SEARCH · Search NASA
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.
The Integrated Propulsion Data System's (IPDS) focus is to provide technologically-advanced philosophies of doing business at SSC that will enhance the existing operations, engineering and management strategies and provide insight and metrics to assess their daily impacts, especially as related to the Propulsion Test Directorate testing scenarios for the 21st Century.
With the increased emphasis on aircraft safety, enhanced performance and affordability, and the need to reduce the environmental impact of aircraft, there are many new challenges being faced by the designers of aircraft propulsion systems. The Controls and Dynamics Branch (CDB) at NASA (National Aeronautics and Space Administration) Glenn Research Center (GRC) in Cleveland, Ohio, is leading and participating in various projects in partnership with other organizations within GRC and across NASA, the U.S. aerospace industry, and academia to develop advanced controls and health management technologies that will help meet these challenges through the concept of an Intelligent Engine. CDB conducts propulsion control and diagnostics research in support of various programs and projects under the NASA Aeronautics Research Mission Directorate and the Human Exploration and Operations Mission Directorate. The paper first provides an overview of the various research tasks in CDB relative to the NASA programs and projects, and briefly describes the progress being made on each of these tasks. The discussion here is at a high level providing the objectives of the tasks, the technical challenges in meeting the objectives and most recent accomplishments. References are provided for each of the technical tasks for the reader to familiarize themselves with the details.
The ARES Directorate education team is charged with translating the work of ARES scientists into content that can be used in formal and informal K-12 education settings and assisting with public outreach. This is accomplished through local efforts and national partnerships. Local efforts include partnerships with universities, school districts, museums, and the Lunar and Planetary Institute (LPI) to share the content and excitement of space science research. Sharing astromaterials and exploration science with the public is an essential part of the Directorate's work. As a small enclave of physical scientists at a NASA Center that otherwise emphasizes human space operations and engineering, the ARES staff is frequently called upon by the JSC Public Affairs and Education offices to provide presentations and interviews. Scientists and staff actively volunteer with the JSC Speaker's Bureau, Digital Learning Network, and National Engineers Week programs as well as at Space Center Houston activities and events. The education team also participates in many JSC educator and student workshops, including the Pre-Service Teacher Institute and the Texas Aerospace Scholars program, with workshop presentations, speakers, and printed materials.
The document is a compilation of Computer Programming resources. It is geared toward front-end and back-end web development. It specializes on an ongoing project to create a website for the Safety and Mission Assurance Directorate. The Quality Assurance System (QAS) is intended to improve the overall quality and efficiency of communication among NASA Quality Assurance Engineers and Contractors. The use of QAS software will be limited to NASA Kennedy Space Center and Contractors. It is accessible through the KSC network.
This paper captures and transfers knowledge of in-space propellant transfer accomplishments and communicate the remaining challenges to a new generation of NASA engineers as multiple NASA programs and centers have worked related and applicable efforts. The Propulsion Technical Discipline Team (TDT) established a plan to draft this paper as an effort to help engineers and decision makers recognize and access the various islands of experience that have formed within the agency as different NASA directorates and projects have embraced the challenges associated with propellant transfer.
To maintain Crew Health and Performance (CHP) during an Artemis mission, the NASA Human Research Program (HRP) and Exploration Medical Capabilities (ExMC) element recognize the challenge that many different vehicles, habitats, and operational groups must come together to develop and implement cross program capabilities. To address this challenge, the ExMC team created the prototype 2023 Artemis CHP System Model to analyze how human system requirements are implemented throughout an Artemis mission and help understand the effects of changing an individual vehicle or habitat requirement on a full mission. Since presenting this work at the 2024 HRP Investigators’ Workshop, ExMC has continued this effort, now called the Artemis III and IV CHP System Model, to better support its operational end users within the NASA Human Health and Performance Directorate (HHPD) workforce. In this presentation, we will recapitulate how visualizing requirements and their relationships using a Model-Based Systems Engineering approach (MBSE) serves to improve understanding of an Artemis mission’s CHP capabilities along with discussion on updates made to the model to increase accessibility for users within HHPD so that it may be used in the development of cross program CHP capabilities at NASA.
