Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Planetary Protection Technologies”

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 307 records · Page 17
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2009

Heliophysics: The Solar and Space Physics of a New Era. Recommended Roadmap for Science and Technology 2009-2030

Our planet is immersed in a seemingly invisible yet exotic and inherently dangerous environment. Above the protective cocoon of Earth's lower atmosphere is a plasma soup composed of electrified and magnetized matter entwined with penetrating radiation and energetic particles. The Earth's magnetic field interacts with the Sun's outer atmosphere to create this extraordinary environment.

Heliophysics↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Development of Advanced Conformal and Soft Pica for Future Nasa Missions and Commercial Space

Phenolic Impregnated Carbon Ablator (PICA) is a low-density ablator that has been used as the planetary entry heatshield for several NASA missions since the late 90’s. Its low density and efficient performance characteristics have proven effective for use from Discovery to Flag-ship class missions, from Sample Return missions such as Stardust, OSIRIS-REx to large Mars Lander missions such as MSL and Mars 2020. Continued development of a more mass efficient and compliant versions of PICA that use a carbon felt as the substrate will be presented. The felt based versions of PICA known as Conformal PICA (C-PICA) and Soft PICA (S-PICA), are very comparable in terms of peak heat-flux capabilities compared to standard PICA. The lower density and of C-PICA and S-PICA further show a much higher thermal protection efficiency and hence more mass savings. The compliant nature of these materials allows for use on a wide variety of substrates and therefore makes it very attractive for commercial low earth orbit missions as well as NASA’s aerocapture missions to Ice Giants. NASA is currently working with several commercial partners (Varda and Inversion Space) to Technology Transfer C/S-PICA variants for commercial LEO missions. Thermal, mechanical, and representative environment arc-jet tests have been conducted comparing the performance of Conformal and Soft-PICA materials.

Matthew J Gasch↗
NASA NTRS2016

Mars Sample Thermal Control During Mars Ascent and Orbit

Although NASA has no official plans at this time for a mission to return samples from Mars, the Program Formulation Office of the Mars Exploration Program sponsors ongoing mission concept studies, systems analyses, and technology investments which explore different strategies for the potential return of samples from Mars, consistent with the charter of the program and stated priorities of the science community. Maintaining the thermal integrity of collected samples would be very important. In general, samples would be collected, sealed inside tubes, and left on the surface for later retrieval. They would then be inserted into an OS (Orbiting Sample), and carried to a Mars or Solar orbit via a MAV (Mars Ascent Vehicle). Subsequently, an Earth return vehicle would rendezvous with the OS and bring it back to Earth. During ascent from Mars, the OS could serve as the nose cone of the MAV and would be subjected to significant aerodynamic heating from the Martian atmosphere. Once the OS is released from the MAV, its external surface would be exposed to potentially several years of sunlight, eclipse, planetary IR, albedo, and space. The challenge is to ensure that these samples are kept at thermally moderate conditions to preserve their integrity in these widely different environments. Various thermal techniques have been investigated to achieve sample thermal control: use of thermal protection shields and surfaces (ablative and non-ablative) to protect them from adverse exposure to ascent heating, as well combinations of thermo-optical coatings during the orbital phase. The work described herein is part of this ongoing effort & will describe the key challenges related to the thermal control of the potential Mars samples during these phases and the corresponding schemes to overcome them.

Bhandari, Pradeep↗
NASA NTRS2005

Neptune Polar Orbiter with Probes

The giant planets of the outer solar system divide into two distinct classes: the gas giants Jupiter and Saturn, which consist mainly of hydrogen and helium; and the ice giants Uranus and Neptune, which are believed to contain significant amounts of the heavier elements oxygen, nitrogen, and carbon and sulfur. Detailed comparisons of the internal structures and compositions of the gas giants with those of the ice giants will yield valuable insights into the processes that formed the solar system and, perhaps, other planetary systems. By 2012, Galileo, Cassini and possibly a Jupiter Orbiter mission with microwave radiometers, Juno, in the New Frontiers program, will have yielded significant information on the chemical and physical properties of Jupiter and Saturn. A Neptune Orbiter with Probes (NOP) mission would deliver the corresponding key data for an ice giant planet. Such a mission would ideally study the deep Neptune atmosphere to pressures approaching and possibly exceeding 1000 bars, as well as the rings, Triton, Nereid, and Neptune s other icy satellites. A potential source of power would be nuclear electric propulsion (NEP). Such an ambitious mission requires that a number of technical issues be investigated, however, including: (1) atmospheric entry probe thermal protection system (TPS) design, (2) probe structural design including seals, windows, penetrations and pressure vessel, (3) digital, RF subsystem, and overall communication link design for long term operation in the very extreme environment of Neptune's deep atmosphere, (4) trajectory design allowing probe release on a trajectory to impact Neptune while allowing the spacecraft to achieve a polar orbit of Neptune, (5) and finally the suite of science instruments enabled by the probe technology to explore the depths of the Neptune atmosphere. Another driving factor in the design of the Orbiter and Probes is the necessity to maintain a fully operational flight system during the lengthy transit time from launch through Neptune encounter, and throughout the mission. Following our response to the recent NASA Research Announcement (NRA) for Space Science Vision Missions for mission studies by NASA for implementation in the 2013 or later time frame, our team has been selected to explore the feasibility of such a Neptune mission.

