SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “launch pad”

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.

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

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

At least 325 records · Page 18

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Evaluating Liftoff Debris for NASA’s Space Launch System (SLS) Prior to the Artemis I Launch

The SLS Artemis I launch vehicle is the first of several planned Artemis launch vehicles, with a number of design differences from earlier NASA missions that incur liftoff debris risk to the mission. As a test vehicle, the Artemis I hardware also endured environments and tests not planned for future missions, which led to several additional factors contributing to an evolving liftoff debris risk to the SLS vehicle. This paper will summarize these risk factors and address the processes used to evaluate and communicate the risks to support a successful Artemis I launch. It will discuss how the evolving risks that were quantified and evaluated by a Cross-Program team of debris Subject Matter Experts to mitigate liftoff debris hazards and communicate updated risk to the SLS vehicle. This process was performed through the inaugural use of an SLS debris day-of-launch (DOL) standard operating procedure that will be used for subsequent Artemis missions. This paper addresses the risk of liftoff debris, debris released by the vehicle or from the launch pad during liftoff through vehicle tower clear. Expected liftoff debris is well understood from previous NASA programs’ experience and from tests of materials, processes and functions that are known to release liftoff debris. These expected sources were assessed and cleared well ahead of launch day. However, given the ever-changing schedules and environments, processes were in place to evaluate any additional potential liftoff debris risks identified during launch countdown. Although many of the Artemis vehicle hardware components are similar to those on the NASA Shuttle Program, there are important differences in the architecture of the Artemis I vehicle which require new assessments of liftoff debris risk for the Artemis missions. The more favorable Artemis crew module location and surfaces are far less vulnerable to debris impacts; however, the longer vehicle can result in higher liftoff debris impact energies to those components on the aft end of the vehicle. Additionally, the positional change of the RS-25 liquid engines to nearer the Booster nozzle exit plane along with the change in Booster throat plug design is a disadvantage to the overall liftoff debris risk which resulted in additional test and analysis efforts for evaluating the integrated vehicle debris risk. In spite of the comprehensive tests and analyses of Artemis I expected liftoff debris, a number of additional tests/processes were completed prior to the Artemis I mission that were required to support a complete understanding of a new launch vehicle, but increased the risk of releasing liftoff debris. The hardware endured several additional cryogenic loading cycles, including the Green Run tests at Stennis Space Center, Wet Dress Rehearsals at Kennedy Space Center, and multiple launch attempts. Each of these cycles induced stresses in the thermal protection system (TPS) materials, increasing the risk of damage to and release of the TPS. Additionally, induced and weather environmental factors that could increase the likelihood of debris release were significant. Vibrations and stresses in the TPS were induced by a required roll-back to the Vehicle Assembly Building before Hurricane Ian to protect the vehicle from damage by high winds. Wind damage and potential internal stresses to several outer mold line materials on the integrated SLS vehicle and mobile launcher were caused by weathering Hurricane Nicole at Pad 39B the week before launch. A thorough imagery scan of the vehicle was performed after each event and the damage observed was repaired, removed, or assessed and the risk to the mission evaluated. Mitigation of debris risk can occur by tests and analyses to show debris impacted components as damage tolerant, by new/improved processes for prevention of debris availability, or redesign. Risk mitigation processes for Artemis I-specific liftoff debris events and the development and use of the SLS debris day of launch (DOL) procedures that will be used for subsequent Artemis missions will be described.

Space Launch System↗

NASA NTRS1982

Environmental noise assessment STS-1 Columbia launch

An environmental noise assessement of the initial launch of the Space Transportation System, STS-1 Columbia was conducted. The principal objective of the environmental noise assessment was to measure the noise generated during the initial launch of the space shuttle to ascertain the validity of the levels predicted in the 1979 environmental impact statement. In the 1979 study information obtained for expendable launch vehicles, Titan, Saturn and Atlas was used to predict the noise levels that would be generated by the simultaneous firing of the two solid rocket boosters and the three space shuttle main engines. Fifteen monitoring sites were established in accessable areas located from 4,953 to 23,640 meters from the launch pad. Precision sound level meters were used to capture the peak level during the launch. Data obtained was compared to the predicted levels and were also compared to the identified levels, standards and criteria established by the federal agencies with noise abatement and control responsibilities.

