Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Systems Performance Lab”

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 469 records · Page 26
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2000

4.5-kW Hall Effect Thruster Evaluated

As part of an Interagency Agreement with the Air Force Research Lab (AFRL), a space simulation test of a Russian SPT 140 Hall Effect Thruster was completed in September 1999 at Vacuum Facility 6 at the NASA Glenn Research Center at Lewis Field. The thruster was subjected to a three-part test sequence that included thrust and performance characterization, electromagnetic interference, and plume contamination. SPT 140 is a 4.5-kW thruster developed under a joint agreement between AFRL, Atlantic Research Corp, and Space Systems/Loral, and was manufactured by the Fakal Experimental Design Bureau of Russia. All objectives were satisfied, and the thruster performed exceptionally well during the 120-hr test program, which comprised 33 engine firings. The Glenn testing provided a critical contribution to the thruster development effort, and the large volume and high pumping speed of this vacuum facility was key to the test s success. The low background pressure (1 10 6 torr) provided a more accurate representation of space vacuum than is possible in most vacuum chambers. The facility had been upgraded recently with new cryogenic pumps and sputter shielding to support the active electric propulsion program at Glenn. The Glenn test team was responsible for all test support equipment, including the thrust stand, power supplies, data acquisition, electromagnetic interference measurement equipment, and the contamination measurement system.

Mason, Lee S.↗
NASA NTRS2004

Fast-Acquisition/Weak-Signal-Tracking GPS Receiver for HEO

A report discusses the technical background and design of the Navigator Global Positioning System (GPS) receiver -- . a radiation-hardened receiver intended for use aboard spacecraft. Navigator is capable of weak signal acquisition and tracking as well as much faster acquisition of strong or weak signals with no a priori knowledge or external aiding. Weak-signal acquisition and tracking enables GPS use in high Earth orbits (HEO), and fast acquisition allows for the receiver to remain without power until needed in any orbit. Signal acquisition and signal tracking are, respectively, the processes of finding and demodulating a signal. Acquisition is the more computationally difficult process. Previous GPS receivers employ the method of sequentially searching the two-dimensional signal parameter space (code phase and Doppler). Navigator exploits properties of the Fourier transform in a massively parallel search for the GPS signal. This method results in far faster acquisition times [in the lab, 12 GPS satellites have been acquired with no a priori knowledge in a Low-Earth-Orbit (LEO) scenario in less than one second]. Modeling has shown that Navigator will be capable of acquiring signals down to 25 dB-Hz, appropriate for HEO missions. Navigator is built using the radiation-hardened ColdFire microprocessor and housing the most computationally intense functions in dedicated field-programmable gate arrays. The high performance of the algorithm and of the receiver as a whole are made possible by optimizing computational efficiency and carefully weighing tradeoffs among the sampling rate, data format, and data-path bit width.

Wintemitz, Luke↗
NASA NTRS2018

Large Scale Cryogenic Storage with Active Refrigeration

Storage and transfer of cryogenic liquefied gases on volume scales from under 10 liters for lab use, up to hundreds of millions of liters for industrial applications is of paramount importance across a vast range of industries. Traditionally, these commodities have been stored at or near the normal boiling point due to relative ease of operation and safety-related considerations; however, this also means that some percentage will always be lost due to environmental heat leaking into the vessel and causing boil-off. These losses become more concerning as scales increase, and are of particular importance for high-cost commodities such helium and hydrogen. Additionally, the normal boiling point marks the highest liquid density achievable; which becomes a strong driver of end-use system designs such as space launch vehicles. Recent development and testing of an Integrated Refrigeration and Storage (IRAS) system for liquid hydrogen has proven that next generation cryogenic storage operations such as zero boil-off and densification are feasible on a large scale. This IRAS system married an 850 Watt at 20 Kelvin reverse-Brayton cycle commercial cryogenic refrigerator with a 125,000 liter LH2 storage tank via and internal tubular heat exchanger. This allowed heat to be removed directly from the hydrogen, and by extension, provided a means to control the bulk thermodynamic state. Zero boil-off, in-situ liquefaction, and densification down to the triple point was performed during testing, and data such as fluid temperature profiles and tank pressure were gathered. Details regarding the design, setup, and testing of the IRAS system are discussed herein, and the data used to anchor various physics models created to predict the behavior of the system during transient and steady state operation. It is hoped that these efforts will provide a useful basis for the design and implementation of future large scale IRAS systems across numerous industries.

