Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “SPACE VEHICLE CHECKOUT PROGRAM”

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 55 records · Page 3
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2016

Leadership Development Program Final Project

TOSC is NASA's prime contractor tasked to successfully assemble, test, and launch the EM1 spacecraft. TOSC success is highly dependent on design products from the other NASA Programs manufacturing and delivering the flight hardware; Space Launch System(SLS) and Multi-Purpose Crew Vehicle(MPCV). Design products directly feed into TOSC's: Procedures, Personnel training, Hardware assembly, Software development, Integrated vehicle test and checkout, Launch. TOSC senior management recognized a significant schedule risk as these products are still being developed by the other two (2) programs; SVE and ACE positions were created.

Design products required for Engineering↗
NASA NTRS1972

Umbilical connect systems.

Umbilical connect systems were studied for the purpose of developing techniques, specifications, and hardware design concepts for prototype systems to be used in the space shuttle program. New techniques are described which permit rapid and reliable mating, connection, and checkout of umbilical carrier assemblies and couplings for vehicle services (cryogenic, electrical, pneumatic, and hydraulic systems).

Valkema, D.↗
NASA NTRS1983

Role of simulation and emulation in the development of Shuttle-Centaur (STS-Centaur)

To support the task of integrating the Centaur liquid-fueled upper-stage space vehicle into the space shuttle program. A system to simulate and emulate the STS-Centaur avionic flight system and its supporting ground control and checkout equipment was selected and designated the systems integration facility (SIF). Located in San Diego, California, the SIF is composed of integrated simulators that form a composite control system complement to the STS-Centaur airborne and avionic support equipment. An off-line capability to verify the system design of the Centaur airborne support equipment (CASE) and the Centaur avionic flight system is provided as well as a realistic medium for the development and integration of ground checkout and airborne control software programs. Each simulator is composed of prototype hardware, where feasible, to maximize configuration likeness. Where emulated flight or ground hardware is used, it provides physical characteristics (loads, signals, etc.) equivalent to those of the flight hardware. The hardware and software implementation of the SIF are described.

Gordan, A. L.↗
NASA NTRS2018

Thermal Protection Systems Technology Transfer from Apollo and Space Shuttle to the Orion Program

