Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Space Vehicles and Technology”

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 379 records · Page 21
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2013

The Status of Spacecraft Bus and Platform Technology Development under the NASA ISPT Program

The In-Space Propulsion Technology (ISPT) program is developing spacecraft bus and platform technologies that will enable or enhance NASA robotic science missions. The ISPT program is currently developing technology in four areas that include Propulsion System Technologies (electric and chemical), Entry Vehicle Technologies (aerocapture and Earth entry vehicles), Spacecraft Bus and Sample Return Propulsion Technologies (components and ascent vehicles), and Systems/Mission Analysis. Three technologies are ready for near-term flight infusion: 1) the high-temperature Advanced Material Bipropellant Rocket (AMBR) engine providing higher performance; 2) NASA s Evolutionary Xenon Thruster (NEXT) ion propulsion system, a 0.6-7 kW throttle-able gridded ion system; and 3) Aerocapture technology development with investments in a family of thermal protection system (TPS) materials and structures; guidance, navigation, and control (GN&C) models of blunt-body rigid aeroshells; and aerothermal effect models. Two component technologies being developed with flight infusion in mind are the Advanced Xenon Flow Control System and ultralightweight propellant tank technologies. Future directions for ISPT are technologies that relate to sample return missions and other spacecraft bus technology needs like: 1) Mars Ascent Vehicles (MAV); 2) multi-mission technologies for Earth Entry Vehicles (MMEEV); and 3) electric propulsion. These technologies are more vehicles and mission-focused, and present a different set of technology development and infusion steps beyond those previously implemented. The Systems/Mission Analysis area is focused on developing tools and assessing the application of propulsion and spacecraft bus technologies to a wide variety of mission concepts. These inspace propulsion technologies are applicable, and potentially enabling for future NASA Discovery, New Frontiers, and sample return missions currently under consideration, as well as having broad applicability to potential Flagship missions. This paper provides a brief overview of the ISPT program, describing the development status and technology infusion readiness of in-space propulsion technologies in the areas of electric propulsion, Aerocapture, Earth entry vehicles, propulsion components, Mars ascent vehicle, and mission/systems analysis.

Anderson, David J.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Modeling and Simulation of Tank Pressure Control using Zero-Boil Off Active Thermal Control for LOXSAT Technology Demonstration Mission

