Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “MANEUVERABLE SPACECRAFT”

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.

47 records · Page 3
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Maneuverable Automated Tethered Space Tug Simulator

This TIP will develop autonomous capabilities for the space tugs in the Flat Floor Robotics Laboratory (FFRL) for use in support of In-Space Servicing, Assembly, and Manufacturing (ISAM) and future vehicles in the FFRL. The space tugs would be housed on larger spacecraft, such as ISS or Gateway, and deployed for various ISAM activities. When these activities are complete, the space tug can be reeled back to its host spacecraft.

Flat Floor Robotics Lab↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Nuclear Electric Propulsion for Outer Planet Science Missions

Nuclear electric propulsion (NEP) combines the high specific impulse of electric thrusters with a constant power source that can operate anywhere in the solar system. Current investments in fission surface power offer a starting point for development of an NEP capability for deep space science missions, with a mission to the Saturn system illustrating the potential of such a system. Minimum time of flight transits, maximum payload delivery, and a sample return from Enceladus are considered. The NEP system can deliver payloads to the Saturn system with similar transit times to the Cassini spacecraft without requiring the planetary flyby maneuvers, and when coupled with a heavy-lift launch vehicle an NEP-powered spacecraft can complete a Saturn transit significantly faster than Cassini. High payload masses can be delivered on a longer trajectory at the expense of transit time. Replacing a portion of the payload with propellant allows for a high degree of maneuverability upon reaching the Saturn system. An Enceladus sample return mission closes when utilizing the NEP system for the Saturn departure and Earth return burns.

Matthew E Duchek↗
NASA NTRS1980

Spacecraft for flight in the atmosphere of Venus

Possible configurations of space vehicles which would be delivered to Venus by rocket system in order to autonomously carry out flights in an automatic (and possibly piloted) mode are considered with respect to mission and flight altitude. Base (high altitude) vehicles, operating at pressure, sendity, and temperature corresponding to those on Earth at sea level, will have little maneuverability, will serve as carriers for equipment, scientific devices, and other cargo, and will study the gas composition of the Venus atmosphere from above. Low altitude vehicles will explore the planet from flight altitude in the vicinity of the planet's surface, as well as land on it. Analogous to deep submergence vehicles such as the bathyscaphe and the bathyplane, they will have a certain amount of maneuverability and will study the atmospheric boundary layer from below. The advantages of aerostats in this environment are discussed. Drawings of the aerostatic base station, the variable-length aerostatic sing vehicle, and the hybrid aerostatic vehicle with attached wings are included.

Moskalenko, G. M.↗
NASA NTRS2000

A Human Factors Evaluation of a Methodology for Pressurized Crew Module Acceptability for Zero-Gravity Ingress of Spacecraft

This project aimed to develop a methodology for evaluating performance and acceptability characteristics of the pressurized crew module volume suitability for zero-gravity (g) ingress of a spacecraft and to evaluate the operational acceptability of the NASA crew return vehicle (CRV) for zero-g ingress of astronaut crew, volume for crew tasks, and general crew module and seat layout. No standard or methodology has been established for evaluating volume acceptability in human spaceflight vehicles. Volume affects astronauts'ability to ingress and egress the vehicle, and to maneuver in and perform critical operational tasks inside the vehicle. Much research has been conducted on aircraft ingress, egress, and rescue in order to establish military and civil aircraft standards. However, due to the extremely limited number of human-rated spacecraft, this topic has been un-addressed. The NASA CRV was used for this study. The prototype vehicle can return a 7-member crew from the International Space Station in an emergency. The vehicle's internal arrangement must be designed to facilitate rapid zero-g ingress, zero-g maneuverability, ease of one-g egress and rescue, and ease of operational tasks in multiple acceleration environments. A full-scale crew module mockup was built and outfitted with representative adjustable seats, crew equipment, and a volumetrically equivalent hatch. Human factors testing was conducted in three acceleration environments using ground-based facilities and the KC-135 aircraft. Performance and acceptability measurements were collected. Data analysis was conducted using analysis of variance and nonparametric techniques.

