SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Mobile Launch Pad Development”

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.

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

42 records · Page 3

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

ISS EVA80 EMU Water in the Helmet Failure and Associated Analytical Response

On March 23rd, 2022, during Extra-Vehicular Activity (EVA) 80 aboard the International Space Station (ISS) crew identified an 8-10-inch diameter thin film of water in the pressure bubble of the suit during repress. This launched an investigation to determine the cause of the water in the helmet as well as short- and long-term mitigation efforts to enable return to EVA as quickly as possible. The investigation analysis efforts in combination with hardware inspection and testing determined the most likely cause of the water in the helmet to be sublimator carryover as a result of high latent loading put on the system. In parallel with this investigation, efforts were being made to mitigate any future water in the helmet events. The short-term mitigation strategy developed is to install absorbent material in the pressure bubble to capture water as it enters the helmet before it can impact the astronauts. This hardware is referred to as the Helmet Absorption Band (HAB) and Helmet Absorption Pad – Extender (HAP-E). Longer-term mitigation strategies include a device to capture small water events before entering the helmet by installing a water capture system in the vent loop of the Extravehicular Mobility Unit (EMU). This effort is coined the T2 Water Capture System. Additionally, developing an on-orbit sublimator challenge test which will be able to verify sublimator performance before and after EVAs. The sublimator is the hardware which condenses water vapor and removes it from the vent loop, and this hardware is referred to as the EMU Moisture Injection Test System (EMITS). Based on the investigation and short-term water capture solutions the ISS Program decided to return to nominal EVAs on October 7, 2022. With the addition of the long-term mitigation strategies, the team hopes to be able to prevent any future water in the helmet events.

Veronica Lee Pizor↗

NASA NTRS2015

Characterization of the Ignition Over-Pressure/Sound Suppression Water in the Space Launch System Mobile Launcher Using Volume of Fluid Modeling

The Space Launch System (SLS) Vehicle consists of a Core Stage with four RS-25 engines and two Solid Rocket Boosters (SRBs). This vehicle is launched from the Launchpad using a Mobile Launcher (ML) which supports the SLS vehicle until its liftoff from the ML under its own power. The combination of the four RS-25 engines and two SRBs generate a significant Ignition Over-Pressure (IOP) and Acoustic Sound environment. One of the mitigations of these environments is the Ignition Over-Pressure/Sound Suppression (IOP/SS) subsystem installed on the ML. This system consists of six water nozzles located parallel to and 24 inches downstream of each SRB nozzle exit plane as well as 16 water nozzles located parallel to and 53 inches downstream of the RS-25 nozzle exit plane. During launch of the SLS vehicle, water is ejected through each water nozzle to reduce the intensity of the transient pressure environment imposed upon the SLS vehicle. While required for the mitigation of the transient pressure environment on the SLS vehicle, the IOP/SS subsystem interacts (possibly adversely) with other systems located on the Launch Pad. One of the other systems that the IOP/SS water is anticipated to interact with is the Hydrogen Burn-Off Igniter System (HBOI). The HBOI system's purpose is to ignite the unburned hydrogen/air mixture that develops in and around the nozzle of the RS-25 engines during engine start. Due to the close proximity of the water system to the HBOI system, the presence of the IOP/SS may degrade the effectiveness of the HBOI system. Another system that the IOP/SS water may interact with adversely is the RS-25 engine nozzles and the SRB nozzles. The adverse interaction anticipated is the wetting, to a significant degree, of the RS-25 nozzles resulting in substantial weight of ice forming and water present to a significant degree upstream of the SRB nozzle exit plane inside the nozzle itself, posing significant additional blockage of the effluent that exits the nozzle upon motor start leading to detrimental effects. The purpose of the CFD simulations were to i) characterize the location of the IOP/SS water after it is ejected from the IOP/SS nozzles, ii) characterize the interaction of the IOP/SS system with the HBOI system and iii) characterize the interaction of the IOP/SS water with the RS-25 nozzles and the SRB nozzles.

