Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Booster Separation”

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.

375 records · Page 21
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS1993

The Far Ultraviolet (FUV) auroral imager for the Inner Magnetospheric Imager (IMI) mission: Options

The change from an intermediate mission (cost ceiling of $300 million) to a solar-terrestrial probe class mission (cost ceiling of $150 million) will require some major changes in the configuration of the IMI mission. One option being considered is to move to a small spin-stabilized spacecraft (with no despun platform) which could be launched with a smaller Taurus or Conestoga class booster. Such a change in spacecraft type would not present any fundamental problems (other than restrictions on mass and power) for the He plus 304 A plasmasphere imager, the high and low energy neutral atom imagers, and the geocoronal imager, but would present a challenge for the FUV auroral imager since the original plan called for this instrument to operate from a despun platform. Since the FUV instrument is part of the core payload it cannot be dropped from the instrument complement without jeopardizing the science goals of the mission. A way must be found to keep this instrument and to allow it to accomplish most, if not all, of its science objectives. One of the subjects discussed are options for building an FUV instrument for a spinning spacecraft. Since a number of spinning spacecraft have carried auroral imagers, a range of techniques exists. In addition, the option of flying the FUV imager on a separate micro-satellite launched with the main IMI spacecraft or with a separate pegasus launch, was considered and is discussed.

Wilson, Gordon R.↗
NASA NTRS1990

Analytical method for the ditching analysis of an airborne vehicle

A simple analytical method has been introduced for aerohydrodynamic load analysis of an airborne configuration during water ditching. The method employs an aerodynamic panel code, based on linear potential flow theory, to simulate the flow of air and water around an aircraft configuration. The free surface separating the air and water region is represented by doublet" singularities. Although all the theoretical load distributions are computed for air, provisions are made to correct the pressure coefficients obtained on the configuration-wetted surfaces to account for the water density. As an analytical tool, a vortex aerodynamic code is chosen to carry out the present investigation. After assessing· the validity of the method, an application is presented for the water ditching of the Space Shuttle configuration at a 12-deg attitude.

Pressure coefficient↗
NASA NTRS1974

Development of technology for modeling of a 1/8-scale dynamic model of the shuttle Solid Rocket Booster (SRB)

A NASTRAN analysis of the solid rocket booster (SRB) substructure of the space shuttle 1/8-scale structural dynamics model. The NASTRAN finite element modeling capability was first used to formulate a model of a cylinder 10 in. radius by a 200 in. length to investigate the accuracy and adequacy of the proposed grid point spacing. Results were compared with a shell analysis and demonstrated relatively accurate results for NASTRAN for the lower modes, which were of primary interest. A finite element model of the full SRB was then formed using CQUAD2 plate elements containing membrane and bending stiffness and CBAR offset bar elements to represent the longerons and frames. Three layers of three-dimensional CHEXAI elements were used to model the propellant. This model, consisting of 4000 degrees of freedom (DOF) initially, was reduced to 176 DOF using Guyan reduction. The model was then submitted for complex Eigenvalue analysis. After experiencing considerable difficulty with attempts to run the complete model, it was split into two substructres. These were run separately and combined into a single 116 degree of freedom A set which was successfully run. Results are reported.

Levy, A.↗
NASA NTRS1963

Launch Vehicle Flight Report - Nasa Project Apollo Little Joe 2 Qualification Test Vehicle 12-50-1

The Little Joe II Qualification Test Vehicle, Model 12-50-1, was launched from Army Launch Area 3 {ALA-3) at White Sands Missile Range, New Mexico, on 28 August 1963. This was the first launch of this class of boosters. The Little Joe II Launch Vehicle was designed as a test vehicle for boosting payloads into flight. For the Apollo Program, its mission is to serve as a launch vehicle for flight testing of the Apollo spacecraft. Accomplishment of this mission requires that the vehicle be capable of boosting the Apollo payload to parameters ranging from high dynamic pressures at low altitude to very high altitude flight. The fixed-fin 12-50 version was designed to accomplish the low-altitude parameter. The 12-51 version incorporates an attitude control system to accomplish the high altitude mission. This launch was designed to demonstrate the Little Joe II capability of meeting the high dynamic pressure parameter for the Apollo Program. For this test, a boiler-plate version of the Apollo capsule, service module and escape tower were attached to the launch vehicle to simulate weight, center of gravity and aerodynamic shape of the Apollo configuration. No attempt was made to separate the payload in flight. The test was conducted in compliance with Project Apollo Flight Mission Directive for QTV-1, NASA-MSC, dated 3 June 1963, under authority of NASA Contract NAS 9-492,