To-date, research and modeling of cryogenic fluid management technologies (CFM) for spaceflight has been limited to ground tests, short-duration zero-g simulations (e.g. drop towers), and small-scale experiments on-orbit. There has not been a large-scale flight demonstration of a flight-like system. As future NASA missions to take humans further from Earth will require large, in-space cryogenic propulsion vehicles, it is imperative to begin collecting flight data for these systems to accurately model and design future vehicles. To meet this goal, NASA awarded tipping point technology demonstration awards to Eta Space, Lockheed Martin, Space Exploration Technologies (SpaceX), and United Launch Alliance (ULA) to demonstrate on-orbit storage and transfer of cryogenic propellant. For its award, Eta Space is developing LOXSAT-1. It is a small satellite that will be launched on a Rocket Lab Electron rocket. The spacecraft consists of a Rocket Lab Photon spacecraft bus with a primary payload of a spherical liquid oxygen (LOX) storage tank with thermodynamic control systems. The primary objective of the mission is to demonstrate zero-boil-off storage of liquid oxygen. To accomplish this objective, the payload is equipped with an active thermal control system fluid loop that consists of propellant management device (PMD), positive-displacement pump, heat exchanger connected to a cryocooler, and a spray bar mixing injector. When the fluid loop is operating, fluid is drawn from the tank by the PMD and pumped through the heat exchanger, lowering the fluid temperature below the fluid temperature in the tank. This subcooled liquid is then injected back into the tank through the spray bar. The subcooled injected liquid has two effects. If it is sprayed into the ullage space, the injected liquid will form into jets or droplets and exchange heat with the ullage gas. This will cool and condense the gas, reducing the pressure in the tank. Additionally, the liquid that is not sprayed through the ullage, as well as any remaining liquid spray from the ullage, will rejoin the liquid mass of the tank, lowering the bulk temperature of the liquid. These combines effects provide for zero-boil off pressure control by lowering the tank pressure and the liquid saturation pressure simultaneously, ensuring the liquid stays subcooled. To model these complex mechanics and predict the performance of the active thermal control system, NASA is providing Eta Space with 3 parallel models of the tank. The approach of providing 3 different models allows for cross-checking and comparisons between the three to better understand how different modeling assumptions and selection semi-empirical factors affects the modeling result. Additionally, developing 3 models provides three different schemes for numerical simulation, providing confidence that results depict real physical phenomenon and not numerical quirks of the program. Within the tank thermodynamics, there are two primary areas of heat transfer we concern ourselves with: the heat transfer between the ullage space and the droplet spray, and between the ullage space and bulk liquid. For the droplet heat transfer, there are multiple sets of assumptions that can be made and correlations that can be used. Currently, two working models - the TankSIM model and Easy5 model – provide for an overview of the different approaches available. The TankSIM model and Easy5 model use two different models for droplet heating and evaporation that illustrate how the models use different types of mechanisms to arrive at the same answer. For the TankSIM model, droplets are treated as spheres of constant radius. Heat is transferred from the ullage to the droplet and warms the droplet until it reaches saturation, then the droplet begins evaporating and reducing its radius and mass. To calculate the heat transfer coefficient between the droplet and ullage, the Ranz-Marshall correlation is used. To determine the number of droplets in the ullage, a resident mass approach is used. This approach averages the number of droplets such that residuals at the start-up and shut-off of the spray bar cancel out. This same approach is used in the Easy5 model. The GFSSP model implements a linked list to track individual droplet “nodes” within the model. For the Easy5 model, the droplet is assumed to have an interface at a temperature equal to the saturation temperature corresponding to the pressure of the gas phase. The heat transfer from the gas to the interface and the interface to the droplet bulk is then calculated, and the net mass transfer between the droplet and interface is determined by performing an energy balance across the interface. For the gas side of the interface, the Ranz-Marshall correlation is used. For the liquid side of the interface, a variety of correlations were tried, including Kronig and Brink (1950) and effective conductivity models. As a result of these assumptions, the Easy5 model currently predicts faster depressurization, as at saturated vapor conditions, the heat transfer coeffect on the liquid side for the Easy5 model is greater than the heat transfer coefficient predicted by Ranz-Marshall used in the TankSIM code. This greater heat flux translates into faster condensation of the saturated ullage gas. At the bulk liquid to ullage interface, the models are in much closer agreement. Both models model the ullage as a sphere centered within the bulk liquid in the tank, and both use the energy-jumping boundary condition to model heat and mass transfer across the interface. There are slight differences in how the interface temperature is calculated, however. The Easy5 model assumes the temperature of the interface is equal to the saturation temperature associated with the pressure of the gas phase. The TankSIM model calculates this temperature with Alabovskii’s equation, which provides a correction factor for interface temperatures. Analysis tasks are focused on determining rates of depressurization within the tank during active cooling operation. To maintain net positive suction head at the pump inlet, the tank pressure cannot fall faster than the saturation pressure associated with the temperature of the bulk liquid. Additionally, there is interest in analyzing the performance of the loop at different pump speeds and cryocooler input powers. Adjusting the flowrate affects both the performance of the heat exchanger between the cryocooler and pumped liquid, and the heat transfer between the droplet spray and the ullage. Ideally, a pump speed and cryocooler power can be selected that will allow the tank to operate in zero-boil-off mode with a very narrow range of storage pressure.

Cameron J. Hines↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Modeling and Simulation of Tank Pressure Control using Zero-Boil Off Active Thermal Control for LOXSAT Technology Demonstration Mission