Bienstock, Bernard↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

22 N HPGP Thruster Life Testing

In the ever-changing paradigm of efficient and capable spacecraft design, scientific missions continue pushing the envelope enabling spacecraft subsystems to deliver effective solutions to meet challenging new mission/spacecraft needs. From an in-space storable liquid chemical propulsion perspective, monopropellant hydrazine has been, and continues to be, a dependable propellant with considerable flight heritage, a variety of engine thrust classes available from multiple vendors, with repeatable and reliable performance. Additionally, the space propulsion industry has learned to successfully handle hydrazine, its regulations, the safety protocols, the personnel protective equipment, and the unique training standards–all requisite for loading spacecraft propulsion systems with toxic hypergolic hydrazine. The question now arises as to “what is next for in-space chemical propulsion?” Further, with the evolution and concrete advancements in innovative in-space green propellant technologies, capable of providing realizable benefits to scientific missions, concern over the reliability and availability of this higher performing and safer to handle class of propellants is waning. As science missions move forward with the potential flight in fusion of High Performance Green Propulsion (HPGP), NASA and its industry partners are working to address any gaps in system reliability, performance, or unique operational considerations. Propellant technology that offers both higher performance and significant reduction in personnel hazards compared to hydrazine presents an attractive propulsion subsystem design opportunity. Increased propulsion subsystem performance can result in lower spacecraft launch mass, larger scientific payloads, or extended on-orbit lifetimes. Mission trades using green propulsion technologies have been documented on multiple NASA Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC) mission classes, examining various parameters and requirements to support mission architectures in Low Earth Orbit (LEO), High Earth Orbit (HEO), geostationary, lunar, planetary, and Quasi-halo orbit around Sun-Earth Lagrange point (L2). The results of these trade studies show promising, attainable benefits. The perceived programmatic risk of flying a newer propulsion technology has, unfortunately, not outweighed the benefits to date. To take advantage of the improved performance and mitigate programmatic risk, HPGP engines must demonstrate life testing at higher propellant throughputs than have currently been demonstrated. In an effort to proactively address the challenges with technology infusion into a risk-averse community, NASA and the Swedish National Space Agency (SNSA) outlined a collaborative Implementing Arrangement (IA) for the respective agencies to pursue increased HPGP technology maturation. This initial IA effort began in 2013, fresh off the heels of the successful PRISMA HPGP technology demonstration mission. The IA targeted objective is to reduce risk to potential future HPGP missions and fully characterize the LMP-103S propellant and associated engine performance. Over the past eight years, HPGP has flown in propulsion systems on twenty-five(25) spacecraft from seven(7) different Launch Ranges around the globe and on seven (7) different Launch Vehicles. Six(6) of these launches involved multiple loading operations for multiple spacecraft. For U.S. Range operations, nine (9) HPGP systems have been processed at Vandenberg Space Force Base(VSFB):six(6) in 2017, and three (3) in 2018. Six (6) more have been processed at Cape Canaveral Air Force Station (CCAFS)in May 2020, with three (3) systems launched in June 2020 and the remaining three (3) system were left loaded and ready until their launch in August of 2020. Three (3) more systems have been processed at Wallops Flight Facility(WFF)and launched in June 2021. In addition, these propulsion subsystems employed heritage propulsion subsystem component such as valves, filters, and pressure transducers, and have further demonstrated nominal functionality in both diaphragm and Propellant Management Device (PDM) propellant tanks. Based on these successes, HPGP technology continues to be considered for NASA Science Mission Directorate missions at GSFC. The work presented herein represents many years of development and collaborative efforts to successfully align higher performance, low toxicity hydrazine alternatives into scientific missions. NASA GSFC Propulsion Engineering, in collaboration with Bradford ECAPS, has developed mission specific thruster design and testing requirements to establish GSFC’s desired test conditions and firing sequences.In2017, the first flight-like 22N HPGP thruster Engineering Qualification Model (EQM-1)was designed and built by Bradford ECAPS to prove out the thruster design, materials, build process, and test campaign with respect to NASA GSFC critical component and mission requirements. This test program was developed to comprehensively test the thruster, the technology, and ultimately increase the 22N HPGP Technology Readiness Level(TRL). EQM-1was tested to environmental qualification levels prior to hot fire performance testing to represent the relevant end-to-end environment (launch to on-orbit operation)with required margin. This thruster demonstrated steady-state and pulse mode operational capability with propellant thruster throughput up to~53kg.At this throughput level, the EQM-1 engine began to present off-nominal performance and the test campaign was halted to allow for non-destructive testing and identify the root cause for the an omalous performance. Capitalizing on the successful elements of the EQM-1 campaign, an upgraded 22N HPGP EQM-2 has been manufactured by Bradford ECAPS to meet the complete GSFC requirements. The EQM-2 thruster’s test campaign has further demonstrated the robustness of the HPGP propulsion technology and increased the Technology Readiness Level (TRL) by undergoing a full acceptance test program, then proceeding into qualification, including environmental testing (vibration and shock to qualification levels),as well as hot-fire life testing, operating at steady-state and pulse modes with increased propellant thruster throughput to~150kg. The HPGP thruster performance testing enables effective HPGP thruster readiness evaluation to meet NASA candidate mission requirements in the future.