Source record↗
NASA NTRS1962

Dyna-Soar Bioastronautics

Dyna-Soar is a manned boost-orbit-glide vehicle. Conventional booster and guidance systems will place the glider on a course at the proper altitude and velocity with the resultant energy to accomplish the planned mission. After boost termination, the pilot verifies the course during orbit and controls the flight path during reentry, approach, and landing. The flight profiles and over-all flight regime for the Dyna-Soar's single-orbit mission will impose no new or extreme environmental hazards on the pilot. '!he environmental parameters of a normal space flight will not expose the pilot to stress magnitudes as great as pilots have experienced in the Mercury flights. Under presently planned flights, the pilot should be in an environment that is well within known human tolerances. We will present the calculated environmental stress to be imposed on the pilot in both normal and emergency conditions and the design techniques .developed to provide a cockpit that will keep the pilot well within his tolerance limits. The various primary environmental parameters will be discussed separately. The solution for each parameter will be discussed in a concurrent manner. No significance is attached to the order in which the specific parameters of the environment are considered.

Spacecraft↗
NASA NTRS2009

A Review of the MLAS Parachute Systems

The NASA Engineering and Safety Center (NESC) is developing the Max Launch Abort System (MLAS) as a risk-mitigation design should problems arise with the baseline Orion spacecraft launch abort design. The Max in MLAS is dedicated to Max Faget, the renowned NASA spacecraft designer. The MLAS flight test vehicle consists of boost skirt, coast skirt and the MLAS fairing which houses a full scale boilerplate Orion Crew Module (CM). The objective of the flight test is to prove that the CM can be released from the MLAS fairing during pad abort conditions without detrimental recontact between the CM and fairing, achieving performance similar to the Orion launch abort system. The boost and coast skirts provide the necessary thrust and stability to achieve the flight test conditions and are released prior to the test -- much like the Little Joe booster was used in the Apollo Launch Escape System tests. To achieve the test objective, two parachutes are deployed from the fairing to reorient the CM/fairing to a heatshield first orientation. The parachutes then provide the force necessary to reduce the total angle of attack and body angular rates required for safe release of the CM from the fairing. A secondary test objective after CM release from the fairing is to investigate the removal of the CM forward bay cover (FBC) with CM drogue parachutes for the purpose of attempting to synchronously deploying a set of CM main parachutes. Although multiple parachute deployments are used in the MLAS flight test vehicle to complete its objective, there are only two parachute types employed in the flight test. Five of the nine parachutes used for MLAS are 27.6 ft D(sub 0) ribbon parachutes, and the remaining four are standard G-12 cargo parachutes. This paper presents an overview of the 27.6 ft D(sub 0) ribbon parachute system employed on the MLAS flight test vehicle for coast skirt separation, fairing reorientation, and as drogue parachutes for the CM after separation from the fairing. Discussion will include: the process used to select this design, previously proven as a spin/stall recovery parachute; descriptions of all components of the parachute system; the minor modifications necessary to adapt the parachute to the MLAS program; the techniques used to analyze the parachute for the multiple roles it performs; a discussion of the rigging techniques used to interface the parachute system to the vehicle; and a brief description of how the evolution of the program affected parachute usage and analysis. An overview of the Objective system, rationale for the MLAS approach and the future of the program will also be presented. We hope to have flight test results to report at the time of the Conference Presentation.