NASA requested that a committee under the auspices of the National Research Council's Aeronautics and Space Engineering Board carry out an assessment of NASA's Exploration Technology Development Program (ETDP). Organizationally, this program functions under the direction of NASA's Exploration Systems Mission Directorate and is charged with developing new technologies that will enable NASA to conduct future human and robotic exploration missions, while reducing mission risk and cost. The Committee to Review NASA's Exploration Technology Development Program has been tasked to examine how well the program is aligned with the stated objectives of the President's Vision for Space Exploration (VSE), to identify gaps in the program, and to assess the quality of the research. The full statement of task is given in Appendix A. The committee consists of 25 members and includes a cross section of senior executives, engineers, researchers, and other aerospace professionals drawn from industry, universities, and government agencies with expertise in virtually all the technical fields represented within the program.
The Ames Research Center R&D Services Directorate teams with NASA, other government agencies and/or industry investigators for the development, design, fabrication, manufacturing and qualification testing of space-flight and ground-based experiment hardware for biomedical and general aerospace applications. In recent years, biomedical research hardware and software has been developed to support space-flight and ground-based experiment needs including the E 132 Biotelemetry system for the Research Animal Holding Facility (RAHF), E 100 Neurolab neuro-vestibular investigation systems, the Autogenic Feedback Systems, and the Standard Interface Glove Box (SIGB) experiment workstation module. Centrifuges, motion simulators, habitat design, environmental control systems, and other unique experiment modules and fixtures have also been developed. A discussion of engineered systems and capabilities will be provided to promote understanding of possibilities for future system designs in biomedical applications. In addition, an overview of existing engineered products will be shown. Examples of hardware and literature that demonstrate the organization's capabilities will be displayed. The Ames Research Center R&D Services Directorate is available to support the development of new hardware and software systems or adaptation of existing systems to meet the needs of academic, commercial/industrial, and government research requirements. The Ames R&D Services Directorate can provide specialized support for: System concept definition and feasibility Mathematical modeling and simulation of system performance Prototype hardware development Hardware and software design Data acquisition systems Graphical user interface development Motion control design Hardware fabrication and high-fidelity machining Composite materials development and application design Electronic/electrical system design and fabrication System performance verification testing and qualification.
NASA is currently developing Additive Manufacturing (AM) technologies and design tools aimed at reducing the costs and manufacturing time of regeneratively cooled rocket engine components. These Low Cost Upper Stage Propulsion (LCUSP) tasks are funded through NASA's Game Changing Development Program in the Space Technology Mission Directorate. The LCUSP project will develop a copper alloy additive manufacturing design process and develop and optimize the Electron Beam Freeform Fabrication (EBF3) manufacturing process to direct deposit a nickel alloy structural jacket and manifolds onto an SLM manufactured GRCop chamber and Ni-alloy nozzle. In order to develop these processes, the project will characterize both the microstructural and mechanical properties of the SLMproduced GRCop-84, and will explore and document novel design techniques specific to AM combustion devices components. These manufacturing technologies will be used to build a 25K-class regenerative chamber and nozzle (to be used with tested DMLS injectors) that will be tested individually and as a system in hot fire tests to demonstrate the applicability of the technologies. These tasks are expected to bring costs and manufacturing time down as spacecraft propulsion systems typically comprise more than 70% of the total vehicle cost and account for a significant portion of the development schedule. Additionally, high pressure/high temperature combustion chambers and nozzles must be regeneratively cooled to survive their operating environment, causing their design to be time consuming and costly to build. LCUSP presents an opportunity to develop and demonstrate a process that can infuse these technologies into industry, build competition, and drive down costs of future engines.
The Space Launch Initiative (SLI) procurement mechanism NRA8-30 initiated the Auxiliary Propulsion System/Main Propulsion System (APS/MPS) Project in 2001 to address technology gaps and development risks for non-toxic and cryogenic propellants for auxiliary propulsion applications. These applications include reaction control and orbital maneuvering engines, and storage, pressure control, and transfer technologies associated with on-orbit maintenance of cryogens. The project has successfully evolved over several years in response to changing requirements for re-usable launch vehicle technologies, general launch technology improvements, and, most recently, exploration technologies. Lessons learned based on actual hardware performance have also played a part in the project evolution to focus now on those technologies deemed specifically relevant to the Exploration Initiative. Formal relevance reviews held in the spring of 2004 resulted in authority for continuation of the Auxiliary Propulsion Project through Fiscal Year 2005 (FY05), and provided for a direct reporting path to the Exploration Systems Mission Directorate. The tasks determined to be relevant under the project were: continuation of the development, fabrication, and delivery of three 870 lbf thrust prototype LOX/ethanol reaction control engines; the fabrication, assembly, engine integration and testing of the Auxiliary Propulsion Test Bed at White Sands Test Facility; and the completion of FY04 cryogenic fluid management component and subsystem development tasks (mass gauging, pressure control, and liquid acquisition elements). This paper presents an overview of those tasks, their scope, expectations, and results to-date as carried forward into the Exploration Initiative.