Sanchez, Merri J.↗
NASA NTRS1985

A Concept for a Mobile Remote Manipulator System

A conceptual design for a Mobile Remote Manipulator System (MRMS) is presented. This concept does not require continuous rails for mobility (only guide pins at truss hardpoints) and is very compact, being only one bay square. The MRMS proposed is highly maneuverable and is able to move in any direction along the orthogonal guide pin array under complete control at all times. The proposed concept would greatly enhance the safety and operational capabilities of astronauts performing EVA functions such as structural assembly, payload transport and attachment, space station maintenance, repair or modification, and future spacecraft construction or servicing. The MRMS drive system conceptual design presented is a reasonably simple mechanical device which can be designed to exhibit high reliability. Developmentally, all components of the proposed MRMS either exist or are considered to be completely state of the art designs requiring minimal development, features which should enhance reliability and minimize costs.

Mikulus, M. M., Jr.↗
NASA NTRS1988

Optimal plane change during constant altitude hypersonic flight

Future spacecraft operating in the vicinity of the earth may have resort to the atmosphere as an aid in effecting orbital change. While a previous treatment of this technique chose constant altitude, speed, and angle-of-attack values in order to maximize the plane change for a fixed amount of propellant consumption during hypersonic flight, the former two parameters are presently released from the constraint of constancy. The general characteristics of the optimal controls are described on the basis of the domain of maneuverability, and numerical solutions are obtained for several specific cases. Under the condition of constant-altitude flight, it is generally not optimal to fly at constant angle-of-attack.

Mease, K. D.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Advanced Electric Propulsion System (AEPS) Enabling a Sustainable Return to the Lunar Surface through NASA Gateway

NASA continues to evolve a human exploration approach for beyond low-Earth orbit. The center of this approach is NASA’s Gateway that is envisioned to provide a maneuverable outpost in lunar orbit to extend human presence in deep space and expand on NASA exploration goals. The Gateway represents the initial step in NASA’s architecture for human cislunar operations, lunar surface access and missions to Mars. NASA announced at the May 2020 NASA Advisory Council’s Human Explorations and Operations Committee a new plan that calls for launching the first two elements of Gateway as a co-manifested mission in the late 2023 timeframe [2]. Launching the Power and Propulsion Element (PPE) and the Habitation and Logistics Outpost (HALO) together reduces mission risk, utilizes the PPE high-powered Electric Propulsion (EP) system to transport both elements to the lunar orbit, and reduces overall cost. NASA and Maxar Technologies have a commercial partnership to develop and demonstration a high-powered Solar Electric Propulsion (SEP) spacecraft [3, 4]. The PPE is baselined to include three 12.5-kW Advanced Electric Propulsion Systems (AEPS) and four 6-kW Hall thrusters, currently under development by Maxar, for a total beginning of life propulsion power of over 48-kW [5]. High-power solar electric propulsion is one of the key technologies that has been prioritized because of its significant exploration benefits, specifically, for missions beyond low Earth orbit. Spacecraft size and mass are currently dominated by onboard chemical propulsion systems and propellants that may constitute more than 50 percent of spacecraft mass. This impact can be substantially reduced through the utilization of SEP, due to its higher specific impulse and lower propellant load required to meet the equivalent mission delta-V. Studies performed for NASA’s HEOMD and Science Mission Directorate (SMD) have demonstrated that 40-kW-class SEP provides the necessary capabilities that would enable near term and future architectures, and science missions [6]. Accordingly, NASA has been developing a 12 kW Hall thruster electric propulsion thruster that can serve as the building block for a 40-kW-class SEP capability. The AEPS development, led by the NASA Glenn Research Center (GRC) and the Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL), began with the maturation of the high-power Hall thruster. The technology development work has transitioned to AR via a competitive procurement selection for the AEPS contract in May 2016. Management of the AEPS contract is being led by NASA GRC with funding from NASA’s Science Technology Mission Directorate (STMD) under the Technology Demonstration Missions (TDM) program. NASA continues to support the AEPS development leveraging in-house expertise, plasma modeling capability, and world-class test facilities.