To-date, research and modeling of cryogenic fluid management technologies (CFM) for spaceflight has been limited to ground tests, short-duration zero-g simulations (e.g. drop towers), and small-scale experiments on-orbit. There has not been a large-scale flight demonstration of a flight-like system. As future NASA missions to take humans further from Earth will require large, in-space cryogenic propulsion vehicles, it is imperative to begin collecting flight data for these systems to accurately model and design future vehicles. To meet this goal, NASA awarded tipping point technology demonstration awards to Eta Space, Lockheed Martin, Space Exploration Technologies (SpaceX), and United Launch Alliance (ULA) to demonstrate on-orbit storage and transfer of cryogenic propellant. For its award, Eta Space is developing LOXSAT-1. It is a small satellite that will be launched on a Rocket Lab Electron rocket. The spacecraft consists of a Rocket Lab Photon spacecraft bus with a primary payload of a spherical liquid oxygen (LOX) storage tank with thermodynamic control systems. The primary objective of the mission is to demonstrate zero-boil-off storage of liquid oxygen. To accomplish this objective, the payload is equipped with an active thermal control system fluid loop that consists of propellant management device (PMD), positive-displacement pump, heat exchanger connected to a cryocooler, and a spray bar mixing injector. When the fluid loop is operating, fluid is drawn from the tank by the PMD and pumped through the heat exchanger, lowering the fluid temperature below the fluid temperature in the tank. This subcooled liquid is then injected back into the tank through the spray bar. The subcooled injected liquid has two effects. If it is sprayed into the ullage space, the injected liquid will form into jets or droplets and exchange heat with the ullage gas. This will cool and condense the gas, reducing the pressure in the tank. Additionally, the liquid that is not sprayed through the ullage, as well as any remaining liquid spray from the ullage, will rejoin the liquid mass of the tank, lowering the bulk temperature of the liquid. These combines effects provide for zero-boil off pressure control by lowering the tank pressure and the liquid saturation pressure simultaneously, ensuring the liquid stays subcooled. To model these complex mechanics and predict the performance of the active thermal control system, NASA is providing Eta Space with 3 parallel models of the tank. The approach of providing 3 different models allows for cross-checking and comparisons between the three to better understand how different modeling assumptions and selection semi-empirical factors affects the modeling result. Additionally, developing 3 models provides three different schemes for numerical simulation, providing confidence that results depict real physical phenomenon and not numerical quirks of the program. Within the tank thermodynamics, there are two primary areas of heat transfer we concern ourselves with: the heat transfer between the ullage space and the droplet spray, and between the ullage space and bulk liquid. For the droplet heat transfer, there are multiple sets of assumptions that can be made and correlations that can be used. Currently, two working models - the TankSIM model and Easy5 model – provide for an overview of the different approaches available. The TankSIM model and Easy5 model use two different models for droplet heating and evaporation that illustrate how the models use different types of mechanisms to arrive at the same answer. For the TankSIM model, droplets are treated as spheres of constant radius. Heat is transferred from the ullage to the droplet and warms the droplet until it reaches saturation, then the droplet begins evaporating and reducing its radius and mass. To calculate the heat transfer coefficient between the droplet and ullage, the Ranz-Marshall correlation is used. To determine the number of droplets in the ullage, a resident mass approach is used. This approach averages the number of droplets such that residuals at the start-up and shut-off of the spray bar cancel out. This same approach is used in the Easy5 model. The GFSSP model implements a linked list to track individual droplet “nodes” within the model. For the Easy5 model, the droplet is assumed to have an interface at a temperature equal to the saturation temperature corresponding to the pressure of the gas phase. The heat transfer from the gas to the interface and the interface to the droplet bulk is then calculated, and the net mass transfer between the droplet and interface is determined by performing an energy balance across the interface. For the gas side of the interface, the Ranz-Marshall correlation is used. For the liquid side of the interface, a variety of correlations were tried, including Kronig and Brink (1950) and effective conductivity models. As a result of these assumptions, the Easy5 model currently predicts faster depressurization, as at saturated vapor conditions, the heat transfer coeffect on the liquid side for the Easy5 model is greater than the heat transfer coefficient predicted by Ranz-Marshall used in the TankSIM code. This greater heat flux translates into faster condensation of the saturated ullage gas. At the bulk liquid to ullage interface, the models are in much closer agreement. Both models model the ullage as a sphere centered within the bulk liquid in the tank, and both use the energy-jumping boundary condition to model heat and mass transfer across the interface. There are slight differences in how the interface temperature is calculated, however. The Easy5 model assumes the temperature of the interface is equal to the saturation temperature associated with the pressure of the gas phase. The TankSIM model calculates this temperature with Alabovskii’s equation, which provides a correction factor for interface temperatures. Analysis tasks are focused on determining rates of depressurization within the tank during active cooling operation. To maintain net positive suction head at the pump inlet, the tank pressure cannot fall faster than the saturation pressure associated with the temperature of the bulk liquid. Additionally, there is interest in analyzing the performance of the loop at different pump speeds and cryocooler input powers. Adjusting the flowrate affects both the performance of the heat exchanger between the cryocooler and pumped liquid, and the heat transfer between the droplet spray and the ullage. Ideally, a pump speed and cryocooler power can be selected that will allow the tank to operate in zero-boil-off mode with a very narrow range of storage pressure.

zero boil-off↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Modeling and Simulation of Tank Pressure Control using Zero-Boil Off Active Thermal Control for LOXSAT Technology Demonstration Mission