Established in 1990, San Diego State University’s (SDSU) Industrial Assessment Center (IAC) is proud of its years of service. During this period, it has served over 620 small and medium-sized manufacturing plants in Southern California. SDSU/IAC’s efforts to transfer state-of-the-art technologies to industry have increased revenues, cultivated creativity, improved energy efficiencies, and benefited the environment. The Center has contributed to the region's economic growth and stability by assisting small and medium size companies to better compete in the global market. It has helped mitigate climate change by reducing greenhouse gas emissions. IAC activities have fostered productive relationships between the University and local industry, assisted industrial sectors to improve their energy efficiency and enhance their manufacturing productivity, in turn impacting the material and working conditions of their employees. In addition to financial savings and environmental benefits, we have trained tens of students who became energy specialists in various companies. Thus, a substantial benefit of the IAC has been the ongoing training of engineering faculty and students. All IAC graduates were offered jobs before or within weeks of their graduation. The activities of the SDSU/IAC have expanded the institutional expertise of the College and improved the knowledge base of the faculties involved leading to several related publications, master’s theses, and senior student projects. Significant number of peer-reviewed publications of the IAC director at SDSU have greatly benefitted from the experience of the Center. As a result of this extensive exposure to manufacturing processes, the SDSU/IAC has grown to be an integral component of SDSU’s engineering research and training. We have successfully built upon these established achievements and academic excellence. IAC service to industry is particularly vital in Southern California, a region with one of the highest manufacturing concentrations in the country. SDSU/IAC has understood and implemented the overall objectives of DOE’s IAC program and guidelines except for the pandemic years when the country’s manufacturing sector was put in dire stress. In addition to student training and service to industry, IAC’s contribution to state and local governments as well as utility companies to assess energy policies and design rebate and incentive strategies cannot be undermined.
In discussing a new NASA initiative in advanced space transportation systems and technologies, the Director of the NASA Marshall Space Flight Center, Arthur G. Stephenson, noted that, "It would use new propulsion technology, air-breathing engine so you don't have to carry liquid oxygen, at least while your flying through the atmosphere. We are calling it Spaceliner 100 because it would be 100 times cheaper, costing $ 100 dollars a pound to orbit." While airbreathing propulsion is directly named, rocket propulsion is also implied by, "... while you are flying through the atmosphere." In-space final acceleration to orbital speed mandates rocket capabilities. Thus, in this informed view, Spaceliner 100 will be predicated on combined airbreathing/rocket propulsion, the technical subject of this paper. Interestingly, NASA's recently concluded Highly Reusable Space Transportation (HRST) study focused on the same affordability goal as that of the Spaceliner 100 initiative and reflected the decisive contribution of combined propulsion as a way of expanding operability and increasing the design robustness of future space transports, toward "aircraft like" capabilities. The HRST study built on the Access to Space Study and the Reusable Launch Vehicle (RLV) development activities to identify and characterize space transportation concepts, infrastructure and technologies that have the greatest potential for reducing delivery cost by another order of magnitude, from $1,000 to $100-$200 per pound for 20,000 lb. - 40.000 lb. payloads to low earth orbit (LEO). The HRST study investigated a number of near-term, far-term, and very far-term launch vehicle concepts including all-rocket single-stage-to-orbit (SSTO) concepts, two-stage-to-orbit (TSTO) concepts, concepts with launch assist, rocket-based combined cycle (RBCC) concepts, advanced expendable vehicles, and more far term ground-based laser powered launchers. The HRST study consisted of preliminary concept studies, assessments and analysis tool development for advanced space transportation systems, followed by end-to-end system concept definitions and trade analyses, specific system concept definition and analysis, specific key technology and topic analysis, system, operational and economics model development, analysis, and integrated assessments. The HRST Integration Task Force (HITF) was formed to synthesize study results in several specific topic areas and support the development of conclusions from the study: Systems Concepts Definitions, Technology Assessment, Operations Assessment, and Cost Assessment. This paper summarizes the work of the Operations Assessment Team: the six approaches used, the analytical tools and methodologies developed and employed, the issues and concerns, and the results of the assessment. The approaches were deliberately varied in measures of merit and procedure to compensate for the uncertainty inherent in operations data in this early phase of concept exploration. In general, rocket based combined cycle (RBCC) concepts appear to have significantly greater potential than all-rocket concepts for reducing operations costs.