Putnicki, G. J.↗

NASA NTRS1991

STS-37 Rollout to Pad B

The primary objective of the STS-37 mission was to deploy the Gamma Ray Observatory. The mission was launched at 9:22:44 am on April 5, 1991, onboard the space shuttle Atlantis. The mission was led by Commander Steven R. Nagel. The crew was Pilot Kenneth D. Cameron and Mission Specialists Jerry Ross, Jay Apt, and Linda Godwing. This videotape shows the shuttle being rolled out to the launch pad.

Source record↗

NASA NTRS1990

STS-41 Ulysses Breakfast, Suit-up, C-7 Exit, Launch and ISOS Cam Views

Live footage shows the crewmembers of STS-41, Commander Richard N. Richards, Pilot Robert D. Cabana, Mission Specialists William M. Shepherd, Bruce E. Melnick, and Thomas D. Akers, participating in the traditional activities the day of their flight. The crew are seen eating breakfast, suiting-up, walking out to the Astronaut-Van, putting on life vests in the 'White Room' area, and entering the crew module of the Discovery Orbiter. Footage also includes preparation of the Ulysses Payload. Engineers are seen loading Ulysses to the upper stage, transferring Discovery to an upright position, bolting Discovery to the external tank, rolling Discovery out to the launch pad, and finally installing the Ulysses Payload inside Discovery. Also shown are both night and morning panoramic shots of the shuttle on the pad, main engine start, ignition, liftoff, booster separation, and various camera views of the launch.

Source record↗

NASA NTRS2003

Proof-of-Concept Application of Impedance-Based Health Monitoring on Space Shuttle Ground Structures

Many of the structures responsible for the launch, ground systems and support operations of the space shuttle are still being used well past their nominal expected design life. This has led to an increased interest in monitoring these structures in order to decrease the risk of eventual breakdown or structural failure. One monitoring method, which has shown promising results for such applications, is the impedance-based structural health monitoring technique. This paper presents results from proof-of-concept tests on the launch pad's orbiter access arm bolted connection, solid rocket booster hold down post, mobile launch platform heat shield and crawler transporter bearing. Modification for future tests are suggested.

Peairs, Daniel M.↗

NASA NTRS2005

Environmental Conditions for Space Flight Hardware: A Survey

Interest in generalization of the physical environment experienced by NASA hardware from the natural Earth environment (on the launch pad), man-made environment on Earth (storage acceptance an d qualification testing), the launch environment, and the space environment, is ed to find commonality among our hardware in an effort to reduce cost and complexity. NASA is entering a period of increase in its number of planetary missions and it is important to understand how our qualification requirements will evolve with and track these new environments. Environmental conditions are described for NASA projects in several ways for the different periods of the mission life cycle. At the beginning, the mission manager defines survivability requirements based on the mission length, orbit, launch date, launch vehicle, and other factors . such as the use of reactor engines. Margins are then applied to these values (temperature extremes, vibration extremes, radiation tolerances, etc,) and a new set of conditions is generalized for design requirements. Mission assurance documents will then assign an additional margin for reliability, and a third set of values is provided for during testing. A fourth set of environmental condition values may evolve intermittently from heritage hardware that has been tested to a level beyond the actual mission requirement. These various sets of environment figures can make it quite confusing and difficult to capture common hardware environmental requirements. Environmental requirement information can be found in a wide variety of places. The most obvious is with the individual projects. We can easily get answers to questions about temperature extremes being used and radiation tolerance goals, but it is more difficult to map the answers to the process that created these requirements: for design, for qualification, and for actual environment with no margin applied. Not everyone assigned to a NASA project may have that kind of insight, as many have only the environmental requirement numbers needed to do their jobs but do not necessarily have a programmatic-level understanding of how all of the environmental requirements fit together.