AEPS↗
NASA NTRS2001

Thermal Protection Materials for Reentry and Planetary Applications

Thermal protection materials and systems (TPS) are used to protect spacecraft during reentry into Earth's atmosphere or entry into planetary atmospheres. As such, these materials are subject to severe environments with high heat fluxes and rapid heating. Catalytic effects can increase the temperatures substantially. These materials are also subject to impact damage from micrometeorites or other debris during ascent, orbit, and descent, and thus must be able to withstand damage and function following damage. Thermal protection materials and coatings used in reusable launch vehicles will be reviewed, including the needs and directions for new materials to enable new missions that require faster turnaround and much greater reusability. The role of ablative materials for use in high heat flux environments, especially for non-reusable applications and upcoming planetary missions, will be discussed. New thermal protection system materials may enable the use of sharp nose caps and leading edges on future reusable space transportation vehicles. Vehicles employing this new technology would have significant increases in maneuverability and out-of-orbit cross range compared to current vehicles, leading to increased mission safety in the event of the need to abort during ascent or from orbit. Ultrahigh temperature ceramics, a family of materials based on HfB2and ZrB2 with SiC, will be discussed. The development, mechanical and thermal properties, and uses of these materials will be reviewed.

Johnson, Sylvia M.↗
NASA NTRS2001

Thermal Protection Materials for Reentry Applications

Thermal protection materials and systems (IRS) are used to protect spacecraft during reentry into Earth's atmosphere or entry into planetary atmospheres. As such, these materials are subject to severe environments with high heat fluxes and rapid heating. Catalytic effects can increase the temperatures substantially. These materials are also subject to impact damage from micrometeorites or other debris during ascent, orbit, and descent, and thus must be able to withstand damage and to function following damage. Thermal protection materials and coatings used in reusable launch vehicles will be reviewed, including the needs and directions for new materials to enable new missions that require faster turnaround and much greater reusability. The role of ablative materials for use in high heat flux environments, especially for non-reusable applications and upcoming planetary missions, will be discussed. New thermal protection system materials may enable the use of sharp nose caps and leading edges on future reusable space transportation vehicles. Vehicles employing this new technology would have significant increases in maneuverability and out-of-orbit cross range compared to current vehicles, leading to increased mission safety in the event of the need to abort during ascent or from orbit. Ultrahigh temperature ceramics, a family of materials based on HfB2 and ZrB2 with SiC, will be discussed. The development, mechanical and thermal properties, and uses of these materials will be reviewed.

Johnson, Sylvia M.↗
NASA NTRS2004

Manned Spacecraft Landing and Recovery

As recent history has tragically demonstrated, a successful space mission is not complete until the crew has safely returned to earth and has been successfully recovered. It is noted that a safe return to earth does not guarantee a successful recovery. The focus of this presentation will be a discussion of the ground operation assets involved in a successful recovery. The author's experience in land and water-based recovery of crewed vehicles and flight hardware at Kennedy Space Center (KSC), Edwards Air Force Base, international landing sites, and the Atlantic Ocean provides for some unique insight into this topic. He has participated in many aspects of Space Shuttle landing and recovery operations including activation of Transatlantic Abort Landing (TAL) sites and Emergency Landing Sites (ELS) as an Operations Test Director, execution of post landing convoy operations as an Orbiter Move Director, Operations Test Director, and Landing and Recovery Director, and recovery of solid rocket boosters, frustum and their parachutes 140 miles offshore in a wide range of sea states as a Retrieval Diver/Engineer. The recovery operations for the Mercury, Gemini, and Apollo were similar from a landing and recovery perspective in th t they all were capsules with limited "flying" capability and had a planned End of Mission (EOM) in an ocean with a descent slowed by parachutes. The general process was to deploy swim teams via helicopters to prepare the capsule for recovery and assist with crew extraction when required. The capsule was then hoisted onto the deck of a naval vessel. This approach required the extensive use and deployment of military assets to support the primary landing zone as well as alternate and contingency locations. The Russian Soyuz capsule also has limited "flying" capability; however, the planned EOM is terrestrial. In addition to use of parachutes to slow the reentry descent, soft-landing rockets on the bottom of the vehicle are employed to cushion the landing. The recovery forces are deployed via helicopters and the capsule is transported by a specialized all-terrain vehicle. The Space Shuttle Orbiter landing and recovery process is considerably different. The added lift capability and maneuverability allow the Orbiter to land at an exact location/runway for a nominal EOM. This allows for a timely response of recovery/contingency rescue forces, centralized staging of personnel and equipment, and assured access by ground vehicles. The well defined landing zone also provides for far more options when selecting landing sites for EOM and emergency returns and the relatively large cross-range capability increases the number of landing opportunities at the preferred sites.

