Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “NASA Docking System”

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.

338 records · Page 19
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2005

The Integrated Safety-Critical Advanced Avionics Communication and Control (ISAACC) System Concept: Infrastructure for ISHM

Integrated System Health Management (ISHM) architectures for spacecraft will include hard real-time, critical subsystems and soft real-time monitoring subsystems. Interaction between these subsystems will be necessary and an architecture supporting multiple criticality levels will be required. Demonstration hardware for the Integrated Safety-Critical Advanced Avionics Communication & Control (ISAACC) system has been developed at NASA Marshall Space Flight Center. It is a modular system using a commercially available time-triggered protocol, ?Tp/C, that supports hard real-time distributed control systems independent of the data transmission medium. The protocol is implemented in hardware and provides guaranteed low-latency messaging with inherent fault-tolerance and fault-containment. Interoperability between modules and systems of modules using the TTP/C is guaranteed through definition of messages and the precise message schedule implemented by the master-less Time Division Multiple Access (TDMA) communications protocol. "Plug-and-play" capability for sensors and actuators provides automatically configurable modules supporting sensor recalibration and control algorithm re-tuning without software modification. Modular components of controlled physical system(s) critical to control algorithm tuning, such as pumps or valve components in an engine, can be replaced or upgraded as "plug and play" components without modification to the ISAACC module hardware or software. ISAACC modules can communicate with other vehicle subsystems through time-triggered protocols or other communications protocols implemented over Ethernet, MIL-STD- 1553 and RS-485/422. Other communication bus physical layers and protocols can be included as required. In this way, the ISAACC modules can be part of a system-of-systems in a vehicle with multi-tier subsystems of varying criticality. The goal of the ISAACC architecture development is control and monitoring of safety critical systems of a manned spacecraft. These systems include spacecraft navigation and attitude control, propulsion, automated docking, vehicle health management and life support. ISAACC can integrate local critical subsystem health management with subsystems performing long term health monitoring. The ISAACC system and its relationship to ISHM will be presented.

Gwaltney, David A.↗
NASA NTRS2018

Advanced Multimodal Solutions for Information Presentation

High-workload, fast-paced, and degraded sensory environments are the likeliest candidates to benefit from multimodal information presentation. For example, during EVA (Extra-Vehicular Activity) and telerobotic operations, the sensory restrictions associated with a space environment provide a major challenge to maintaining the situation awareness (SA) required for safe operations. Multimodal displays hold promise to enhance situation awareness and task performance by utilizing different sensory modalities and maximizing their effectiveness based on appropriate interaction between modalities. During EVA, the visual and auditory channels are likely to be the most utilized with tasks such as monitoring the visual environment, attending visual and auditory displays, and maintaining multichannel auditory communications. Previous studies have shown that compared to unimodal displays (spatial auditory or 2D visual), bimodal presentation of information can improve operator performance during simulated extravehicular activity on planetary surfaces for tasks as diverse as orientation, localization or docking, particularly when the visual environment is degraded or workload is increased. Tactile displays offer a third sensory channel that may both offload information processing effort and provide a means to capture attention when urgently required. For example, recent studies suggest that including tactile cues may result in increased orientation and alerting accuracy, improved task response time and decreased workload, as well as provide self-orientation cues in microgravity on the ISS (International Space Station). An important overall issue is that context-dependent factors like task complexity, sensory degradation, peripersonal vs. extrapersonal space operations, workload, experience level, and operator fatigue tend to vary greatly in complex real-world environments and it will be difficult to design a multimodal interface that performs well under all conditions. As a possible solution, adaptive systems have been proposed in which the information presented to the user changes as a function of taskcontext-dependent factors. However, this presupposes that adequate methods for detecting andor predicting such factors are developed. Further, research in adaptive systems for aviation suggests that they can sometimes serve to increase workload and reduce situational awareness. It will be critical to develop multimodal display guidelines that include consideration of smart systems that can select the best display method for a particular contextsituation.The scope of the current work is an analysis of potential multimodal display technologies for long duration missions and, in particular, will focus on their potential role in EVA activities. The review will address multimodal (combined visual, auditory andor tactile) displays investigated by NASA, industry, and DoD (Dept. of Defense). It also considers the need for adaptive information systems to accommodate a variety of operational contexts such as crew status (e.g., fatigue, workload level) and task environment (e.g., EVA, habitat, rover, spacecraft). Current approaches to guidelines and best practices for combining modalities for the most effective information displays are also reviewed. Potential issues in developing interface guidelines for the Exploration Information System (EIS) are briefly considered.

