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.
Viewgraphs on vibration isolation are presented. Techniques to control and isolate centrifuge disturbances were identified. Topics covered include: disturbance sources in the microgravity environment; microgravity assessment criteria; life sciences centrifuge; flight support equipment for launch; active vibration isolation system; active balancing system; and fuzzy logic control.
NASA established the Small Explorer (SMEX) program in 1988 to provide frequent opportunities for highly focused and relatively inexpensive space science missions that can be launched into low earth orbit by small expendable vehicles. The development schedule for each SMEX spacecraft was three years from start to launch. The SMEX program has produced five satellites; Solar Anomalous and Magnetospheric Particle Explorer (SAMPEX), Fast Auroral Snapshot Explorer (FAST), Submillimeter Wave Astronomy Satellite (SWAS), Transition Region and Coronal Explorer (TRACE) and Wide-Field Infrared Explorer (WIRE). SAMPEX and FAST are on-orbit, TRACE is scheduled to be launched in April of 1998, WIRE is scheduled to be launched in September of 1998, and SWAS is scheduled to be launched in January of 1999. In each of these missions, the Attitude Control System (ACS) software was written using a modular procedural design. Current program goals require complete spacecraft development within 18 months. This requirement has increased pressure to write reusable flight software. Object-Oriented Design (OOD) offers the constructs for developing an application that only needs modification for mission unique requirements. This paper describes the OOD that was used to develop the SMEX-Lite ACS software. The SMEX-Lite ACS is three-axis controlled, momentum stabilized, and is capable of performing sub-arc-minute pointing. The paper first describes the high level requirements which governed the architecture of the SMEX-Lite ACS software. Next, the context in which the software resides is explained. The paper describes the benefits of encapsulation, inheritance and polymorphism with respect to the implementation of an ACS software system. This paper will discuss the design of several software components that comprise the ACS software. Specifically, Object-Oriented designs are presented for sensor data processing, attitude control, attitude determination and failure detection. The paper addresses the benefits of the OOD versus a conventional procedural design. The final discussion in this paper will address the establishment of the ACS Foundation Class (AFC) Library. The AFC is a large software repository, requiring a minimal amount of code modifications to produce ACS software for future projects, saving production time and costs.
Perturbation techniques used to analyze short period dynamics in space launch vehicle
This paper will present an overview of the flight test objectives and performance of the Orion Launch Abort System during Exploration Flight Test-1. Exploration Flight Test-1, the first flight test of the Orion spacecraft, was managed and led by the Orion prime contractor, Lockheed Martin, and launched atop a United Launch Alliance Delta IV Heavy rocket. This flight test was a two-orbit, high-apogee, high-energy entry, low-inclination test mission used to validate and test systems critical to crew safety. This test included the first flight test of the Launch Abort System preforming Orion nominal flight mission critical objectives. NASA is currently designing and testing the Orion Multi-Purpose Crew Vehicle (MPCV). Orion will serve as NASA's new exploration vehicle to carry astronauts to deep space destinations and safely return them to earth. The Orion spacecraft is composed of four main elements: the Launch Abort System, the Crew Module, the Service Module, and the Spacecraft Adapter (Fig. 1). The Launch Abort System (LAS) provides two functions; during nominal launches, the LAS provides protection for the Crew Module from atmospheric loads and heating during first stage flight and during emergencies provides a reliable abort capability for aborts that occur within the atmosphere. The Orion Launch Abort System (LAS) consists of an Abort Motor to provide the abort separation from the Launch Vehicle, an Attitude Control Motor to provide attitude and rate control, and a Jettison Motor for crew module to LAS separation (Fig. 2). The jettison motor is used during a nominal launch to separate the LAS from the Launch Vehicle (LV) early in the flight of the second stage when it is no longer needed for aborts and at the end of an LAS abort sequence to enable deployment of the crew module's Landing Recovery System. The LAS also provides a Boost Protective Cover fairing that shields the crew module from debris and the aero-thermal environment during ascent. Although the Orion Program has tested a number of the critical systems of the Orion spacecraft on the ground, the launch environment cannot be replicated completely on Earth. A number of flight tests have been conducted and are planned to demonstrate the performance and enable certification of the Orion