To-date, research and modeling of cryogenic fluid management technologies (CFM) for spaceflight has been limited to ground tests, short-duration zero-g simulations (e.g. drop towers), and small-scale experiments on-orbit. There has not been a large-scale flight demonstration of a flight-like system. As future NASA missions to take humans further from Earth will require large, in-space cryogenic propulsion vehicles, it is imperative to begin collecting flight data for these systems to accurately model and design future vehicles. To meet this goal, NASA awarded tipping point technology demonstration awards to Eta Space, Lockheed Martin, Space Exploration Technologies (SpaceX), and United Launch Alliance (ULA) to demonstrate on-orbit storage and transfer of cryogenic propellant. For its award, Eta Space is developing LOXSAT-1. It is a small satellite that will be launched on a Rocket Lab Electron rocket. The spacecraft consists of a Rocket Lab Photon spacecraft bus with a primary payload of a spherical liquid oxygen (LOX) storage tank with thermodynamic control systems. The primary objective of the mission is to demonstrate zero-boil-off storage of liquid oxygen. To accomplish this objective, the payload is equipped with an active thermal control system fluid loop that consists of propellant management device (PMD), positive-displacement pump, heat exchanger connected to a cryocooler, and a spray bar mixing injector. When the fluid loop is operating, fluid is drawn from the tank by the PMD and pumped through the heat exchanger, lowering the fluid temperature below the fluid temperature in the tank. This subcooled liquid is then injected back into the tank through the spray bar. The subcooled injected liquid has two effects. If it is sprayed into the ullage space, the injected liquid will form into jets or droplets and exchange heat with the ullage gas. This will cool and condense the gas, reducing the pressure in the tank. Additionally, the liquid that is not sprayed through the ullage, as well as any remaining liquid spray from the ullage, will rejoin the liquid mass of the tank, lowering the bulk temperature of the liquid. These combines effects provide for zero-boil off pressure control by lowering the tank pressure and the liquid saturation pressure simultaneously, ensuring the liquid stays subcooled. To model these complex mechanics and predict the performance of the active thermal control system, NASA is providing Eta Space with 3 parallel models of the tank. The approach of providing 3 different models allows for cross-checking and comparisons between the three to better understand how different modeling assumptions and selection semi-empirical factors affects the modeling result. Additionally, developing 3 models provides three different schemes for numerical simulation, providing confidence that results depict real physical phenomenon and not numerical quirks of the program. Within the tank thermodynamics, there are two primary areas of heat transfer we concern ourselves with: the heat transfer between the ullage space and the droplet spray, and between the ullage space and bulk liquid. For the droplet heat transfer, there are multiple sets of assumptions that can be made and correlations that can be used. Currently, two working models - the TankSIM model and Easy5 model – provide for an overview of the different approaches available. The TankSIM model and Easy5 model use two different models for droplet heating and evaporation that illustrate how the models use different types of mechanisms to arrive at the same answer. For the TankSIM model, droplets are treated as spheres of constant radius. Heat is transferred from the ullage to the droplet and warms the droplet until it reaches saturation, then the droplet begins evaporating and reducing its radius and mass. To calculate the heat transfer coefficient between the droplet and ullage, the Ranz-Marshall correlation is used. To determine the number of droplets in the ullage, a resident mass approach is used. This approach averages the number of droplets such that residuals at the start-up and shut-off of the spray bar cancel out. This same approach is used in the Easy5 model. The GFSSP model implements a linked list to track individual droplet “nodes” within the model. For the Easy5 model, the droplet is assumed to have an interface at a temperature equal to the saturation temperature corresponding to the pressure of the gas phase. The heat transfer from the gas to the interface and the interface to the droplet bulk is then calculated, and the net mass transfer between the droplet and interface is determined by performing an energy balance across the interface. For the gas side of the interface, the Ranz-Marshall correlation is used. For the liquid side of the interface, a variety of correlations were tried, including Kronig and Brink (1950) and effective conductivity models. As a result of these assumptions, the Easy5 model currently predicts faster depressurization, as at saturated vapor conditions, the heat transfer coeffect on the liquid side for the Easy5 model is greater than the heat transfer coefficient predicted by Ranz-Marshall used in the TankSIM code. This greater heat flux translates into faster condensation of the saturated ullage gas. At the bulk liquid to ullage interface, the models are in much closer agreement. Both models model the ullage as a sphere centered within the bulk liquid in the tank, and both use the energy-jumping boundary condition to model heat and mass transfer across the interface. There are slight differences in how the interface temperature is calculated, however. The Easy5 model assumes the temperature of the interface is equal to the saturation temperature associated with the pressure of the gas phase. The TankSIM model calculates this temperature with Alabovskii’s equation, which provides a correction factor for interface temperatures. Analysis tasks are focused on determining rates of depressurization within the tank during active cooling operation. To maintain net positive suction head at the pump inlet, the tank pressure cannot fall faster than the saturation pressure associated with the temperature of the bulk liquid. Additionally, there is interest in analyzing the performance of the loop at different pump speeds and cryocooler input powers. Adjusting the flowrate affects both the performance of the heat exchanger between the cryocooler and pumped liquid, and the heat transfer between the droplet spray and the ullage. Ideally, a pump speed and cryocooler power can be selected that will allow the tank to operate in zero-boil-off mode with a very narrow range of storage pressure.