The primary objective of the STS-99 mission was to complete high resolution mapping of large sections of the Earth's surface using the Shuttle Radar Topography Mission (SRTM), a specially modified radar system. This radar system produced unrivaled 3-D images of the Earth's Surface. The mission was launched at 12:31 on February 11, 2000 onboard the space shuttle Endeavour. This tape shows a pre-launch briefing. The panel members are George Diller, NASA Public Affairs; Scott Higginbotham, SRTM Payload Manager; Steve Altemus, NASA Test Director; and Ed Priselac, Meteorologist. The briefing opens with an announcement by Mr Diller that there were no further developments with the engine problems, and requests that questions about that issue be held for another press briefing. Steve Altemus summarized the situation and the steps to be taken. Scott Higginbotham reported that there were no problems with the mission hardware. Ed Priselac reported favorable weather for tanking and launch, and at emergency landing sites.
NASA formed the NASA Engineering and Safety Center in 2003 following the Space Shuttle Columbia accident. It is an Agency level, program-independent engineering resource supporting NASA's missions, programs, and projects. It functions to identify, resolve, and communicate engineering issues, risks, and, particularly, alternative technical opinions, to NASA senior management. The goal is to help ensure fully informed, risk-based programmatic and operational decision-making processes. To date, the NASA Engineering and Safety Center (NESC) has conducted or is actively working over 600 technical studies and projects, spread across all NASA Mission Directorates, and for various other U.S. Government and non-governmental agencies and organizations. Since inception, NESC human spaceflight related activities, in particular, have transitioned from Shuttle Return-to-Flight and completion of the International Space Station (ISS) to ISS operations and Orion Multi-purpose Crew Vehicle (MPCV), Space Launch System (SLS), and Commercial Crew Program (CCP) vehicle design, integration, test, and certification. This transition has changed the character of NESC studies. For these development programs, the NESC must operate in a broader, system-level design and certification context as compared to the reactive, time-critical, hardware specific nature of flight operations support.
The NASA Science Mission Directorate Earth Science Division Airborne Science Program enables access to modified aircraft in support of NASA projects. The Program supports researchers and engineers by enabling testing of new instruments, calibration of on-orbit satellite instruments with airborne sensors, and to support process studies and model development. This talk will provide an overview of the Program capabilities, review past NASA flight projects that have focused on wildfires, and discuss how the Program is poised to support the FireSense project and interagency efforts to incorporate new technologies and observations into the wildfire management community. Past missions including the Western States Fire Mission and FIREX-AQ will be discussed, an overview of relevant NASA sensors will be provided, and an introduction to upcoming flight activity will be presented. Data telemetry, communications, and data standards will also be discussed towards improving timely distribution of data products to land managers.
The maintenance requirements for Test, Control, and Monitor System (TCMS) and the method for satisfying these requirements prior to First Need Date (FND) of the last TCMS set are described. The method for satisfying maintenance requirements following FND of the last TCMS set will be addressed by a revision to this plan. This maintenance plan serves as the basic planning document for maintenance of this equipment by the NASA Payloads Directorate (CM) and the Payload Ground Operations Contractor (PGOC) at KSC. The terms TCMS Operations and Maintenance (O&M), Payloads Logistics, TCMS Sustaining Engineering, Payload Communications, and Integrated Network Services refer to the appropriate NASA and PGOC organization. For the duration of their contract, the Core Electronic Contractor (CEC) will provide a Set Support Team (SST). One of the primary purposes of this team is to help NASA and PGOC operate and maintain TCMS. It is assumed that SST is an integral part of TCMS O&M. The purpose of this plan is to describe the maintenance concept for TCMS hardware and system software in order to facilitate activation, transition planning, and continuing operation. When software maintenance is mentioned in this plan, it refers to maintenance of TCMS system software.
