Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Liquid propellant rocket engine”

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 397 records · Page 22
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2015

Cryogenic Orbital Testbed (CRYOTE) Ground Test Article, Final Report

Liquid propulsion has been used since Robert Goddard started developing a liquid oxygen (LO2) and gasoline powered rocket and fired it in 1923 (Ref. 1). In the following decades engineers settled on the combination of liquid hydrogen (LH2) and LO2 as the most efficient propellant combination for in-space travel. Due to their low temperatures (LH2 at 20 K and LO2 at 90 K), they require special handling and procedures. General Dynamics began developing LO2 and LH2 upper stages in 1956 in the form of Centaur, these efforts were soon funded by the Department of Defense in conjunction with NASA (beginning in 1958) (Ref. 2). Meanwhile NASA also worked with McDonnell Douglas to develop the SIV-B stage for the Saturn V rocket. In the subsequent years, the engineers were able to push the Centaur to up to 9 hr of orbital lifetime and the SIV-B to up to 6 hr. Due to venting the resultant boil-off from the high heat loads through the foam insulation on the upper stages, both vehicles remained in a settled configuration throughout the flights, thus the two phases of propellant (liquid and vapor) were separated at a known location. The one exception to this were the Titan/Centaur missions, which thanks to the lower boil-off using three layers of multilayer insulation (MLI), were able to coast unsettled for up to 5.25 hr during direct geosynchronous orbit insertion missions. In the years since there has been a continuous effort to extend the life of these upper stages from hours to days or even months.

Joule-Thompson Effect↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Nodal Modeling of Tank Pressurization and Draining using a Multi-Node-Ullage Approach

The purpose of the pressurization system in liquid rocket propulsion is to control the pressure in the gas space of the propellant tank (known as the ullage space) and the propellant mass flowrate to the engine. A mathematical model is required to predict the amount of pressurant necessary to ensure that pressure and temperature levels inside the tank remain within acceptable limits and that the propellant pressure leaving the tank satisfies the net positive suction pressure (NPSP) requirement of the pump feeding the engine. Nodal codes typically model tank pressurization and draining using a single node to represent the ullage and a single node to represent the propellant. As the tank drains, the ullage node grows and the propellant node shrinks. The heat transfer between ullage to wall and ullage to propellant is governed by natural convection. Designers of liquid propulsion systems often use empirical correlations to estimate the “Collapse Factor” which represents the ratio of pressurant required with heat transfer and the amount of pressurant required without heat transfer. A single node ullage model of tank pressurization was developed using GFSSP to compute the collapse factor reasonably well and later was used to model tank pressurization during test firing of the FASTRAC rocket engine. The predicted tank pressure compared well with the test data. In the early 1970’s, pressurization and drain tests with liquid methane were performed at NASA Lewis Research Center in a vacuum chamber. A 5 ft diameter spherical aluminum tank was tested to drain from 95% to 5% full using gaseous helium, hydrogen, nitrogen and methane as pressurant. Tests were conducted with different pressurant inlet temperatures and drain times. Measured data include pressurant requirement, amount of pressurant condensed, and ullage and wall temperatures at various heights in the ullage space at the end of draining. A single node GFSSP model was developed to simulate helium pressurization of the methane tank. Predicted helium consumption was 8-23% less than measured. The average error of the six test cases was 16%. A single ullage node with multiple solid node model was developed using Thermal Desktop. Predicted helium consumption compares with the test data within 2%. This paper describes the development of a GFSSP multi-node ullage model of the test configuration and compares the predicted pressurant consumption for both helium and autogenous pressurization using gaseous methane with experimental as well as TD predictions.

Nodal Model↗
NASA NTRS2015

Affordable Development and Demonstration of a Small NTR Engine and Stage: How Small is Big Enough?