Taylor, Anthony P.↗
NASA NTRS1996

STS-74 Space Shuttle Mission Report

The STS-74 Space Shuttle Program Mission Report summarizes the Payload activities as well as the Orbiter, External Tank (ET), Solid Rocket Booster (SRB), Reusable Solid Rocket Motor (RSRM), and the Space Shuttle main engine (SSME) systems performance during the seventy-third flight of the Space Shuttle Program, the forty-eighth flight since the return-to-flight, and the fifteenth flight of the Orbiter Atlantis (OV-104). In addition to the Orbiter, the flight vehicle consisted of an ET that was designated ET-74; three Phase 11 SSME's that were designated as serial numbers 2012, 2026, and 2032 in positions 1, 2, and 3, respectively; and two SRB's that were designated BI-076. The RSRM's, designated RSRM-51, were installed in each SRB and the individual RSRM's were designated as 360TO51 A for the left SRB, and 360TO51 B for the right SRB. The primary objectives of this flight were to rendezvous and dock with the Mir Space Station and perform life sciences investigations. The Russian Docking Module (DM) was berthed onto the Orbiter Docking System (ODS) using the Remote Manipulator System (RMS), and the Orbiter docked to the Mir with the DM. When separating from the Mir, the Orbiter undocked, leaving the DM attached to the Mir. The two solar arrays, mounted on the DM, were delivered for future Russian installation to the Mir. The secondary objectives of the flight were to perform the operations necessary to fulfill the requirements of the GLO experiment (GLO-4)/Photogrammetric Appendage Structural Dynamics Experiment Payload (PASDE) (GPP), the IMAX Cargo Bay Camera (ICBC), and the Shuttle Amateur Radio Experiment-2 (SAREX-2). Appendix A lists the sources of data, both formal and informal, that were used to prepare this report. Appendix B provides the definition of acronyms and abbreviations used throughout the report. All times during the flight are given in Greenwich mean time (GMT)) and mission elapsed time (MET).

Fricke, Robert W., Jr.↗
NASA NTRS2009

Synergistic Development, Test, and Qualification Approaches for the Ares I and V Launch Vehicles

The U.S. National Aeronautics and Space Administration is designing and developing the Ares I and Ares V launch vehicles for access to the International Space Station (ISS) and human exploration of the Moon. The Ares I consists of a first stage reusable five-segment solid rocket booster, a upper stage using a J-2X engine derived from heritage experience (Saturn and Space Shuttle External Tank programs), and the Orion crew exploration vehicle (CEV). The Ares V is designed to minimize the development and overall life-cycle costs by leveraging off of the Ares I design. The Ares V consists of two boosters, a core stage, an earth departure stage (EDS), and a shroud. The core stage and EDS use LH2/LO2 propellants, metallic propellant tanks, and composite dry structures. The core stage has six RS-68B upgraded Delta IV engines while the EDS uses a J-2X engine for second stage ascent and trans-lunar injection (TLI) burn. System and propulsion tests and qualification approaches for Ares V elements are being considered as follow-on extensions of the Ares I development program. Following Ares I IOC, testing will be conducted to verify the J-2X engine's orbital restart and TLI burn capability. The Ares I upper stage operation will be demonstrated through integrated stage development and acceptance testing. The EDS will undergo similar development and acceptance testing with additional testing to verify aspects of cryogenic propellant management, operation of sub-systems in a space simulation environment, and orbital re-start of the main propulsion system. RS-68B certification testing will be conducted along with integrated core stage development and acceptance testing. Structural testing of the Ares V EDS and core stage propellant tanks will be conducted similar to the Ares I upper stage. The structural qualification testing may be accomplished with separate propellant tank test articles. Structural development and qualification testing of the dry structure will be pursued as part of the design and development process. Especially critical is the development test program for the composite structures. The Ares V payload shroud will undergo acoustic, vibration, structural qualification, and deployment testing in a space simulation environment. Similar to Ares I, requirements for full-scale structural dynamic testing are being studied. Both Ares I and Ares V include validation flight testing as part of the qualification programs.