This paper describes how the Orion program is utilizing the Thermal Protection System (TPS) experience from the Apollo and Space Shuttle programs to reduce program risk and improve affordability to meet NASA's future manned exploration missions. The Orion program successfully completed the Exploration Flight Test (EFT-1) mission in 2014 and is currently assembling, integrating, and testing the next spacecraft for the Exploration Mission (EM-1) to meet the flight test objectives of an unmanned orbital mission to the moon and return to earth in 2019. The Orion spacecraft production operations are located in the Neil Armstrong Operations and Checkout (O&C) facility at the Kennedy Space Center (KSC) providing an affordable and seamless delivery approach of vehicles directly to the launch site eliminating spacecraft transportation and additional checkout testing. Innovative vehicle design, manufacturing and test operations approaches are maturing and evolving with each Orion vehicle build to support the challenging NASA exploration mission requirements beyond Low Earth Orbit (LEO) while reducing program cost and schedule impacts. An example of Orion's evolution is the incorporation of an improved heat shield design, assembly and testing approach to meet the higher re-entry velocities for a lunar return for the EM-1 mission. The EFT- 1 heat shield was based on the Apollo heat shield manufacturing processes and was assembled at a supplier location and then transported to KSC for final integration. The EM-1 heat shield is now manufactured, assembled, tested, and installed into the spacecraft at the O&C facility reducing program cost and production schedules. The transition of the Space Shuttle TPS capabilities has enabled Orion to provide a human rated capsule design using proven materials and processes established over years of orbiter re-entry missions. The Orion Crew Module (CM) TPS configuration is derived from the Apollo CM approach utilizing improved materials and processes developed from the Space Shuttle program. The Orion EFT-1 heat shield utilized the Avcoat ablative material from Apollo which was injected into a honeycomb substrate and has been updated for EM-1 incorporating a block configuration bonded to a composite shell structure. This approach utilizes the proven Avcoat material for the heat shield ablator and is utilizing derived bonding and inspection methods and techniques from the Space Shuttle tile experience. The Orion back shell TPS configuration is based on Space Shuttle tile designs using proven tile materials and coatings. The Orion forward bay cover utilizes the high temperature tiles similar to the back shell tiles and low temperature blankets derived from the Space Shuttle program reducing weight impacts. Space Shuttle Multi-Layer Insulation (MLI) is installed in the Orion capsule to control the interior temperature environment providing a light weight design. These TPS design approaches have performed successfully on the Orion first flight test on EFT-1 and are incorporated in the configuration for the next flight test for EM-1. Completion of these two flight tests will certify the TPS for the Orion program for human rated exploration missions and has reduced the development cost to the Orion program. In addition to transitioning the Space Shuttle TPS design configurations to Orion, the supporting manufacturing infrastructure, manufacturing processes, and inspection methods are also incorporated into the Orion assembly operations at KSC. This has avoided significant startup schedule and costs impacts of new capabilities and development of support operations necessary to fabricate, install, inspect, and validate the TPS installations for the Orion spacecraft. The Thermal Protection System Facility (TPSF) which supported the Space Shuttle program provides the heat shield Avcoat blocks and the back shell AETB-8 tiles for Orion program. Extending the existing Space Shuttle TPS operations at KSC provides onsite support to the Orion spacecraft assembly operations. A significant benefit to the Orion program is the transition of the Space Shuttle technician work force at KSC. This highly skilled workforce was able to transition to the Orion program and immediately support the TPS installation operations. They brought with them the human rated manufacturing and assembly operations culture that was critical to the Space Shuttle success avoiding the retraining cost and schedule impacts of a new workforce to Orion. The technician skills certification program from the Space Shuttle was found to be compatible with the Lockheed Martin technician certification programs enabling a seamless training process utilizing process similarity avoiding the cost of retraining the work force to Orion standards. The existing workforce is certificated for multiple processes enabling reassignment of technicians to other tasks in the Orion AI&P operations reducing the overall touch labor manpower requirements. Additional benefits of using the Space Shuttle workforce is the incorporation of the lessons learned from Space Shuttle processes to improve the Orion TPS processes. This has resulted in a continuous evolution of TPS processes to improve the producibility and reduce the program cost for the TPS for the Orion program. Transitioning the Apollo and Space Shuttle TPS designs, processes, and technician workforce has been instrumental in enabling Orion to successfully meet the program challenges for NASA's exploration missions of the future.

Stewart, Michael↗
NASA NTRS2011

Demonstration/Validation of Environmentally-Preferable Coatings for Launch Facilities

Kennedy Space Center (KSC) is responsible for a number of facilities/structures with metallic structural and non-structural components in a highly corrosive environment. Metals require periodic maintenance activity to guard against the insidious effects of corrosion and thus ensure that structures meet or exceed design or performance life. The standard practice for protecting metallic substrates in atmospheric environments is the application of an applied coating system. Applied coating systems work via a variety of methods (barrier, galvanic and/or inhibitor) and adhere to the substrate through a combination of chemical and physical bonds. Maintenance at KSC and other NASA Centers is governed by NASA-STD-50088 (Protective Coating of Carbon Steel, Stainless Steel, and Aluminum on Launch Structures, Facilities, and Ground Support Equipment) which establishes practices for the protective coating of ground support equipment and related facilities used by or for NASA programs and projects. The Standard is for the design of non-flight hardware used to support the operations of receiving, transportation, handling, assembly, inspection, test, checkout, service, and launch of space vehicles and payloads at NASA launch, landing, or retrieval sites. These criteria and practices contained within the Standard may be used for items used at the manufacturing, development, and test sites upstream of the launch, landing, or retrieval sites. The objective of this effort is to demonstrate and validate environmentally-preferable alternatives in accordance with NASA-STD-50088 and KSC requirements which can then be added to the Approved Products List. This Test Protocol contains the critical requirements and tests necessary to qualify alternatives for structural steel applications. These tests were derived from engineering, performance, and operational impact (supportability) requirements defined by a consensus of KSC participants. A Test Report will document the results of the testing as well as any test modifications made during the execution of the testing. Users of this Test Protocol should check the project's Test Report for additional test details or minor modifications that may have been necessary in the execution of the testing. The technical stakeholders will have agreed upon test procedures modifications documented in the Test Report.