The Nuclear Thermal Rocket (NTR) derives its energy from fission of uranium-235 atoms contained within fuel elements that comprise the engine's reactor core. It generates high thrust and has a specific impulse potential of approximately 900 seconds - a 100% increase over today's best chemical rockets. The Nuclear Thermal Propulsion (NTP) project, funded by NASA's AES program, includes five key task activities: (1) Recapture, demonstration, and validation of heritage graphite composite (GC) fuel (selected as the "Lead Fuel" option); (2) Engine Conceptual Design; (3) Operating Requirements Definition; (4) Identification of Affordable Options for Ground Testing; and (5) Formulation of an Affordable Development Strategy. During FY'14, a preliminary DDT&E plan and schedule for NTP development was outlined by GRC, DOE and industry that involved significant system-level demonstration projects that included GTD tests at the NNSS, followed by a FTD mission. To reduce cost for the GTD tests and FTD mission, small NTR engines, in either the 7.5 or 16.5 klbf thrust class, were considered. Both engine options used GC fuel and a "common" fuel element (FE) design. The small approximately 7.5 klbf "criticality-limited" engine produces approximately 157 megawatts of thermal power (MWt) and its core is configured with parallel rows of hexagonal-shaped FEs and tie tubes (TTs) with a FE to TT ratio of approximately 1:1. The larger approximately 16.5 klbf Small Nuclear Rocket Engine (SNRE), developed by LANL at the end of the Rover program, produces approximately 367 MWt and has a FE to TT ratio of approximately 2:1. Although both engines use a common 35 inch (approximately 89 cm) long FE, the SNRE's larger diameter core contains approximately 300 more FEs needed to produce an additional 210 MWt of power. To reduce the cost of the FTD mission, a simple "1-burn" lunar flyby mission was considered to reduce the LH2 propellant loading, the stage size and complexity. Use of existing and flight proven liquid rocket and stage hardware (e.g., from the RL10B-2 engine and Delta Cryogenic Second Stage) was also maximized to further aid affordability. This paper examines the pros and cons of using these two small engine options, including their potential to support future human exploration missions to the Moon, near Earth asteroids, and Mars, and recommends a preferred size. It also provides a preliminary assessment of the key activities, development options, and schedule required to affordably build, ground test and fly a small NTR engine and stage within a 10-year timeframe.

Spacecraft design↗
NASA NTRS2016

Affordable Development and Demonstration of a Small Nuclear Thermal Rocket (NTR) Engine and Stage: How Small Is Big Enough?

The Nuclear Thermal Rocket (NTR) derives its energy from fission of uranium-235 atoms contained within fuel elements that comprise the engine's reactor core. It generates high thrust and has a specific impulse potential of approximately 900 specific impulse - a 100 percent increase over today's best chemical rockets. The Nuclear Thermal Propulsion (NTP) project, funded by NASA's Advanced Exploration Systems (AES) program, includes five key task activities: (1) Recapture, demonstration, and validation of heritage graphite composite (GC) fuel (selected as the Lead Fuel option); (2) Engine Conceptual Design; (3) Operating Requirements Definition; (4) Identification of Affordable Options for Ground Testing; and (5) Formulation of an Affordable Development Strategy. During fiscal year (FY) 2014, a preliminary Design Development Test and Evaluation (DDT&E) plan and schedule for NTP development was outlined by the NASA Glenn Research Center (GRC), Department of Energy (DOE) and industry that involved significant system-level demonstration projects that included Ground Technology Demonstration (GTD) tests at the Nevada National Security Site (NNSS), followed by a Flight Technology Demonstration (FTD) mission. To reduce cost for the GTD tests and FTD mission, small NTR engines, in either the 7.5 or 16.5 kilopound-force thrust class, were considered. Both engine options used GC fuel and a common fuel element (FE) design. The small approximately 7.5 kilopound-force criticality-limited engine produces approximately157 thermal megawatts and its core is configured with parallel rows of hexagonal-shaped FEs and tie tubes (TTs) with a FE to TT ratio of approximately 1:1. The larger approximately 16.5 kilopound-force Small Nuclear Rocket Engine (SNRE), developed by Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) at the end of the Rover program, produces approximately 367 thermal megawatts and has a FE to TT ratio of approximately 2:1. Although both engines use a common 35-inch (approximately 89-centimeters) -long FE, the SNRE's larger diameter core contains approximately 300 more FEs needed to produce an additional 210 thermal megawatts of power. To reduce the cost of the FTD mission, a simple one-burn lunar flyby mission was considered to reduce the liquid hydrogen (LH2) propellant loading, the stage size and complexity. Use of existing and flight proven liquid rocket and stage hardware (e.g., from the RL10B-2 engine and Delta Cryogenic Second Stage) was also maximized to further aid affordability. This paper examines the pros and cons of using these two small engine options, including their potential to support future human exploration missions to the Moon, near Earth asteroids (NEA), and Mars, and recommends a preferred size. It also provides a preliminary assessment of the key activities, development options, and schedule required to affordably build, ground test and fly a small NTR engine and stage within a 10-year timeframe.

