SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Liquid propellant rocket engine”

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.

At least 631 records · Page 35

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Establishing the Feasibility of the Centrifugal Nuclear Thermal Rocket

The Centrifugal Nuclear Thermal Rocket (CNTR) is a Nuclear Thermal Propulsion (NTP) concept designed to heat propellant directly by the reactor fuel. The primary difference between the CNTR concept and traditional NTP systems is that rather than using traditional solid fuel elements, the CNTR uses liquid fuel with the liquid contained in rotating cylinders by centrifugal force. If the concept can be successfully realized, the CNTR would have a high specific impulse (~1800 s) at high thrust, which may enable viable near-term human Mars exploration by reducing round-trip times to ~420 days. The CNTR could also use storable propellants such as ammonia, methane, or hydrazine at an Isp of ~900 s, enabling long-term in-space storage of a dormant system. Significant engineering challenges must be addressed to establish the technical viability of the CNTR, and the plan for addressing these engineering challenges is the subject of this paper.

Dale Thomas↗

NASA NTRS1988

Radiation effect on rocket engine performance

The effects of radiation on the performance of modern rocket propulsion systems operating at high pressure and temperature were recognized as a key issue in the design and operation of various liquid rocket engines of the current and future generations. Critical problem areas of radiation coupled with combustion of bipropellants are assessed and accounted for in the formulation of a universal scaling law incorporated with a radiation-enhanced vaporization combustion model. Numerical algorithms are developed and the pertaining data of the Variable Thrust Engine (VTE) and Space Shuttle Main Engine (SSME) are used to conduct parametric sensitivity studies to predict the principal intercoupling effects of radiation. The analysis reveals that low enthalpy engines, such as the VTE, are vulnerable to a substantial performance set back by the radiative loss, whereas the performance of high enthalpy engines such as the SSME, are hardly affected over a broad range of engine operation. Additionally, combustion enhancement by the radiative heating of the propellant has a significant impact in those propellants with high absorptivity. Finally, the areas of research related with radiation phenomena in bipropellant engines are identified.

Chiu, Huei-Huang↗

NASA NTRS2016

NASA's Space Launch System: Developing the World's Most Powerful Solid Booster

NASA's Journey to Mars has begun. Indicative of that challenge, this will be a multi-decadal effort requiring the development of technology, operational capability, and experience. The first steps are under way with more than 15 years of continuous human operations aboard the International Space Station (ISS) and development of commercial cargo and crew transportation capabilities. NASA is making progress on the transportation required for deep space exploration - the Orion crew spacecraft and the Space Launch System (SLS) heavy-lift rocket that will launch Orion and large components such as in-space stages, habitat modules, landers, and other hardware necessary for deep-space operations. SLS is a key enabling capability and is designed to evolve with mission requirements. The initial configuration of SLS - Block 1 - will be capable of launching more than 70 metric tons (t) of payload into low Earth orbit, greater mass than any other launch vehicle in existence. By enhancing the propulsion elements and larger payload fairings, future SLS variants will launch 130 t into space, an unprecedented capability that simplifies hardware design and in-space operations, reduces travel times, and enhances the odds of mission success. SLS will be powered by four liquid fuel RS-25 engines and two solid propellant five-segment boosters, both based on space shuttle technologies. This paper will focus on development of the booster, which will provide more than 75 percent of total vehicle thrust at liftoff. Each booster is more than 17 stories tall, 3.6 meters (m) in diameter and weighs 725,000 kilograms (kg). While the SLS booster appears similar to the shuttle booster, it incorporates several changes. The additional propellant segment provides additional booster performance. Parachutes and other hardware associated with recovery operations have been deleted and the booster designated as expendable for affordability reasons. The new motor incorporates new avionics, new propellant grain, asbestos-free case insulation, a redesigned nozzle, streamlined manufacturing processes, and new inspection techniques. New materials and processes provide improved performance, safety, and affordability but also have led to challenges for the government/industry development team. The team completed its first full-size qualification motor test firing in early 2015. The second is scheduled for mid-2016. This paper will discuss booster accomplishments to date, as well as challenges and milestones ahead.