Swanger, Adam M.↗
NASA NTRS2017

Electrically Heated Testing of the Kilowatt Reactor Using Stirling Technology (KRUSTY) Experiment Using a Depleted Uranium Core

The Kilopower project aims to develop and demonstrate scalable fission-based power technology for systems capable of delivering 110 kW of electric power with a specific power ranging from 2.5 - 6.5 Wkg. This technology could enable high power science missions or could be used to provide surface power for manned missions to the Moon or Mars. NASA has partnered with the Department of Energys National Nuclear Security Administration, Los Alamos National Labs, and Y-12 National Security Complex to develop and test a prototypic reactor and power system using existing facilities and infrastructure. This technology demonstration, referred to as the Kilowatt Reactor Using Stirling TechnologY (KRUSTY), will undergo nuclear ground testing in the summer of 2017 at the Nevada Test Site. The 1 kWe variation of the Kilopower system was chosen for the KRUSTY demonstration. The concept for the 1 kWe flight system consist of a 4 kWt highly enriched Uranium-Molybdenum reactor operating at 800 degrees Celsius coupled to sodium heat pipes. The heat pipes deliver heat to the hot ends of eight 125 W Stirling convertors producing a net electrical output of 1 kW. Waste heat is rejected using titanium-water heat pipes coupled to carbon composite radiator panels. The KRUSTY test, based on this design, uses a prototypic highly enriched uranium-molybdenum core coupled to prototypic sodium heat pipes. The heat pipes transfer heat to two Advanced Stirling Convertors (ASC-E2s) and six thermal simulators, which simulate the thermal draw of full scale power conversion units. Thermal simulators and Stirling engines are gas cooled. The most recent project milestone was the completion of non-nuclear system level testing using an electrically heated depleted uranium (non-fissioning) reactor core simulator. System level testing at the Glenn Research Center (GRC) has validated performance predictions and has demonstrated system level operation and control in a test configuration that replicates the one to be used at the Device Assembly Facility (DAF) at the Nevada National Security Site. Fabrication, assembly, and testing of the depleted uranium core has allowed for higher fidelity system level testing at GRC, and has validated the fabrication methods to be used on the highly enriched uranium core that will supply heat for the DAF KRUSTY demonstration.

Briggs, Maxwell H.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Validation of Rendered Natural and Artificial Lighting Environments in Real Time Lunar South Pole Simulations