West, Jeff↗

NASA NTRS2003

SUBSA and PFMI Transparent Furnace Systems Currently in use in the International Space Station Microgravity Science Glovebox

The Solidification Using a Baffle in Sealed Ampoules (SUBSA) and Pore Formation and Mobility Investigation (PFMI) furnaces were developed for operation in the International Space Station (ISS) Microgravity Science Glovebox (MSG). Both furnaces were launched to the ISS on STS-111, June 4, 2002, and are currently in use on orbit. The SUBSA furnace provides a maximum temperature of 850 C and can accommodate a metal sample as large as 30 cm long and 12mm in diameter. SUBSA utilizes a gradient freeze process with a minimum cooldown rate of 0.5C per min, and a stability of +/- 0.15C. An 8 cm long transparent gradient zone coupled with a Cohu 3812 camera and quartz ampoule allows for observation and video recording of the solidification process. PFMI is a Bridgman type furnace that operates at a maximum temperature of 130C and can accommodate a sample 23cm long and 10mm in diameter. Two Cohu 3812 cameras mounted 90 deg apart move on a separate translation system which allows for viewing of the sample in the transparent hot zone and gradient zone independent of the furnace translation rate and direction. Translation rates for both the cameras and furnace can be specified from 0.5micrometers/sec to 100 micrometers/sec with a stability of +/-5%. The two furnaces share a Process Control Module (PCM) which controls the furnace hardware, a Data Acquisition Pad (DaqPad) which provides signal condition of thermal couple data, and two Cohu 3812 cameras. The hardware and software allow for real time monitoring and commanding of critical process control parameters. This paper will provide a detailed explanation of the SUBSA and PFMI systems along with performance data and some preliminary results from completed on-orbit processing runs.

Spivey, Reggie A.↗

NASA NTRS2020

Feasibility Study of SDAS Instrumentation's Ability to Identify Mobile Launcher (ML)/Crawler-Transporter (CT) Modes During Rollout Operations

The Space Launch System (SLS) and its Mobile Launcher (ML) will be transported to the launch pad via the Crawler-Transporter (CT) system. Rollout (i.e., transportation) loads produce structural loads on the integrated SLS/Orion Multi-Purpose Crew Vehicle (MPCV) launch vehicle which are of a concern with respect to fatigue. As part of the risk reduction process and in addition to the modal building block test approach that has been adopted by the SLS Program, acceleration data will be obtained during rollout for use in modal parameter estimation. There are several occurrences where the ML/CT will be transported either into the Vertical Assembly Building (VAB) or to the launch pad and back without the SLS stack as part of the Kennedy Space Center (KSC) Exploration Ground Systems (EGS) Integrated Test and Checkout (ITCO). NASA KSC EGS has instrumentation installed on both the ML and CT to record data during rollout, at the launch pad, and during liftoff. The EGS instrumentation on the ML, which includes accelerometers, is referred to as the Sensor Data Acquisition System (SDAS). The EGS instrumentation on the CT, which also includes accelerometers, is referred to as the CT Data Acquisition System (CTDAS). The forces and accelerations applied to the ML and CT during a rollout event will be higher than any of the planned building block modal tests. This can be very beneficial in helping identify nonlinear behavior in the structure. Developing modal parameters from the same test hardware in multiple boundary conditions and under multiple levels of excitation is a key step in developing a well correlated FEM. The purpose of this study was three fold. First, determine the target modes of the ML/CT in its rollout configuration. Second, determine if the test degrees of freedom (DOF) corresponding to the layout of the SDAS/CTDAS accelerometers (i.e. position and orientation) is sufficient to identify the target modes. Third, determine if the Generic Rollout Forcing Functions (GRFF's) is sufficient for identifying the ML/CT target modes accounting for variations in CT speed, modal damping, and sensor/ambient background noise levels. The finding from the first part of this study identified 28 target modes of the ML/CT rollout configuration based upon Modal Effective Mass Fractions (MEFF) and engineering judgement. The finding from the second part of this study showed that the SDAS/CTDAS accelerometers (i.e. position and orientation) are able to identify a sufficient number of the target modes to support model correlation of the ML/CT FEM. The finding from the third part of this study confirms the GRFFs sufficiently excite the ML/CT such that varying quantities of the defined target modes should be able to be extracted when utilizing an Experimental Modal Analysis (EMA) Multi-Input Multi-Output (MIMO) analysis approach. An EMA analysis approach was used because Operational Modal Analysis (OMA) tools were not available and the GRFFs were sufficiently uncorrelated. Two key findings from this third part of the study are that the CT speed does not show a significant impact on the ability to extract the modal parameters and that keeping the ambient background noise observed at each accelerometer location at or below 30 µgrms is essential to the success of this approach.