Priskos, Alex↗

NASA NTRS1990

Robotic lunar surface operations: Engineering analysis for the design, emplacement, checkout and performance of robotic lunar surface systems

The assembly, emplacement, checkout, operation, and maintenance of equipment on planetary surfaces are all part of expanding human presence out into the solar system. A single point design, a reference scenario, is presented for lunar base operations. An initial base, barely more than an output, which starts from nothing but then quickly grows to sustain people and produce rocket propellant. The study blended three efforts: conceptual design of all required surface systems; assessments of contemporary developments in robotics; and quantitative analyses of machine and human tasks, delivery and work schedules, and equipment reliability. What emerged was a new, integrated understanding of hot to make a lunar base happen. The overall goal of the concept developed was to maximize return, while minimizing cost and risk. The base concept uses solar power. Its primary industry is the production of liquid oxygen for propellant, which it extracts from native lunar regolith. Production supports four lander flights per year, and shuts down during the lunar nighttime while maintenance is performed.

Woodcock, Gordon R.↗

NASA NTRS2001

Chemical Engineering in Space

The aerospace industry has long been perceived as the domain of both physicists and mechanical engineers. This perception has endured even though the primary method of providing the thrust necessary to launch a rocket into space is chemical in nature. The chemical engineering and chemistry personnel behind the systems that provide access to space have labored in the shadows of the physicists and mechanical engineers. As exploration into the cosmos moves farther away from Earth, there is a very distinct need for new chemical processes to help provide the means for advanced space exploration. The state of the art in launch systems uses chemical propulsion systems, primarily liquid hydrogen and liquid oxygen, to provide the energy necessary to achieve orbit. As we move away from Earth, there are additional options for propulsion. Unfortunately, few of these options can compare to the speed or ease of use provided by the chemical propulsion agents. It is with great care and significant cost that gaseous compounds such as hydrogen and oxygen are liquefied and become dense enough to use for rocket fuel. These low-temperature liquids fall within a specialty area known as cryogenics. Cryogenics, the science and art of producing cold operating conditions for use on Earth, in orbit, or on some other nonterrestrial body, has become increasingly important to our ability to travel within our solar system. The production of cryogenic fuels and the long-term storage of these fluids are necessary for travel. As our explorations move farther away from Earth, we need to address how to produce the necessary fuels to make a round-trip. The cost and the size of these expeditions are extreme at best. If we take everything necessary for our survival for the round-trip, we invalidate any chance of travel in the near future. As with the early explorers on Earth, we need to harvest much of our energy and our life support from the celestial bodies. The in situ production of these energy sources is paramount to success. We are currently working on several processes to produce the propellants that would allow us to visit and explore the surface of Mars. The capabilities currently at our disposal for launching and delivering equipment to another planet or satellite dictate that the size and scale of any hardware must be extremely small. The miniaturization of the processes needed to prepare the in situ propellants and life support commodities is a real challenge. Chemical engineers are faced with the prospect of reproducing an entire production facility in miniature so the complex can be lifted into space and delivered to our destination. Another area that does not normally concern chemical engineers is the extreme physical aspects payloads are subjected to with the launch of a spacecraft. Extreme accelerations followed by the sudden loss of nearly all gravitational forces are well outside normal equipment design conditions. If the equipment cannot survive the overall trip, then it obviously will not be able to yield the needed products upon arrival. These launch constraints must be taken into account. Finally, we must consider both the effectiveness and efficiencies of the processes. A facility located on the Moon or Mars will not have an unlimited supply of power or other ancillary utilities. For a Mars expedition, the available electric power is severely limited. The design of both the processes and the equipment must be considered. With these constraints in mind, only the most efficient designs will be viable. Cryogenics, in situ resource utilization, miniaturization, launchability, and power/process efficiencies are only a few of the areas that chemical engineers provide support and expertise for the exploration of space.

