Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Lunar Thermal Environments”

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.

581 records · Page 33

NextSTEP Appendix A Modular ECLSS Effort Lessons Learned

NASA’s Artemis program provides the first steps for earth-independent exploration starting with crewed habitats in cislunar space and progressing toward crewed landings on the lunar surface that will prepare systems and crews for the exploration of Mars. The Next Space Technology for Exploration Partnerships (NextSTEP) is a public-private partnership model that facilitates commercial development of deep space exploration capabilities in support of more extensive human spaceflight missions in and beyond cislunar space. NASA issued the original NextSTEP Broad Agency Announcement (BAA) to U.S. industry in late 2014 and issued the second BAA (NextSTEP-2) in April 2016. The first appendix under NextSTEP-2, Appendix A, focused on developing deep space habitation concepts, engineering design and development, and risk reduction efforts leading to a habitation capability in cislunar space. NASA solicited concepts to develop and refine the evolvable, modular architecture, functional allocation options, standards, and common interfaces required to enable interoperability of the aggregate system to provide long duration deep space transit habitation, specifically enhancements and testing of deep space Environmental Control and Life Support Systems (ECLSS). Collins Aerospace, formerly UTC Aerospace Systems (UTAS), was awarded a Phase 1 and subsequent Phase 2 contract to “develop concepts that group ECLS systems into logical modules maximizing the use of common components and the development of unique methods and design concepts that support in-flight maintenance and repair for future exploration systems.” This paper summarizes the work accomplished under this effort, the lessons that can be applied to development of forthcoming habitation elements, and the gaps remaining to achieve a more resilient, maintainable, repairable and adaptable system capable of installation on a wide variety of habitat platforms. A primary accomplishment of this effort is the development and maturation of a modular palletization concept to enable standard rack interfaces, post-launch outfitting, and decoupling of structural supports that withstand launch environments from those needed for lower on-orbit loads in order to reduce installed mass and repurposing of panels within the habitat. In the course of the effort, Collins assessed numerous architecture trades, including the use of condensing and noncondensing heat exchangers, the ability of modular units to accommodate various habitat volumes and thermal loading, and the most appropriate order of and timing of delivery of regenerative ECLSS hardware to orbital habitats. In addition to the modularity of hardware elements, Collins developed software approaches for distributed/modular command, control, and communication systems and innovative Bayesian fault detection and isolation techniques. Finally, the effort explored advanced maintainability and supportability concepts including the definition of maintenance units (MUs) in place of the traditional Orbital Replacement Units (ORUs), increasing parts commonality to reduce the number and type of spare parts, the use of augmented reality to guide crews during maintenance and repair procedures, and how crews would prepare for and recover from long durations of habitat dormancy. Now that the NextSTEP Modular ECLSS effort has come to a close, it’s important to identify the lessons learned and where they can be leveraged to improve NASA’s broader program of ECLSS technology development and demonstration and ultimately how they can increase the performance of future surface and orbital habitats.