zero boil-off↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Modeling and Simulation of Tank Pressure Control using Zero-Boiloff Active Thermal Control for LOXSAT Technology Demonstration Mission

To-date, research and modeling of cryogenic fluid management technologies (CFM) for spaceflight has been limited to ground tests, short-duration zero-g simulations (e.g. drop towers), and small-scale experiments on-orbit. There has not been a large-scale flight demonstration of a flight-like system. As future NASA missions to take humans further from Earth will require large, in-space cryogenic propulsion vehicles, it is imperative to begin collecting flight data for these systems to accurately model and design future vehicles. To meet this goal, NASA awarded tipping point technology demonstration awards to Eta Space, Lockheed Martin, Space Exploration Technologies (SpaceX), and United Launch Alliance (ULA) to demonstrate on-orbit storage and transfer of cryogenic propellant. For its award, Eta Space is developing LOXSAT-1. It is a small satellite that will be launched on a Rocket Lab Electron rocket. The spacecraft consists of a Rocket Lab Photon spacecraft bus with a primary payload of a spherical liquid oxygen (LOX) storage tank with thermodynamic control systems. The primary objective of the mission is to demonstrate zero-boil-off storage of liquid oxygen. To accomplish this objective, the payload is equipped with an active thermal control system fluid loop that consists of propellant management device (PMD), positive-displacement pump, heat exchanger connected to a cryocooler, and a spray bar mixing injector. When the fluid loop is operating, fluid is drawn from the tank by the PMD and pumped through the heat exchanger, lowering the fluid temperature below the fluid temperature in the tank. This subcooled liquid is then injected back into the tank through the spray bar. The subcooled injected liquid has two effects. If it is sprayed into the ullage space, the injected liquid will form into jets or droplets and exchange heat with the ullage gas. This will cool and condense the gas, reducing the pressure in the tank. Additionally, the liquid that is not sprayed through the ullage, as well as any remaining liquid spray from the ullage, will rejoin the liquid mass of the tank, lowering the bulk temperature of the liquid. These combines effects provide for zero-boil off pressure control by lowering the tank pressure and the liquid saturation pressure simultaneously, ensuring the liquid stays subcooled. To model these complex mechanics and predict the performance of the active thermal control system, NASA is providing Eta Space with 3 parallel models of the tank. The approach of providing 3 different models allows for cross-checking and comparisons between the three to better understand how different modeling assumptions and selection semi-empirical factors affects the modeling result. Additionally, developing 3 models provides three different schemes for numerical simulation, providing confidence that results depict real physical phenomenon and not numerical quirks of the program. Within the tank thermodynamics, there are two primary areas of heat transfer we concern ourselves with: the heat transfer between the ullage space and the droplet spray, and between the ullage space and bulk liquid. For the droplet heat transfer, there are multiple sets of assumptions that can be made and correlations that can be used. Currently, two working models - the TankSIM model and Easy5 model – provide for an overview of the different approaches available. The TankSIM model and Easy5 model use two different models for droplet heating and evaporation that illustrate how the models use different types of mechanisms to arrive at the same answer. For the TankSIM model, droplets are treated as spheres of constant radius. Heat is transferred from the ullage to the droplet and warms the droplet until it reaches saturation, then the droplet begins evaporating and reducing its radius and mass. To calculate the heat transfer coefficient between the droplet and ullage, the Ranz-Marshall correlation is used. To determine the number of droplets in the ullage, a resident mass approach is used. This approach averages the number of droplets such that residuals at the start-up and shut-off of the spray bar cancel out. This same approach is used in the Easy5 model. The GFSSP model implements a linked list to track individual droplet “nodes” within the model. For the Easy5 model, the droplet is assumed to have an interface at a temperature equal to the saturation temperature corresponding to the pressure of the gas phase. The heat transfer from the gas to the interface and the interface to the droplet bulk is then calculated, and the net mass transfer between the droplet and interface is determined by performing an energy balance across the interface. For the gas side of the interface, the Ranz-Marshall correlation is used. For the liquid side of the interface, a variety of correlations were tried, including Kronig and Brink (1950) and effective conductivity models. As a result of these assumptions, the Easy5 model currently predicts faster depressurization, as at saturated vapor conditions, the heat transfer coeffect on the liquid side for the Easy5 model is greater than the heat transfer coefficient predicted by Ranz-Marshall used in the TankSIM code. This greater heat flux translates into faster condensation of the saturated ullage gas. At the bulk liquid to ullage interface, the models are in much closer agreement. Both models model the ullage as a sphere centered within the bulk liquid in the tank, and both use the energy-jumping boundary condition to model heat and mass transfer across the interface. There are slight differences in how the interface temperature is calculated, however. The Easy5 model assumes the temperature of the interface is equal to the saturation temperature associated with the pressure of the gas phase. The TankSIM model calculates this temperature with Alabovskii’s equation, which provides a correction factor for interface temperatures. Analysis tasks are focused on determining rates of depressurization within the tank during active cooling operation. To maintain net positive suction head at the pump inlet, the tank pressure cannot fall faster than the saturation pressure associated with the temperature of the bulk liquid. Additionally, there is interest in analyzing the performance of the loop at different pump speeds and cryocooler input powers. Adjusting the flowrate affects both the performance of the heat exchanger between the cryocooler and pumped liquid, and the heat transfer between the droplet spray and the ullage. Ideally, a pump speed and cryocooler power can be selected that will allow the tank to operate in zero-boil-off mode with a very narrow range of storage pressure.