Spacecraft. Exploration Flight Test 1, the first flight test of the Orion spacecraft, was successfully flown on December 5, 2014 from Cape Canaveral Air Force Station's Space Launch Complex 37. Orion's first flight was a two-orbit, high-apogee, high-energy entry, low-inclination test mission used to validate and test systems critical to crew safety, such as heat shield performance, separation events, avionics and software performance, attitude control and guidance, parachute deployment and recovery operations. One of the key separation events tested during this flight was the nominal jettison of the LAS. Data from this flight will be used to verify the function of the jettison motor to separate the Launch Abort System from the crew module so it can continue on with the mission. The LAS nominal jettison event on Exploration Flight Test 1 occurred at six minutes and twenty seconds after liftoff (See Fig. 3). The abort motor and attitude control motors were inert for Exploration Flight Test 1, since the mission did not require abort capabilities. A suite of developmental flight instrumentation was included on the flight test to provide data on spacecraft subsystems and separation events. This paper will focus on the flight test objectives and performance of the LAS during ascent and nominal jettison. Selected LAS subsystem flight test data will be presented and discussed in the paper. Exploration Flight Test -1 will provide critical data that will enable engineering to improve Orion's design and reduce risk for the astronauts it will protect as NASA continues to move forward on its human journey to Mars. The lessons learned from Exploration Flight Test 1 and the other Flight Test Vehicles will certainly contribute to the vehicle architecture of a human-rated space launch vehicle.
The terrestrial environment is an important forcing function in the design and development of the launch vehicle. The scope of the terrestrial environment includes the following phenomena: Winds; Atmospheric Thermodynamic Models and Properties; Thermal Radiation; U.S. and World Surface Environment Extremes; Humidity; Precipitation, Fog, and Icing; Cloud Characteristics and Cloud Cover Models; Atmospheric Electricity; Atmospheric Constituents; Vehicle Engine Exhaust and Toxic Chemical Release; Occurrences of Tornadoes and Hurricanes; Geological Hazards, and Sea States. One must remember that the flight profile of any launch vehicle is in the terrestrial environment. Terrestrial environment definitions are usually limited to information below 90 km. Thus, a launch vehicle's operations will always be influenced to some degree by the terrestrial environment with which it interacts. As a result, the definition of the terrestrial environment and its interpretation is one of the key launch vehicle design and development inputs. This definition is a significant role, for example, in the areas of structures, control systems, trajectory shaping (performance), aerodynamic heating and take off/landing capabilities. The launch vehicle's capabilities which result from the design, in turn, determines the constraints and flight opportunities for tests and operations.
The International Ultraviolet Explorer (IUE) attitude control system originally included an inertial reference package containing six gyroscopes for three axis stabilization. The science instrument includes a prime and redundant Field Error Sensor (FES) camera for target acquisition and offset guiding. Since launch, four of the six gyroscopes have failed. The current attitude control system utilizes the remaining two gyros and a Fine Sun Sensor (FSS) for three axis stabilization. When the next gyro fails, a new attitude control system will be uplinked which will rely on the remaining gyro and the FSS for general three axis stabilization. In addition to the FSS, the FES cameras will be required to assist in maintaining fine attitude control during target acquisition. This has required thoroughly determining the characteristics of the FES cameras and the spectrograph aperture plate as well as devising new target acquisition procedures. The results of this work are presented.
The International Ultraviolet Explorer (IUE) attitude control system originally included an inertial reference package containing six gyroscopes for three axis stabilization. The science instrument includes a prime and redundant Field Error Sensor (FES) camera for target acquisition and offset guiding. Since launch, four of the six gyroscopes have failed. The current attitude control system utilizes the remaining two gyros and a Fine Sun Sensor (FSS) for three axis stabilization. When the next gyro fails, a new attitude control system will be uplinked, which will relay on the remaining gyro and the FSS for general three axis stabilization. In addition to the FSS, the FES cameras will be required to assist in maintaining fine attitude control during target acquisition. This has required thoroughly determining the characteristics of the FES cameras and the spectrograph aperture plate as well as devising new target acquisition procedures. The results of this work are presented.