Plante, Jeannette↗

NASA NTRS1965

Postflight Evaluation of Atlas-Centaur AC-5 (Launched 2 March 1965)

The Atlas-Centaur AC-5 vehicle was launched from ETR Complex 36A on March 2., 1965 at 8:25.04 a.m. EST. Within about 1 second after launch the thrust of the Atlas booster engine decayed rapidly; the vehicle settled back on the launch pad and was quickly destroyed by fire and explosion. Considerable damage was sustained by the launch complex and its associated equipment. Loss of booster engine thrust was due to fuel depletion at the turbopump inlets, which is attributed to closure of the fuel prevalve or the staging valve. To preclude the recurrence of either of these fuel valving malfunctions, the following corrective action has been taken: The remote control actuator has been replaced by manual operation of the Atlas fuel prevalve; the internal passage dimensions in the staging valve have been increased to lessen the hydraulic load on the valve poppet. In addition to the Atlas fuel system malfunction, a failure in the power control circuitry of the Centaur guidance computer resulted in partial removal of power at umbilical ejection. To prevent such a guidance system failure on future flights some redundant circuitry has been eliminated and more rigorous checkout procedures have been adopted. No further anomalies were discovered in the telemetered data prior to the Atlas booster thrust decay. A prime objective of the AC-5 flight was to place a dynamic model of the Surveyor spacecraft in a simulated lunar transfer trajectory. An important facet of this problem is the demonstration of a launch-on-time capability in accordance with the proper Earth-moon relation. The window opening time was established at 8:25 a.m. EST; thus the actual launch occurred within 4 seconds of the planned time.

Source record↗

NASA NTRS2008

Orion Crew Exploration Vehicle Launch Abort System Guidance and Control Analysis Overview

Aborts during the critical ascent flight phase require the design and operation of Orion Crew Exploration Vehicle (CEV) systems to escape from the Crew Launch Vehicle (CLV) and return the crew safely to the Earth. To accomplish this requirement of continuous abort coverage, CEV ascent abort modes are being designed and analyzed to accommodate the velocity, altitude, atmospheric, and vehicle configuration changes that occur during ascent. Aborts from the launch pad to early in the flight of the CLV second stage are performed using the Launch Abort System (LAS). During this type of abort, the LAS Abort Motor is used to pull the Crew Module (CM) safely away from the CLV and Service Module (SM). LAS abort guidance and control studies and design trades are being conducted so that more informed decisions can be made regarding the vehicle abort requirements, design, and operation. This paper presents an overview of the Orion CEV, an overview of the LAS ascent abort mode, and a summary of key LAS abort analysis methods and results.

Davidson, John B.↗

NASA NTRS2009

Commercial off-the-Shelf (COTS) Refractory Material Evaluation

Fondu Fyre (FF) is currently the only refractory material qualified for use in the flame trench at KSC's Shuttle Launch Pads 39A and 39B. However, the material is not used as it was qualified and has undergone increasingly frequent and severe degradation due to the launch blasts. This degradation is costly as well as dangerous for launch infrastructure, crew and vehicle. FF is applied at the pad via the gunnite process, where wetted refractory material is sprayed onto a steel grid mounted on a support structure. The water content in this process can be manually adjusted by operators, causing distinct visual and physical discrepancies among repair areas. Since the application process is unlikely to change for new refractory materials, it is important to understand the effects of water content on commercial off-the-shelf (COTS) refractory materials. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the performance of the FF with respect to various water contents as well as heat treatments, to simulate aging and exposure to the blast. Initial results indicated that different water contents and heat treatments result in distinct differences in crushing strength, apparent porosity and bulk density. However, water content became an insignificant factor in both crush strength and porosity when FF was cured to at least 1500 deg. Additionally, inspection of the material's surface microstructure by scanning electron microscopy indicated distinguishable characteristics for different heat treatment levels. Results from this study will help guide future studies on the development and identification of new refractory materials.