NextSTEP↗

NextSTEP Appendix A Modular ECLSS Effort Lessons Learned

NASA’s Artemis program provides the first steps for earth-independent exploration starting with crewed habitats in cislunar space and progressing toward crewed landings on the lunar surface that will prepare systems and crews for the exploration of Mars. The Next Space Technology for Exploration Partnerships (NextSTEP) is a public-private partnership model that facilitates commercial development of deep space exploration capabilities in support of more extensive human spaceflight missions in and beyond cislunar space. NASA issued the original NextSTEP Broad Agency Announcement (BAA) to U.S. industry in late 2014 and issued the second BAA (NextSTEP-2) in April 2016. The first appendix under NextSTEP-2, Appendix A, focused on developing deep space habitation concepts, engineering design and development, and risk reduction efforts leading to a habitation capability in cislunar space. NASA solicited concepts to develop and refine the evolvable, modular architecture, functional allocation options, standards, and common interfaces required to enable interoperability of the aggregate system to provide long duration deep space transit habitation, specifically enhancements and testing of deep space Environmental Control and Life Support Systems (ECLSS). Collins Aerospace, formerly UTC Aerospace Systems (UTAS), was awarded a Phase 1 and subsequent Phase 2 contract to “develop concepts that group ECLS systems into logical modules maximizing the use of common components and the development of unique methods and design concepts that support in-flight maintenance and repair for future exploration systems.” This paper summarizes the work accomplished under this effort, the lessons that can be applied to development of forthcoming habitation elements, and the gaps remaining to achieve a more resilient, maintainable, repairable and adaptable system capable of installation on a wide variety of habitat platforms. A primary accomplishment of this effort is the development and maturation of a modular palletization concept to enable standard rack interfaces, post-launch outfitting, and decoupling of structural supports that withstand launch environments from those needed for lower on-orbit loads in order to reduce installed mass and repurposing of panels within the habitat. In the course of the effort, Collins assessed numerous architecture trades, including the use of condensing and noncondensing heat exchangers, the ability of modular units to accommodate various habitat volumes and thermal loading, and the most appropriate order of and timing of delivery of regenerative ECLSS hardware to orbital habitats. In addition to the modularity of hardware elements, Collins developed software approaches for distributed/modular command, control, and communication systems and innovative Bayesian fault detection and isolation techniques. Finally, the effort explored advanced maintainability and supportability concepts including the definition of maintenance units (MUs) in place of the traditional Orbital Replacement Units (ORUs), increasing parts commonality to reduce the number and type of spare parts, the use of augmented reality to guide crews during maintenance and repair procedures, and how crews would prepare for and recover from long durations of habitat dormancy. Now that the NextSTEP Modular ECLSS effort has come to a close, it’s important to identify the lessons learned and where they can be leveraged to improve NASA’s broader program of ECLSS technology development and demonstration and ultimately how they can increase the performance of future surface and orbital habitats.