High↗
NASA NTRS2019

Challenges in Qualification of Thermal Protection Systems for Extreme Entry Environments

Planetary entry vehicles employ ablative TPS materials to shield the aeroshell from entry aeroheating environments. To ensure mission success, it must be demonstrated that the heatshield system, including local features such as seams, does not fail at conditions that are suitably margined beyond those expected in flight. Furthermore, its thermal response must be predictable, with acceptable fidelity, by computational tools used in heatshield design. Mission assurance is accomplished through a combination of ground testing and material response modelling. A material's robustness to failure is verified through arcjet testing while its thermal response is predicted by analytical tools that are verified against experimental data. Due to limitations in flight-like ground testing capability and lack of validated high-fidelity computational models, qualification of heatshield materials is often achieved by piecing together evidence from multiple ground tests and analytical simulations, none of which fully bound the flight conditions and vehicle configuration. Extreme heating environments (>2000 W/cm2 heat flux and >2 atm pressure), experienced during entries at Venus, Saturn and Ice Giants, further stretch the current testing and modelling capabilities for applicable TPS materials. Fully-dense Carbon Phenolic was the material of choice for these applications; however, since heritage raw materials are no longer available, future uses of re-created Carbon Phenolic will require re-qualification. To address this sustainability challenge, NASA is developing a new dual-layer material based on 3D weaving technology called Heatshield for Extreme Entry Environments (HEEET) [1]. Regardless of TPS material, extreme environments pose additional certification challenges beyond what has been typical in recent NASA missions.Scope of this presentation: This presentation will give an overview of challenges faced in verifying TPS performance at extreme heating conditions.

Mahzari, Milad↗
NASA NTRS2019

Challenges in Qualification of Thermal Protection Systems in Extreme Entry Environments

Planetary entry vehicles employ ablative TPS materials to shield the aeroshell from entry aeroheating environments. To ensure mission success, it must be demonstrated that the heat shield system, including local features such as seams, does not fail at conditions that are suitably margined beyond those expected in flight. Furthermore, its thermal response must be predictable, with acceptable fidelity, by computational tools used in heat shield design. Mission assurance is accomplished through a combination of ground testing and material response modelling. A material's robustness to failure is verified through arcjet testing while its thermal response is predicted by analytical tools that are verified against experimental data. Due to limitations in flight-like ground testing capability and lack of validated high-fidelity computational models, qualification of heat shield materials is often achieved by piecing together evidence from multiple ground tests and analytical simulations, none of which fully bound the flight conditions and vehicle configuration. Extreme heating environments (>2000 W/sq. cm heat flux and >2 atm pressure), experienced during entries at Venus, Saturn and Ice Giants, further stretch the current testing and modelling capabilities for applicable TPS materials. Fully-dense Carbon Phenolic was the material of choice for these applications; however, since heritage raw materials are no longer available, future uses of re-created Carbon Phenolic will require re-qualification. To address this sustainability challenge, NASA is developing a new dual-layer material based on 3D weaving technology called Heat shield for Extreme Entry Environments (HEEET). Regardless of TPS material, extreme environments pose additional certification challenges beyond what has been typical in recent NASA missions. Scope of this presentation: This presentation will give an overview of challenges faced in verifying TPS performance at extreme heating conditions. Examples include: (1) Bounding aeroheating parameters (heat flux, pressure, shear and enthalpy) in ground facilities. How to certify TPS if environments can't be bounded or aeroheating parameters can't be simultaneously achieved. (2) Higher uncertainties in ground test environments (facility calibration and analytical predictions) at extreme conditions. (3) Testing in flows similar to planetary atmosphere composition (H2/He for Gas and Ice Giants). (4) Test sample size limitations for qualifying seam designs. (5) Lack of computational tools capable of simulating all significant aspects of TPS performance (including initiation and propagation of failures). This presentation will provide recommendations on how the EDL community can address these challenges and mitigate some of the risks involved in flying TPS materials at extreme conditions. Examples include: (1) Dedicated activity to understanding TPS failure modes. Develop computational tools capable of modelling fluid interaction with material's thermostructural response. Validate these tools through failure testing. A better understanding of failure mechanisms may eliminate the need to fully bound all aeroheating parameters in ground testing. (2) Enhancements to current testing facilities to simulate flight-like ablation mechanism (ex. testing in Nitrogen at Ames Interaction Heating Facility to limit oxidation in favor of more sublimation). (3) Improved characterization of test conditions with new diagnostic methods and determination of environment uncertainty through rigorous statistical analysis of available data. (4) Design margin policies that are directly tied to uncertainties in ground test environments and modelling fidelity

Mahzari, Milad↗
NASA NTRS2018

A Plasma Aerocapture and Entry System for Manned Missions and Planetary Deep Space Orbiters

