Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “LUNAR FLIGHT”

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 343 records · Page 19
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Feasibility Study of a Multi Tilt-rotor Aircraft as the Artemis Lunar Training Vehicle

The Lunar Landing Research Vehicles (LLRVs) and the Lunar Landing Training Vehicles (LLTVs) provided astronaut candidates for the Apollo program with essential experience and confidence required to complete the missions, and contributed to six successful manned landings on the moon. The primary challenge in terrestrial training was being able to replicate the ratio of bank angle to linear acceleration that a pilot would experience in lunar gravity. Presently, as the Artemis program seeks to return humans to the Moon by 2025, engineers are evaluating suitable platforms to serve as an In-Flight Trainer (IFT) or Artemis Lunar Training Vehicle (ALTV) for astronauts training in the task of manual landing. The program is investigating the viability of current technology in the field of electric vertical takeoff and landing (eVTOL) vehicles and is evaluating using a multi tilt-rotor aircraft platform as a candidate platform for a preliminary ALTV. The tilt-rotor capability enables the vehicle attitude to be decoupled from its flight path, which is a crucial requirement in realistically simulating lunar gravity on Earth. Other key considerations include compensating for a lack of aerodynamic forces while flying through the atmosphere of Earth, as well as the ability to simulate the dynamics of multiple different lander designs for the Human Landing System (HLS) program. This paper details the feasibility study and presents a preliminary flight control architecture for an IFT based on a notional multi tilt-rotor platform. The modeling-following control law, based on nonlinear dynamic inversion (NDI), removes the need for gain scheduling because the vehicle operates across a wide range of flight conditions. The inner-loop dynamic control allocation strategy consists of a static portion that is optimized offline for trim while compensating for the difference in gravity and a dynamic portion that is computed in real time. The reference model consists of the full closed-loop dynamics of a generic HLS design. The modularity of the flight control architecture enables evaluation of multiple HLS concepts with minimal modifications to the control law. Simulation results of the multi tilt-rotor configuration following the final portion of the Apollo 11 descent trajectory are shown.

Jing Pei↗
NASA NTRS2013

An Evaluation of a High Pressure Regulator for NASA's Robotic Lunar Lander Spacecraft

The Robotic Lunar Lander (RLL) development project office at NASA Marshall Space Flight Center is currently studying several lunar surface science mission concepts. The focus is on spacecraft carrying multiple science instruments and power systems that will allow extended operations on the lunar surface or other air-less bodies in the solar system. Initial trade studies of launch vehicle options indicate the spacecraft will be significantly mass and volume constrained. Because of the investment by the DOD in low mass, highly volume efficient components, NASA has investigated the potential integration of some of these technologies in space science applications. A 10,000 psig helium pressure regulator test activity has been conducted as part of the overall risk reduction testing for the RLL spacecraft. The regulator was subjected to typical NASA acceptance testing to assess the regulator response to the expected RLL mission requirements. The test results show the regulator can supply helium at a stable outlet pressure of 740 psig within a +/- 5% tolerance band and maintain a lock-up pressure less than the +5% above nominal outlet pressure for all tests conducted. Numerous leak tests demonstrated leakage less than 10-3 standard cubic centimeters per second (SCCS) for the internal seat leakage at lock-up and less than 10-5 SCCS for external leakage through the regulator body. The successful test has shown the potential for 10,000 psig helium systems in NASA spacecraft and has reduced risk associated with hardware availability and hardware ability to meet RLL mission requirements.

Burnside, Christopher G.↗
NASA NTRS2019

After LM: NASA Lunar Lander Concepts Beyond Apollo

As this document is being compiled in 2019, NASA is once again planning a return to the Moon, and new lunar lander designs are being generated. Compared to Apollo, crews are projected to be larger (at least four per mission) and stay times longer (beginning at 6.5 days). However, it is expected that the landers will look much like the designs in this document because, as stated in the introduction, lunar lander design is a response to the simple physics that governs the tasks they are asked to perform. Design is also a living thing. New crewed lander designs will continue to emerge up until the point that humans return to the Moon, and even beyond. New players from different countries and commercial providers will create new designs based on new technologies and new requirements. Until some breakthrough technology or new physics principle is created, each lander will respond to the current physics of lunar landing. There may come a time, generations from now, when future engineers are paging through a digital copy of this catalog and reflecting on the early work of lunar lander designers. “Those Apollo guys were really smart, given that they started with nothing as a reference. The Lunar Module – now THAT was a great lunar lander design.”