NASA’s Artemis campaign is making heavy use of simulation to help return humans to the lunar surface by the end of the decade. There are several aspects of the lunar surface and its environment which must be accurately modeled before these simulations can be relied upon to influence decisions being made under these programs. Digital Lunar Exploration Sites, a paper submitted to the 2022 IEEE Aerospace Conference, outlined the process used to generate the lunar surface in a digital environment. This paper will expand upon this topic and delve into the steps being taken by the NASA Exploration Systems Simulations (NExSyS) team at NASA’s Johnson Space Center (JSC) to properly verify and validate these simulations, with a focus on the visual aspects of the environment. Natural lighting validation relies in part on the wealth of data generated during the Apollo program. Many images taken by Apollo astronauts on the lunar surface have been replicated in the simulated environments to gain confidence in the accuracy of terrain and lighting models. However, because the environment the Artemis astronauts will experience at the Lunar South Pole (LSP) is dissimilar from the near-equatorial Apollo sites, other validation techniques must be applied. At the LSP, the sun crests only about three degrees above the horizon and when combined with the lack of a lunar atmosphere, lighting in this region is often very different than what a human would experience on Earth. Solar illumination, earthshine, human eye response, solar blooming, lunar regolith optical properties, and shadows cast by rocks and crater walls will play a significant role in an astronaut’s ability to safely conduct an Extra-Vehicular Activity (EVA) or perform a traverse with a lunar rover. Approaches for validation of these aspects of the rendered LSP environment are considered in this paper. In addition to natural lighting, approaches for the validation of artificial lighting models at the LSP are discussed. The JSC Lighting Lab has been studying the illumination profile of the Exploration Infomatics Subsystem (xINFO) lighting on the Exploration EVA Mobility Unit (xEMU). How these lights interact with the solar illumination and the shadows being cast on the lunar surface is of particular interest, so the validity of models representing these lights in a human-in-the-loop virtual reality environment becomes very important. This paper also touches on some of the simulation performance considerations when a Human in the Loop (HITL) is present, which drives the need for real time rendering of the environment. Natural and artificial lighting will play a crucial role to decisions being made when planning and executing missions at the Lunar South Pole (LSP) and it is vitally important to understand the LSP environment before we return.

Lunar↗
NASA NTRS2023

Approaches for Validation of Lighting Environments in Realtime Lunar South Pole Simulations

NASA’s Artemis campaign is making heavy use of simulation to help return humans to the lunar surface by the end of the decade. There are several aspects of the lunar surface and its environment which must be accurately modeled before these simulations can be relied upon to influence decisions being made under these programs. Digital Lunar Exploration Sites, a paper submitted to the 2022 IEEE Aerospace Conference, outlined the process used to generate the lunar surface in a digital environment. This paper will expand upon this topic and delve into the steps being taken by the NASA Exploration Systems Simulations (NExSyS) team at NASA’s Johnson Space Center (JSC) to properly verify and validate these simulations, with a focus on the visual aspects of the environment. Natural lighting validation relies in part on the wealth of data generated during the Apollo program. Many images taken by Apollo astronauts on the lunar surface have been replicated in the simulated environments to gain confidence in the accuracy of terrain and lighting models. However, because the environment the Artemis astronauts will experience at the Lunar South Pole (LSP) is dissimilar from the near-equatorial Apollo sites, other validation techniques must be applied. At the LSP, the sun crests only about 1.5 degrees above the horizon and when combined with the lack of a lunar atmosphere, lighting in this region is often very different than what a human would experience on Earth. Solar illumination, earthshine, human eye response, solar blooming, lunar regolith optical properties, and shadows cast by rocks and crater walls will play a significant role in an astronaut’s ability to safely conduct an Extra-Vehicular Activity (EVA) or perform a traverse with a lunar rover. Approaches for validation of these aspects of the rendered LSP environment are considered in this paper. In addition to natural lighting, approaches for the validation of artificial lighting models at the LSP are discussed. The JSC Lighting Lab has been studying the illumination profile of the Exploration Informatics Subsystem (xINFO) lighting on the Exploration EVA Mobility Unit (xEMU). How these lights interact with the solar illumination and the shadows being cast on the lunar surface is of particular interest, so the validity of models representing these lights in a human-in-the-loop virtual reality environment becomes very important. This paper also touches on some of the simulation performance considerations when a Human in the Loop (HITL) is present, which drives the need for realtime rendering of the environment. Natural and artificial lighting will play a crucial role to decisions being made when planning and executing missions at the Lunar South Pole (LSP) and it is vitally important to understand the LSP environment before we return.