A rapid mission to Mars requires a large change in vehicle velocity upon arrival to establish a stable orbit. This demand is even greater for a Neptune science, requiring many kilometers per second of V. It is clear from past mission studies that a manned Mars mission and deep space planetary orbiters require aerobraking and aerocapture which use aerodynamic drag forces to slow the spacecraft. Aerocapture would enable long term studies of the outer planets and moons that would not be possible with existing braking methodologies. While the ability to utilize these atmospheres to slow down and capture spacecraft would dramatically reduce the cost, launch mass, and travel time, currently planned approaches require significant additional spacecraft mass and risk as the spacecraft must descend deep into the planetary atmosphere in order to produce significant drag on a relatively small aeroshell. The plasma based Magnetoshell being developed in this program holds the potential to perform the desired braking with significantly increased drag and control while dramatically reducing mass. Most importantly, this technology significantly lowers the risk involved with aerocapture thereby making manned planetary missions possible. The fundamental physics of the Magnetoshell is based on demonstrated experimental results. Successful implementation will dramatically decrease radiation exposures, mission risk, launch cost, and launch mass. Implementation of aerobraking by employing a solid deflector or aeroshell as a method for orbit insertion and circularization has been successfully demonstrated in the past, resulting in launch mass savings greater than 50%. In order to reduce the effect of frictional heating and dynamic pressure on the typically fragile aeroshell, or worse solar panels, the braking must be distributed over many orbital passes at a high altitude in the less dense regions of the atmosphere. It can thus take several months for a meter-scale, 1000 kg, aeroshell to execute the many elliptic orbital passes through the atmosphere to achieve the required V. This rather slow method of braking not only reduces frictional heating and dynamic forces, but also avoids unpredictable dynamic behavior due to turbulence, as well as unknown and seasonally variable atmospheric composition and temperature which has led to dangerous, mission-critical events. For exploration class missions such as DRA 5.0 aerocapture and Thermal Protection Systems (TPS) are proposed for breaking at Mars for cargo missions. Traditional aerocapture is considered too risky for manned missions. Even with the enormous mass savings that aerocapture allows, it still requires 80 tons of aeroshell and significantly increased launch mass and propellant. As will be shown, by using Magnetoshells for aerobraking, the DRA 5.0 mission will save 224 metric tons (MT) and greater than $2 B in launch costs. Beyond the dramatic savings for existing mission architectures, a low-mass, risk-free aerocapture system would allow much more rapid missions to Mars and deep space orbiters by allowing direct, faster trajectories. As will be shown, the plasma Magnetoshell Aerobraking, Aerocapture, and Entry System (AAES) not only reduces mass and cost while enabling significant new mission architectures, but also significantly reduces radiation exposures by decreasing trip times.

Manned Missions↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Small Satellite-sized Hypersonic Inflatable Aerodynamic Decelerators for Interplanetary Science Missions

To make the most of ridesharing opportunities, small satellite (SmallSat) mission designers endeavor to pack as much payload into a SmallSat-class form factor as possible. The mass and volume constraints of this smaller vehicle class present a challenge for interplanetary mission sets that require a means of achieving orbit insertion at their destination of interest. For a fully propulsive orbit insertion design, this may translate to the propellant mass being a significant fraction of the overall vehicle mass and prolonged insertion time. Aerocapture is a single quick maneuver that can significantly reduce the required propellant mass for orbit insertion. Because aerocapture uses a planet’s atmosphere to achieve the necessary change in velocity, a protective aeroshell is needed. The constraints imposed on secondary payloads render traditional rigid aeroshells mass and space prohibitive for the SmallSat class of vehicles; thus, warranting consideration of deployable designs that can be stowed compactly until needed for atmospheric entry. The Hypersonic Inflatable Aerodynamic Decelerator (HIAD) is a deployable aeroshell that leverages inflatable toroids to achieve the large drag area needed for aerodynamic deceleration. While the technology is currently being analyzed for Mars human-scale missions, it has the potential applicability for interplanetary SmallSat-scale missions as well. This paper highlights a study conducted during an internship at NASA Langley Research Center to investigate the feasibility of using a scaled-down HIAD design in SmallSat aerocapture missions. Several scaling methodologies are investigated including use of parametric models and direct computer-aided design (CAD) model scaling. Candidate HIAD configurations that conform to secondary payload adapter requirements are identified. The Program to Optimize Simulated Trajectories II (POST2) is utilized to conduct orbit insertion performance and trajectory sensitivity studies using the candidate configurations at Earth, Venus, and Mars. The results of the study indicate that multiple SmallSat-sized HIAD designs, targeting a range of SmallSat payload classes, are feasible for planetary aerocapture missions to Mars and Venus as well as Earth-based aerocapture missions.