Lewis, Pattie↗
NASA NTRS1992

Vehicle health management technology needs

Background material on vehicle health management (VHM) and health monitoring/control is presented. VHM benefits are described and a list of VHM technology needs that should be pursued is presented. The NASA funding process as it impacts VHM technology funding is touched upon, and the VHM architecture guidelines for generic launch vehicles are described. An example of a good VHM architecture, design, and operational philosophy as it was conceptualized for the National Launch System program is presented. Consideration is given to the Strategic Avionics Technology Working Group's role in VHM, earth-to-orbit, and space vehicle avionics technology development considerations, and some actual examples of VHM benefits for checkout are given.

Hammond, Walter E.↗
NASA NTRS1997

Real-Time Sensor Validation System Developed for Reusable Launch Vehicle Testbed

A real-time system for validating sensor health has been developed for the reusable launch vehicle (RLV) program. This system, which is part of the propulsion checkout and control system (PCCS), was designed for use in an integrated propulsion technology demonstrator testbed built by Rockwell International and located at the NASA Marshall Space Flight Center. Work on the sensor health validation system, a result of an industry-NASA partnership, was completed at the NASA Lewis Research Center, then delivered to Marshall for integration and testing. The sensor validation software performs three basic functions: it identifies failed sensors, it provides reconstructed signals for failed sensors, and it identifies off-nominal system transient behavior that cannot be attributed to a failed sensor. The code is initiated by host software before the start of a propulsion system test, and it is called by the host program every control cycle. The output is posted to global memory for use by other PCCS modules. Output includes a list indicating the status of each sensor (i.e., failed, healthy, or reconstructed) and a list of features that are not due to a sensor failure. If a sensor failure is found, the system modifies that sensor's data array by substituting a reconstructed signal, when possible, for use by other PCCS modules.

Jankovsky, Amy L.↗
NASA NTRS1986

Orbital transfer vehicle launch operations study. Volume 2: Detailed summary

A series of Operational Design Drivers were identified. Several of these could have significant impact(s) on program costs. These recommendations, for example, include such items as: complete factory assembly and checkout prior to shipment to the ground launch site to make significant reductions in time required at the launch site as well as overall manpower required to do this work; minimize use of nonstandard equipment when orbiter provided equipment is available; and require commonality (or interchangeability) of subsystem equipment elements that are common to the space station, Orbit Maneuvering Vehicles, and/or Orbit Transfer Vehicles. Several additional items were identified that will require a significant amount of management attention (and direction) to resolve. Key elements of the space based processing plans are discussed.