NextSTEP↗

Selection and Assessment of Predictions of the Mars Pathfinder Landing Site

The successful landing of the Mars Pathfinder spacecraft on Mars allows the review of the process of selecting the landing site and assessing predictions made for the site based on Viking and Earth-based data. Selection of the landing site for Mars Pathfinder was a two-phase process. The first phase took place from October 1993 to June 1994 and involved: initial identification of engineering constraints, definition of environmental conditions at the site for spacecraft design, and evaluation of the scientific potential of different landing sites. This phase culminated with the first "Mars Pathfinder Landing Site Workshop", held at the Lunar and Planetary Institute in Houston, Texas on April 18-19, 1994, in which suggested approaches and landing sites were solicited from the entire scientific community. A preliminary site was selected by the project for design purposes in June 1994. The second phase took place from July 1994 to March 1996 and involved: developing criteria for evaluating site safety using images and remote sensing data, testing of the spacecraft and landing subsystems (with design improvements) to establish quantitative engineering constraints on landing site characteristics, evaluating all potential landing sites on Mars, and certification of the site by the project. This phase included a second open workshop, "Mars Pathfinder Landing Site Workshop II: Characteristics of the Ares Vallis Region and Field Trips in the Channeled Scabland, Washington" held in Spokane and Moses Lake September 24-30, 1995 and formal acceptance of the site by NASA Headquarters. Engineering constraints on Pathfinder landing sites were developed from the initial design of the spacecraft and the entry, descent and landing scenario. The site must be within 5 degrees of the subsolar latitude at the time of landing (15N for maximum solar power and flexible communications with Earth. It also must be below 0 km elevation to enable enough time for the parachute to bring the lander to the proper terminal velocity for landing. The entire landing ellipse, which is 70 km by 200 km due to navigational, ephemeris and atmospheric uncertainties, must be free of steep slopes, scarps and obvious hazards in Viking orbiter images, have acceptable radar reflectivity, moderate rock abundances and have little or no dust. Scientific considerations of the Mars Pathfinder payload and mission indicate that analyses of "grab bag" samples at the mouths of outflow channels can offer a first order assessment of a variety of rock types on Mars. Highland sites offer the advantage of in situ analysis of ancient rocks on Mars that record crustal differentiation and the nature of the early environment. Dark gray sites offer the potential of analyzing unweathered and unoxidized materials. Following a general assessment of the safety of different sites, a preliminary selection of a "grab bag" site was made. This site, Ares Vallis, is near the mouth of an outflow channel that may contain ancient Noachian terrain, Hesperian ridged plains, and reworked channel materials. All potential landing sites on Mars that met basic safety criteria were analyzed in detail. Sites (100 by 200 km target ellipses) were considered safe if they were below 0 km elevation, were free of obvious hazards (high relief surface features) in high-resolution (< 50 m/pixel) Viking orbiter images and had acceptable reflectivity and roughness at radar wavelengths, high thermal inertia, moderate rock abundance, low red to violet ratio, and low albedo. Only 4 sites on Mars met all the above criteria, which included 1995 opposition 3.5 cm delay-Doppler radar data. Complete data were evaluated for 7 sites and the Viking landing sites for comparison for all the above criteria as well as crater abundance, hill and mesa abundance, slopes over meter to kilometer scales, low altitude winds (from global circulation models and slopes), the size-frequency distribution of large rocks, as well as rover trafficability and science potential. Discussion of potential hazards at Ares Vallis using a variety of data sets (including radar) at a second open workshop, indicated this site cannot be shown to be any more hazardous than the Viking landing sites. Field trips to the Channeled Scabland and the Ephrata Fan, analogs for Ares Vallis and the landing site, respectively, provided valuable insight into possible geologic processes and potential surface characteristics. Three sites met all the data requirements and safety criteria for landing Pathfinder. Ares Vallis was selected by the project because it appeared acceptably safe (although it appeared to have greater rock abundances than other sites, its elevation was likely the best known) and offered the prospect of analyzing a variety of rock types expected to be deposited by catastrophic floods, which would enable addressing first-order scientific questions such as differentiation of the crust, the development of weathering products, and the nature of the early martian environment and its subsequent evolution. The selection was reviewed by an external board at a number of meetings and accepted, and the site was approved by NASA Headquarters. Data gathered by the Pathfinder lander' and rover provides the opportunity to test the predictions made for the site in the selection process based on remote observations from Earth, orbit, and the surface. The discussion below is taken from Golombek et al. to which the reader is referred for a more complete discussion and a complete list of references, which are omitted here for brevity. Many characteristics of the landing site are consistent with its being shaped and deposited by the Ares and Tiu catastrophic floods. The rocky surface is consistent a depositional plain comprising semi-rounded pebbles, cobbles and tabular boulders (some of which appear imbricated and/or inclined in the direction of flow) that appear similar to depositional plains in terrestrial catastrophic floods. The Twin Peaks appear to be streamlined hills in lander images, which is consistent with interpretations of larger hills in Viking orbiter images of the region that suggest the lander is on the flank of a broad, gentle ridge trending northeast from Twin Peaks. This ridge, which is the rise to the north of the lander, is aligned in the downstream direction from the Ares and Tiu Valles floods, and may be a debris tail deposited in the wake of the Twin Peaks. Channels visible throughout the scene may be a result of late stage drainage. As predicted by delay-Doppler radar measurements and tracking results, the average elevation of the center of the site was about the same as Viking Lander I relative to the 6.1 mbar geoid. The Doppler tracking and two-way ranging estimate for the elevation of the spacecraft is only 45 in lower than the Viking I Lander and within 100 in of that expected, which is within the uncertainties of the measurements. After landing, surface pressures and winds (5-10 m/s) were found to be similar to expectations based on Viking data, although temperatures were about 10 K warmer. The temperature profile below 50 km was also roughly 20 K warmer. As a result, predicted densities were 5% higher near the surface and up to 40% lower at 50 km but within the entry, descent and landing design margins. The populations of craters and small hills and the slopes of the hills measured in high-resolution (38 m/pixel) Viking orbiter images and the radar derived slopes of the landing site are all consistent with observations of these properties in the lander images. A rocky surface was expected from Viking Infra-Red Thermal Mapper (IRTM) observations and comparisons with the Viking landing sites. The observed cumulative fraction of area covered by rocks with diameters greater than 3 cm and heights greater than 0.5 in (potentially hazardous to landing) at Ares is similar to that predicted by IRTM observations and models of Viking lander and Earth analog rock size-frequency distributions. The IRTM prediction postulated an effective thermal inertia of 30 (10(exp -3) cgs units - cal/cubic cm/s(exp 0.5)/K) for the rock population, but we obtain a slightly different effective thermal inertia for the actual rock population. The validity of interpretations of radar echoes prior to landing are supported by a simple radar echo model, an estimate of the reflectivity of the soil from its bulk density, and the fraction of area covered by rocks. In the calculations, the soil produces the quasi-specular echo and the rocks produce the diffuse echo. The derived quasispecular cross section is comparable to the cross-sections and reflectivities reported for 3.5-cm wavelength observations. The model yields a diffuse echo that is modestly larger than the polarized diffuse echo reported for 3.5-cm wavelength observations. At 12.5-cm wavelength, similar rock populations at Ares and the Viking I site were expected because the diffuse echoes are comparable, but the large normal reflectivities suggests that bulk densities of the soils at depth are greater than those at the surface. We also obtain a fine-component inertia near 8.4 which agrees with the fine-component inertia of 8.7 (in 10(exp -3) cgs units) estimated from thermal observations from orbit by the IRTM; for this estimate, we used a bulk thermal inertia of 10.4 for the landing site, an effective thermal inertia near 40 (10(exp -3) cgs units) for the rock population, and a graphical representation of Kieffer's model. Color and albedo data for Ares suggested surfaces of materials at Ares Vallis would be relatively dust free or unweathered prior to landing compared with the materials at the Viking landing sites. This suggestion is supported by the abundance of relatively dark-gray rocks at Ares and their relative rarity at the Viking landing sites, where rocks are commonly coated with bright red dust. Finally, the 40 km long Ephrata Fan of the Channeled Scabland in Washington state, which was deposited where c