Shelly C. Mann↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

High-Enthalpy Testing to Validate Simulation of an Aerosol Capture Probe

AERACEPT (Aerosol Rapid Analysis Combined Entry Probe/sonde Technology) is a developing technology enabling in-situ aerosol particle sampling and analysis in a small spacecraft mission envelope. It integrates a passive aerosol sample collection system into a probe’s thermal protection system (TPS) to remove the need for heat shield separation and active descent control (parachutes, gliders, etc.). AERACEPT is being validated against the requirements of the Nephele mission concept, which targets the middle and lower Venus cloud layers. The proposed technology employs 3D Carbon-Carbon (3D-CC) at the probe’s nose to withstand the extreme environments encountered in a Venus entry without producing pyrolysis gases that would contaminate the mission sample collection. Any shape change of this 3D-CC sample inlet will affect airflow through the sampling system, thereby impacting aerosol sample collection bias and efficiency. Accurate prediction of the nose’s material response during entry is there-fore of fundamental importance to the development and practical use of this technology. As a result, the AERACEPT project is planning a test campaign in the newly built PlasmatronX facility with a novel “Open Iso-Q” test article to validate state-of-the-art material response tools for a simulated Venus entry. The PlasmatronX is a 350 kW inductively-coupled plasma facility developed and run by the Center for Hypersonics and Entry Systems Studies at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. The facility can support ground testing for a variety of planetary destinations by simulating entry conditions in Nitrogen, Air, and Carbon Dioxide. To best simulate the Venus atmosphere and match flight-like recession, the planned AERACEPT test campaign will use Carbon Dioxide as its test gas. AERACEPT has designed two test articles for this campaign: 1) a standard test article whose curved surface approximates a constant applied heat flux (“Closed Iso-Q” model) and 2) a novel inlet test article with a through-hole at the stagnation point (“Open Iso-Q” model). Both article types consist of a 3D-CC sample bonded to a graphite fixture. All articles will be laser scanned before and after testing to estimate shape change and recession, and the “Closed Iso-Q” articles will be instrumented with thermocouples to provide temperature histories. The test article temperatures and inlet shape change will be compared against simulations run with the Porous material Analysis Toolbox based on OpenFOAM (PATO) to validate the AERACEPT 3D-CC material response model. Due to the high thermal conductivity of 3D-CC, multidimensional effects have a large influence on the test article temperature and the standard 1-D material response tools are not sufficient for test planning. The test campaign features (e.g. article design, run duration, heat fluxes) are therefore informed by a series of 3-D simulations using state-of-the-art material response tools such as PATO. The test campaign is scheduled for spring of 2024. Expected results include 1) Key drivers of selected test conditions (e.g. matching mission flight atmosphere & recession), 2) Simulation results that informed test article design, 3) Acquired test data such as recession measurements, temperature histories, and photos, and 4) Comparisons between test results and simulation predictions.

AERACEPT↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

High-Enthalpy Testing to Validate Simulation of an Aerosol Capture Probe

AERACEPT (Aerosol Rapid Analysis Combined Entry Probe/sonde Technology) is a developing technology enabling in-situ aerosol particle sampling and analysis in a small spacecraft mission envelope. It integrates a passive aerosol sample collection system into a probe’s thermal protection system (TPS) to remove the need for heat shield separation and active descent control (parachutes, gliders, etc.). AERACEPT is being validated against the requirements of the Nephele mission concept, which targets the middle and lower Venus cloud layers. The proposed technology employs 3D Carbon-Carbon (3D-CC) at the probe’s nose to withstand the extreme environments encountered in a Venus entry without producing pyrolysis gases that would contaminate the mission sample collection. Any shape change of this 3D-CC sample inlet will affect airflow through the sampling system, thereby impacting aerosol sample collection bias and efficiency. Accurate prediction of the nose’s material response during entry is there-fore of fundamental importance to the development and practical use of this technology. As a result, the AERACEPT project is planning a test campaign in the newly built PlasmatronX facility with a novel “Open Iso-Q” test article to validate state-of-the-art material response tools for a simulated Venus entry. The PlasmatronX is a 350 kW inductively-coupled plasma facility developed and run by the Center for Hypersonics and Entry Systems Studies at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. The facility can support ground testing for a variety of planetary destinations by simulating entry conditions in Nitrogen, Air, and Carbon Dioxide. To best simulate the Venus atmosphere and match flight-like recession, the planned AERACEPT test campaign will use Carbon Dioxide as its test gas. AERACEPT has designed two test articles for this campaign: 1) a standard test article whose curved surface approximates a constant applied heat flux (“Closed Iso-Q” model) and 2) a novel inlet test article with a through-hole at the stagnation point (“Open Iso-Q” model). Both article types consist of a 3D-CC sample bonded to a graphite fixture. All articles will be laser scanned before and after testing to estimate shape change and recession, and the “Closed Iso-Q” articles will be instrumented with thermocouples to provide temperature histories. The test article temperatures and inlet shape change will be compared against simulations run with the Porous material Analysis Toolbox based on OpenFOAM (PATO) to validate the AERACEPT 3D-CC material response model. Due to the high thermal conductivity of 3D-CC, multidimensional effects have a large influence on the test article temperature and the standard 1-D material response tools are not sufficient for test planning. The test campaign features (e.g. article design, run duration, heat fluxes) are therefore informed by a series of 3-D simulations using state-of-the-art material response tools such as PATO. The test campaign is scheduled for spring of 2024. Expected results include 1) Key drivers of selected test conditions (e.g. matching mission flight atmosphere & recession), 2) Simulation results that informed test article design, 3) Acquired test data such as recession measurements, temperature histories, and photos, and 4) Comparisons between test results and simulation predictions.