Lobmeyer, Dennis A.↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Overview of the SLS Core Stage Thrust Vector Control System Design

The Space Launch System (SLS) Core Stage (CS) Thrust Vector Control (TVC) consists of four independent hydraulic systems. The SLS CS TVC system is comprised of 8 mechanical feedback Shuttle heritage Type III TVC actuators and four RS-25 engines, each attached to a Shuttle heritage gimbal block/bearing. Each hydraulic system nominally provides hydraulic power to one RS-25 engine and two actuators. Additionally, each system provides redundant control capability to one actuator on each of its neighboring systems. The RS-25 uses hydraulic power to control propellant valves, and the TVC actuators are used to move the engine in the pitch and yaw gimbal planes. The TVC system design leverages hardware from the Space Shuttle program as well as new hardware designed specifically for the Core Stage. The Space Shuttle heritage hardware directly reused on SLS includes the Orbiter TVC hydraulic servo-actuators (with two slight design modifications), the Orbiter hydraulic circulation pumps, the Orbiter gimbal block/bearing, and the Solid Rocket Booster hydraulic pumps. The Solid Rocket Booster APU turbines are powered by hot gas produced by a catalyzed hydrazine decomposition. The SLS Core Auxiliary Power Unit (CAPU) is derived from the Space Shuttle Orbiter Auxiliary Power Unit (APU); on the SLS Core Stage, the CAPU turbine is spun using cold gas tapped-off from the RS-25 to CS liquid hydrogen autogenous pressurization line. The remaining hardware in the TVC system (hydraulic Filter Manifold (FM), hydraulic Supply Accumulator (SA), hydraulic Return Accumulator (RA), Hydraulic Reservoir, Exhaust Gas Heat Exchanger (EGHE)) as well as the avionics providing control and telemetry (TVC Actuator Controller (TAC) and CAPU Controller (CAPUC) are new components developed for SLS. This paper is the first installment in a seven-paper series surveying the design, engineering, test validation, and flight performance of the Core Stage Thrust Vector Control system. In this paper, the overall design architecture of the CS TVC is presented, with a focus on the interfaces between the TVC actuators, the engines, their hydraulic power systems, and the avionics that provide commands from the SLS Vehicle Management (VM) software to effect stable and robust flight control for the integrated SLS launch vehicle.

Thrust Vector Control↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Overview of the SLS Core Stage Thrust Vector Control System Design

Thrust Vector Control↗

NASA NTRS2016

Development of Detonation Modeling Capabilities for Rocket Test Facilities: Hydrogen-Oxygen-Nitrogen Mixtures

The objective of the presented work was to develop validated computational fluid dynamics (CFD) based methodologies for predicting propellant detonations and their associated blast environments. Applications of interest were scenarios relevant to rocket propulsion test and launch facilities. All model development was conducted within the framework of the Loci/CHEM CFD tool due to its reliability and robustness in predicting high-speed combusting flow-fields associated with rocket engines and plumes. During the course of the project, verification and validation studies were completed for hydrogen-fueled detonation phenomena such as shock-induced combustion, confined detonation waves, vapor cloud explosions, and deflagration-to-detonation transition (DDT) processes. The DDT validation cases included predicting flame acceleration mechanisms associated with turbulent flame-jets and flow-obstacles. Excellent comparison between test data and model predictions were observed. The proposed CFD methodology was then successfully applied to model a detonation event that occurred during liquid oxygen/gaseous hydrogen rocket diffuser testing at NASA Stennis Space Center.

Allgood, Daniel C.↗

NASA NTRS1995

Human Lunar Mission Capabilities Using SSTO, ISRU and LOX-Augmented NTR Technologies: A Preliminary Assessment

The feasibility of conducting human missions to the Moon is examined assuming the use of three 'high leverage' technologies: (1) a single-stage-to-orbit (SSTO) launch vehicle, (2) 'in-situ' resource utilization (ISRU)--specifically 'lunar-derived' liquid oxygen (LUNOX), and (3) LOX-augmented nuclear thermal rocket (LANTR) propulsion. Lunar transportation system elements consisting of a LANTR-powered lunar transfer vehicle (LTV) and a chemical propulsion lunar landing/Earth return vehicle (LERV) are configured to fit within the 'compact' dimensions of the SSTO cargo bay (diameter: 4.6 m/length: 9.0 m) while satisfying an initial mass in low Earth orbit (IMLEO) limit of approximately 60 t (3 SSTO launches). Using approximately 8 t of LUNOX to 'reoxidize' the LERV for a 'direct return' flight to Earth reduces its size and mass allowing delivery to LEO on a single 20 t SSTO launch. Similarly, the LANTR engine's ability to operate at any oxygen/ hydrogen mixture ratio from 0 to 7 with high specific impulse (approximately 940 to 515 s) is exploited to reduce hydrogen tank volume, thereby improving packaging of the LANTR LTV's 'propulsion' and 'propellant modules'. Expendable and reusable, piloted and cargo missions and vehicle designs are presented along with estimates of LUNOX production required to support the different mission modes. Concluding remarks address the issue of lunar transportation system costs from the launch vehicle perspective.