Lunar↗
NASA NTRS2015

3-D CFD Simulation and Validation of Oxygen-Rich Hydrocarbon Combustion in a Gas-Centered Swirl Coaxial Injector using a Flamelet-Based Approach

Injector design is a critical part of the development of a rocket Thrust Chamber Assembly (TCA). Proper detailed injector design can maximize propulsion efficiency while minimizing the potential for failures in the combustion chamber. Traditional design and analysis methods for hydrocarbon-fuel injector elements are based heavily on empirical data and models developed from heritage hardware tests. Using this limited set of data produces challenges when trying to design a new propulsion system where the operating conditions may greatly differ from heritage applications. Time-accurate, Three-Dimensional (3-D) Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) modeling of combusting flows inside of injectors has long been a goal of the fluid analysis group at Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) and the larger CFD modeling community. CFD simulation can provide insight into the design and function of an injector that cannot be obtained easily through testing or empirical comparisons to existing hardware. However, the traditional finite-rate chemistry modeling approach utilized to simulate combusting flows for complex fuels, such as Rocket Propellant-2 (RP-2), is prohibitively expensive and time consuming even with a large amount of computational resources. MSFC has been working, in partnership with Streamline Numerics, Inc., to develop a computationally efficient, flamelet-based approach for modeling complex combusting flow applications. In this work, a flamelet modeling approach is used to simulate time-accurate, 3-D, combusting flow inside a single Gas Centered Swirl Coaxial (GCSC) injector using the flow solver, Loci-STREAM. CFD simulations were performed for several different injector geometries. Results of the CFD analysis helped guide the design of the injector from an initial concept to a tested prototype. The results of the CFD analysis are compared to data gathered from several hot-fire, single element injector tests performed in the Air Force Research Lab EC-1 test facility located at Edwards Air Force Base.

Richardson, Brian↗
NASA NTRS2011

Design, Development and Test Challenges: Separation Mechanisms for the Orion Pad Abort-1 Flight Test

On May 6, 2010, NASA launched the first successful integrated flight test, Pad Abort-1, of the Orion Project from the White Sands Missile Range in Las Cruces, New Mexico. This test demonstrated the ability to perform an emergency pad abort of a full-scale 4.8 m diameter, 8200 kg crew capsule. During development of the critical separation mechanisms for this flight test, various challenges were overcome related to environments definition, installation complications, separation joint retraction speed, thruster ordnance development issues, load path validation and significant design loads increases. The Launch Abort System retention and release (LAS R&R) mechanism consisted of 6 discrete structural connections between the LAS and the crew module (CM) simulator, each of which had a preloaded tension tie, Superbolt torque-nut and frangible nut. During the flight test, the frangible nuts were pyrotechnically split, permitting the CM to separate from the LAS. The LAS separation event was the driving case in the shock environment for many co-located hardware items. During development testing, it was necessary to measure the source shock during the separation event so the predicted shock environment could be validated and used for certification testing of multiple hardware items. The Lockheed Martin test team measured the source separation shock due to the LAS R&R function, which dramatically decreased the predicted environment by 90% at 100 Hz. During development testing a hydraulic tensioner was used to preload the joint; however, the joint relaxation with the tensioner proved unsatisfactory so the design was modified to include a Superbolt torque-nut. The observed preload creep during lab testing was 4% after 30 days, with 2.5% occurring in the first 24 hours. The conversion of strain energy (preload) to kinetic energy (retraction) was measured to be 50-75%. Design features and careful monitoring of multiple strain gauges on each tension tie allowed a pure tensile load to be applied after stacking at the launch pad. Following installation, preload in each joint was monitored for 24 hours. Due to unforeseen complications and the influence of temperature on the portable data acquisition system, the team encountered difficulty in tracking the joint relaxation. In some cases, bond-line failure of the strain gauges occurred.