Cockrell, Charles E.↗
NASA NTRS2019

Kestrel Results at Liftoff Conditions for a Space Launch System Configuration in Proximity to the Launch Tower

Aerodynamic data books for Space Launch System vehicles require databases for the integrated forces and moments and section loads during liftoff and transition to the ascent phase of flight. While the force and moment database can be generated from wind tunnel results, computational analyses are necessary to provide the extensive surface information required to generate proper lineloads. Of the two flight regimes, the liftoff problem is the more costly and complex situation to simulate, as it requires modeling of the vehicle in proximity to the launch tower. The effects of massive separation on the leeward pressure fields of both the tower and vehicle are not well captured with RANS methods, necessitating the use of more advanced methods, such as Delayed Detached Eddy Simulation, in conjunction with computational grids sufficiently refined to resolve the wakes. Details on the computational setup for employing the Kestrel flow solver to address the liftoff problem are presented. The methodology involves the use of independent unstructured near-body grids for the vehicle and the tower, overset by a solution adaptive Cartesian off-body grid. Results from the simulations are compared to experimental results from a test in the NASA Langley Research Center 14- by 22-Foot Subsonic Tunnel.

Computational fluid dynamics↗
NASA NTRS2018

NASA's Space Launch System: Unprecedented Payload Capabilities

As part of a renewed focus on deep space exploration, NASA and its private sector and international partners are building a new super heavy-lift launch vehicle, the Space Launch System (SLS), as well as the new Orion crew vehicle, and upgrading launch facilities at Kennedy Space Center. Progress made on the Block 1 vehicle, as well as its expected performance metrics and fiscal support from the U.S. administration and Congress, have opened up additional manifest possibilities that the Agency continues to evaluate. Offering a combination of power, payload capacity and departure energy unmatched in contemporary boosters, the SLS family of launch vehicles features the world's most-proven propulsion system: solid rocket boosters and RS-25 main engines with a modified existing cryogenic in-space stage. The initial SLS configuration, Block 1, will deliver at least 26 metric tons (t) of payload to trans-lunar injection (TLI). The vehicle's flexible architecture will enable the rocket to evolve over the next decade to meet the most demanding deep space mission requirements. The second configuration, Block 1B, will deliver at least 34 to 40 t to TLI, depending on whether the crewed or cargo variant is selected. Although designed to facilitate human exploration of deep space, the vehicle also provides game-changing benefits for large science payloads and even harnesses excess capacity to provide small satellites with affordable access to deep space. For the first integrated mission of SLS and Orion, launching from Kennedy Space Center in fiscal year 2020, SLS Block 1 will send Orion on a 25.5-day mission to a distant retrograde lunar orbit with the primary objective to test and validate new systems and procedures. That first mission, called Exploration Mission-1 (EM-1), also has 13 6U-class CubeSat payloads manifested. Those payloads, which will carry out a variety of scientific experiments and technology demonstrations, will deploy in several locations along the trajectory after Orion has separated from SLS. Contractors and suppliers have made significant progress since last year manufacturing the Block 1 vehicle for EM-1. The upper stage and adapters are complete as are the four RS-25 engines. All other major components are constructed and being outfitted for flight. In fact, hardware for the second flight is currently being manufactured at locations across the United States. This paper will outline hardware, avionics and testing progress toward the first and second flights of SLS. Manifest opportunities for primary, co-manifested and secondary payloads will be discussed. An in-depth look at payload utilization and integration will be provided, as well as lessons learned from installing a secondary payload deployment system for EM-1.

Creech, Steve↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Validation of Artemis I Aerothermal Design Models Using Developmental Flight Instrumentation