Calle, Luz Marina↗

NASA NTRS2005

A Summary of Meteorological Parameters During Space Shuttle Pad Exposure Periods

During the 113 missions of the Space Transportation System (STS), the Space Shuffle fleet has been exposed to the elements on the launch pad for a total of 4195 days. The Natural Environments Branch at Marshall Space Flight Center archives atmospheric environments to which the Space Shuttle vehicles are exposed. This paper provides a summary of the historical record of the meteorological conditions encountered by the Space Shuttle fleet during the pad exposure period. Sources of the surface parameters, including temperature, dew point temperature, relative humidity, wind speed, wind direction, sea level pressure and precipitation are presented. Data is provided from the first launch of the STS in 1981 through the launch of STS-107 in 2003.

Overbey, Glenn↗

NASA NTRS1972

Evaluation of Skylab IB sensitivity to on-pad winds with turbulence

Computer simulation was performed to estimate displacements and bending moments experienced by the SKYLAB 1B vehicle on the launch pad due to atmospheric winds. The vehicle was assumed to be a beam-like structure represented by a finite number of generalized coordinates. Wind flow across the vehicle was treated as a nonhomogeneous, stationary random process. Response computations were performed by the assumption of simple strip theory and application of generalized harmonic analysis. Displacement and bending moment statistics were obtained for six vehicle propellant loading conditions and four representative reference wind profile and turbulence levels. Means, variances and probability distributions are presented graphically for each case. A separate analysis was performed to indicate the influence of wind gradient variations on vehicle response statistics.

Coffin, T.↗

NASA NTRS1992

Challenges of space medical operations and life sciences management

The Kennedy Space Center (KSC) has been the premier launch and landing site for America's space program since the early 1960s. Visitors are cognizant of space vehicles, processing facilities and launch pads which are treasured national resources. However, most are unaware of the unique organization which supports launch and landing activities and manages the center's occupational medicine, environmental health, ecological and environmental monitoring functions, as well as human and plant research programs. Management of this multifaceted organization can be complex because funding its different functions comes from a number of sources. Additionally the diverse disciplines of personnel present a special challenge in maintaining professional competencies while assuring efficiency in cyclical operations. This article explains the organization's structure and reviews some of its accomplishments.

Haddad, S. G.↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Extreme Meteorological Parameters During Space Shuttle Pad Exposure Periods

During the 113 missions of the Space Transportation System (STS), the Space Shuttle fleet has been exposed to the elements on the launch pad for a total of 4195 days. This paper provides a summary of the historical record of the meteorological extremes encountered by the Space Shuttle fleet during the pad exposure period. Parameters included are temperature, dew point, relative humidity, wind speed, sea level pressure and precipitation. All the data presented are archived by the Marshall Space Flight Center Environments Group, and were obtained from a combination of surface observations and meteorological towers at Kennedy Space Center (KSC), Florida. Data are provided from the first launch of the STS in 1981 through the launch of STS-107 in 2003.

B. Glenn Overbey↗

NASA NTRS1992

STS-54 TDRS-F in Cargo Bay at Pad B

Footage shows close-up shots of the Tracking and Data Relay Satellite (TDRS) in the Endeavour Orbiter's cargo bay at Launch Pad B.