Dinsel, Alison↗
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 NTRS1998

Continuation of the University of Michigan Sounding Rocket Program

This interim report gives the activity on this grant through 31 October 1998, and the planned activities for the next fiscal year. A Project Initiation Conference (PIC) was held at the Wallops Flight Facility (WFF), with planning for the launch of flight 36.174 in Fall 1998. However, following the PIC, the WFF personnel decided that the experiment telemetry system had to be completely rewired, which required substantial design and wiring changes on the experiment side of the payload. These costs had not been anticipated in the FY98 budget, and used up considerable resources of the experimenters. In addition, the telemetry re-design was not completed until Fall 1998, so that there was no opportunity for a launch in 1998 (the Jupiter window closes in late November 1998 and it will reopen in late summer 1999). A Design Review was held by telecon with WFF personnel on 26 October 1998, with plans for the 36.174 launch now in late August 1999 with a launch window which extends into winter 2000. On a more positive note, we have been developing a vacuum UV calibration chamber in Michigan's Space Physics Research Lab, for future measurements of our experiment components, and this facility is now undergoing initial measurements of various calibration lamps in preparation for testing of the telescope UV reflective efficiency. This facility will greatly increase our ability to optimize our experiment for UV efficiency, which has been lacking in the past, and it will be made available for support of other NASA missions at Michigan and for visitors from other institutions. For the next flight 36.174, the following activities will be accomplished: (1) prepare the experiment, including replacement and upgrading of critical components, at University of Michigan; (2) pre-integrate the payload at the Wallops Flight Facility; (3) perform final far-UV calibration of instrument (4) perform final alignment, integration, and electrical checks at WSMR; (5) launch payload from WSMR and check condition of recovered payload; (6) perform post-flight calibration, if necessary and applicable (7) reduce and analyze flight data. The following pages contain information from the experimenter package for the Design Review for the next flight, 36.174, listing the plans, changes, and schedule for this flight.

Clarke, John↗
NASA NTRS2024

Experimental Studies on the Effect of Impact Processes on the Formation and Evolution of Amino Acids

Introduction: A critical step in the emergence of life on Earth was the synthesis of larger organic molecules from simple building blocks such as NH3, CO2, H2O, and CH3OH. The presence of amino acids and other complex organics in comets and meteorites demonstrates that widespread organic synthesis likely occurred across the early solar system. Building on previous work [e.g., 1-3], we systematically explore impact-driven chemical evolution of exogenous organics and their precursors. Collisional processes may also have provided a source of energy for the formation of more complex organics from endogenous building blocks. The high flux of impactors to Earth immediately prior to and during the origins of life suggests that impacts could have played a critical role. Key Questions: 1. How are the formation and evolution of amino acids affected by the presence of a mineral matrix during cometary and asteroidal impacts onto the early Earth? 2. Do some minerals (e.g., phyllosilicates) provide a more robust protective framework or reactive surface site for amino-acid formation and/or polymerization? 3. Does the abundance of ices and/or amino acids relative to that of the mineral matrix affect the formation and evolution of amino acids? 4. Are there impact velocities/shock pressures at which formation or polymerization of amino acids is favored or precluded? Experimental Approach: This study systematically examines the conditions under which amino acids and other organic molecules can form, be polymerized, and/or be destroyed during impact events into particulate regolith simulants. Variable parameters include the modal composition of this regolith (silicate matrices, ratios of ices, silicates, and amino acids) and impact velocities/shock pressures. Impacts experiments were performed using the two-stage light-gas gun (LGG), vertical gun (VG), and flat-plate accelerator (FPA) in the Experimental Impact Lab at JSC. FPA experiments were performed over a range of shock pressures (11.3-31.5 GPa) using CM chondrite simulant mixed with amino acids at ratios of 0:10, 1:10, 1:103, and 1:106 (amino acid:host). Techniques for mixing cometary ices have been optimized and test runs have been performed using the LGG (see figure below). Analysis: Post-impact, samples are heated in water to extract amino acids and peptides. Extracts are characterized via liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry (LC-MS) and the mineralogies of solid residues are characterized using X-ray diffraction, scanning electron microscopy and transmission electron microscopy. Additional LC-MS and mineralogical analyses are underway.