Golombek, M. P.↗

Space Nuclear Propulsion for Deep Space Science Missions

The use of nuclear thermal propulsion (NTP) 1 and nuclear electric propulsion (NEP) 2 systems on deep space science missions to the outer planets and into the interstellar medium 3 can yield significant spacecraft system and mission performance benefits and improvements relative to the use of conventional chemical propulsion systems. Several recent and ongoing programs are developing the technologies and systems required to realize a near-term deep space nuclear propulsion capability. NTP provides improved propulsion efficiencies compared to chemical propulsion, while also providing substantial thrust. This combination of high thrust and increased specific impulse (I_sp) provides high acceleration and extended thrusting periods, enabling greatly reduced trip-times on certain types of missions compared to various propulsive alternatives. For examples, compared to a baseline mission using chemical propulsion, NTP-powered missions to Jupiter or Uranus could deliver approximately 2.4-3.6 times more payload (in the case of Jupiter, the payload delivery is significantly larger than the Juno spacecraft). In this comparison, the higher end of the payload advantage is obtained when the trip time is held equal for the NTP-powered vehicle and a vehicle using a chemical propulsion departure stage. NTP systems are presently under development by multiple government agencies. NASA’s Space Nuclear Propulsion (SNP) project aims to demonstrate a hydrogen-fed NTP engine at 900 s specific impulse (I_sp) and approximately 10-15 klb_f of thrust. DARPA’s Demonstration Rocket for Agile Cislunar Operations (DRACO) program is targeting a demonstration of an NTP system in the cislunar space between the Earth and the Moon. An appropriately phased development plan that applies the development of the reactor technology for an NTP engine in this performance class and leverages mature, existing liquid rocket component hardware provides a path to a lower cost propulsion system that can be realized on a shorter development schedule. NEP, with high Isp in the 2,000-8,000 s range, can also provide advantages over chemical propulsion, including a much greater payload delivery mass and the flexibility for planners to trade between delivered mass and a wider window of mission trajectory options. Electric propulsion (EP) systems have demonstrated great utility, performing notably on the Dawn mission to enable rendezvous and orbital insertion at two separate bodies, Vesta and Ceres. An NEP-powered vehicle would have a similar capability to visit multiple bodies, loitering at each before moving to the next. A 10 kW_e NEP system provides a power- rich environment on the spacecraft that is simply not possible using present radioisotope power systems, giving mission planners more scientific instrument and communication hardware options. Several programs and projects are presently developing NEP systems and subsystems in the 10 kW_e power range, leveraging past reactor work and recent nuclear power generation risk-reduction demonstration activities such as the Demonstration Using Flattop Fission (DUFF) and the Kilopower Reactor Using Stirling TechnologY (KRUSTY). The goal of the Air Force Research Laboratory’s Joint Energy Technology Supplying On-Orbit Nuclear Power (JETSON) program is an in-space demonstration vehicle that has a 10 kW_e -class fission power source. These past and present efforts can be combined with the ongoing development of 10 kW_e -class electric propulsion systems (notably the NEXT-C ion thruster or the Hall-effect thrusters for Power and Propulsion Element of the Lunar Gateway) to provide a pathway to a low-cost, reliable NEP system for deep space science application.