Spacecraft design↗
NASA NTRS2012

The Direction of Fluid Dynamics for Liquid Propulsion at NASA Marshall Space Flight Center

Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) is the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA)-designated center for the development of space launch systems. MSFC is particularly known for propulsion system development. Many engineering skills and technical disciplines are needed to accomplish this mission. This presentation will focus on the work of the Fluid Dynamics Branch (ER42). ER42 resides in the Propulsion Systems Department at MSFC. The branch is responsible for all aspects of the discipline of fluid dynamics applied to propulsion or propulsion-induced loads and environments. This work begins with design trades and parametric studies, and continues through development, risk assessment, anomaly investigation and resolution, and failure investigations. Applications include the propellant delivery system including the main propulsion system (MPS) and turbomachinery; combustion devices for liquid engines and solid rocket motors; coupled systems; and launch environments. An advantage of the branch is that it is neither analysis nor test centric, but discipline centric. Fluid dynamics assessments are made by analysis, from lumped parameter modeling through unsteady computational fluid dynamics (CFD); testing, which can be cold flow or hot fire; or a combination of analysis and testing. Integration of all discipline methods into one branch enables efficient and accurate support to the projects. To accomplish this work, the branch currently employs approximately fifty engineers divided into four teams -- Propellant Delivery CFD, Combustion Driven Flows CFD, Unsteady and Experimental Flows, and Acoustics and Stability. This discussion will highlight some of the work performed in the branch and the direction in which the branch is headed.

Griffin, Lisa W.↗
NASA NTRS2003

Evaluation of Impinging Stream Vortex Chamber Concepts for Liquid Rocket Engine Applications

NASA Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) and the U. S. Army are jointly investigating vortex chamber concepts for cryogenic oxygen/hydrocarbon fuel rocket engine applications. One concept, the Impinging Stream Vortex Chamber Concept (ISVC), has been tested with gel propellants at AMCOM at Redstone Arsenal, Alabama. A version of this concept for the liquid oxygen (LOX)/hydrocarbon fuel (RP-1) propellant system is derived from the one for the gel propellant. An unlike impinging injector is employed to deliver the propellants to the chamber. MSFC has also designed two alternative injection schemes, called the chasing injectors, associated with this vortex chamber concept. In these injection techniques, both propellant jets and their impingement point are in the same chamber cross-sectional plane. One injector has a similar orifice size with the original unlike impinging injector. The second chasing injector has small injection orifices. The team has achieved their objectives of demonstrating the self-cooled chamber wall benefits of ISVC and of providing the test data for validating computational fluids dynamics (CFD) models. These models, in turn, will be used to design the optimum vortex chambers in the future.

Trinh, Huu↗
NASA NTRS2015

Low-Profile Diffuser

The propellant tanks used in liquid rockets require pressurization gases in order to maintain tank pressure while the tanks are being drained during engine operation. The pressurization gas, which is typically much warmer than the relatively cold propellants in the tank, must be introduced into the empty ullage space at the top of the tank. The purpose of the diffuser is to control the flow of the gas into the tank in order to prevent direct impingement of the gas on the liquid surface and/or the tank walls. If the diffuser did not perform those tasks, the warm gas can create excess heat transfer causing an increase in the amount of pressurization mass required. Typical diffusers are long vertical cylinders that create a large exit area in order to minimize gas velocities. However, long vertical cylinders limit the amount of liquid that can be loaded into the tank in order not to have the liquid surface near the diffuser. A design goal for a pressurization diffuser is to create uniform flow in order to prevent jets that can impact the liquid surface and/or tank walls. The purpose of the task was to create a diffuser design that had a lower vertical profile (in order to be able to raise the liquid surface) while still maintaining uniform flow.