Altair spacecraft↗
NASA NTRS2017

NASA's CubeQuest Challenge - From Ground Tournaments to Lunar and Deep Space Derby

The First Flight of NASA's Space Launch System will feature 13 CubeSats that will launch into cis-lunar space. Three of these CubeSats are winners of the CubeQuest Challenge, part of NASA's Space Technology Mission Directorate (STMD) Centennial Challenge Program. In order to qualify for launch on EM-1, the winning teams needed to win a series of Ground Tournaments, periodically held since 2015. The final Ground Tournament, GT-4, was held in May 2017, and resulted in the Top 3 selection for the EM-1 launch opportunity. The Challenge now proceeds to the in-space Derbies, where teams must build and test their spacecraft before launch on EM-1. Once in space, they will compete for a variety of Communications and Propulsion-based challenges. This is the first Centennial Challenge to compete in space and is a springboard for future in-space Challenges. In addition, the technologies gained from this challenge will also propel development of deep space CubeSats.

deep space↗
NASA NTRS2017

NASA's CubeQuest Challenge - From Ground Tournaments to Lunar and Deep Space Derby

The First Flight of NASA's Space Launch System will feature 13 CubeSats that will launch into cis-lunar space. Three of these CubeSats are winners of the CubeQuest Challenge, part of NASA's Space Technology Mission Directorate (STMD) Centennial Challenge Program. In order to qualify for launch on EM-1, the winning teams needed to win a series of Ground Tournaments, periodically held since 2015. The final Ground Tournament, GT-4, was held in May 2017, and resulted in the Top 3 selection for the EM-1 launch opportunity. The Challenge now proceeds to the in-space Derbies, where teams must build and test their spacecraft before launch on EM-1. Once in space, they will compete for a variety of Communications and Propulsion-based challenges. This is the first Centennial Challenge to compete in space and is a springboard for future in-space Challenges. In addition, the technologies gained from this challenge will also propel development of deep space CubeSats.

CubeSats↗
NASA NTRS2017

NASA's CubeQuest Challenge - From Ground Tournaments to Lunar and Deep Space Derby

The First Flight of NASA's Space Launch System will feature 13 CubeSats that will launch into cis-lunar space. Three of these CubeSats are winners of the CubeQuest Challenge, part of NASA's Space Technology Mission Directorate (STMD) Centennial Challenge Program. In order to qualify for launch on EM-1, the winning teams needed to win a series of Ground Tournaments, periodically held since 2015. The final Ground Tournament, GT-4, was held in May 2017, and resulted in the Top 3 selection for the EM-1 launch opportunity. The Challenge now proceeds to the in-space Derbies, where teams must build and test their spacecraft before launch on EM-1. Once in space, they will compete for a variety of Communications and Propulsion-based challenges. This is the first Centennial Challenge to compete in space and is a springboard for future in-space Challenges. In addition, the technologies gained from this challenge will also propel development of deep space CubeSats.

Deep Space↗
NASA NTRS2024

Bumper Implementation of LMEEM

The Hypervelocity Impact Technology (HVIT) group at the NASA Johnson Space Center (JSC) maintains the Bumper 3 computer program (referred to as “Bumper”) to perform Micrometeoroid and Orbital Debris (MMOD) risk assessments for spacecraft. To perform its calculations, this program requires detailed mathematical models of the space environments and can include those models representing orbital debris, micrometeoroids, and lunar ejecta. The lunar ejecta environment is a projectile environment specific to the lunar surface. Due to the Moon’s lack of an atmosphere, meteoroids frequently strike the lunar surface. When this happens, the impact ejects material radially away from the impact point, which can pose a potential impact hazard to surface-based hardware. This lunar ejecta environment was previously described in 1969, in NASA Special Publication SP-8013, which was used as the basis for a model that will be referred to in this document as the “SP-8013 environment model,” or simply, “SP-8013.” Since around 2020, this model has been used in MMOD risk assessments for the Human Landing System (HLS) program and other lunar surface programs. A new lunar meteoroid ejecta environment was developed via a computer code named Lunar Meteoroid Ejecta Engineering Model (LMEEM), produced by the Natural Environments Branch (NEB) at Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC). A global lunar surface environment definition using LMEEM is to be provided in the Cross-Program Design Specification for Natural Environments (DSNE) Revision J in 2024. Contact the NASA MSFC Natural Environments Branch for an in-depth discussion of the LMEEM environment model and its derivation. This environment model will supersede SP-8013 for MMOD risk assessments. To perform such assessments, Bumper must read data from text files output by LMEEM and use that data in risk calculations. The purpose of this document is to: •Demonstrate verification that the Bumper code has properly implemented the LMEEM environment model (Section 3) •Discuss the LMEEM environment as understood through an initial environment file (Section 4) •Compare the calculated risk due to the SP-8013 and LMEEM models (Section 5)

Bumper↗
NASA NTRS1998

Lunar Prospector: overview

Lunar Prospector is providing a global map of the composition of the moon and analyzing the moon's gravity and magnetic fields. It has been in a polar orbit around the moon since 16 January 1998. Neutron flux data show that there is abundant H, and hence probably abundant water ice, in the lunar polar regions. Gamma-ray and neutron data reveal the distribution of Fe, Ti, and other major and trace elements on the moon. The data delineate the global distributions of a key trace element-rich component of lunar materials called KREEP and of the major rock types. Magnetic mapping shows that the lunar magnetic fields are strong antipodal to Mare Imbrium and Mare Serenitatis and has discovered the smallest known magnetosphere, magnetosheath, and bow shock complex in the solar system. Gravity mapping has delineated seven new gravity anomalies and shown that the moon has a small Fe-rich core of about 300 km radius.