Inspection and testing of proportional temperature controller for air conditioning system of Saturn IB launch vehicle
Saturn launch vehicle configurations, stages, and guidance and control systems, and wind effects on vehicle design
The survey summarizes 15 papers whose topics represent significant safety developments reported between July 1979 and June 1980 in connection with spaceflight. The majority of the papers address the Space Shuttle mission (control-system software modification; abort procedures; Vandenberg AFB launch operations; assembly and repair of the Orbiter's Thermal Protection System; flight hardware). One paper describes a procedure aiding Space Transportation System (STS) payload organizations in complying with safety requirements established by NASA. Spacecraft cabin environments, collision avoidance in near-earth space, and intercept and rendezvous charts are other topics of discussion. The survey also includes two papers outlining the European and Chinese approaches to astronaut selection and training.
All major components of an integrated power/attitude control system (IPACS) assembly were analyzed for testing, launch, and operational stresses. The conceptual design for the outer gimbal and mounting ring structures were developed and analyzed along with preliminary designs of the pivot and torquer assemblies. Results from the system response analysis and the thermal analysis are also presented. Gimballing of this rotating assembly should present few difficulties as the maximum gimballing rate is quite low. However, the inner gimbal assembly in its current configuration must be modified to develop the system from a laboratory concept to a realistic flight hardware status.
Live footage shows the Red Team of STS-99, Commander Kevin R. Kregel and Mission Specialists Janet L. Kavandi and Gerhard P.J. Thiele, participating in interviews with the Launch Control Center (LCC). Kregel discusses the mapping system, and Thiele speaks about the antenna. The Red Team completes the flight cast maneuver for the day. Footage also shows the Red Team, Pilot Dominic L. Pudwill Gorie and Mission Specialists Janet E. Voss and Mamoru Mohri, participating in discussion with the LCC. Voss explains how the equipment works, while Mohri and Gorie discusses the mass. Also seen is the entire crew gathered on the flight deck participating in an interview with the LCC.
The initial X-43A flight test, June 2, 2001, resulted in a mishap and loss of the vehicle. A mishap investigation board (MIB) report and findings, including the established root cause, were publicly released on July, 23, 2003. The X-43A Flight 1 Hyper-X Launch Vehicle (HXLV) failed because the vehicle control system design was deficient for the trajectory flown due to inaccurate analytical models (Pegasus heritage and HXLV specific), which overestimated the (control) system margin ? X-43A Mishap Investigation Report, Vol. I. ? included as Reference 1. Several specific errors were noted, 1) HXLV aerodynamics ? failure to model changes to wing, fin and rudder airfoil shapes due to addition of thermal protection system (TPS); 2) Fin actuation system (FAS) modeling ? under prediction of the control surface hinge moments and FAS compliance; and 3) Parametric uncertainties ? insufficient variation in the aerodynamic, FAS and control system models. In response to the MIB findings, the X-43A program has been working RTF through an approved Corrective Action Plan (CAP) over the last two years.
Topics discussed include: Nearly Direct Measurement of Relative Permittivity; DCS-Neural-Network Program for Aircraft Control and Testing; Dielectric Heaters for Testing Spacecraft Nuclear Reactors; Using Doppler Shifts of GPS Signals To Measure Angular Speed; Monitoring Temperatures of Tires Using Luminescent Materials; Highly Efficient Multilayer Thermoelectric Devices; Very High-Speed Digital Video Capability for In-Flight Use; MMIC DHBT Common-Base Amplifier for 172 GHz; Modular, Microprocessor-Controlled Flash Lighting System; Generic Environment for Simulating Launch Operations; Modular Aero-Propulsion System Simulation; X-Windows Socket Widget Class; Infrastructure for Rapid Development of Java GUI Programs; Processing Raman Spectra of High-Pressure Hydrogen Flames; X-Windows Information Sharing Protocol Widget Class; Simulating Humans as Integral Parts of Spacecraft Missions; Analyzing Power Supply and Demand on the ISS; Polyimides From a-BPDA and Aromatic Diamines; Making Plant-Support Structures From Waste Plant Fiber; Large Deployable Reflectarray Antenna; Periodically Discharging, Gas-Coalescing Filter; Ion Milling On Steps for Fabrication of Nanowires; Neuro-Prosthetic Implants With Adjustable Electrode Arrays; Microfluidic Devices for Studying Biomolecular Interactions; Studying Functions of All Yeast Genes Simultaneously; Polarization Phase-Compensating Coats for Metallic Mirrors; Tunable-Bandwidth Filter System; Methodology for Designing Fault-Protection Software; and Ground-Based Localization of Mars Rovers.