AERACEPT↗
NASA NTRS2005

Reuse International Space Station (ISS) Modules as Lunar Habitat

NASA currently projects ending the ISS mission in approximately 2016, due primarily to the expense of re-boost and re-supply. Lunar outposts are expected to be in place in the same timeframe. In support of these mission goals, a scheme to reuse ISS modules on the moon has been identified. These modules could function as pressurized volumes for human habitation in a lunar vacuum as they have done in low-earth orbit. The ISS hull is structurally capable of withstanding a lunar landing because there is no atmospheric turbulence or friction. A compelling reason to send ISS modules to the moon is their large mass; a large portion of the ISS would survive re-entry if allowed to de-orbit to Earth. ISS debris could pose a serious risk to people or structures on Earth unless a controlled re-entry is performed. If a propulsive unit is devised to be attached to the ISS and control re-entry, a propulsion system could be used to propel the modules to the moon and land them there. ISS modules on the lunar surface would not require re-boost. Radiation protection can be attained by burying the module in lunar regolith. Power and a heat removal system would be required for the lunar modules which would need little support structure other than the lunar surface. With planetary mass surrounding the module, heat flux may be controlled by conductance. The remaining requirement is the re-supply of life-support expendables. There are raw materials on the moon to supplement these vital resources. The lunar maria is known to contain approximately 40% oxygen by mass in inorganic mineral compounds. Chemical conversion of moon rocks to release gaseous oxygen is known science. Recycling and cleaning of air and water are currently planned to be accomplished with ISS Environmental Control & Life Support Systems (ECLSS). By developing a Propulsion and Landing Module (PLM) to dock to the Common Berthing Mechanism (CBM), several identical PLMs could be produced to rescue and transfer the ISS modules to the lunar surface, one by one. The propulsion does not need to be as swift as Apollo, nor would the modules need to be manned during transportation to the moon. The trajectory from low-Earth to lunar orbit would avoid or quickly pass through the Van Allen belts to minimize radiation exposure to electronics onboard. A landing technology similar to Apollo's could be utilized to land an ISS module on the moon. Since the mission will be unmanned, system redundancy could be minimized to keep the cost down. If the mission failed and a module crashed landed on the moon, the risk of debris landing on Earth would be avoided and the raw materials could be used in future lunar missions.

Miernik, Janie↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Mars Sample Return (MSR) Sample Receiving Facility (SRF) Assessment Study (MSAS)

NASA, in partnership with the European Space Agency (ESA), is seeking to return Martian geological and atmospheric samples to Earth for scientific study in the early 2030s. Due to the possibility that the samples could contain extraterrestrial life, Mars Sample Return (MSR) is classified as a Category V: Restricted Earth Return mission by the NASA Planetary Protection Office. As a result of this classification, a MSR Sample Receiving Facility (SRF) must not only provide a pristine environment to ensure samples are protected from terrestrial contamination for scientific investigations, it must also provide high-containment (biosafety level 4 [BSL-4]-equivalence) to isolate the samples from Earth’s biosphere until the samples are deemed safe for release and/or sterilized. The nominal utilization period for a SRF is anticipated to be 2-5 years and is intended to enable curation activities, biohazard assessment, select early science activities, and the rapid release of samples to the scientific community. However, to account for possible delays in schedule or the identification of extant life, this anticipated period of time must be flexible to accommodate schedule extensions and contingency plans. Due to requirements for high-level biological containment and cleanliness, a traditional receiving/curation facility cannot be utilized for MSR. Therefore, beginning in 2022, NASA Johnson Space Center is performing a MSR SRF Assessment Study (MSAS) to investigate the most optimal facility modality for a MSR SRF, as well as start to define programmatic early estimate of costs and schedules before the initial design phase begins. NASA is partnering with industry contractors (architectural and engineering firms with BSL-4 and cleanroom technology experience, as well as other contracted infrastructure and construction specialists) along with selected experts from NASA, ESA, existing U.S. BSL-4 facilities, and other U.S. government agencies, to carry out the assessment study. The MSAS should also aid in the future refinement of the science requirements (e.g., contamination control, equipment accommodations) before site-specific design would commence. As part of the MSAS, NASA is planning to assess an array of possibilities for a MSR SRF. One of the main considerations is the facility modality and whether an existing BSL-4 facility can be utilized (for some or all functions); or, if new constructure would be required, would a traditional fixed facility or a modular facility the best choice. MSAS will also investigate the ability of the modalities to accommodate two different facility capability endmembers: 1) a minimal facility focusing on biohazard assessment and curation tasks with a small footprint, and 2) an enhanced facility with additional capabilities to enable expedited processing and the completion of time-sensitive and (some) sterilization-sensitive science. The assessment is intended to generate information that will inform the selection of facility modalities for high-level conceptual design development. While the assessment study will focus on SRF requirements for accommodating curation, science, and sample safety assessment infrastructure, it will also consider an array of other factors, such as ease of access for international users, decommissioning, repurposing, future sale or lease following MSR’s use of the facility, and uncontained preparatory laboratory spaces. Upon completion of the study, the preferred modality and refined requirements would be utilized for site-specific design but will not be finalized until NASA’s completion of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) process.

A.D. Harrington↗
NASA NTRS1991

Next generation: In-space transportation system(s)

The development of the next generation In-Space Transportation System presents a unique challenge to the design of a propulsion system for the Space Exploration Initiative (SEI). Never before have the requirements for long-life, multiple mission use, space basing, high reliability, man-rating, and minimum maintenance come together with performance in one system that must protect the lives of space travelers, support the mission logistics needs, and do so at an acceptable cost. The challenge that is presented is to quantify the bounds of these requirements. The issue is one of degree. The length of acceptable life in space, the time it takes for reuse to pay off, and the degree to which space basing is practical (full, partial, or expended) are the issues that determine the reusable bounds of a design and include dependability, contingency capabilities, resilency, and minimum dependence on a maintenance node in preparation for and during a mission. Missions to planet earth, other non-NASA missions, and planetary missions will provide important but less demanding requirements for the transportation systems of the future. The mission proposed for the SEI require a family of transportation vehicles to meet the requirements for establishing a permanent human presence on the Moon and eventually on Mars. Specialized vehicles are needed to accomplish the different phases of each mission. These large scale missions require assembly in space and will provide the greatest usage of the planned integrated transportation system. The current approach to defining the In-Space Transportation System for the SEI Moon missions with later Mars mission applications is presented. Several system development options, propulsion concepts, current/proposed activities are reviewed, and key propulsion design criteria, issues, and technology challenges for the next generation In-Space Transportation System(s) are outlined.