Borowski, Stanley K.↗

NASA NTRS1996

Flight control augmentation for AFT CG launch vehicles

The Space Shuttle was only the first step in achieving routine access to space. Recently, the NASA Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) has been studying a whole spectrum of new launch vehicles (L/V's) for space transportation. Some of these could transport components of the Space Station to orbit, and some could take us to Mars and beyond to boldly expand our frontiers of knowledge. In all our future launch vehicle (L/V) designs, decreasing the structural weight will always be of great concern. This is tantamount to increased payload capability, which in turn means reduced cost-per-pound to orbit. One very significant increase in payload capability has been defined. In a L/V recently studied at MSFC it has been shown that a sizable weight savings can be realized by a rearrangement of the internal propellant tanks. Studies have been conducted both at MSFC and at Martin Marietta Corporation, maker of the Space Shuttle External Tank (ET) which show that a very substantial weight can be saved by inverting the relative positions of the liquid hydrogen (LH2) and the liquid oxygen (LOX) propellant tanks in a particular L/V studied. As the vehicle sits on the launch pad, in the conventional configuration the heavier LOX tank is located on top of the lighter LH2. This requires a heavy structural member between the two tanks to prevent the lighter LH2 tank from being crushed. This configuration also requires large, long, and even drag producing LOX feed lines running the length of the vehicle on the exterior fuselage. If the relative position of the propellant tanks is inverted, both the heavy structural separation member and the long LOX feed lines could be deleted. While the structures community at MSFC was elated with this finding, the LOX tank aft configuration gave the vehicle an aft center-of-gravity (cg) location which surfaced controllability concerns. In the conventional configuration the L/V is controlled in the ascent trajectory by the gimballing of its rocket engines. Studies have been conducted at MSFC which showed that the resulting aft cg configured L/V would not be adequately controllable with the engine gimballing alone.

Barret, Chris↗

NASA NTRS2002

Vehicle and Mission Design Options for the Human Exploration of Mars/Phobos Using "Bimodal" NTR and LANTR Propulsion