Nuclear Thermal Propulsion (NTP) was started in ~1955 under the Atomic Energy Commission as project Rover and was assigned to Los Alamos National Laboratory. The Nevada Test Site was selected in 1956 and facility construction began in 1957. The KIWI-A was tested on July 1, 1959 for 5 minutes at 70MW. KIWI-A1 was tested on July 8, 1960 for 6 minutes at 85MW. KIWI-A3 was tested on October 10, 1960 for 5 minutes at 100MW. The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) was formed in 1958. On August 31, 1960 the AEC and NASA established the Space Nuclear Propulsion Office and named Harold Finger as Director. Immediately following the formation of SNPO, contracts were awarded for the Reactor In Flight Test (RIFT), master plan for the Nuclear Rocket Engine Development Station (NRDS), and the Nuclear Engine for Rocket Vehicle Application (NERVA). From December 7, 1961 to November 30, 1962, the KIWI-B1A, KIWI-B1B, and KIWI-B4A were tested at test cell A. The last two engines were only tested for several seconds before noticeable failure of the fuel elements. Harold Finger called a stop to any further hot fire testing until the problem was well understood. The KIWI-B4A cold flow test showed the problem to be related to fluid dynamics of hydrogen interstitial flow causing fuel element vibrations. President Kennedy visited the NTS one week after the KIWI-B4A failure and got to see the engine starting to be disassembled in the maintenance facility. The KIWI-B4D and KIWI-B4E were modified to not have the vibration problems and were tested in test cell C. The NERVA NRX program started testing in early 1964 with NRX-A1 cold flow test series (unfueled graphite core), NRX-A2 and NRX-A3 power test series up to 1122 MW for 13 minutes. In March 1966, the NRX-EST (Engine System Test) was the first breadboard using flight functional relationship and total operating time of 116 minutes. The NRX-EST demonstrated the feasibility of a hot bleed cycle. The NRX-A5 had multiple start-ups in May-June 1966 with 30.75 minutes accumulative operating time at or above 1GW. The NRX-A6 was tested in December 1969 and ran for 62 minutes at 1100 MW. Each engine had post-test examination and found various structure anomalies which were identified for correction and the fuel element corrosion rate was reduced. The Phoebus series of research reactors began testing at test cell C, in June 1965 with Phoebus 1A. Phoebus 1A operated for 10.5 minutes at 1100 MW before unexpected loss of propellant and leading to an engine breakdown. Phoebus 1B ran for 30 minutes in February of 1967. Phoebus 2A was the highest steady state reactor built at 5GW. Phoebus 2A ran for 12 minutes at 4100 MW demonstrating sufficient power is available. The Peewee test bed reactor was tested November- December 1968 in test cell C for 40 minutes at 500MW with overall performance close to pre-run predictions. The XE' engine was the only engine tested with close to a flight configuration and fired downward into a diffuser at the Engine Test Stand (ETS) in 1969. The XE' was 1100 MW and had ~28 start-ups. The nuclear furnace NF-1 was operated at 44 MW with multiple test runs at 90 minutes in the summer of 1972. The NF-1 was the last NTP reactor tested. The Rover/NERVA program was cancelled in 1973. However, before cancellation, a lot of other engineering work was conducted by Aerojet on a 75, 000 lbf prototype flight engine and by Los Alamos on a ~16,000 lbf "Small Engine" nuclear rocket design. The ground test history of NTP at the NRDS also offers many lessons learned on how best to setup, operate, emergency shutdown, and post-test examine NTP engines. The reactor and engine maintenance and disassembly facilities were used for assembly and inspection of radioactive engines after testing. Most reactor/ engines were run at test cell A or test cell C with open air exhaust. The Rover/NERVA program became aware of a new environmental regulation that would restrict the amount of radioactive particulates allowed to be release in open air and successfully demonstrated a scrubber concept with the NF-1. The ETS stand was the only one with a high altitude test chamber used for XE'. The ETS and other test cells showed the effects the engine's radiation had on the facility materials and instrumentation as well as side effects the ground test facility has back on the engine operation. The breakdown of Phoebus 1A at test cell C showed how the site was cleaned up and back to operation for five more engines before the program was cancelled.
The NASA Goddard Space Flight Center Safety and Mission Assurance Directorate is implementing an alternate process for approval of Spacecraft Inherited Items in accordance with Goddard Procedural Requirements 8730.5. A Commodity Risk Assessment Engineer is performing an Inherited Item Risk Assessment (I2RA) for the use of Spacecraft Standard Components (items generally necessary to control the spacecraft, e.g. reaction wheel assemblies) and payload flight spares or Built-to-Print items. The I2RA may take into account prior space flight performance, criticality of the component, qualification records, quality and reliability records, storage conditions, manufacturer assessments, and mission specific parameters like mission environment and duration. The I2RA provides a means to accept for the entire item materials, parts or workmanship non-conformances, that do not significantly increase risk.