Source record↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

NASA’s Space Launch System: Progress Toward Launch

The Space Launch System (SLS), NASA’s cornerstone launch capability for a new generation of deep space exploration, has begun assembly at Kennedy Space Center (KSC) in preparation for launch in 2021. SLS will provide an unparalleled launch capability for human and robotic deep space exploration missions. Its proven propulsion system, upgrade path to more powerful vehicles, and high-volume payload fairings make it the foundation for ambitious and demanding as part of the Artemis program. Artemis is NASA’s 21st-century plan to put boots on the Moon and to perform sustainable, long-term science in deep space, with eyes toward sending explorers to Mars. The initial SLS vehicle to fly, Block 1 in the crew configuration – with the new Orion spacecraft – is scheduled to lift off from revitalized launch facilities at KSC in 2021 for an uncrewed test flight known as Artemis I. Manufacturing is complete on the vehicle and all elements have been delivered to the Exploration Ground Systems (EGS) Program, except the core stage. The program’s all-new development, the core stage is currently in the midst of a “Green Run” test campaign at Stennis Space Center (SSC). Eight progressively more challenging tests in the Green Run series will culminate in a hot-fire of four flight-proven liquid hydrogen/liquid oxygen (LH2/LOX) RS25 engines. Following the Green Run hotfiring, the core stage will ship to KSC. Already at KSC, aft sections of the fivesegment solid rocket boosters are being assembled. Previously delivered elements, including the upper stage, are undergoing final checkouts in preparation for stacking. An exciting 2021 will include such milestones as stacking SLS and Orion in KSC’s Vehicle Assembly Building (VAB), modal testing, roll out to Launch Pad 39B, Wet Dress Rehearsal (WDR), and launch. Teams across the country are preparing for launch by finalizing procedures, defining launch constraints and flight rules, training console operators, performing simulations, and more. With the SLS Block 1 vehicle for Artemis I nearing integration and launch, the second Block 1 vehicle in the crew configuration, which will carry astronauts on an Artemis II hybrid lunar flyby mission, has several elements manufactured. In fact, the solid rocket motor segments and RS-25 engines are complete. Those program elements are processing hardware for the third flight and working toward manufacturing the second SLS variant to fly, Block 1B, which will onramp a powerful new upper stage, the Exploration Upper Stage (EUS).

John Honeycutt↗
NASA NTRS1973

The Launch Processing System for Space Shuttle.

In order to reduce costs and accelerate vehicle turnaround, a single automated system will be developed to support shuttle launch site operations, replacing a multiplicity of systems used in previous programs. The Launch Processing System will provide real-time control, data analysis, and information display for the checkout, servicing, launch, landing, and refurbishment of the launch vehicles, payloads, and all ground support systems. It will also provide real-time and historical data retrieval for management and sustaining engineering (test records and procedures, logistics, configuration control, scheduling, etc.).

Springer, D. A.↗
NASA NTRS2019

Orion Heat Shield Manufacturing Producibility Improvements for the EM-1 Flight Test Program

This paper describes how the Orion program is incorporating improvements in the heat shield design and manufacturing processes reducing programmatic risk and ensuring crew safety in support of NASA’s Exploration Missions. The Orion program successfully completed the EFT-1 flight test in 2014 and is currently developing the EM-1 spacecraft to meet the test objectives of an orbital mission to the moon and return to earth in 2019. Lessons learned from the EFT-1 manufacturing and flight test experience are being incorporated into a wide variety of vehicle systems and manufacturing processes to reduce risk to the Orion missions and flight crew. A critical contributor to crew safety is the heat shield that protects the crew capsule during re-entry through the earth’s atmosphere for return from deep space. The first flight test vehicle, EFT-1, was manufactured and tested in the Neil Armstrong Operations and Checkout (O&C) facility at KSC to demonstrate early risk reduction including the functionality of the Thermal Protection Systems (TPS) for capsule safe return to earth. The approach for the EFT-1 heat shield utilized a low risk approach using Apollo heritage design and manufacturing processes using an Avcoat TPS ablator with a honeycomb substrate to provide a one piece heat shield to meet the mission re-entry heating environments. The manufacturing processes used honeycomb cell injection guns which were redeveloped from the Apollo Lunar Program processes to build the EFT-1 heat shield. The completed heat shield was transported across the country by aircraft to the O&C at KSC for installation onto the capsule. The EFT-1 heat shield successfully performed its mission and experienced ~80% of the re-entry velocity (50% heating rate) for a lunar return for an Exploration Mission. The second flight test vehicle is the EM-1 mission which will have additional flight systems installed to fly to the moon and return. Heat shield design and producibility improvements have been incorporated in the EM-1 vehicle to meet deep space mission and programmatic requirements. The design continues to use the Avcoat material, but in a “block” configuration to enable improvements in the application processes as well as additional improvements in the carrier structure design and manufacturing operations. Incorporating flight test results and producibility improvements from EFT-1 for the heat shield system design and processes have improved the thermal protection capability, improved the producibility, and cost for EM-1 flight test.