The nuclear thermal rocket (NTR) is one of the leading propulsion options for future human missions to Mars because of its high specific impulse (lsp~850-1000 s) capability and its attractive engine thrust-to-weight ratio (~3-10). To stay within the available mass and payload volume limits of a “Magnum” heavy lift vehicle, a high performance propulsion system is required for trans-Mars injection (TMI). An expendable TMI stage, powered by three 15 thousand pounds force (klbf) NTR engines is currently under consideration by NASA for its Design Reference Mission (DRM). However, because of the miniscule burnup of enriched uranium-235 during the Earth departure phase (~10 grams out of 33 kilograms in each NTR core), disposal of the TMI stage and its engines after a single use is a costly and inefficient use of this high performance stage. By reconfiguring the engines for both propulsive thrust and modest power generation (referred to as “bimodal” operation), a robust, multiple burn, “power-rich” stage with propulsive Mars capture and reuse capability is possible. A family of modular “bimodal” NTR (BNTR) vehicles are described which utilize a common “core” stage powered by three 15 klbf BNTRs that produce 50 kWe of total electrical power for crew life support, an active refrigeration / reliquification system for long term, zero-boiloff liquid hydrogen (LH 2 ) storage, and high data rate communications. An innovative, spine-like “saddle truss” design connects the core stage and payload element and is open underneath to allow supplemental “in-line” propellant tanks and contingency crew consumables to be easily jettisoned to improve vehicle performance. A “modified” DRM using BNTR transfer vehicles requires fewer transportation system elements, reduces IMLEO and mission risk, and simplifies space operations. By taking the next logical step—use of the BNTR for propulsive capture of all payload elements into Mars orbit—the power available in Mars orbit grows to 150 kWe compared to 30 kWe for the DRM. Propulsive capture also eliminates the complex, higher risk aerobraking and capture maneuver which is replaced by a simpler reentry using a standardized, lower mass “aerodescent” shell. The attractiveness of the “all BNTR” option is further increased by the substitution of the lightweight, inflatable “TransHab” module in place of the heavier, hard-shell hab module. Use of TransHab introduces the potential for propulsive recovery and reuse of the BNTR / Earth return vehicle (ERV). It also allows the crew to travel to and from Mars on the same BNTR transfer vehicle thereby cutting the duration of the ERV mission in half—from ~4.7 to 2.5 years. Finally, for difficult Mars options, such as Phobos rendezvous and sample return missions, volume (not mass) constraints limit the performance of the “all LH 2 ” BNTR stage. The use of “LOX-augmented” NTR (LANTR) engines, operating at a modest oxygen-to-hydrogen mixture ratio (MR) of 0.5, helps to increase “bulk” propellant density and total thrust during the TMI burn. On all subsequent burns, the bimodal LANTR engines operate on LH 2 only (MR=0) to maximize vehicle performance while staying within the mass limits of two Magnum launches.

Nuclear thermal rocket↗

NASA NTRS1998

Vehicle and Mission Design Options for the Human Exploration of Mars/Phobos Using "Bimodal" NTR and LANTR Propulsion

The nuclear thermal rocket (NTR) is one of the leading propulsion options for future human missions to Mars because of its high specific impulse (Isp-850-1000 s) capability and its attractive engine thrust-to-weight ratio (approximately equal 3-10). To stay within the available mass and payload volume limits of a "Magnum" heavy lift vehicle, a high performance propulsion system is required for trans-Mars injection (TMI). An expendable TMI stage, powered by three 15 thousand pounds force (klbf) NTR engines is currently under consideration by NASA for its Design Reference Mission (DRM). However, because of the miniscule burnup of enriched uranium-235 during the Earth departure phase (approximately 10 grams out of 33 kilograms in each NTR core), disposal of the TMI stage and its engines after a single use is a costly and inefficient use of this high performance stage. By reconfiguring the engines for both propulsive thrust and modest power generation (referred to as "bimodal" operation), a robust, multiple burn, "power-rich" stage with propulsive Mars capture and reuse capability is possible, A family of modular "bimodal" NTR (BNTR) vehicles are described which utilize a common "core" stage powered by three 15 klbf BNTRs that produce 50 kWe of total electrical power for crew life support, an active refrigeration / reliquification system for long term, "zero-boiloff" liquid hydrogen (LH 2 ) storage, and high data rate communications. An innovative, spine-like "saddle truss" design connects the core stage and payload element and is open underneath to allow supplemental "in-line" propellant tanks and contingency crew consumables to be easily jettisoned to improve vehicle performance. A "modified" DRM using BNTR transfer vehicles requires fewer transportation system elements, reduces IMLEO and mission risk, and simplifies space operations. By taking the next logical step--use of the BNTR for propulsive capture of all payload elements into Mars orbit--the power available in Mars orbit grows to 150 kWe compared to 30 kWe for the DRM. Propulsive capture also eliminates the complex, higher risk aerobraking and capture maneuver which is replaced by a simpler reentry using a standardized, lower mass "aerodescent" shell. The attractiveness of the "all BNTR" option is further increased by the substitution of the lightweight, inflatable "TransHab" module in place of the heavier, hard-shell hab module. Use of TransHab introduces the potential for propulsive recovery and reuse of the BNTR/ERV. It also allows the crew to travel to and from Mar on the same BNTR transfer vehicle thereby cutting the duration of the ERV mission in half--from approximately 4.7 to 2.5 years. Finally, for difficult Mars options, such as Phobos rendezvous and sample return missions, volume (not mass) constraints limit the performance of the "all LH 2 " BNTR stage. The use of "LOX-augmented" NTR (LANTR) engines, operating at a modest oxygen-to-hydrogen mixutre ratio (MR) of 0.5, helps to increase "bulk" propellant density and total thrust during the TMI burn. On all subsequent burns, the bimodal LANTR engines operate on LH 2 only (MR=0) to maximize vehicle performance while staying within the lift capability of two Magnum launches.