Source record↗

NASA NTRS2000

Formation of Leading-Edge Pinholes in the Space Shuttle Wings Investigated

The space shuttle wing leading edge and nose cap are composed of a carbon/carbon composite that is protected by silicon carbide. The coefficient of thermal expansion mismatch leads to cracks in the silicon carbide. The outer coating of the silicon carbide is a sodium-silicate-based glass that becomes fluid at the shuttles high reentry temperatures and fills these cracks. Small pinholes roughly 0.1 mm in diameter have been observed on these materials after 12 or more flights. These pinholes have been investigated by researchers at the NASA Johnson Space Center, Rockwell International, the Boeing Company, Lockheed Martin Corporation, and the NASA Glenn Research Center at Lewis Field to determine the possible sources and the extent of damage. A typical pinhole is illustrated in the photomicrographs. These pinholes are found primarily on the wing leading edges and not on the nose cap, which is covered when the orbiter is on the launch pad. The pinholes are generally associated with a bead of zincrich glass. Examination of the orbiter and launch structure indicates that weathering paint on the launch structure leads to deposits of zinc-containing paint flakes on the wing leading edge. These may become embedded in the crevices of the wing leading edge and form the observed zinc-rich glass. Laboratory experiments indicate that zinc oxide reacts vigorously with the glass coating on the silicon carbide. Thus, it is likely that this is the reaction that leads to pinhole formation (Christensen, S.V.: Reinforced Carbon/Carbon Pin Hole Formation Through Zinc Oxide Attack. Rockwell International Internal Letter, RDW 96 057, May 1996). Cross-sectional examination of pinholes suggests that they are enlarged thermal expansion mismatch cracks. This is illustrated in the photomicrographs. A careful microstructural analysis indicates that the pinhole walls consist of layers of zinc-containing glass. Thus, pinholes are likely formed by zinc oxide particles lodging in crevices and forming a corrosive zinc-rich glass that enlarges existing cracks. Having established the likely source of the pinholes, we next needed to model the damage. Our concern was that if a pinhole went through the silicon carbide to the carbon/carbon substrate, oxygen would have a clear path to oxidize the carbon at high temperatures. This possibility was examined with studies in a laboratory furnace. An ultrasonic drill was used to make artificial pinholes in a sample of protected carbon/carbon. After exposure, the specimens were weighed and cross-sectioned to quantify the extent of oxidation below the pinhole. The results at higher temperatures showed good agreement with a simple diffusion-control model. This model is based on the two-step oxidation of carbon to carbon monoxide and carbon dioxide. The fluxes are illustrated in the final figure. The model indicates a strong dependence on pinhole diameter. For smaller diameters and short times, the oxidation of carbon is very limited.

Jacobson, Nathan S.↗

NASA NTRS2007

Exploring the Solid Rocket Boosters and Properties of Matter

I worked for the United Space Alliance, LLC (USA) with the Solid Rocket Booster (SRB) Materials and Process engineers (M&P). I was assigned a project in which I needed to research and collect chemical and physical properties information, material safety data sheets (MSDS), and other product information from the vendor's websites and existing "inhouse" files for a select group of materials used in building and refurbishing the SRBs. This information was then compiled in a report that summarized the information collected. My work site was at the Kennedy Space Center (KSC). This allowed for many opportunities to visit and tour sites operated by NASA, by USA, and by the Air Force. This included the vehicle assembly building (VAB), orbital processing facilities (OPF), the crawler with the mobile launch pad (MLP), and the SRB assembly and refurbishment facility (ARF), to name a few. In addition, the launch, of STS- 117 took place within the first week of employment allowing a day by day following of that mission including post flight operations for the SRBs. Two Delta II rockets were also launched during these 7 weeks. The sights were incredible and the operations witnessed were amazing. I learned so many things I never knew about the entire program and the shuttle itself. The entire experience, especially my work with the SRB materials, inspired my plan for implementation into the classroom.