Producibility↗
NASA NTRS1971

Space shuttle program. Expendable second stage reusable space shuttle booster. Volume 2: Technical summary. Book 2: Expendable second stage vehicle definition

A definition of the expendable second stage for use with the reusable space shuttle booster is presented. The subjects discussed are: (1) expendable second stage design, (2) structural subsystem, (3) propulsion subsystem, (4) avionics subsystems, (5) recovery and deorbit subsystem, and (6) expendable second stage vehicle installation, assembly, and checkout.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS2010

Analysis of Possible Explosions at Kennedy Space Center Due to Spontaneous Ignition of Hypergolic Propellants

NASA's Constellation Program plan currently calls for the replacement of the Space Shuttle with the ARES I & V spacecraft and booster vehicles to send astronauts to the moon and beyond. Part of the ARES spacecraft is the Orion Crew Exploration Vehicle (CEV), which includes the Crew Module (CM) and Service Module (SM). The Orion CM's main propulsion system and supplies are provided by the SM. The SM is to be processed off line and moved to the Vehicle Assembly Building (V AB) for stacking to the first stage booster motors prior to ARES move to the launch pad. The new Constellation Program philosophy to process in this manner has created a major task for the KSC infrastructure in that conventional QD calculations are no longer viable because of the location of surrounding facilities near the VAB and the Multi Purpose Processing Facility (MPPF), where the SM will be serviced with nearly 18,000 pounds of hypergolic propellants. The Multi-Payload Processing Facility (MPPF) complex, constructed by NASA in 1994, is located just off E Avenue south of the Operations and Checkout (O&C) building in the Kennedy Space Center industrial area. The MPPF includes a high bay and a low bay. The MPPF high bay is 40.2 m (132 ft) long x 18.9 m (60 ft) wide with a ceiling height of 18.9 m (62 ft). The low bay is a 10.4 m (34 ft) long x 10.4 m (34 ft) wide processing area and has a ceiling height of6.1 m (20 ft). The MPPF is currently used to process non-hazardous payloads. Engineering Analysis Inc. (EAI), under contract with ASRC Aerospace, Inc. in conjunction with the Explosive Safety Office, NASA, Kennedy Space Center (KSC), has carried out an analysis of the effects of explosions at KSC in or near various facilities produced by the spontaneous ignition ofhypergolic fuel stored in the CEV SM. The facilities considered included (1) Vehicle Assembly Building (VAB) (2) Multi-Payload Processing Facility (MPPF) (3) Canister Rotation Facility (CRF) Subsequent discussion deals with the MPPF analysis. Figure 1 provides a view of the MPPF from the northwest. An interior view ofthe facility is shown in Figure 2. The study was concerned with both blast hazards and hazardous fragments which exceed existing safety standards, as described in Section 2.0. The analysis included both blast and fragmentation effects and was divided into three parts as follows: (1) blast (2) primary fragmentation (3) secondary fragmentation Blast effects are summarized in Section 3.0, primary fragmentation in Section 4.0, and secondary fragmentation (internal and external) in Section 5.0. Conclusions are provided in Section 6.0, while references cited are included in Section 7.0. A more detailed description of the entire study is available in a separate document.

Brown, Stephen↗
NASA NTRS1986

Space station utilization and commonality

Several potential ways of utilizing the space station, including utilization of learning experiences (such as operations), utilization of specific elements of hardware which can be largely common between the SS and Mars programs, and utilization of the on-orbit SS for transportation node functions were identified and discussed. The probability of using the SS in all of these areas seems very good. Three different ways are discussed of utilizing the then existing Low Earth Orbit (LEO) SS for operational support during assembly and checkout of the Mars Space Vehicle (SV): attaching the SV to the SS; allowing the SV to co-orbit near the SS; and a hybrid of the first 2 ways. Discussion of each of these approaches is provided, and the conclusion is reached that either the co-orbiting or hybrid approach might be preferable. Artists' conception of the modes are provided, and sketches of an assembly system concept (truss structure and subsystems derivable from the SS) which could be used for co-orbiting on-orbit assembly support are provided.