Eve L Berger↗
NASA NTRS2001

Assessment of Stirling Technology Has Provided Critical Data Leading Toward Flight Readiness of the Stirling Converter

The NASA Glenn Research Center is supporting the development of a Stirling converter with the Department of Energy (DOE, Germantown, Maryland) for an advanced Stirling Radioisotope Power System (SRPS) to provide spacecraft onboard electric power for NASA space science missions. A key technology assessment completed by Glenn and DOE has led to the SRPS being identified as a high-efficiency power source for such deep space missions as the Europa Orbiter and the Solar Probe. In addition, the Stirling system is now being considered for unmanned Mars rovers, especially where mission profiles may exclude the use of photovoltaic power systems, such as exploration at high Martian latitudes or for missions of long duration. The SRPS efficiency of over 20 percent will reduce the required amount of radioisotope by more than a factor of 3 in comparison to current radioisotope thermoelectric generators. This significantly reduces radioisotope cost, radiological inventory, and system cost, and it provides efficient use of scarce radioisotope resources. In support of this technology assessment, Glenn conducted a series of independent evaluations and tests to determine the technology readiness of a 55-We Stirling converter developed by Stirling Technology Company (Kennewick, Washington) and DOE. Key areas evaluated by Glenn included: 1) Radiation tolerance of materials; 2) Random vibration testing of the Stirling converter in Glenn's Structural Dynamics Lab to simulate operation in the launch environment; 3) Electromagnetic interference and compatibility (EMI/EMC) of the converter operating in Glenn's EMI lab; Independent failure modes, effects, and criticality analysis, and life and reliability 4. Independent failure modes, effects, and criticality analysis, and life and reliability assessment; and 5) SRPS cost estimate. The data from these evaluations were presented to NASA Headquarters and the Jet Propulsion Laboratory mission office by a joint industry/Government team consisting of DOE, Glenn, and Lockheed Martin Astronautics. This team concluded that there are no technical reasons that would rule out using the Stirling converter for deep space missions. As a direct result of the successful testing at Glenn, the DOE/Stirling Technology Company 55-We Stirling converter has been baselined for the SRPS. Glenn is now continuing an in-house project to assist in developing the Stirling converter for readiness for space qualification and mission implementation. As part of this effort, the Stirling converter will be further characterized under launch environment random vibration testing, methods to reduce converter EMI will be developed, and an independent performance verification will be completed. Converter life assessment and permanent magnet aging characterization tasks are also underway. Substitute organic materials for the linear alternator and piston bearing coatings for use in a high-radiation environment have been identified and have now been incorporated in Stirling converters built by Stirling Technology Company for Glenn. Electromagnetic and thermal finite element analyses for the alternator are also being conducted.

Thieme, Lanny G.↗
NASA NTRS1993

Cognitive engineering models in space systems

NASA space systems, including mission operations on the ground and in space, are complex, dynamic, predominantly automated systems in which the human operator is a supervisory controller. Models of cognitive functions in complex systems are needed to describe human performance and form the theoretical basis of operator workstation design, including displays, controls, and decision aids. Currently, there several candidate modeling methodologies. They include the Rasmussen abstraction/aggregation hierarchy and decision ladder, the goal-means network, the problem behavior graph, and the operator function model. The research conducted under the sponsorship of this grant focuses on the extension of the theoretical structure of the operator function model and its application to NASA Johnson mission operations and space station applications. The initial portion of this research consists of two parts. The first is a series of technical exchanges between NASA Johnson and Georgia Tech researchers. The purpose is to identify candidate applications for the current operator function model; prospects include mission operations and the Data Management System Testbed. The second portion will address extensions of the operator function model to tailor it to the specific needs of Johnson applications. At this point, we have accomplished two things. During a series of conversations with JSC researchers, we have defined the technical goal of the research supported by this grant to be the structural definition of the operator function model and its computer implementation, OFMspert. Both the OFM and OFMspert have matured to the point that they require infrastructure to facilitate use by researchers not involved in the evolution of the tools. The second accomplishment this year was the identification of the Payload Deployment and Retrieval System (PDRS) as a candidate system for the case study. In conjunction with government and contractor personnel in the Human-Computer Interaction Lab, the PDRS was identified as the most accessible system for the demonstration. Pursuant to this a PDRS simulation was obtained from the HCIL and an initial knowledge engineering effort was conducted to understand the operator's tasks in the PDRS application. The preliminary results of the knowledge engineering effort and an initial formulation of an operator function model (OFM) are contained in the appendices.