Huffaker, Fredrick↗
NASA NTRS2018

Mars Ecopoiesis Testbed

Mars surface conditions where liquid water is absent were simulated for the purposes of laboratory research. A pressure-temperature (P-T) profile was maintained in which no combination of pressure or temperature corresponds to the liquid region of the water phase diagram. The triple point of pure water occurs at T = 0.1oC and P(H2O) = 6.01 mbar; therefore all temperatures and pressures must be kept below these values, respectively. A 35-day test was performed in a commercial planetary simulation system (Techshot, Inc., Greenville, IN) in which the minimum night-time temperature was -80oC, the maximum daytime temperature was +26oC, the simulated day-night light cycle in earth hours was 12-on and 12-off, and the total pressure of the pure CO2 atmosphere was maintained below 11 mbar. Any water present was allowed to equilibrate with the changing temperature and pressure. The gas phase was sampled into a CR1-A condensation-mirror low-pressure hygrometer, which uses liquid nitrogen (down to 77oK) to determine the dew point (Buck Technologies, Boulder, CO). Dew point was measured once every hour and recorded on a data logger, along with the varying temperature in the chamber, from which the partial pressure of water was calculated. The resulting calculated daily cycles were tracked on the water P-T diagram, and no points were found to fall within the liquid-phase region of the diagram. It is concluded that there was no liquid water present throughout the test except during the initial pump-down period when aqueous specimens were introduced on the first day (less than 1 hour). Mars regolith simulant was present during this test, and further investigation is needed to determine whether liquid water could have been present or absent in the regolith in the form of brine. Biological samples consisting of Cyanobacteria: Anabena sp., Chroococcidiopsis CCMEE171, Plectonema boryanum; Eubacteria: Bacillus subtilis, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, and Eukaryota: Chlorella ellipsoidia were maintained in the simulator under the above-described conditions. The exposed specimens were tested for intracellular esterase activity, chlorophyll content (where appropriate) and reproductive survival. All tests yielded low-level positive results in all cases. In parallel to these terrestrial studies a planned design study was undertaken for the proposed test bed. Design requirements include compact assembly for transport and installation on the planetary surface (multiple units per mission would be expected), protective internal package for the release of organisms, a means of atmosphere exchange, access to sunlight, a means of penetrating the planetary surface, and most importantly a means of acquiring regolith while meeting the requirements of planetary protection. In consultation with advisers a design was created, and a large-scale mock-up of this design was fabricated by additive manufacturing at Techshot, Inc. with moving parts that simulated the components of the design. The mock-up assembly has been demonstrated to interested parties. A means of detecting live metabolism will also be included in the test bed. Several options were reviewed, and it is concluded that, by the time the ecopoiesis test bed is ready for testing the optimum instrument will be the equivalent of a hand-held mass spectrometer for metabolic gas analysis. This will maximize versatility and reveal much more information than could a detector of a single product (such as molecular oxygen), and the

Ecopoiesis↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Parametric Analysis of Entry Vehicles for Giant Planet Missions

The Planetary Science Decadal Survey has identified Uranus and Saturn as high priori-ty destinations for a flagship and New Frontier missions respectively in the decade 2023-2032. The pro-posed presentation will focus on the entry and descent aspects of the entry vehicles design, considered as part of Giant Planet probe mission concepts, and associated trades for viable trajectory options. Giant Planet Entry Vehicle Parametric Study: Launch vehicle capabilities are evolving and provide an opportunity to increase instrumented probe dimensions. To assess the impact of larger aeroshell designs, a parametric study was conducted to understand the impact on aerothermal environments, TPS options, and TPS mass over a range of 1.0m to 2.0m aeroshell diameters for Uranus and Saturn probe concept missions. The 45° sphere-cone geometry is a legacy configuration that has demonstrated static stability and been used successfully in missions to Venus (Pioneer-Venus) and Jupiter (Galileo). A nose radius of 0.4 m was considered primarily to reduce the heat flux at the stagnation point compared to the smaller radii used in the Venus and Jupiter missions. Representative inertial velocities are chosen from a prior NASA Ames study. Viable entry trajectories to meet concept mission and science objectives were developed using the tool POST2. The newly developed thermal protection material called HEEET (Heatshield for Extreme Entry Environment Technology) was considered in the study. This material, which is at a technology readiness level (TRL) of 6, is highly customizable and available in two varieties: (i) a dual-layer version consisting of recession layer on top of an insulative layer, and (ii) a single-layer version consisting of the insulative layer alone, termed 3- dimensional Mid-Density Carbon Phenolic (3MDCP). Both options were considered for the forward heatshield (the sphere-cone part) in the pre-sent study.