Martin, Michael A.↗
NASA NTRS1988

Test stand design and analysis for Titan 34D static firing

The Test Stand 1C at the Air Force Astronautic Laboratory (AFAL), Edwards AFB, Calif., was originally designed for F-1 liquid propellant engines. The stand was modified to handle a five and one half segment Solid Rocket Motor (SRM) Titan 34D vertical static firing test. The main design drivers and analysis effort utilized in the modification of the test stand are discussed.

Pazargadi, Shayan↗
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

Nonlinear Combustion Instability Prediction

The liquid rocket engine stability prediction software (LCI) predicts combustion stability of systems using LOX-LH2 propellants. Both longitudinal and transverse mode stability characteristics are calculated. This software has the unique feature of being able to predict system limit amplitude.

Flandro, Gary↗
NASA NTRS2010

Self-Adjusting Liquid Injectors for Combustors

A class of self-adjusting injectors for spraying liquid oxidizers and/or fuels into combustion chambers has been proposed. The proposed injectors were originally intended for use in rocket-engine combustion chambers, but could also be used to improve control over flows of liquid propellants in other combustion chambers. The basic idea of the proposed injectors is to use simple mechanisms, inside the injectors themselves, to adjust inlet areas so as to keep injection pressure drops at or near optimum values through out wide throttling ranges. These mechanisms would be actuated by the very pressure drops that they are intended to regulate.

Trinh, Huu↗
NASA NTRS1993

Fundamental rocket injector/spray programs at the Phillips Laboratory

The performance and stability of liquid rocket engines is determined to a large degree by atomization, mixing, and combustion processes. Control over these processes is exerted through the design of the injector. Injectors in liquid rocket engines are called upon to perform many functions. They must first of all mix the propellants to provide suitable performance in the shortest possible length. For main injectors, this is driven by the tradeoff between the combustion chamber performance, stability, efficiency, and its weight and cost. In gas generators and preburners, however, it is also driven by the possibility of damage to downstream components, for example piping and turbine blades. This can occur if unburned fuel and oxidant later react to create hot spots. Weight and cost considerations require that the injector design be simple and lightweight. For reusable engines, the injectors must also be durable and easily maintained. Suitable atomization and mixing must be produced with as small a pressure drop as possible, so that the size and weight of pressure vessels and turbomachinery can be minimized. However, the pressure drop must not be so small as to promote feed system coupled instabilities. Another important function of the injectors is to ensure that the injector face plate and the chamber and nozzle walls are not damaged. Typically this requires reducing the heat transfer to an acceptable level and also keeping unburned oxygen from chemically attacking the walls, particularly in reusable engines. Therefore the mixing distribution is often tailored to be fuel-rich near the walls. Wall heat transfer can become catastrophically damaging in the presence of acoustic instabilities, so the injector must prevent these from occurring at all costs. In addition to acoustic stability (but coupled with it), injectors must also be kinetically stable. That is, the flame itself must maintain ignition in the combustion chamber. This is not typically a problem with main injectors, but can be a consideration in preburners, where the desire to keep turbine inlet temperatures as cool as possible can make it advantageous for the preburners to operate as far from stoichiometry as can be tolerated. For some missions such as single stage to orbit, all of the above requirements must be maintained over a throttleable range, for example 5:1 to 10:1. Finally, the injectors must be ignitable during startup where pressures and temperatures are far from design conditions, and ignition transients must be minimized in order to avoid damage to engine components. In order to satisfy these various constraints, the injector designer must be able to perform design tradeoff studies, and it is important that this be done with minimal time and costs. In fact, it can easily be argued that reducing engine development time and costs is essential to maintaining U.S. competitiveness in space. The Propulsion Directorate of the Phillips Laboratory has invested in a number of programs to advance liquid rocket engine technology, and several of these are directed at improving design tools for liquid rocket injectors. The purpose of the presentation will be to describe some of these latter programs.