The inaugural flight of the Space Launch System (SLS) Block 1 launch vehicle, Artemis I, occurred on November 16, 2022, and featured a full suite of Developmental Flight Instrumentation (DFI) that provided aerothermodynamic measurements to assess thermal design and substantiate aerothermodynamic models. The Block 1 launch vehicle aerothermal instrumentation consisted of approximately 277 aerothermal gauges mounted throughout the Orion Multi-Purpose Crew Vehicle (MPCV), Integrated Spacecraft and Payload Element (ISPE), Core Stage (CS) and Solid Rocket Boosters (SRB) and an additional 179 thermal gauges on the Orion Crew Module (CM). Instrumentation included calorimeters, radiometers, pressure transducers, gas temperature probes, and thermocouples. Data was collected from lift-off through CS Main Engine Cut-Off (MECO). The flight data was invaluable for determining aerothermal model performance and developing flight-derived aerothermal environments for flight reconstruction thermal analysis and future SLS aerothermal models. The data offered critical insights into the aerothermodynamic conditions experienced during the launch and ascent of the SLS vehicle. This study compares the flight derived environments to pre-existing design models. The aerothermal models were constructed using MINIVER, the aerothermal engineering code which predicts aerodynamic heating and acts as an integration tool for incorporating databases from computational fluid dynamics (CFD) simulations and wind tunnel test data. The comparisons reveal the fidelity of the design models, highlighting areas where the design models accurately predicted flight conditions and instances where deviations were observed. Preliminary results suggest that while the design models largely aligned with the observed flight data, there were unique observations that reflected needed areas of model refinement. Aerothermal flight data from Artemis I for the SLS Block 1 vehicle will be further utilized to enhance the accuracy of Block 1B and Block 2 aerothermal models, ensuring improved safety and performance for subsequent Artemis missions.

aerothermodynamics↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Validation of Artemis I Aerothermal Design Models Using Developmental Flight Instrumentation

The inaugural flight of the Space Launch System (SLS) Block 1 launch vehicle, Artemis I, occurred on November 16, 2022, and featured a full suite of Developmental Flight Instrumentation (DFI) that provided aerothermodynamic measurements to assess thermal design and substantiate aerothermodynamic models. The Block 1 launch vehicle aerothermal instrumentation consisted of approximately 277 aerothermal gauges mounted throughout the Orion Multi-Purpose Crew Vehicle (MPCV), Integrated Spacecraft and Payload Element (ISPE), Core Stage (CS) and Solid Rocket Boosters (SRB) and an additional 179 thermal gauges on the Orion Crew Module (CM). Instrumentation included calorimeters, radiometers, pressure transducers, gas temperature probes, and thermocouples. Data was collected from lift-off through CS Main Engine Cut-Off (MECO). The flight data was invaluable for determining aerothermal model performance and developing flight-derived aerothermal environments for flight reconstruction thermal analysis and future SLS aerothermal models. The data offered critical insights into the aerothermodynamic conditions experienced during the launch and ascent of the SLS vehicle. This study compares the flight derived environments to pre-existing design models. The aerothermal models were constructed using MINIVER, the aerothermal engineering code which predicts aerodynamic heating and acts as an integration tool for incorporating databases from computational fluid dynamics (CFD) simulations and wind tunnel test data. The comparisons reveal the fidelity of the design models, highlighting areas where the design models accurately predicted flight conditions and instances where deviations were observed. Preliminary results suggest that while the design models largely aligned with the observed flight data, there were unique observations that reflected needed areas of model refinement. Aerothermal flight data from Artemis I for the SLS Block 1 vehicle will be further utilized to enhance the accuracy of Block 1B and Block 2 aerothermal models, ensuring improved safety and performance for subsequent Artemis missions.

aerothermodynamics↗
NASA NTRS2010

Analysis of Possible Explosions at Kennedy Space Center Due to Spontaneous Ignition of Hypergolic Propellants

