples include ice from umbilicals, tape and tie wraps that protect cables, and rust or corrosion from the launch platform. While NASA has historically been aware of debris as a potential issue that could cause a failure resulting in loss of mission, loss of vehicle, or loss of crew, the likelihood and severity of that risk was not always well understood or given sufficient weight in program and flight decisions. After the Space Shuttle Columbia accident (STS-107), the investigation found that foam TPS debris shed from the external tank was the proximate cause of the damage to the orbiter wing. Six previous observations of debris released from the foam ramp that covered the bipod connecting the forward end of the orbiter to the external tank resulted in minor changes or were determined to be accepted flight risks. Two occurrences of bipod ramp foam loss were not identified until the STS-107 investigation. Despite the damage inflicted by these debris strikes, the Shuttle Program Requirements Control Board deemed the vehicle safe to fly. During the Return to Flight effort following the Columbia disaster, NASA Engineering developed a process for the assessment of debris transport, impact, and damage tolerance to support independent assessments of risk by NASA Safety and Mission Assurance (S&MA). Under this system, each element (vehicle or ground system) defines a catalog of all expected debris based on launch history, component testing, or analysis. Debris transport analysis (DTA) is conducted using the debris catalog characteristics and potential flow transport mechanisms (e.g., vehicle aerodynamics, gravity, wind, plume-driven). The predicted debris impact locations and velocities are provided to the hardware owners, who use available test data and analysis to determine whether each component can withstand the impacts. In cases where the element hardware may be severely damaged or fail, the options are to mitigate the debris source through some change in design or operation, or to work with S&MA to try to characterize the probability of the impact and damage for program risk acceptance. Because of the differences in debris characteristics and transport, the DTA has been divided between the Liftoff and Ascent regimes. The development and application of Liftoff DTA methodology from the Shuttle Program to the current Artemis Program is the subject of this paper. Liftoff DTA covers the time from the start of pre-launch operations at the launch pad, up until the vehicle clears the launch tower and there is no longer any interaction with ground systems. Debris transport during this period is broadly classified as either gravity, wind, and plume-entrained (GWPE) or plume driven (PD). GWPE debris is generally lower speed, travelling in a forward-to-aft direction. PD transport includes flow features from the rocket ignition transient, as well as plume impingement and recirculation that occur as the vehicle lifts off the launch platform. In these cases, the debris typically moves in an aft-to-forward direction at higher speeds. The applicable transport mechanisms must be considered for each piece of debris depending on the material, and release location and time. For example, rust or metallic debris from the tower could fall (GWPE) and impact the vehicle before landing on the launch platform deck where it could be also be transported by plume impingement (PD). However, falling ice (GWPE) from an umbilical is unlikely to survive impact with the vehicle or launch platform and be available for PD transport. Modeling of debris transport is accomplished using a set of DTA tools which simulate debris trajectories subject to a reference frame acceleration (i.e., gravity) and aerodynamic drag. Where the trajectory encounters a solid surface, the debris is allowed to rebound with a specified coefficient of restitution. The drag is calculated by interpolating the fluid state at each point in the debris trajectory from high-fidelity computational fluid dynamics (CFD) simulations of the launch vehicle and pad. The CFD data may either be static (steady state or time averaged), typically for GWPE transport, or dynamic (time-accurate) for PD flow features like the ignition transient. Examples of the CFD flow field solutions for the Space Launch System (SLS) rocket and launch pad are shown in Figure 2. Typical SLS debris trajectory predictions from DTA are illustrated in Figure 3. The final version of this paper will include a more detailed examination of the Liftoff DTA process developed during the Shuttle Program, and how it has been augmented and applied to the SLS rocket under the Artemis Program. Comparisons with debris observations from the Artemis I launch will demonstrate validation of the tools and methodology.

Debris↗