multimodal display↗
NASA NTRS1999

On Orbit Testing of the Video Guidance Sensor

The Video Guidance Sensor (VGS), part of NASA's Automated Rendezvous and Capture program, was flown on Shuttle mission STS-95 in October of 1998 to orbitally test the functional characteristics of the VGS. This was the second flight of the VGS (the first flight was in 1997 on STS-87), and this time long-range tracking data was gathered during the experiment. The flight experiment sensor was designed to operate from 1.5 meter range out to 110 meter range, with a field-of-view of 16 X 21 degrees. The VGS tracked its target at a 5 Hz rate and returned 6-degree-of-freedom information on the target's position and attitude relative to the sensor. The VGS was mounted in the Shuttle cargo bay, and its target was mounted on the Spartan spacecraft being carried on this mission. The orbital testing of the VGS included operations with the target on the Shuttle's Remote Manipulator System (RMS) at the start of the 10-day mission, long-range data during the Shuttle rendezvous with the Spartan two days later, and some more RMS operations later in the mission. The data returned from the orbital testing included VGS diagnostics, acquisition, and tracking data, RMS positions, hand-held laser range data, tapes of the data from the VGS video camera, and orbital positioning data from the Spartan and the Shuttle to allow correlation of the VGS data with orbital best-estimate-of-truth data. The Video Guidance Sensor performed well in all phases of the testing, and the VGS is being incorporated into the ground testing of a complete automated rendezvous and docking system. Work on the development of the next generation VGS is continuing

Howard, Richard T.↗
NASA NTRS2008

NASA Tech Briefs, June 2008

Topics covered include: Charge-Control Unit for Testing Lithium-Ion Cells; Measuring Positions of Objects Using Two or More Cameras; Lidar System for Airborne Measurement of Clouds and Aerosols; Radiation-Insensitive Inverse Majority Gates; Reduced-Order Kalman Filtering for Processing Relative Measurements; Spaceborne Processor Array; Instrumentation System Diagnoses a Thermocouple; Chromatic Modulator for a High-Resolution CCD or APS; Commercial Product Activation Using RFID; Cup Cylindrical Waveguide Antenna; Aerobraking Maneuver (ABM) Report Generator; ABM Drag_Pass Report Generator; Transformation of OODT CAS to Perform Larger Tasks; Visualization Component of Vehicle Health Decision Support System; Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter Uplink Analysis Tool; Problem Reporting System; G-Guidance Interface Design for Small Body Mission Simulation; DSN Scheduling Engine; Replacement Sequence of Events Generator; Force-Control Algorithm for Surface Sampling; Tool for Merging Proposals Into DSN Schedules; Micromachined Slits for Imaging Spectrometers; Fabricating Nanodots Using Lift-Off of a Nanopore Template; Making Complex Electrically Conductive Patterns on Cloth; Special Polymer/Carbon Composite Films for Detecting SO2; Nickel-Based Superalloy Resists Embrittlement by Hydrogen; Chemical Passivation of Li+-Conducting Solid Electrolytes; Organic/Inorganic Polymeric Composites for Heat-Transfer Reduction; Composite Cathodes for Dual-Rate Li-Ion Batteries; Improved Descent-Rate Limiting Mechanism; Alignment-Insensitive Lower-Cost Telescope Architecture; Micro-Resistojet for Small Satellites; Using Piezoelectric Devices to Transmit Power through Walls; Miniature Latching Valve; Apparatus for Sampling Surface Contamination; Novel Species of Non-Spore-Forming Bacteria; Chamber for Aerosol Deposition of Bioparticles; Hyperspectral Sun Photometer for Atmospheric Characterization and Vicarious Calibrations; Dynamic Stability and Gravitational Balancing of Multiple Extended Bodies; Simulation of Stochastic Processes by Coupled ODE-PDE; Cluster Inter-Spacecraft Communications; Genetic Algorithm Optimizes Q-LAW Control Parameters; Low-Impact Mating System for Docking Spacecraft; Non-Destructive Evaluation of Materials via Ultraviolet Spectroscopy; Gold-on-Polymer-Based Sensing Films for Detection of Organic and Inorganic Analytes in the Air; and Quantum-Inspired Maximizer.