Mitchell, Christine M.↗
NASA NTRS2013

Parametric Thermal Soak Model for Earth Entry Vehicles

The analysis and design of an Earth Entry Vehicle (EEV) is multidisciplinary in nature, requiring the application many disciplines. An integrated tool called Multi Mission System Analysis for Planetary Entry Descent and Landing or M-SAPE is being developed as part of Entry Vehicle Technology project under In-Space Technology program. Integration of a multidisciplinary problem is a challenging task. Automation of the execution process and data transfer among disciplines can be accomplished to provide significant benefits. Thermal soak analysis and temperature predictions of various interior components of entry vehicle, including the impact foam and payload container are part of the solution that M-SAPE will offer to spacecraft designers. The present paper focuses on the thermal soak analysis of an entry vehicle design based on the Mars Sample Return entry vehicle geometry and discusses a technical approach to develop parametric models for thermal soak analysis that will be integrated into M-SAPE. One of the main objectives is to be able to identify the important parameters and to develop correlation coefficients so that, for a given trajectory, can estimate the peak payload temperature based on relevant trajectory parameters and vehicle geometry. The models are being developed for two primary thermal protection (TPS) materials: 1) carbon phenolic that was used for Galileo and Pioneer Venus probes and, 2) Phenolic Impregnated Carbon Ablator (PICA), TPS material for Mars Science Lab mission. Several representative trajectories were selected from a very large trade space to include in the thermal analysis in order to develop an effective parametric thermal soak model. The selected trajectories covered a wide range of heatload and heatflux combinations. Non-linear, fully transient, thermal finite element simulations were performed for the selected trajectories to generate the temperature histories at the interior of the vehicle. Figure 1 shows the finite element model that was used for the simulations. The results indicate that it takes several hours for the thermal energy to soak into the interior of the vehicle and achieve maximum payload temperatures. In addition, a strong correlation between the heatload and peak payload container temperature is observed that will help establishing the parametric thermal soak model.

Agrawal, Parul↗
NASA NTRS2009

An Overview of the Microgravity Science Glovebox (MSG) Facility and the Research Performed in the MSG on the International Space Station (ISS)

The Microgravity Science Glovebox (MSG) is a double rack facility aboard the International Space Station (ISS) designed for investigation handling. The MSG has been operating on the ISS since July 2002 and is currently located in the Columbus Laboratory Module. The unique design of the facility allows it to accommodate science and technology investigations in a workbench type environment. The facility has an enclosed working volume that is held at a negative pressure with respect to the crew living area. This allows the facility to provide two levels of containment for small parts, particulates, fluids, and gases. This containment approach protects the crew from possible hazardous operations that take place inside the MSG work volume. Research investigations operating inside the MSG are provided a large 255 liter enclosed work space, 1000 watts of dc power via a versatile supply interface (120, 28, +/- 12, and 5 Vdc), 1000 watts of cooling capability, video and data recording and real time downlink, ground commanding capabilities, access to ISS Vacuum Exhaust and Vacuum Resource Systems, and gaseous nitrogen supply. These capabilities make the MSG one of the most utilized facilities on ISS. In fact, the MSG has been used for over 5000 hours of scientific payload operations. MSG investigations involve research in cryogenic fluid management, fluid physics, spacecraft fire safety, materials science, combustion, plant growth, and life support technologies. MSG is an ideal platform for science investigations and research required to advance the technology readiness levels (TRLs) applicable to the Constellation Program. This paper will provide an overview of the MSG facility, a synopsis of the research that has already been accomplished in the MSG, an overview of future investigations currently planned for operation in the MSG, and potential applications of MSG investigations that can provide useful data to the Constellation Program. In addition, this paper will address the role of the MSG facility in the ISS National Lab.

Spivey, Reggie↗