zero boil-off↗
NASA NTRS2017

An Overview of Recent Cryogenic Fluid Management Developments

Long-term storage, supply, and transfer of cryogenic fluids are critical capabilities needed to advance the human exploration of space. Technologies and advanced development programs have been pursued to address issues likely to confront the designers and developers of future cryogenic fluid management (CFM) subsystems and propulsion systems. NASA and aerospace industries have continued to conduct research and development for the propulsion applications of cryogenic fluids. From the well known in-space applications, to new applications involving superconducting motors within multiple different aircraft, and a renewed interest in production of oxygen on Mars, NASA continues to probe cryogenic applications within propulsion. This article presents brief reviews of several of the current CFM efforts to support future space missions. NASA GRC is currently focusing on understanding some of the finer points in the application of multilayer insulation. GRC recently finished the activation of a new calorimeter that operates at 20 K with a warm boundary that can operate either around 90 K or at 300 K. Current testing is focused on investigating multiple different seam concepts, initially between temperatures of 300 K and 20 K, and between 20 K and 90 K. One of the larger recent NASA investments has been on the Structural Heat Intercept, Insulation, and Vibration Experiment Rig (SHIIVER). SHIIVER is a 4 m diameter tank that is approximately 1/2 scale of the planned upper stage of the new Space Launch System (SLS) rocket. SHIIVER is focused on demonstrating the thermal benefits of multilayer insulation on the tank domes and boil-off vapor cooling on structural cylinders that hold the tank in-line on the rocket. It will also quantify any damage that may incur during the acoustic environment of over 160 decibels that SLS will experience on its trip to Earth orbit. In support of the possible production of oxygen out of the Mars' atmosphere, a team comprised of four NASA centers (GRC, MSFC, JSC, and KSC) collaborated to investigate multiple different hardware combinations, refrigeration cycles, and integration techniques to minimize power and mass of the storage and liquefaction system. Moreover, high efficiency, high capacity cryocoolers are an element of CFM which is essential for achieving NASA's future long duration missions. Currently in development is a 20W at 20K unit for use with liquid hydrogen. It is scheduled for delivery to NASA in the summer of 2017. Two Phase I SBIRS have recently concluded resulting in the preliminary design of two different 90K units, each having a refrigeration capacity of approximately 150W. Once the development efforts are complete, these high capacity 90K units will be integrated into the design of NASA's Liquid Oxygen (LOX)/Methane applications such as the Lander and Ascent Vehicles, or possibly an in-space stage. CFM technology is critical to the success of missions to Mars, Planetary Exploration, and In-Situ Resource Utilization (ISRU) for cryogenic propellant production. NASA is focusing on the development of CFM technologies needed to provide necessary data and relevant experience to support informed decisions on implementation of design of cryogenic systems for long term space missions. Lessons learned from the described CFM developments would lead to enhanced safety and reliability and enabling technologies which could allow NASA to meet future space exploration goals.