Source record↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

A Crew and Logistics Lander for the Common Habitat Architecture

The Common Habitat Architecture is a conceptual study that explores the use of a large habitat derived from the Space Launch System (SLS) liquid oxygen tank as a core habitation element that can be used for crew missions or training in 0g, 1/6g, 3/8g, and 1g. This is not part of current NASA Artemis mission planning, but instead represents an architecture that could potentially follow after the Artemis missions and initial human Mars landings. This architecture leverages Starship-derived vehicles for crew landing on and ascent from the Moon and Mars in support of long-duration surface missions with pressurized crew transfer baselined as a nominal capability. This is not the Human Landing System variant of Starship but represents a number of modifications to enable long-duration surface missions with an eight-person crew size. A rapid brainstorming study was conducted in February of 2021, using only public data, to identify options to deliver the 90-ton Common Habitat to the surface and emplace it at the intended habitation site. This study compared three lunar lander concepts and three Mars lander concepts before ultimately selecting the SpaceX Starship as the most viable lander. The Common Habitat Architecture assumes that this Starship variant can further be modified for crew and cargo delivery, assuming that the use of a common system will lead to cost benefits. It is assumed that the Starship will expend too much propellant in landing crew and logistics to be able to launch, given the assumed absence of surface propellant production. Consequently, a separable ascent stage is used for crew ascent. The pressurized elements of this modified Starship are discussed: Starship Ascent Module, Airlock, Transfer Tunnel, Pressurized Crew Transfer Module, and Logistics Modules. For each element, a description, dimensions, rough mass estimates, core capabilities, and design features are presented. Key mechanisms and internal structures of the starship are also discussed. This will include flame diverters for the ascend module, the orbital docking hatch, Pressurized Crew Transfer Module Garage door, Starship Ascent Module fairing, flame diverter blow-out panels, Pressurized Crew Transfer Module lift system, logistics module lift system, contingency crew ascent via the logistics module lift system, internal catwalks, and structural interfaces. Concept of Operations will be discussed for both Moon and Mars. This will include in-space crew rendezvous and transfer, crewed landing, shirtsleeve crew transfer, crew departure, contingency surface operations, and final element disposition. Key differences for Mars will be discussed, such as the Martian atmosphere, dust storms, the absence of crew handover, and Deep Space Exploration Vehicle rendezvous. Contingency microgravity maintenance access will also be discussed. This work will demonstrate viable pressurized crew transfer with a Starship-based lander architecture. Forward work includes Garage lighting and camera systems, Starship Ascent Module propulsion system and docking port trades, contingency habitation trades, and mass/power equipment estimation. Finally, forward work includes developing a heavy cargo return system derived from the Crew and Logistics Starship. The goal of this system is the return of at least 10,000 kg payloads from the surfaces of the Moon and Mars.

Lunar Lander↗
NASA NTRS2001

Thermal Analysis for Orbiter and ISS Plume Impingement on International Space Station

The NASA Reaction Control System (RCS) Plume Model (RPM) is an exhaust plume flow field and impingement heating code that has been updated and applied to components of the International Space Station (ISS). The objective of this study was to use this code to determine if plume environments from either Orbiter PRCS jets or ISS reboost and Attitude Control System (ACS) jets cause thermal issues on ISS component surfaces. This impingement analysis becomes increasingly important as the ISS is being assembled with its first permanent crew scheduled to arrive by the end of fall 2000. By early summer 2001 , the ISS will have a number of major components installed such as the Unity (Node 1), Destiny (Lab Module), Zarya (Functional Cargo Block), and Zvezda (Service Module) along with the P6 solar arrays and radiators and the Z-1 truss. Plume heating to these components has been analyzed with the RPM code as well as additional components for missions beyond Flight 6A such as the Propulsion Module (PM), Mobile Servicing System, Space Station Remote Manipulator System, Node 2, and the Cupola. For the past several years NASA/JSC has been developing the methodology to predict plume heating on ISS components. The RPM code is a modified source flow code with capabilities for scarfed nozzles and intersecting plumes that was developed for the 44 Orbiter RCS jets. This code has been validated by comparison with Shuttle Plume Impingement Flight Experiment (SPIFEX) heat flux and pressure data and with CFD and Method of Characteristics solutions. Previous analyses of plume heating predictions to the ISS using RPM have been reported, but did not consider thermal analysis for the components nor jet-firing histories as the Orbiter approaches the ISS docking ports. The RPM code has since been modified to analyze surface temperatures with a lumped mass approach and also uses jet-firing histories to produce pulsed heating rates. In addition, RPM was modified to include plume heating from ISS jets to ISS components where the jet coordinates are specified, together with the engine cant angle. These latter studies have been focused on the PM with plumes from its reboost and ACS jets impinging on various ISS components and also focused on the Japanese H2 Transfer Vehicle (HTV) with the plumes from its reboost engines impinging on the Cupola window. This paper will present plume heating and surface temperature results on a number of ISS components with and without jet-firing histories, evaluate post-flight data, and describe any potential thermal issues