Kurt A. Polzin↗

Space Nuclear Propulsion for Deep Space Science Missions

The use of nuclear thermal propulsion (NTP) 1 and nuclear electric propulsion (NEP) 2 systems on deep space science missions to the outer planets and into the interstellar medium 3 can yield significant spacecraft system and mission performance benefits and improvements relative to the use of conventional chemical propulsion systems. Several recent and ongoing programs are developing the technologies and systems required to realize a near-term deep space nuclear propulsion capability. NTP provides improved propulsion efficiencies compared to chemical propulsion, while also providing substantial thrust. This combination of high thrust and increased specific impulse (I_sp) provides high acceleration and extended thrusting periods, enabling greatly reduced trip-times on certain types of missions compared to various propulsive alternatives. For examples, compared to a baseline mission using chemical propulsion, NTP-powered missions to Jupiter or Uranus could deliver approximately 2.4-3.6 times more payload (in the case of Jupiter, the payload delivery is significantly larger than the Juno spacecraft). In this comparison, the higher end of the payload advantage is obtained when the trip time is held equal for the NTP-powered vehicle and a vehicle using a chemical propulsion departure stage. NTP systems are presently under development by multiple government agencies. NASA’s Space Nuclear Propulsion (SNP) project aims to demonstrate a hydrogen-fed NTP engine at 900 s specific impulse (I_sp) and approximately 10-15 klb_f of thrust. DARPA’s Demonstration Rocket for Agile Cislunar Operations (DRACO) program is targeting a demonstration of an NTP system in the cislunar space between the Earth and the Moon. An appropriately phased development plan that applies the development of the reactor technology for an NTP engine in this performance class and leverages mature, existing liquid rocket component hardware provides a path to a lower cost propulsion system that can be realized on a shorter development schedule. NEP, with high Isp in the 2,000-8,000 s range, can also provide advantages over chemical propulsion, including a much greater payload delivery mass and the flexibility for planners to trade between delivered mass and a wider window of mission trajectory options. Electric propulsion (EP) systems have demonstrated great utility, performing notably on the Dawn mission to enable rendezvous and orbital insertion at two separate bodies, Vesta and Ceres. An NEP-powered vehicle would have a similar capability to visit multiple bodies, loitering at each before moving to the next. A 10 kW_e NEP system provides a power- rich environment on the spacecraft that is simply not possible using present radioisotope power systems, giving mission planners more scientific instrument and communication hardware options. Several programs and projects are presently developing NEP systems and subsystems in the 10 kW_e power range, leveraging past reactor work and recent nuclear power generation risk-reduction demonstration activities such as the Demonstration Using Flattop Fission (DUFF) and the Kilopower Reactor Using Stirling TechnologY (KRUSTY). The goal of the Air Force Research Laboratory’s Joint Energy Technology Supplying On-Orbit Nuclear Power (JETSON) program is an in-space demonstration vehicle that has a 10 kW_e -class fission power source. These past and present efforts can be combined with the ongoing development of 10 kW_e -class electric propulsion systems (notably the NEXT-C ion thruster or the Hall-effect thrusters for Power and Propulsion Element of the Lunar Gateway) to provide a pathway to a low-cost, reliable NEP system for deep space science application.

Kurt A. Polzin↗