Hedayat, A.↗
NASA NTRS1976

Symposium on Space Industrialization, Huntsville, Ala., May 26, 27, 1976, Proceedings

Space habitats are considered, with attention given the evolution of space station systems, space station habitability, space settlement planning methodology, and orbital assembly. Various aspects of the Space Transportation System are discussed, including Shuttle booster/propulsion growth concept, advanced earth orbital transportation systems technology, single-stage-to-orbit vehicles and aeromaneuvering orbit transfer vehicles. Materials processing in space is examined, with emphasis on biological materials, metallurgical materials, the uses of space ultrahigh vacuum, and extraterrestrial mining and industrial processing. Solar space power is investigated, with attention given the potential of satellite solar power stations, thermal engine power satellites and microwave power transmission to earth. Individual items are announced in this issue.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS1986

Applications of Tethers in Space: Workshop Proceedings, Volume 2

Topics addressed include: tethered orbital transfer vehicle operations, Centaur and Shuttle tether technology; tethered constellations, gravitational effects; Shuttle continuous open wind tunnel; optimal control laws, electrodynamic tether technology; and space station facilities.

Baracat, W. A.↗
NASA NTRS2007

Integration and Testing Challenges of Small Satellite Missions: Experiences from the Space Technology 5 Project

The Space Technology 5(ST5) payload was successfully carried into orbit on an OSC Pegasus XL launch vehicle, which was carried aloft and dropped from the OSC Lockheed L-1011 from Vandenberg Air Force Base March 22,2006, at 9:03 am Eastern time, 6:03 am Pacific time. In order to reach the completion of the development and successful launch of ST 5, the systems integration and test(I&T) team determined that a different approach was required to meet the project requirements rather than the standard I&T approach used for single, room-sized satellites. The ST5 payload, part of NASA's New Millennium Program headquartered at JPL, consisted of three micro satellites (approximately 30 kg each) and the Pegasus Support Structure (PSS), the system that connected the spacecrafts to the launch vehicle and deployed the spacecrafts into orbit from the Pegasus XL launch vehicle. ST5 was a technology demonstration payload, intended to test six (6) new technologies for potential use for future space flights along with demonstrating the ability of small satellites to perform quality science. The main technology was a science grade magnetometer designed to take measurements of the earth's magnetic field. The three spacecraft were designed, integrated, and tested at NASA Goddard Space Flight Center with integration and environmental testing occurring in the Bldg. 7-1 0-15-29. The three spacecraft were integrated and tested by the same I&T team. The I&T Manager determined that there was insufficient time in the schedule to perform the three I&T spacecraft activities in series used standard approaches. The solution was for spacecraft #1 to undergo integration and test first, followed by spacecraft #2 and #3 simultaneously. This simultaneous integration was successful for several reasons. Each spacecraft had a Lead Test Conductor who planned and coordinated their spacecraft through its integration and test activities. One team of engineers and technicians executed the integration of all three spacecraft, learning and gaining knowledge and efficiency as spacecraft #1 integration and testing progressed. They became acutely familiar with the hardware, operation and processes for I&T, thus each team member had the experience and knowledge to safely execute I&T for spacecraft #2 and #3 together. The integration team was very versatile and each member could perform many different activities or work any spacecraft, when needed. Daily meetings between the three Lead TCs and technician team allowed the team to plan and implement activities efficiently. The three (3) spacecraft and PSS were successfully integrated and tested, shipped to the launch site, and ready for launch per the I&T schedule that was planned three years previously.

Sauerwein, Timothy A.↗
NASA NTRS1964

Proceedings of Second Conference on Solar Simulation Research

The subjects most actively discussed informally at the 1964 meeting included progress reports on solar simulators which have been completed or are planned or under construction. Need for radiometric standards and the possible need for further solar data were also discussed.