The Space Launch System (SLS) Core Stage (CS) Thrust Vector Control (TVC) system is comprised of eight mechanical feedback Shuttle heritage Type III TVC actuators and four RS-25 engines, each attached to a Shuttle heritage gimbal block/bearing. The actuators are powered by a Shuttle-derived hydraulic Core Auxiliary Power Unit (CAPU), and integrated with an all-new Core Stage thrust structure. The actuators are interfaced to the SLS Vehicle Management (VM) software via an all-new TVC Actuator Control (TAC) avionics subsystem. Despite the significant test and flight experience of the Shuttle hardware, the SLS Green Run ambient and hot fire test activities revealed a number of new findings associated with the dynamic response of the TVC integrated system. Test responses suggested that the TVC system did not meet its performance specifications and its step and frequency responses exhibited unexpected departures from prior lab tests and modeled behavior. This paper is the fifth installment in a seven-paper series surveying the design, engineering, test validation, and flight performance of the Core Stage Thrust Vector Control system. In this paper, the design of the TVC analyses conducted during the Core Stage Green Run test series are discussed in detail. Throughout the course of the test activities, the SLS flight control team worked diligently with the Core Stage contractor to revise test command profiles and ensure sufficient instrumentation was available to collect data. Post-test analysis combined the Green Run modal, ambient, and hot fire test data, MSFC 2- axis Core Stage TVC Inertial Load Simulator (ILS) data, Hardware-In-the-Loop (HWIL) Systems Integration Lab (SIL) results, and actuator Acceptance Testing Procedure (ATP) responses. These data were used to characterize the response, validate critical math models of the TVC subsystem, and isolate the probable cause of the unexpected responses. Through comprehensive analysis of the available test data sources, the integrated team identified the dominant contributors to the observed response and developed test-correlated rationale for vehicle flight control system performance, ultimately leading to a confident posture for the Artemis I mission.
The Space Launch System (SLS) Core Stage (CS) Thrust Vector Control (TVC) system is comprised of 8 mechanical feedback Shuttle heritage Type III TVC actuators and four RS-25 engines, each attached to a Shuttle heritage gimbal block/bearing. Two actuators are used to move each engine in two planes perpendicular to one another (i.e., pitch and yaw). The TVC system design leverages hardware from the Space Shuttle program as well as new hardware designed specifically for the Core Stage. The Space Shuttle heritage hardware directly reused on SLS includes the Orbiter TVC hydraulic servo-actuators (with two slight design modifications), the Orbiter hydraulic circulation pumps, the Orbiter gimbal block/bearing, and the Solid Rocket Booster hydraulic pumps. The Core Auxiliary Power Unit (CAPU) is derived from the Orbiter Auxiliary Power Unit (APU). The Orbiter and Solid Rocket Booster APU turbines are powered by hot gas produced by catalyzed hydrazine decomposition. On the SLS Core Stage, the CAPU turbine is spun using cold gas tapped-off from the RS-25 to CS liquid hydrogen autogenous pressurization line. While direct reuse or slight modification of existing hardware may seem to be a triple-win for a program in cost, schedule, and technical risk mitigation, those benefits can only be realized when its degree of application in a new system is carefully and thoughtfully managed. The heritage hardware reuse should be prescribed within the heritage design capability and reuse environments must lie within the envelope of heritage qualification testing. Despite the significant test and flight experience of the Shuttle heritage hardware components, successful integration with the newly designed CS TVC components and incorporation into the stage design proved to be a challenge which required re-qualification of the heritage hardware as well as thorough integrated testing to support flight certification. Examples of the challenges that were overcome include: re-qualifying heritage hardware to survive new shock and vibration environments, certifying performance of extensively modified heritage hardware, regenerating design insight due to lack of available heritage vendor data, showing compliance to modern structural design standards, translation of heritage requirements for analog avionics to modern digital avionics, and interfacing heritage mechanical hardware with newly designed avionics. This paper is the second installment in a seven-paper series surveying the design, engineering, test validation, and flight performance of the Core Stage Thrust Vector Control system. This paper will discuss several engineering challenges encountered during the development process for SLS CS TVC and how they were successfully overcome to reach flight readiness.