NASA's Constellation Program plan currently calls for the replacement of the Space Shuttle with the ARES I & V spacecraft and booster vehicles to send astronauts to the moon and beyond. Part of the ARES spacecraft is the Orion Crew Exploration Vehicle (CEV), which includes the Crew Module (CM) and Service Module (SM). The Orion CM's main propulsion system and supplies are provided by the SM. The SM is to be processed off line and moved to the Vehicle Assembly Building (V AB) for stacking to the first stage booster motors prior to ARES move to the launch pad. The new Constellation Program philosophy to process in this manner has created a major task for the KSC infrastructure in that conventional QD calculations are no longer viable because of the location of surrounding facilities near the VAB and the Multi Purpose Processing Facility (MPPF), where the SM will be serviced with nearly 18,000 pounds of hypergolic propellants. The Multi-Payload Processing Facility (MPPF) complex, constructed by NASA in 1994, is located just off E Avenue south of the Operations and Checkout (O&C) building in the Kennedy Space Center industrial area. The MPPF includes a high bay and a low bay. The MPPF high bay is 40.2 m (132 ft) long x 18.9 m (60 ft) wide with a ceiling height of 18.9 m (62 ft). The low bay is a 10.4 m (34 ft) long x 10.4 m (34 ft) wide processing area and has a ceiling height of6.1 m (20 ft). The MPPF is currently used to process non-hazardous payloads. Engineering Analysis Inc. (EAI), under contract with ASRC Aerospace, Inc. in conjunction with the Explosive Safety Office, NASA, Kennedy Space Center (KSC), has carried out an analysis of the effects of explosions at KSC in or near various facilities produced by the spontaneous ignition ofhypergolic fuel stored in the CEV SM. The facilities considered included (1) Vehicle Assembly Building (VAB) (2) Multi-Payload Processing Facility (MPPF) (3) Canister Rotation Facility (CRF) Subsequent discussion deals with the MPPF analysis. Figure 1 provides a view of the MPPF from the northwest. An interior view ofthe facility is shown in Figure 2. The study was concerned with both blast hazards and hazardous fragments which exceed existing safety standards, as described in Section 2.0. The analysis included both blast and fragmentation effects and was divided into three parts as follows: (1) blast (2) primary fragmentation (3) secondary fragmentation Blast effects are summarized in Section 3.0, primary fragmentation in Section 4.0, and secondary fragmentation (internal and external) in Section 5.0. Conclusions are provided in Section 6.0, while references cited are included in Section 7.0. A more detailed description of the entire study is available in a separate document.

Brown, Stephen↗
NASA NTRS2009

Modeling and Simulation of Variable Mass, Flexible Structures

The advent of the new Ares I launch vehicle has highlighted the need for advanced dynamic analysis tools for variable mass, flexible structures. This system is composed of interconnected flexible stages or components undergoing rapid mass depletion through the consumption of solid or liquid propellant. In addition to large rigid body configuration changes, the system simultaneously experiences elastic deformations. In most applications, the elastic deformations are compatible with linear strain-displacement relationships and are typically modeled using the assumed modes technique. The deformation of the system is approximated through the linear combination of the products of spatial shape functions and generalized time coordinates. Spatial shape functions are traditionally composed of normal mode shapes of the system or even constraint modes and static deformations derived from finite element models of the system. Equations of motion for systems undergoing coupled large rigid body motion and elastic deformation have previously been derived through a number of techniques [1]. However, in these derivations, the mode shapes or spatial shape functions of the system components were considered constant. But with the Ares I vehicle, the structural characteristics of the system are changing with the mass of the system. Previous approaches to solving this problem involve periodic updates to the spatial shape functions or interpolation between shape functions based on system mass or elapsed mission time. These solutions often introduce misleading or even unstable numerical transients into the system. Plus, interpolation on a shape function is not intuitive. This paper presents an approach in which the shape functions are held constant and operate on the changing mass and stiffness matrices of the vehicle components. Each vehicle stage or component finite element model is broken into dry structure and propellant models. A library of propellant models is used to describe the distribution of mass in the fuel tank or Solid Rocket Booster (SRB) case for various propellant levels. Based on the mass consumed by the liquid engine or SRB, the appropriate propellant model is coupled with the dry structure model for the stage. Then using vehicle configuration data, the integrated vehicle model is assembled and operated on by the constant system shape functions. The system mode shapes and frequencies can then be computed from the resulting generalized mass and stiffness matrices for that mass configuration. The rigid body mass properties of the vehicle are derived from the integrated vehicle model. The coupling terms between the vehicle rigid body motion and elastic deformation are also updated from the constant system shape functions and the integrated vehicle model. This approach was first used to analyze variable mass spinning beams and then prototyped into a generic dynamics simulation engine. The resulting code was tested against Crew Launch Vehicle (CLV-)class problems worked in the TREETOPS simulation package and by Wilson [2]. The Ares I System Integration Laboratory (SIL) is currently being developed at the Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) to test vehicle avionics hardware and software in a hardware-in-the-loop (HWIL) environment and certify that the integrated system is prepared for flight. The Ares I SIL utilizes the Ares Real-Time Environment for Modeling, Integration, and Simulation (ARTEMIS) tool to simulate the launch vehicle and stimulate avionics hardware. Due to the presence of vehicle control system filters and the thrust oscillation suppression system, which are tuned to the structural characteristics of the vehicle, ARTEMIS must incorporate accurate structural models of the Ares I launch vehicle. The ARTEMIS core dynamics simulation models the highly coupled nature of the vehicle flexible body dynamics, propellant slosh, and vehicle nozzle inertia effects combined with mass and flexible body properties that vary significant with time during the flight. All forces that act on the vehicle during flight must be simulated, including deflected engine thrust force, spatially distributed aerodynamic forces, gravity, and reaction control jet thrust forces. These forces are used to excite an integrated flexible vehicle, slosh, and nozzle dynamics model for the vehicle stack that simulates large rigid body translations and rotations along with small elastic deformations. Highly effective matrix math operations on a distributed, threaded high-performance simulation node allow ARTEMIS to retain up to 30 modes of flex for real-time simulation. Stage elements that separate from the stack during flight are propagated as independent rigid six degrees of freedom (6DOF) bodies. This paper will present the formulation of the resulting equations of motion, solutions to example problems, and describe the resulting dynamics simulation engine within ARTEMIS.