Rochelle, William C.↗
NASA NTRS1988

Status of the US Space Station ECLSS and internal TCS

The U.S. Space Station includes many elements and systems. Responsibility for these have been delegated to four NASA centers via a work packaging concept. Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) is responsible for work package one (WPOI) which includes the habitation, laboratory modules, the logistic carrier elements, as well as the environmental control and life support system (ECLSS), the internal thermal control system (ITCS), and the internal audio and video systems. Current status of the ECLSS and internal thermal are the subjects of this paper. The ECLSS is composed of six subsystem groups: the temperature humidity control, the atmosphere control and supply, the air revitalization, water reclamation and management, fecal waste management, and the fire detection and suppression subsystems. The internal TCS consists of all WP01 elements of passive and active thermal measures. The ECLSS and ITCS provide services for the permanently orbiting pressurized modules as well as the pressurized and unpressurized logistics carriers. The logistics carriers are used as ground-to-station ferries for both resupply and initial delivery of selected new equipment and later replacement items. Equipment, which cannot be subjected to the rigors of the space environment, will be carried in the pressurized logistic carrier; while an unpressurized carrier is used to resupply other commodities, such as external fluid consumables. The laboratory module houses the equipment for both payloads and subsystem maintenance and repair. The habitation module is dedicated to providing living and sleeping quarters including a galley, sleeping provisions, hygiene facilities, medical services as well as services for exercise and relaxation. The four nodes that join the two modules at their ends also house electronics as well as work stations and outside viewing cupolas. The airlocks, one providing an emergency hyperbaric chamber capability, are also attached. This assembly constitutes the U.S. provided portion of the initial station. Additional international modules and docking provisions for future attached pressurized payload as well as dual logistic module and growth capabilities are also provided. The primary heat rejection mechanism is achieved via a central set of radiators provided by another work package. The interface with the central TCS at the module heat exchangers defines the active control interface boundary of the ITCS with the central TCS. All internal cooling of the permanent orbital elements are provided via internal active fluid loops within the elements utilizing water as the transport media. Cabin and equipment cooling are provided by forced air flow and cold plate heat sinks. A special active cooling loop is provided in the laboratory module to accommodate experiments and other payloads. Coatings and insulation are used in conjunction with the active components to passively limit heat losses/gains. The most challenging ECLSS new technology issues relate to oxygen and water recovery. Closure of the oxygen loop requires the use of new regenerative CO 2 removal and concentration techniques, CO 2 reduction to convert the CO 2 to water with a waste by-product, and the electrolysis of water to produce breathing oxygen for water recovery. For water recovery three separate loops are currently planned. One loop provides potable water by utilizing a combination of recovered condensate and CO 2 reduction water. A second loop purifies hygiene water from waste from the showers, clothes washer, hygiene/hand wash stations and a dishwasher. The third loop provides hygiene water by the reclamation and purification of urine water. This paper outlines the basic services provided by the ECLSS and ITCS and describes the ECLSS functional distribution throughout the pressurized assembly.

R. Humphries↗
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 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 NTRS2009

Nuclear Thermal Rocket/Vehicle Characteristics And Sensitivity Trades For NASA's Mars Design Reference Architecture (DRA) 5.0 Study