The Low-Earth Orbit (LEO) Flight Test of an Inflatable Decelerator (LOFTID) mission was the culmination of two decades of research and development for Hyper-sonic Inflatable Aerodynamic Decelerator (HIAD) technology. LOFTID was a project overseen by the Technology Demonstration Mission (TDM) program within NASA’s Space Technology Mission Directorate. The success of the LOFTID mission could enable new NASA missions to Mars, Venus, and most solar-system destinations with atmospheres, as well as cost-effective payload returns to Earth, including in-space manufactured materials and launch vehicle asset recovery. LOFTID, with its unique inflatable heat shield, was the first-of-a-kind orbital reentry flight, and the largest blunt body atmospheric entry of any kind. On November 10, 2022, just over 10 years since the previous flight test of the smaller sub-orbital Inflatable Reentry Vehicle Experiment-3 (IRVE-3) [1], NASA Langley Research Center, with partner United Launch Alliance (ULA), successfully launched and achieved reentry and recovery of the LOFTID Reentry Vehicle (RV), further demonstrating the viability of the HIAD technology for large-diameter, inflatable heat shields to safely and accurately deliver large payloads through an atmosphere via a controlled descent and landing. Launching as a secondary payload with the Joint Polar Satellite System 2 (JPSS-2) from Vandenberg Space Force Base, California, stowed inside an ex-tended payload adapter of the Atlas V 401 launch vehicle, the LOFTID mission officially began after the JPSS-2 payload was delivered to its orbit by the Centaur second stage. The LOFTID RV was flying solo on its spin-stabilized ballistic reentry trajectory about one hour after launch, and the flight ended approximately one hour later with a gentle splashdown under parachute in the Pacific Ocean off the east coast of Hawaii, where the RV was recovered and later shipped back to NASA Langley. LOFTID endured the harsh environments of atmospheric reentry while demonstrating stable aerodynamics through the entire spectrum of hypersonic, supersonic, transonic, and subsonic flight. The LOFTID RV was exposed to an aeroheating environment representative of many Mars and LEO HIAD applications, while successfully demonstrating the ability of the heat-affected inflatable structure to with-stand aerodynamic forces that exceeded those expected at Mars. This flight demonstration of a 6m diameter HIAD confirmed the technology structural and thermal performance as it protected the 1100kg RV entering Earth’s atmosphere at 8 km/s, reaching Mach 30, and experiencing 9g deceleration before deploying parachutes and splashing down in the Pacific Ocean. HIAD technology involves an aeroshell that can be hard packed into a small volume for launch and then deployed prior to atmospheric entry for a controlled deceleration through the atmosphere. Large deployable heat shields enable spacecraft to carry bigger, heavier payloads, including scientific instruments and human support systems for planetary landing and exploration. Much larger than traditional fixed diameter aeroshells that are constrained by the size of launch vehicle shrouds, inflatable decelerators create more drag and start the deceleration process in the upper reaches of the atmosphere with greater efficiency and stability. LOFTID’s successful demonstration of the HIAD technology has greatly expanded NASA’s options for future planetary missions and opened new commercial opportunities for lower-cost mission pay-load recovery including recovery of launch vehicle assets, or as a delivery system to return cargo from the International Space Station or cislunar space. The developments for some of these applications are al-ready underway. While LOFTID was indeed a first-of-a-kind flight for an inflatable heatshield, the largest blunt-body entry ever, its remarkable performance assured that it will not be the last of its kind.
A market survey and evaluation of inertial guidance systems (inertial measurement units and digital computers) were made. Comparisons were made to determine the candidate systems for use in the Scout launch vehicle. Error analyses were made using typical Scout trajectories. A reaction control system was sized for the fourth stage. The guidance hardware to Scout vehicle interface was listed.