Talley, D. G.↗
NASA NTRS2005

SOLID SOLUTION CARBIDES ARE THE KEY FUELS FOR FUTURE NUCLEAR THERMAL PROPULSION

Nuclear thermal propulsion uses nuclear energy to directly heat a propellant (such as liquid hydrogen) to generate thrust for space transportation. In the 1960 s, the early Rover/Nuclear Engine for Rocket Propulsion Application (NERVA) program showed very encouraging test results for space nuclear propulsion but, in recent years, fuel research has been dismal. With NASA s renewed interest in long-term space exploration, fuel researchers are now revisiting the RoverMERVA findings, which indicated several problems with such fuels (such as erosion, chemical reaction of the fuel with propellant, fuel cracking, and cladding issues) that must be addressed. It is also well known that the higher the temperature reached by a propellant, the larger the thrust generated from the same weight of propellant. Better use of fuel and propellant requires development of fuels capable of reaching very high temperatures. Carbides have the highest melting points of any known material. Efforts are underway to develop carbide mixtures and solid solutions that contain uranium carbide, in order to achieve very high fuel temperatures. Binary solid solution carbides (U, Zr)C have proven to be very effective in this regard. Ternary carbides such as (U, Zr, X) carbides (where X represents Nb, Ta, W, and Hf) also hold great promise as fuel material, since the carbide mixtures in solid solution generate a very hard and tough compact material. This paper highlights past experience with early fuel materials and bi-carbides, technical problems associated with consolidation of the ingredients, and current techniques being developed to consolidate ternary carbides as fuel materials.

Panda, Binayak↗
NASA NTRS1998

NASA Advanced Fuels Program

NASA with the USAF Research Laboratory and it's industry partners, has been conducting planning and research into advanced fuels. This work is sponsored under the NASA Advanced Space Transportation Program (ASTP). The current research focus is on Alternative Hydrocarbon fuels, Monopropellants, and Solid Cryogens for storing atoms of Hydrogen, Boron, Carbon, and Aluminum. Alternative hydrocarbons that are under consideration are bi cyclo propylidene, spiro pentane, and tri propargyl amine. These three fuels have been identified as initial candidates to increase the specific impulse of hydrocarbon fueled rockets by 10-15 seconds over 02/RP-1. Formulation of these propellants is proceeding this year, and rocket engine testing is planned for the near future. Monopropellant investigations are focused on dinitramine based fuels, and potential collaborations with the US Navy. The dinitramine fuel work is being conducted under an Small Business Innovation research (SBIR) contract with the team of Orbital Technologies Corp. (Madison, WI) and SRI (Menlo Park, CA). This work may lead to a high density, high specific impulse monopropellants that can simplify the operations for launch vehicles and spacecraft. Solid Cryogens are being considered to store atoms of Hydrogen, Boron, Carbon, and Aluminum. Stored atom propellants are potentially the highest specific impulse chemical rockets that may be practical. These fuels are composed of atoms, stored in solid cryogenic particles, suspended in a cryogenic liquid or gel. The fuel would be fed to a rocket engine as a slurry or gelled cryogenic liquid with the suspended particles with the trapped atoms. Testing is planned to demonstrate the formation of the particles, and then characterize the slurry flows. Rocket propellant and propulsion technology improvements can be used to reduce the development time and operational costs of new space vehicle programs. Advanced propellant technologies can make the space vehicles safer, more operable, and better performing. Five technology areas are described: Monopropellants, Alternative Hydrocarbons, Gelled Hydrogen, Metallized Gelled Propellants, and High Energy Density Materials. The benefits of these propellants for future vehicles are outlined using mission study results and the technologies are briefly discussed.

Palaszewski, Bryan↗
NASA NTRS2018

Enhanced Liquid Oxygen-Propylene Rocket Engine

Provided herein are various improvements to rocket engine components and rocket engine operational techniques. In one example, a rocket engine propellant injection apparatus is provided that includes a manifold formed into a single body by an additive manufacturing process and comprising a fuel cavity and an oxidizer cavity. The manifold also includes one or more propellant feed stubs, the one or more propellant feed stubs protruding from the manifold and formed into the single body of the manifold by the additive manufacturing process, with at least a first stub configured to carry fuel to the fuel cavity and at least a second stub configured to carry oxidizer to the oxidizer cavity. The manifold also includes a plurality of injection features formed by apertures in a face of the manifold, ones of the plurality of injection features configured to inject the fuel and the oxidizer for combustion.