Thermal Protection System↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Recent Advances in the U.S. in Ablative TPS for In-situ Exploration of Giant Planets

The Decadal Survey report released [1] prioritizes Uranus as the highest priority Flagship class mission to be explored with an orbiter and a probe and it also recommended Saturn Probe under New Frontiers mission class. Thermal protection system (TPS) is essential for Uranus and Saturn probe missions. The two cardinal requirements are that it must be fail-safe and yet be mass efficient. The Decadal Survey report also pointed out the readiness of heatshield for extreme entry environment technology (HEEET) at TRL 6 for probe missions at Gas Giants. HEEET relies on 3-D weaving and is shown to be a robust and mass efficient TPS through ground testing and analysis. HEEET was matured to TRL 6 in 2019. HEEET was reported at the Ice Giant Workshop in 2019 at Marseille. Since 2019, significant advances have been made primarily because of Mars Sample Return (MSR) mission. MSR baselined 3-D Woven TPS as its heatshield for the earth entry system. MSR earth entry system (EES) requirements and the resulting heatshield/TPS requirements are most stringent of all entry missions. This is a result of backward contamination protection which classifies MSR as a “restricted class 5” mission to safeguard the accidental release of potentially hazardous Mars Sample into Earth’s atmosphere. Complex requirements for the heatshield start with micro-meteor impact tolerance followed by the requirement for steep entry to minimize the size of the impact footprint which results in extreme heating. The heatshield is part of the impact attenuation system. The EES architecture does not use a parachute and is designed to tolerate impact loads. Hence heatshield TPS selection and design becomes one of the key challenges. After completion of the HEEET technology maturation in 2019, IRAD efforts focused on assessing the 3-D Woven family of TPS to MSR EES. After nearly two years of evaluation of alternate TPS such as carbon phenolic, C-C hot structure, PICA, and 3-D woven family of TPS, a single layer 3-D woven TPS derived from the dual-layer HEEET was down selected and is currently the baseline. A new loom capable of weaving the single-layer 3-D woven preform at 80” wide has been designed, assembled and is currently on the verge of weaving the MSR EES TPS. During the HEEET maturation and the follow-on development, the single-layer TPS has been tested at extreme heating conditions. As a result, single layer TPS was recommended and evaluated during the Planetary Mission Concept Studies funded by NASA in preparation for the Decadal committee. In addition, in anticipation of Saturn mission proposals, single layer was evaluated as well. Aerocapture can reduce the trip time, also allow bigger payload fraction and in addition, it allows for the possibility of probe delivery once the spacecraft is in orbit. This can lead to obtaining both in-situ data as well as data from orbit simultaneously. Since Aerocapture depletes energy/velocity, probe delivery from orbit reduces the demand on TPS. Aerocapture was mentioned in the Decadal Study report as ready for implementation, but due to perceived risk it is not adopted by the mission designers. Establishing TPS readiness for aerocapture missions will be addressed. Going one step beyond aerocapture is aerogravity assist if fast return is the goal. Recent studies [4] looked at aerogravity assist and the TPS readiness. This talk will highlight both aerocapture and aerogravity assist from a TPS perspective. The main objective of this proposed talk is to present a comprehensive picture of the SOA TPS technology including recent developments. The talk will highlight advances in manufacturing, results from the Decadal White Papers, PMCS and other studies, and aerocapture and aerogravity assist that could play a role in the near or far term in-situ exploration.

E. Venkatapathy↗
NASA NTRS2013

Dual-Compartment Inflatable Suitlock

There is a need for an improvement over current NASA Extravehicular Activity (EVA) technology. The technology must allow the capacity for quicker, more efficient egress/ingress, allow for shirtsleeve suit maintenance, be compact in transport, and be applicable to environments ranging from planetary surface (partial-g) to orbital or deep space zero-g environments. The technology must also be resistant to dust and other foreign contaminants that may be present on or around a planetary surface. The technology should be portable, and be capable of docking with a variety of habitats, ports, stations, vehicles, and other pressurized modules. The Dual-Compartment Inflatable Suitlock (DCIS) consists of three hard inline bulkheads, separating two cylindrical membrane-walled compartments. The Inner Bulkhead can be fitted with a variety of hatch types, docking flanges, and mating hardware, such as the Common Berthing Mechanism (CBM), for the purpose of mating with vehicles, habitats, and other pressurized modules. The Inner Bulkhead and Center Bulkhead function as the end walls of the Inner Compartment, which during operations, would stay pressurized, either matching the pressure of the habitat or acting as a lower-pressure transitional volume. The Inner Compartment contains donning/doffing fixtures and inner suit-port hatches. The Center Bulkhead has two integrated suit-ports along with a maintenance hatch. The Center Bulkhead and Outer Bulkhead function as the end walls of the Outer Compartment, which stays at vacuum during normal operations. This allows the crewmember to quickly don a suit, and egress the suitlock without waiting for the Outer Compartment to depressurize. The Outer Compartment can be pressurized infrequently for both nominal and off-nominal suit maintenance tasks, allowing shirtsleeve inspections and maintenance/repair of the environmental suits. The Outer Bulkhead has a pressure-assisted hatch door that stays open and stowed during EVA operations, but can be closed for environmental protection of the suits, suit maintenance, and pressurization.

Kennedy, Kriss J.↗