This paper summarizes Phase I and II analysis results from NASA's recent Mars DRA 5.0 study which re-examined mission, payload and transportation system requirements for a human Mars landing mission in the post-2030 timeframe. Nuclear thermal rocket (NTR) propulsion was again identified as the preferred in-space transportation system over chemical/aerobrake because of its higher specific impulse (I(sub sp)) capability, increased tolerance to payload mass growth and architecture changes, and lower total initial mass in low Earth orbit (IMLEO) which is important for reducing the number of Ares-V heavy lift launches and overall mission cost. DRA 5.0 features a long surface stay (approximately 500 days) split mission using separate cargo and crewed Mars transfer vehicles (MTVs). All vehicles utilize a common core propulsion stage with three 25 klbf composite fuel NERVA-derived NTR engines (T(sub ex) approximately 2650 - 2700 K, p(sub ch) approximately 1000 psia, epsilon approximately 300:1, I(sub sp) approximately 900 - 910 s, engine thrust-toweight ratio approximately 3.43) to perform all primary mission maneuvers. Two cargo flights, utilizing 1-way minimum energy trajectories, pre-deploy a cargo lander to the surface and a habitat lander into a 24-hour elliptical Mars parking orbit where it remains until the arrival of the crewed MTV during the next mission opportunity (approximately 26 months later). The cargo payload elements aerocapture (AC) into Mars orbit and are enclosed within a large triconicshaped aeroshell which functions as payload shroud during launch, then as an aerobrake and thermal protection system during Mars orbit capture and subsequent entry, descent and landing (EDL) on Mars. The all propulsive crewed MTV is a 0-gE vehicle design that utilizes a fast conjunction trajectory that allows approximately 6-7 month 1-way transit times to and from Mars. Four 12.5 kW(sub e) per 125 square meter rectangular photovoltaic arrays provide the crewed MTV with approximately 50 kW(sub e) of electrical power in Mars orbit for crew life support and spacecraft subsystem needs. Vehicle assembly involves autonomous Earth orbit rendezvous and docking between the propulsion stages, in-line propellant tanks and payload elements. Nine Ares-V launches -- five for the two cargo MTVs and four for the crewed MTV -- deliver the key components for the three MTVs. Details on mission, payload, engine and vehicle characteristics and requirements are presented and the results of key trade studies are discussed.

Borowski, Stanley K.↗
NASA NTRS2009

Ares V: Game Changer for National Security Launch

NASA is designing the Ares V cargo launch vehicle to vastly expand exploration of the Moon begun in the Apollo program and enable the exploration of Mars and beyond. As the largest launcher in history, Ares V also represents a national asset offering unprecedented opportunities for new science, national security, and commercial missions of unmatched size and scope. The Ares V is the heavy-lift component of NASA's dual-launch architecture that will replace the current space shuttle fleet, complete the International Space Station, and establish a permanent human presence on the Moon as a stepping-stone to destinations beyond. During extensive independent and internal architecture and vehicle trade studies as part of the Exploration Systems Architecture Study (ESAS), NASA selected the Ares I crew launch vehicle and the Ares V to support future exploration. The smaller Ares I will launch the Orion crew exploration vehicle with four to six astronauts into orbit. The Ares V is designed to carry the Altair lunar lander into orbit, rendezvous with Orion, and send the mated spacecraft toward lunar orbit. The Ares V will be the largest and most powerful launch vehicle in history, providing unprecedented payload mass and volume to establish a permanent lunar outpost and explore significantly more of the lunar surface than was done during the Apollo missions. The Ares V consists of a Core Stage, two Reusable Solid Rocket Boosters (RSRBs), Earth Departure Stage (EDS), and a payload shroud. For lunar missions, the shroud would cover the Lunar Surface Access Module (LSAM). The Ares V Core Stage is 33 feet in diameter and 212 feet in length, making it the largest rocket stage ever built. It is the same diameter as the Saturn V first stage, the S-IC. However, its length is about the same as the combined length of the Saturn V first and second stages. The Core Stage uses a cluster of five Pratt & Whitney Rocketdyne RS-68B rocket engines, each supplying about 700,000 pounds of thrust. Its propellants are liquid hydrogen and liquid oxygen. The two solid rocket boosters provide about 3.5 million pounds of thrust at liftoff. These 5.5-segment boosters are derived from the 4-segment boosters now used on the Space Shuttle, and are similar to those used in the Ares I first stage. The EDS is powered by one J-2X engine. The J-2X, which has roughly 294,000 pounds of thrust, also powers the Ares I Upper Stage. It is derived from the J-2 that powered the Saturn V second and third stages. The EDS performs two functions. Its initial suborbital burns will place the lunar lander into a stable Earth orbit. After the Orion crew vehicle, launched separately on an Ares I, docks with the lander/EDS stack, EDS will ignite a second time to put the combined 65-metric ton vehicle into a lunar transfer orbit. When it stands on the launch pad at Kennedy Space Center late in the next decade, the Ares V stack will be approximately 381 feet tall and have a gross liftoff mass of 8.1 million pounds. The current point-of-departure design exceeds Saturn V s mass capability by approximately 40 percent. Using the current payload shroud design, Ares V can carry 315,000 pounds to 29-degree low Earth orbit (LEO) or 77,000 pounds to a geosynchronous orbit. Another unique aspect of the Ares V is the 33-foot-diameter payload shroud, which encloses approximately 30,400 cubic feet of usable volume. A larger hypothetical shroud for encapsulating larger payloads has been studied. While Ares V makes possible larger payload masses and volumes, it may alternately make possible more cost-effective mission design if the relevant payload communities are willing to consider an alternative to the existing approach that has driven them to employ complexity to solve current launch vehicle mass and volume constraints. By using Ares V s mass and volume capabilities as margin, payload designers stand to reduce development risk and cost. Significant progress has been made on the Ares V to support a plaed fiscal 2011 authority-to-proceed (ATP) milestone. The Ares V team is actively reaching out to external organizations during this early concept phase to ensure that the Ares V vehicle can be leveraged for national security, science, and commercial development needs. This presentation will discuss Ares V vehicle configuration, the path to the current concept, accomplishments to date, and potential payload utilization opportunities.