Bostwick, Christopher↗
NASA NTRS2009

The E-3 Test Facility at Stennis Space Center: Research and Development Testing for Cryogenic and Storable Propellant Combustion Systems

This paper will provide the reader a broad overview of the current upgraded capabilities of NASA's John C. Stennis Space Center E-3 Test Facility to perform testing for rocket engine combustion systems and components using liquid and gaseous oxygen, gaseous and liquid methane, gaseous hydrogen, hydrocarbon based fuels, hydrogen peroxide, high pressure water and various inert fluids. Details of propellant system capabilities will be highlighted as well as their application to recent test programs and accomplishments. Data acquisition and control, test monitoring, systems engineering and test processes will be discussed as part of the total capability of E-3 to provide affordable alternatives for subscale to full scale testing for many different requirements in the propulsion community.

Pazos, John T.↗
NASA NTRS2017

Robust Exploration and Commercial Missions to the Moon Using LANTR Propulsion and In-Situ Propellants Derived from Lunar Polar Ice (LPI) Deposits

The nuclear thermal rocket (NTR) has frequently been identified as a key space asset required for the human exploration of Mars. This proven technology can also provide the affordable access through cislunar space necessary for commercial development and sustained human presence on the Moon. It is a demonstrated technology capable of generating both high thrust and high specific impulse (Isp 900 s) twice that of todays best chemical rockets. Nuclear lunar transfer vehicles consisting of a propulsion stage using three approx.16.5 klbf "Small Nuclear Rocket Engines (SNREs)", an in-line propellant tank, plus the payload can enable a variety of reusable lunar missions. These include cargo delivery and crewed lunar landing missions. Even weeklong "tourism" missions carrying passengers into lunar orbit for a day of sightseeing and picture taking are possible. The NTR can play an important role in the next phase of lunar exploration and development by providing a robust in-space lunar transportation system (LTS) that can allow initial outposts to evolve into settlements supported by a variety of commercial activities such as in-situ propellant production used to supply strategically located propellant depots and transportation nodes. The processing of LPI deposits (estimated to be approx. 2 billion metric tons) for propellant production - specifically liquid oxygen (LO2) and hydrogen (LH2) can significantly reduce the launch mass requirements from Earth and can enable reusable, surface-based lunar landing vehicles (LLVs) using LO2/LH2 chemical rocket engines. Afterwards, LO2/LH2 propellant depots can be established in lunar polar and equatorial orbits to supply the LTS. At this point a modified version of the conventional NTR called the LO2-augmented NTR, or LANTR would be introduced into the LTS allowing bipropellant operation and leveraging the mission benefits of refueling with lunar-derived propellants (LDPs) for Earth return. The bipropellant LANTR engine utilizes the large divergent section of its nozzle as an afterburner into which oxygen is injected and supersonically combusted with nuclear preheated hydrogen emerging from the engines choked sonic throat essentially scramjet propulsion in reverse. By varying the oxygen-to-hydrogen mixture ratio, LANTR engines can operate over a range of thrust and Isp values while the reactor core power level remains relatively constant. A LANTR-based LTS offers unique mission capabilities including short transit time crewed cargo transports. Even a commuter shuttle service may be possible allowing one-way trip times to and from the Moon on the order of 36 hours or less. If only 1 of the postulated water ice trapped in deep shadowed craters at the lunar poles were available for use in lunar orbit, such a supply could support daily commuter flights to the Moon for many thousands of years! The proposed paper outlines an evolutionary mission architecture and examines a variety of mission types and transfer vehicle designs, along with the increasing demands on LDP production as mission complexity and delta V requirements increase. A comparison of vehicle features and engine operating characteristics are also provided together with a discussion of the propellant production and mining requirements, and issues, associated with using LPI as the source material.

Nuclear Thermal Propulsion↗