Winkel, James P.↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Fusion of Test and Analysis: Artemis I Booster to Mobile Launcher Interface Validation

NASA is in the midst of bold and exciting next steps in human exploration and spaceflight. The designs of the new Space Launch System (SLS), the Orion spacecraft and the Exploration Ground Systems (EGS) for vehicle processing and launch are essentially complete and there has been significant progress in manufacturing and assembly of specific hardware for the Artemis I and Artemis II missions. Equally as important, the program level and integrated system level testing and analyses are also well underway to support integrated verification, validation, and Certificate of Flight Readiness (CoFR) for Artemis I. Testing and analysis are key to addressing technical challenges faced by the Artemis missions. Building block approaches are required that provide the right balance between component, element, and/or system level testing that satisfies verification and validation objectives where uncertainties are quantified and minimized. Artemis I is a system of systems that requires a fusion of test and analysis that adeptly characterizes critical interfaces between major program elements. An example of this fusion involves characterizing the interface between the SLS booster and the Mobile Launcher (ML) Vertical Support Post (VSP) interfaces. Proper characterization of this interface represents a number of challenges beginning with the fact that it is a mating of ground support structure in the form of a civil structure to flight hardware. Both sides of the interface are built to different construction standards, but are governed by interface requirements to ensure compatibility when mated. From past program experience, the flexibility at the booster to ML interface is critical in developing accurate prelaunch stacking and cryogenic preloads, squat loads, and pad separation release of preloads and squat loads. This same premise holds for Artemis I. To characterize the asymmetric characteristics at this interface, careful consideration of static forces due to gravity loading with the commensurate effects due to leveling during booster stacking (i.e., spacing and shimming) and nonlinear geometric forces are necessary for inclusion in pre-test assessments. This paper will look at these issues for the upcoming Booster Pull Test in which two boosters will be installed on the ML and one of these boosters will undergo static lateral loading followed afterwards with dynamic excitation into resonance and free-decay. This paper evaluates the booster to ML interface characteristics by characterizing the interface flexibility between the booster aft skirt and the ML VSP interfaces. Furthermore, this paper methodically evaluates the effect of the following on the test outcome: gravitational effects on the booster and ML, the effects of VSP leveling, spacing, and shimming under gravitational loading during booster stacking, the effect of geometric nonlinear follower force due to cg offset as booster is laterally displaced, and the system coupling between the booster under test, ML, and the second booster. Simulated results for a static load pull and dynamic excitation provide insight into the differences in measurement responses when boundary conditions and geometric conditions are included and not included.

Joel W Sills Jr.↗

NASA NTRS2010

Operational Lessons Learned from the Ares I-X Flight Test

The Ares I-X flight test, launched in 2009, is the first test of the Ares I crew launch vehicle. This development flight test evaluated the flight dynamics, roll control, and separation events, but also provided early insights into logistical, stacking, launch, and recovery operations for Ares I. Operational lessons will be especially important for NASA as the agency makes the transition from the Space Shuttle to the Constellation Program, which is designed to be less labor-intensive. The mission team itself comprised only 700 individuals over the life of the project compared to the thousands involved in Shuttle and Apollo missions; while missions to and beyond low-Earth orbit obviously will require additional personnel, this lean approach will serve as a model for future Constellation missions. To prepare for Ares I-X, vehicle stacking and launch infrastructure had to be modified at Kennedy Space Center's Vehicle Assembly Building (VAB) as well as Launch Complex (LC) 39B. In the VAB, several platforms and other structures designed for the Shuttle s configuration had to be removed to accommodate the in-line, much taller Ares I-X. Vehicle preparation activities resulted in delays, but also in lessons learned for ground operations personnel, including hardware deliveries, cable routing, transferred work and custodial paperwork. Ares I-X also proved to be a resource challenge, as individuals and ground service equipment (GSE) supporting the mission also were required for Shuttle or Atlas V operations at LC 40/41 at Cape Canaveral Air Force Station. At LC 39B, several Shuttle-specific access arms were removed and others were added to accommodate the in-line Ares vehicle. Ground command, control, and communication (GC3) hardware was incorporated into the Mobile Launcher Platform (MLP). The lightning protection system at LC 39B was replaced by a trio of 600-foot-tall towers connected by a catenary wire to account for the much greater height of the vehicle. Like Shuttle, Ares I-X will be stacked on a MLP and rolled out to the pad on a Saturn-era crawler-transporter. While Ares I-X was only held in place by the four hold-down posts on its aft skirt during rollout, a new vehicle stabilization system (VSS) attached to the vertical service structure kept the vehicle from undue swaying prior to launch at the pad, LC 39B. Following the launch, the flight test vehicle first stage was recovered with the aid of new parachutes resized to accommodate the five-segment-long first stage, which had a much greater length and mass than the Shuttle s reusable solid rocket boosters. After splashdown, recovery divers exercised extra care when handling the first stage to ensure that the flight data recorders in the fifth segment simulator were not damaged by exposure to sea water. The data recovered from the Ares I-X flight test will be very valuable in verifying the predicted environments and models used to design the vehicle. Lessons learned from Ares I-X will be shared with the Ares Projects through written and verbal reports and through integration of mission team members into the Project workforce.

Davis, Stephan R.↗