Sumrall, Phil↗
NASA NTRS1996

The Spacelab-Mir-1 "Greenhouse-2" experiment

The Spacelab-Mir-1 (SLM-1) mission is the first docking of the Space Shuttle Atlantis (STS-71) with the Orbital Station Mir in June 1995. The SLM-1 "Greenhouse-2" experiment will utilize the Russian-Bulgarian-developed plant growth unit (Svet). "Greenhouse-2" will include two plantings (1) designed to test the capability of Svet to grow a crop of Superdwarf wheat from seed to seed, and (2) to provide green plant material for post-flight analysis. Protocols, procedures, and equipment for the experiment have been developed by the US-Russian science team. "Greenhouse-2" will also provide the first orbital test of a new Svet Instrumentation System (SIS) developed by Utah State University to provide near real time data on plant environmental parameters and gas-exchange rates. SIS supplements the Svet control and monitoring system with additional sensors for substrate moisture, air temperature, IR leaf temperature, light, oxygen, pressure, humidity, and carbon-dioxide. SIS provides the capability to monitor canopy transpiration and net assimilation of the plants growing in each vegetation unit (root zone) by enclosing the canopy in separate, retractable, ventilated leaf chambers. Six times during the seed-to-seed experiment, plant samples will be collected, leaf area measured, and plant parts fixed and/or dried for ground analysis. A second planting initiated 30 days before the arrival of a U.S. Shuttle [originally planned to be STS-71] is designed to provide green material at the vegetative development stage for ground analysis. [As this paper is being edited, the experiment has been delayed until after the arrival of STS-71.].

Non-NASA Center↗
NASA NTRS2010

Evaluation of Dual-Launch Lunar Architectures Using the Mission Assessment Post Processor

The National Aeronautics and Space Administrations (NASA) Constellation Program is currently designing a new transportation system to replace the Space Shuttle, support human missions to both the International Space Station (ISS) and the Moon, and enable the eventual establishment of an outpost on the lunar surface. The present Constellation architecture is designed to meet nominal capability requirements and provide flexibility sufficient for handling a host of contingency scenarios including (but not limited to) launch delays at the Earth. This report summarizes a body of work performed in support of the Review of U.S. Human Space Flight Committee. It analyzes three lunar orbit rendezvous dual-launch architecture options which incorporate differing methodologies for mitigating the effects of launch delays at the Earth. NASA employed the recently-developed Mission Assessment Post Processor (MAPP) tool to quickly evaluate vehicle performance requirements for several candidate approaches for conducting human missions to the Moon. The MAPP tool enabled analysis of Earth perturbation effects and Earth-Moon geometry effects on the integrated vehicle performance as it varies over the 18.6-year lunar nodal cycle. Results are provided summarizing best-case and worst-case vehicle propellant requirements for each architecture option. Additionally, the associated vehicle payload mass requirements at launch are compared between each architecture and against those of the Constellation Program. The current Constellation Program architecture assumes that the Altair lunar lander and Earth Departure Stage (EDS) vehicles are launched on a heavy lift launch vehicle. The Orion Crew Exploration Vehicle (CEV) is separately launched on a smaller man-rated vehicle. This strategy relaxes man-rating requirements for the heavy lift launch vehicle and has the potential to significantly reduce the cost of the overall architecture over the operational lifetime of the program. The crew launch occurs first, four days prior to the optimal trans-lunar injection (TLI) departure window. This is done to allow for launch delays in the Altair/EDS launch. During this time, the Orion vehicle is required to conduct orbit maintenance while loitering in low Earth orbit (LEO). The alternative architectures presented aim to eliminate the need for costly orbit maintenance maneuvers while loitering in LEO. In all of the alternative architectures considered, it is assumed that the Altair and Orion vehicles are nominally launched 90 minutes apart, depart the Earth separately, and complete the rendezvous and docking sequence at the Moon. In this lunar orbit rendezvous (LOR) strategy, both the Altair and Orion vehicles will require separate EDS stages, and each will be required to perform lunar orbit insertion (LOI). This has the effect of balancing payload requirements between the two launch vehicles at the Earth. In this case, the overall payload mass is increased slightly, but the increased mission costs could potentially be offset by requiring the construction of two rockets similar in size and nature, unlike the current Constellation architecture. Three dual-launch architecture options with LOR were evaluated, which incorporate differing methodologies for mitigating the effects of launch delays at the Earth. Benefits and drawbacks of each of the dual-launch architecture options with LOR are discussed and the overall mission performance is compared with that of the existing Constellation Program lunar architecture.