Hammel, Don↗
NASA NTRS2007

Biomedical Support of U.S. Extravehicular Activity

The world's first extravehicular activity (EVA) was performed by A. A. Leonov on March 18, 1965 during the Russian Voskhod-2 mission. The first US EVA was executed by Gemini IV astronaut Ed White on June 3, 1965, with an umbilical tether that included communications and an oxygen supply. A hand-held maneuvering unit (HHMU) also was used to test maneuverability during the brief EVA; however the somewhat stiff umbilical limited controlled movement. That constraint, plus difficulty returning through the vehicle hatch, highlighted the need for increased thermal control and improved EVA ergonomics. Clearly, requirements for a useful EVA were interrelated with the vehicle design. The early Gemini EVAs generated requirements for suits providing micro-meteor protection, adequate visual field and eye protection from solar visual and infrared radiation, gloves optimized for dexterity while pressurized, and thermal systems capable of protecting the astronaut while rejecting metabolic heat during high workloads. Subsequent Gemini EVAs built upon this early experience and included development of a portable environmental control and life support systems (ECLSS) and an astronaut maneuvering unit. The ECLSS provided a pressure vessel and controller with functional control over suit pressure, oxygen flow, carbon dioxide removal, humidity, and temperature control. Gemini EVA experience also identified the usefulness of underwater neutral buoyancy and altitude chamber task training, and the importance of developing reliable task timelines. Improved thermal management and carbon dioxide control also were required for high workload tasks. With the Apollo project, EVA activity was primarily on the lunar surface; and suit durability, integrated liquid cooling garments, and low suit operating pressures (3.75 pounds per square inch absolute [psia] or 25.8 kilopascal [kPa],) were required to facilitate longer EVAs with ambulation and significant physical workloads with average metabolic rates of 1000 BTU/hr and peaks of up to 2200 BTU/hr. Mobility was further augmented with the Lunar Roving Vehicle. The Apollo extravehicular mobility unit (EMU) was made up of over 15 components, ranging from a biomedical belt for capturing and transmitting biomedical data, urine and fecal containment systems, a liquid cooling garment, communications cap, a modular portable life support system (PLSS), a boot system, thermal overgloves, and a bubble helmet with eye protection. Apollo lunar astronauts performed successful EVAs on the lunar surface from a 5 psia (34.4 kPa) 100% oxygen environment in the Lunar Lander. A maximum of three EVAs were performed on any mission. For Skylab a modified A7LB suit, used for Apollo 15, was selected. The Skylab astronaut life support assembly (ALSA) provided umbilical support through the life support umbilical (LSU) and used open loop oxygen flow, rather than closed-loop as in Apollo missions. Thermal control was provided by liquid water circulated by spacecraft pumps and electrical power also was provided from the spacecraft via the umbilical. The cabin atmosphere of 5 psia (34.4 kPa), 70% oxygen, provided a normoxic atmosphere and because of the very low nitrogen partial pressures, no special protocols were required to protect against decompression sickness (DCS) as was the case with the Apollo spacecraft with a 5 psi, 100% oxygen environment.

Gernhardt, Michael L.↗