SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Deployable Fission 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.

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

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

21 records · Page 2

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

NASA NTRS2009

Fission Surface Power Technology Development Status

With the potential future deployment of a lunar outpost there is expected to be a clear need for a high-power, lunar surface power source to support lunar surface operations independent of the day-night cycle, and Fission Surface Power (FSP) is a very effective solution for power levels above a couple 10 s of kWe. FSP is similarly enabling for the poorly illuminated surface of Mars. The power levels/requirements for a lunar outpost option are currently being studied, but it is known that cost is clearly a predominant concern to decision makers. This paper describes the plans of NASA and the DOE to execute an affordable fission surface power system technology development project to demonstrate sufficient technology readiness of an affordable FSP system so viable and cost-effective FSP system options will be available when high power lunar surface system choices are expected to be made in the early 2010s.

Palac, Donald T.↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

SERENE: Saturn Enceladus Return Explorer with Nuclear Electric Propulsion

A ‘quick’ Enceladus sample return mission concept was developed based on the scientist recommendations at the recent ‘Accelerating Space Science with Nuclear Technology Workshop’. The Nuclear Electric Propulsion spacecraft assumed a follow-on 40 kWe nuclear reactor using the demonstrated 40 kWe Fission Surface Power system, expected in the early 2030s. The NEP vehicle also utilized a set of NEXT-C ion thrusters as well as planned Artemis commercial launchers. By launching the 40 kW NEP vehicle on a Starship and adding the propellants of 15 tankers, the 27t probe could be sent on a direct trajectory to Saturn (no Earth or Jupiter flybys) where NEP was used for Saturn capture, spiral down, spiral up and return to the Earth. A small lander obtained the surface Enceladus sample. Using the 40 kW NEP provided a round-trip time of only 16.5 years. A second option was more attractive from a science perspective whereby the NEP vehicle would deliver a large, 6t chemical lander to low Enceladus orbit where it would grab and return a sample to Earth (similar to the recent Orbilander design but in reverse). After deploying the lander, the NEP vehicle would stay in Saturn space performing a moon tour by orbiting four more moons and mapping the large moon of Titan. This option took slightly longer (18.5 yrs) due to the chemical return leg limitations. Both options demonstrated the agility, payload capability, and sample return goals the workshop recommended. An all-chemical option with two stages was roughly analyzed but took 21.5 yrs and required a Jupiter gravity assist.

Nuclear Electric Propulsion↗

NASA NTRS2005

Electric Power System Technology Options for Lunar Surface Missions

In 2004, the President announced a 'Vision for Space Exploration' that is bold and forward-thinking, yet practical and responsible. The vision explores answers to longstanding questions of importance to science and society and will develop revolutionary technologies and capabilities for the future, while maintaining good stewardship of taxpayer dollars. One crucial technology area enabling all space exploration is electric power systems. In this paper, the author evaluates surface power technology options in order to identify leading candidate technologies that will accomplish lunar design reference mission three (LDRM-3). LDRM-3 mission consists of multiple, 90-day missions to the lunar South Pole with 4-person crews starting in the year 2020. Top-level power requirements included a nominal 50 kW continuous habitat power over a 5-year lifetime with back-up or redundant emergency power provisions and a nominal 2-kW, 2-person unpressurized rover. To help direct NASA's technology investment strategy, this lunar surface power technology evaluation assessed many figures of merit including: current technology readiness levels (TRLs), potential to advance to TRL 6 by 2014, effectiveness of the technology to meet the mission requirements in the specified time, mass, stowed volume, deployed area, complexity, required special ground facilities, safety, reliability/redundancy, strength of industrial base, applicability to other LDRM-3 elements, extensibility to Mars missions, costs, and risks. For the 50-kW habitat module, dozens of nuclear, radioisotope and solar power technologies were down-selected to a nuclear fission heat source with Brayton, Stirling or thermoelectric power conversion options. Preferred energy storage technologies included lithium-ion battery and Proton Exchange Membrane (PEM) Regenerative Fuel Cells (RFC). Several AC and DC power management and distribution architectures and component technologies were defined consistent with the preferred habitat power generation technology option and the overall lunar surface mission. For rover power, more than 20 technology options were down-selected to radioisotope Stirling, liquid lithium-ion battery, PEM RFC, or primary fuel cell options. The author discusses various conclusions that can be drawn from the findings of this surface power technologies evaluation.

Kerslake, Thomas W.↗