Stewart, Shaun M.↗
NASA NTRS2007

Robotics

Lunar robotic functions include: 1. Transport of crew and payloads on the surface of the moon; 2. Offloading payloads from a lunar lander; 3. Handling the deployment of surface systems; with 4. Human commanding of these functions from inside a lunar vehicle, habitat, or extravehicular (space walk), with Earth-based supervision. The systems that will perform these functions may not look like robots from science fiction. In fact, robotic functions may be automated trucks, cranes and winches. Use of this equipment prior to the crew s arrival or in the potentially long periods without crews on the surface, will require that these systems be computer controlled machines. The public release of NASA's Exploration plans at the 2nd Space Exploration Conference (Houston, December 2006) included a lunar outpost with as many as four unique mobility chassis designs. The sequence of lander offloading tasks involved as many as ten payloads, each with a unique set of geometry, mass and interface requirements. This plan was refined during a second phase study concluded in August 2007. Among the many improvements to the exploration plan were a reduction in the number of unique mobility chassis designs and a reduction in unique payload specifications. As the lunar surface system payloads have matured, so have the mobility and offloading functional requirements. While the architecture work continues, the community can expect to see functional requirements in the areas of surface mobility, surface handling, and human-systems interaction as follows: Surface Mobility 1. Transport crew on the lunar surface, accelerating construction tasks, expanding the crew s sphere of influence for scientific exploration, and providing a rapid return to an ascent module in an emergency. The crew transport can be with an un-pressurized rover, a small pressurized rover, or a larger mobile habitat. 2. Transport Extra-Vehicular Activity (EVA) equipment and construction payloads. 3. Transport habitats and power modules over long distances, pre-positioning them for the arrival of crew on a subsequent lander. Surface Handling 1. Offload surface system payloads from the lander, breaking launch restraints and power/data connections. Payloads may be offloaded to a wheeled vehicle for transport. 2. Deploy payloads from a wheeled vehicle at a field site, placing the payloads in their final use site on the ground or mating them with existing surface systems. 3. Support regolith collection, site preparation, berm construction, or other civil engineering tasks using tools and implements attached to rovers. Human-Systems Interaction 1. Provide a safe command and control interface for suited EVA to ride on and drive the vehicles, making sure that the systems are also safe for working near dismounted crew. 2. Provide an effective control system for IV crew to tele-operate vehicles, cranes and other equipment from inside the surface habitats with evolving independence from Earth. .. Provide a supervisory system that allows machines to be commanded from the ground, working across the Earth-Lunar time delays on the order of 5-10 seconds (round trip) to support operations when crew are not resident on the surface. Technology Development Needs 1. Surface vehicles that can dock, align and mate with outpost equipment such as landers, habitats and fluid/power interfaces. 2. Long life motors, drive trains, seals, motor electronics, sensors, processors, cable harnesses, and dash board displays. 3. Active suspension control, localization, high speed obstacle avoidance, and safety systems for operating near dismounted crew. 4. High specific energy and specific power batteries that are safe, rechargeable, and long lived.

Ambrose, Robert O.↗