Flight Experiment↗
NASA NTRS1963

RANGER PROJECT STATUS

Status of the ranger project, a program for obtaining lunar surface data in preparation for manned flights, noting results of the four ranger flights

RANGER PROJECT↗
NASA NTRS2019

A Joinable Undercarriage to Maximize Payload (JUMP) Lunar Lander for Cargo Delivery to the Lunar Surface

Currently, NASA has engaged industry to develop a series of small to medium capacity landers with payload capacities of up to 5-9 tons by the mid to late 2020s. This contrasts with the former Constellation program, where the Altair lunar lander was targeting a payload capability of roughly 14-20 tons. Investment in smaller landers may present future challenges in delivering habitat modules larger than lunar lander cabins or small logistics modules to the lunar surface. Additionally, given a projected SLS flight rate of 1-2 launches per year, a lunar surface buildup from small elements seems problematic at best. While commercial launchers provide a supplement to SLS, many of the current and projected launch vehicles deliver less than 20 tons to a Trans-Lunar Injection – even fewer to the lunar surface. However, a possible solution could emerge if the lander itself could be launched in pieces with a buildup in Cislunar space. Thus, launchers with these capacities could contribute to a lunar lander capable of delivering 30 tons or more to the lunar surface. This paper introduces the notional concept of a Joinable Undercarriage to Maximized Payload (JUMP) lander. Key elements of a proposed JUMP lander concept will be discussed, followed by recommendations and forward work.

Human spaceflight↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Future Homes in Space: Development of Concepts for Exploration Space Habitats

NASA’s Artemis campaign seeks to return humans to the moon and establish a sustained presence on the lunar surface. This session will emphasize how habitation capabilities on the moon and in cislunar space can potentially contribute to the sustainability objectives of Artemis. Habitable elements represent opportunities to enable longer duration stays, increase the number of crew members present, enhance science and utilization activities, drive technology development for future Mars exploration, perform analog missions, and fuel economic opportunities for US industry. Panelists include Paul Kessler (NASA Marshall Space Flight Center, deputy lead for lunar surface habitation); Andrew Choate (NASA Marshall Space Flight Center, Mars habitation lead); Krystofer Dudzinski (NASA Marshall Space Flight Center, a space architect within the MSFC Advanced Concepts Office); and Larry Toups (retired from NASA Johnson Space Center, currently an adjunct professor at University of Houston in space architecture). The panel is moderated by Tracie Prater (NASA Marshall Space Flight Center, Habitation Systems Development Office). The panel will begin with an overview of the history of habitation concepts and an academic perspective on general considerations in space habitat design (Larry Toups). Paul Kessler and Andrew Choate will introduce NASA’s principle of “architecting from the right” to help define objectives for Artemis missions, needs/characteristics, use cases, and functions (as published in the agency’s Architecture Definition Document) and provide perspective on how this principle informs habitation concept development work. NASA panelists will discuss key engineering challenges identified for developing, deploying, and operating habitable assets on the lunar surface and/or in deep space. These may include dust mitigation, outfitting of inflatable softgoods (for concepts which may use softgoods as a primary structural material), survival in lunar darkness, human health and performance considerations, maintenance/repair/sparing, and autonomy. These identified challenges represent risks for habitation systems development and relate closely to capability gaps identified by the agency. While the work of NASA Marshall Space Flight Center’s habitation development office is primarily focused on habitats which are launched from earth pre-integrated (referred to as Class I in the framework previously developed by NASA space architects Kennedy/Cohen) or launched from earth and deployed at the point of use (Class II), there is also extensive work in NASA, academia, and companies on constructed habitats, which would be built on a planetary surface using indigenous resources (Class III habitats). Panelist Krystopher Dudzinski will discuss potential evolutionary pathways from Class I and Class II habitats to Class III habitats, unique and common architectural challenges within each habitat class, and key gaps in implementing Class III habitats from an architectural perspective. NASA panelists and the moderator will also provide an overview of partnership opportunities and avenues for further engagement to advance habitation systems for the SpaceCom audience. NASA is currently developing notional concepts for a lunar surface habitat and Mars transit habitat, which will be discussed during this panel session and used as examples. These concepts represent options for habitation system design and are a point of departure. They do not represent a final plan or formal recommendation on the part of the agency. Based on the most recent analysis cycle, NASA’s lunar surface habitat (SH) concept nominally supports two crew members for 30 days, with the capacity to support four crew during a surge period where crew will swap between the SH and another surface asset, such as a pressurized rover. This example design has a metallic airlock for ingress/egress and the upper portion is an inflatable material system which serves as the habitation module. The notional interior of the habitat is a three-deck layout/configuration which supports all crew mission functions, including exercise, stowage, extravehicular activity (EVA), sleep, hygiene waste collection, maintenance and repair, and meal preparation. Under analysis assumptions for habitation, the Mars Transit Habitat (TH) concept would support four crew on an up to 1,200 day Mars mission. One option for the concept is to initially dock Transit Habitat at Gateway, where it can be used to increase the duration of crew stays in cislunar space and perform shakedown and analog missions prior to a Mars departure. One challenge in longer duration missions which involve both surface exploration and transit is understanding crew adaptation when transitioning between partial gravity and microgravity environments. TH at Gateway offers an opportunity to study this transition and in doing so reduce risks associated with future Mars exploration. Like lunar SH, the most recent analysis cycle concept of a Mars TH is a hybrid structure design, with a metallic section supporting EVAs, axial/radial docking, and Safe Haven capabilities, and an inflatable softgoods structure for the primary habitation function. Interior layouts to optimize crew usability and livability are currently under trade. The panel will include presentation material, but also seeks to engage the audience in a highly interactive conversation regarding the potential role for habitation in future exploration initiatives. Potential topics for discussion include the influence of the crew experience on habitation systems design and livability/usability considerations, the benefits of space habitation development in terrestrial applications, and challenges and opportunities in “feeding forward” lunar surface habitation systems development to Mars exploration.