Moffett, Amy↗

NASA NTRS2015

Center Planning and Development: Multi-User Spaceport Initiatives

The Vehicle Assembly building at NASAs Kennedy Space Center has been used since 1966 to vertically assemble every launch vehicle, since the Apollo Program, launched from Launch Complex 39 (LC-39). After the cancellation of the Constellation Program in 2010 and the retirement of the Space Shuttle Program in 2011, the VAB faced an uncertain future. As the Space Launch System (SLS) gained a foothold as the future of American spaceflight to deep space, NASA was only using a portion of the VABs initial potential. With three high bays connected to the Crawler Way transportation system, the potential exists for up to three rockets to be simultaneously processed for launch. The Kennedy Space Center (KSC) Master plan, supported by the Center Planning and Development (CPD) Directorate, is guiding Kennedy toward a 21st century multi-user spaceport. This concept will maintain Kennedy as the United States premier gateway to space and provide multi-user operations through partnerships with the commercial aerospace industry. Commercial aerospace companies, now tasked with transporting cargo and, in the future, astronauts to the International Space Station (ISS) via the Commercial Resupply Service (CRS) and Commercial Crew Program (CCP), are a rapidly growing industry with increasing capabilities to make launch operations more economical for both private companies and the government. Commercial operations to Low Earth Orbit allow the government to focus on travel to farther destinations through the SLS Program. With LC-39B designated as a multi-use launch pad, companies seeking to use it will require an integration facility to assemble, integrate, and test their launch vehicle. An Announcement for Proposals (AFP) was released in June, beginning the process of finding a non-NASA user for High Bay 2 (HB2) and the Mobile Launcher Platforms (MLPs). An Industry Day, a business meeting and tour for interested companies and organizations, was also arranged to identify and answer any additional questions posed by potential proposers. After amending the AFP and posting additional material for potential users to consider, proposals are being accepted until July 31, at which point they will be evaluated to determine the proposer which best meets the objectives of the government. By identifying VAB HB2 as available and seeking proposals from the commercial sector for VAB HB2 and MLP use, Center Planning and Development is ensuring Kennedy Space Centers relevance in the evolving launch industry of the 21st century.

AFP↗

NASA NTRS2010

Wind Tunnel Investigation of Ground Wind Loads for Ares Launch Vehicle

A three year program was conducted at the NASA Langley Research Center (LaRC) Aeroelasticity Branch (AB) and Transonic Dynamics Tunnel (TDT) with the primary objective to acquire scaled steady and dynamic ground-wind loads (GWL) wind-tunnel data for rollout, on-pad stay, and on-pad launch configurations for the Ares I-X Flight Test Vehicle (FTV). The experimental effort was conducted to obtain an understanding of the coupling of aerodynamic and structural characteristics that can result in large sustained wind-induced oscillations (WIO) on such a tall and slender launch vehicle and to generate a unique database for development and evaluation of analytical methods for predicting steady and dynamic GWL, especially those caused by vortex shedding, and resulting in significant WIO. This paper summarizes the wind-tunnel test program that employed two dynamically-aeroelastically scaled GWL models based on the Ares I-X Flight Test Vehicle. The first model tested, the GWL Checkout Model (CM), was a relatively simple model with a secondary objective of restoration and development of processes and methods for design, fabrication, testing, and data analysis of a representative ground wind loads model. In addition, parametric variations in surface roughness, Reynolds number, and protuberances (on/off) were investigated to determine effects on GWL characteristics. The second windtunnel model, the Ares I-X GWL Model, was significantly more complex and representative of the Ares I-X FTV and included the addition of simplified rigid geometrically-scaled models of the Kennedy Space Center (KSC) Mobile Launch Platform (MLP) and Launch Complex 39B primary structures. Steady and dynamic base bending moment as well as model response and steady and unsteady pressure data was acquired during the testing of both models. During wind-tunnel testing of each model, flow conditions (speed and azimuth) where significant WIO occurred, were identified and thoroughly investigated. Scaled data from the Ares I-X GWL model test was used in the determination of worst-case loads for the analysis of Ares I-X FTV design wind conditions. Finally, this paper includes a brief discussion of the limited full-scale GWL data acquired during the rollout and on-pad stay of the Ares I-X FTV that was launched from KSC on October 28, 2009.

Keller, Donald F.↗