SOLAR SIMULATION↗
NASA NTRS1979

Development of the Space Shuttle Main Engine /May 1979/

During the last year, significant progress was made toward the development of the Space Shuttle Main Engine, which will provide propulsion for the Space Shuttle Orbiter vehicle. Engine system testing continued at the National Space Technology Laboratories on both single engines and a three-engine cluster. A third single engine test position was activated at the Rocketdyne Santa Susana Field Laboratory to provide additional capability for demonstrating increasing engine maturity and for solving problems. The results of engine system testing is discussed as well as the major problems identified and the design changes incorporated to solve those problems. A review of the program efforts toward the delivery of the first set of flight engines and the certification of the SSME for manned flight is included.

Colbo, H. I.↗
NASA NTRS1986

Thrust vectoring for single-stage-to-orbit, horizontal takeoff, horizontal landing, space vehicles

The preliminary design of a horizontal takeoff, horizontal landing, single-stage-to-orbit, rocket-powered space vehicle was performed. The purpose was to examine technology requirements for future small payload launch vehicles. The distinguishing aspect of the design was the utilization of thrust vectoring to provide half of the lift at takeoff. The inclusion of a canard was necessary to provide additional lift at takeoff and to balance the moments produced with thrust vectoring. A weights estimation, an aerodynamic assessment, a trajectory analysis, and a gear weight analysis were performed. The takeoff weight of the resulting vehicle was approximately 1.26 million pounds, based on advanced technology structures and subsystems. The vehicle was designed to deliver a 5000-pound payload to a polar orbit.

Cunningham, M. J.↗
NASA NTRS1990

The aerobraking space transfer vehicle

With the advent of the Space Station and the proposed Geosynchronous Operation Support Center (GeoShack) in the early 21st century, the need for a cost effective, reusable orbital transport vehicle has arisen. This transport vehicle will be used in conjunction with the Space Shuttle, the Space Station, and GeoShack. The vehicle will transfer mission crew and payloads between low earth and geosynchronous orbits with minimal cost. Recent technological advances in thermal protection systems such as those employed in the Space Shuttle have made it possible to incorporate and aerobrake on the transfer vehicle to further reduce transport costs. The research and final design configuration of the aerospace senior design team from VPISU, working in conjunction with NASA, are presented. The topic of aerobraking and focuses on the evolution of an Aerobraking Space Transfer Vehicle (ASTV), is addressed.

Andrews, Glen↗
NASA NTRS1991

Aeronautics and Space Report of the President

The years 1989 to 1990 activities are reported including human space flight, unmanned expendable launch vehicles, space science and applications, space communications operations, space research and technology, and aeronautics research and technology. Contributions made by the 14 participating government organizations are outline. Each organization's aeronautics and/or space activities for the year are presented. The organizations involved include: (1) NASA; (2) Dept. of Defense; (3) Dept. of Commerce; (4) Dept. of Energy; (5) Dept. of the Interior; (6) Dept. of Agriculture; (7) Federal Communications Commission; (8) Dept. of Transportation; (9) Environmental Protection Agency; (10) National Science Foundation; (11) Smithsonian Institution; (12) Dept. of State; (13) Arms Control and Disarmament; and (14) United States Information Agency.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS1992

Advanced expander test bed engine

The Advanced Expander Test Bed (AETB) is a key element in NASA's Space Chemical Engine Technology Program for development and demonstration of expander cycle oxygen/hydrogen engine and advanced component technologies applicable to space engines as well as launch vehicle upper stage engines. The AETB will be used to validate the high pressure expander cycle concept, study system interactions, and conduct studies of advanced mission focused components and new health monitoring techniques in an engine system environment. The split expander cycle AETB will operate at combustion chamber pressures up to 1200 psia with propellant flow rates equivalent to 20,000 lbf vacuum thrust.

Mitchell, J. P.↗
NASA NTRS1993

Advanced expander test bed program

The Advanced Expander Test Bed (AETB) is a key element in NASA's Space Chemical Engine Technology Program for development and demonstration of expander cycle oxygen/hydrogen engine and advanced component technologies applicable to space engines as well as launch vehicle upper stage engines. The AETB will be used to validate the high-pressure expander cycle concept, investigate system interactions, and conduct investigations of advanced mission focused components and new health monitoring techniques in an engine system environment. The split expander cycle AETB will operate at combustion chamber pressures up to 1200 psia with propellant flow rates equivalent to 20,000 lbf vacuum thrust. Contract work began 27 Apr. 1990. During 1992, a major milestone was achieved with the review of the final design of the oxidizer turbopump in Sep. 1992.

Riccardi, D. P.↗