Tobbe, Patrick A.↗
NASA NTRS2010

Operational Lessons Learned from the Ares I-X Flight Test

The Ares I-X flight test, launched in 2009, is the first test of the Ares I crew launch vehicle. This development flight test evaluated the flight dynamics, roll control, and separation events, but also provided early insights into logistical, stacking, launch, and recovery operations for Ares I. Operational lessons will be especially important for NASA as the agency makes the transition from the Space Shuttle to the Constellation Program, which is designed to be less labor-intensive. The mission team itself comprised only 700 individuals over the life of the project compared to the thousands involved in Shuttle and Apollo missions; while missions to and beyond low-Earth orbit obviously will require additional personnel, this lean approach will serve as a model for future Constellation missions. To prepare for Ares I-X, vehicle stacking and launch infrastructure had to be modified at Kennedy Space Center's Vehicle Assembly Building (VAB) as well as Launch Complex (LC) 39B. In the VAB, several platforms and other structures designed for the Shuttle s configuration had to be removed to accommodate the in-line, much taller Ares I-X. Vehicle preparation activities resulted in delays, but also in lessons learned for ground operations personnel, including hardware deliveries, cable routing, transferred work and custodial paperwork. Ares I-X also proved to be a resource challenge, as individuals and ground service equipment (GSE) supporting the mission also were required for Shuttle or Atlas V operations at LC 40/41 at Cape Canaveral Air Force Station. At LC 39B, several Shuttle-specific access arms were removed and others were added to accommodate the in-line Ares vehicle. Ground command, control, and communication (GC3) hardware was incorporated into the Mobile Launcher Platform (MLP). The lightning protection system at LC 39B was replaced by a trio of 600-foot-tall towers connected by a catenary wire to account for the much greater height of the vehicle. Like Shuttle, Ares I-X will be stacked on a MLP and rolled out to the pad on a Saturn-era crawler-transporter. While Ares I-X was only held in place by the four hold-down posts on its aft skirt during rollout, a new vehicle stabilization system (VSS) attached to the vertical service structure kept the vehicle from undue swaying prior to launch at the pad, LC 39B. Following the launch, the flight test vehicle first stage was recovered with the aid of new parachutes resized to accommodate the five-segment-long first stage, which had a much greater length and mass than the Shuttle s reusable solid rocket boosters. After splashdown, recovery divers exercised extra care when handling the first stage to ensure that the flight data recorders in the fifth segment simulator were not damaged by exposure to sea water. The data recovered from the Ares I-X flight test will be very valuable in verifying the predicted environments and models used to design the vehicle. Lessons learned from Ares I-X will be shared with the Ares Projects through written and verbal reports and through integration of mission team members into the Project workforce.

Davis, Stephan R.↗