Butler, John↗
NASA NTRS1992

National Launch System KSC facilities and operations

The current planning for the launch site ground operations and facilities required at the Kennedy Space Center to accommodate the National Launch System (NLS) are described. Special consideration is given to the program activities associated with reducing costs for ground operations and with the ground operations vehicle processing scenarios for launching the NLS vehicles from KSC. The KSC facilities described include the Payload Encapsulation Facility, the Mobile Launcher Platform, and the Cargo Transfer Vehicle Checkout Facility. Attention is also given to the modifications of existing facilities required to accommodate the NLS facilities and the transportation and handling equipment.

Evans, R. T., Jr.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

An Intern Experience with NASA’s Artemis Program

“3...2...1...Go For Launch”. Nasa’s Kennedy Space Center is projected to launch the first mission of theArtemis Program by the end of this year, 2021. I have had the opportunity to contribute directly to this mission through my internship with their Engineering organization from January to August of 2021.Within their Engineering organization, I am an intern for the Avionics branch. Throughout this experience I have completed two projects with one project still in progress. These projects allowed me to work directly with the Orion vehicle’s software and hardware power ups, checkouts, and tests. I became familiarized with the engineering concepts that allowed this advanced technology to perform as intended.In addition, I became acquainted with the operations and tasks that are completed during a LaunchCountdown, both at a detailed level as well as a higher managerial level. Lastly, I worked directly with the software algorithm that detects and responds to onboard faults and failures. I have analyzed and made conclusions based on data and documentation, allowing my team to benefit from a condensed, centralized informational file. In addition to my technical experience, I have learned a significant amount about how the Kennedy Space Center operates, it’s history, and the history of the agency. The education I received from the Engineering department at Texas A&M University not only allowed me to obtain this internship, but provided me with the required background in computer and electrical engineering principles to be successful in this organization.

Sarah Bianco↗
NASA NTRS1974

Skylab checkout and launch operations at KSC

Checkout and launch operations for the four Skylab flights, plus checkout for a fifth vehicle on rescue status during the last mission, were complex and demanding. Preparations began well before the launch of the last Apollo moon mission in December 1972, and had to be performed without interference with the ongoing program. Three major new flight modules were used in Skylab, each of which imposed specific requirements on Kennedy Space Center. A major facilities modification program resulted in the ability to launch the three Saturn IB Skylab vehicles from Saturn V facilities. This provided large cost savings, but imposed the usual problems caused by first-time use of a new system.

Moser, R. E.↗
NASA NTRS2019

NASA’s Space Launch System Progress Report

NASA’s Space Launch System (SLS) continues to achieve assembly and testing milestones on its way to the launch of the first human-rated spacecraft to the Moon since the Apollo Program. Major flight hardware for Artemis I (see Fig. 1), formerly known as Exploration Mission 1 (EM-1), is complete, including the liquid and solid main propulsion systems. The Artemis I core stage is fully assembled and engine integration and checkout is underway. Structural testing on the core stage engine and payload sections and intertank are complete. Liquid hydrogen tank structural testing is under way, and liquid oxygen tank structural testing will begin in fall 2019. Major structural components for the second and third flights are also in production; hardware has been fabricated for each element of the Artemis II vehicle. SLS and the Orion crew vehicle along with the Exploration Ground Systems (EGS) launch facilities at Kennedy Space Center are critical to the nation’s plans to return to the Moon to stay in a measured, sustainable fashion. Lunar exploration will expand our understanding of Earth’s formation, serve as a proving ground for technologies for pushing deeper into the solar system, and inspire a new generation. This paper will discuss details of 2018-2019 progress and the work ahead to ready SLS for launch.

Honeycutt, John↗