space habitats↗
NASA NTRS1967

Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1966

At the opening of the tenth year in the era of man’s mobility in outer space, we can look back on 1966 as offering convincing evidence that the United States had gained great competence. This evidence included: five orbital space flights by ten Gemini astronauts; four lunar missions undertaking the orbiting of and soft landing on the moon; numerous contributions to scientific knowledge by unmanned spacecraft and sounding rockets; and further demonstrations of the practical utility of operational space systems, including weather and communications satellites. During 1966, a record 100 American spacecraft were placed into earth orbit or on escape trajectories. Thousands of revealing and useful pictures of the earth were taken from space and of the moon from lunar orbit and on its surface. The Gemini program ended with rendezvous and docking experiments and extravehicular activity by the Gemini test pilots as the Apollo R&D test flights leading to the manned lunar mission came into the schedule. Thirty-five major scientific, technological, and operational milestones were cited for 1966 by the President in his Report to the Congress on aeronautical and space activities of the United States. This was one measure of the American commitment to share in the peaceful exploration of space for all mankind. Another was our support of the final steps toward a United Nations space treaty, undertaken to ensure that the peaceful exploitation of space had juridical basis in international law. Spectacular as some events in the space venture were in 1966, they nonetheless came to have diminished novelty in the eyes of many laymen. The multitude of both important and unspectacular space activities attained almost an accepted and routine place. This volume, as well as its predecessor chronicles, offers a ready reference on the major as well as the less-well known events. Beyond the welter of documented details on the complex nature of aeronautical and space related events and their impact, this volume helps to provide a better perspective upon today as we contemplate tomorrow. Such intent also serves future historians and analysts who cannot be unmindful of what is herein presented. When the Congress created the National Aeronautics and Space Administration in 1958, it charged NASA with the responsibility to “contribute materially to . . . the expansion of human knowledge of phenomena in the atmosphere and space’’ and to “provide for the widest practical and appropriate dissemination of information concerning its activities and results thereof.” NASA has attempted to do this and to include documentation for the historical record. The relating of NASA history begins with this day-by day chronicle and leads to more specialized studies and histories of the unprecedented task of extending man’s mobility and understanding beyond his planet. While a chronology cannot in itself serve as a full-fledged history, the size of this annual volume alone is illustrative of the scope and complexity of the historical task yet to be completed as memories fade and the records disappear.

SPACE PROBE↗
NASA NTRS1967

Summary of rendezvous operations

One of the major objectives of the Gemini Program was to develop and to demonstrate techniques for the rendezvous and docking of space vehicles. This objective is of vital importance since rendezvous and docking is mandatory for success in many future manned space-flight programs. For example, lunar orbital rendezvous has been selected as the primary mode for the Apollo lunar-landing mission which requires one rendezvous and two dockings. Other programs requiring rendezvous are planetary missions, manned space stations, and unmanned satellite inspection and repair missions.

structural integrity↗