Nuclear thermal rocket↗

NASA NTRS1983

A parametric study of thermally augmented O2/H2 rocket enines

An analysis is presented of the performance of a conceptual propulsion system in which liquid hydrogen and liquid oxygen are first vaporized and heated by thermal power from a spacecraft nuclear electric power supply prior to combustion in a rocket engine. Calculations of the specific impulse (I-sp) are presented for a series of O2/H2 oxidizer-to-fuel mixture ratios and reactant pre-heat temperatures (T-aug). It is found that the ratio of the augmentation power to the total engine jet power (P-aug/P-tot) determines the engine thrust for a given P-aug, T-aug, and I-sp. In addition, the performance of an unaugmented O2/H2 and a heated-hydrogen rocket engine were also calculated for the same conditions. Results show that an augmented O2/H2 engine has three to eight times the thrust of a heated H2 engine for a given P-aug. It is concluded that it should be possible to design a high/low thrust propulsion system using a common propellant, with the option of using thermal power from the nuclear electric power supply to augment the low-thrust propulsion system during cruise periods when the reactor's full electric power is not needed.

Frisbee, R. H.↗

NASA NTRS1979

Advanced cooling techniques for high-pressure hydrocarbon-fueled engines

The regenerative cooling limits (maximum chamber pressure) for 02/hydrocarbon gas generator and staged combustion cycle rocket engines over a thrust range of 89,000 N (20,000lbf) to 2,669,000 N (600,000 lbf) for a reusable life of 250 missions were defined. Maximum chamber pressure limits were first determined for the three propellant combinations (O2/CH4, O2/C3H8, and O2/RP-1 without a carbon layer (unenhanced designs). Chamber pressure cooling enhancement limits were then established for seven thermal barriers. The thermal barriers evaluated for these designs were: carbon layer, ceramic coating, graphite liner, film cooling, transpiration cooling, zoned combustion, and a combination of two of the above. All fluid barriers were assessed a 3 percent performance loss. Sensitivity studies were then conducted to determine the influence of cycle life and RP-1 decomposition temperature on chamber pressure limits. Chamber and nozzle design parameters are presented for the unenahanced and enhanced designs. The maximum regenerative cooled chamber pressure limits were attained with the O2/CH4 propellant combination. The O2/RP-1 designs relied on a carbon layer and liquid gas injection chamber contours, short chamber, to be competitive with the other two propellant combinations. This was attributed to the low decomposition temperature of RP-1.

Cook, R. T.↗

NASA NTRS1953

Theoretical performance of liquid ammonia and liquid fluorine as a rocket propellant

Theoretical values of performance parameters for liquid ammonia and liquid fluorine as a rocket propellant were calculated on the assumption of equilibrium composition during the expansion process for a wide range of fuel-oxidant and expansion ratios. The parameters included were specific impulse, combustion chamber temperature, nozzle-exit temperature, equilibrium composition, mean molecular weight, characteristic velocity, coefficient of thrust, ratio of nozzle-exit area to throat area, specific heat at constant pressure, coefficient of viscosity, and coefficient of thermal conductivity. The maximum value of specific impulse was 311.5 pound-seconds per pound for a chamber pressure of 300 pounds per square inch absolute (20.41 atm) and an exit pressure of 1 atmosphere.

COMBUSTION - ROCKET ENGINES↗

NASA NTRS2010

CECE: Expanding the Envelope of Deep Throttling in Liquid Oxygen/Liquid Hydrogen Rocket Engines For NASA Exploration Missions

As one of the first technology development programs awarded by NASA under the Vision for Space Exploration, the Pratt & Whitney Rocketdyne (PWR) Deep Throttling, Common Extensible Cryogenic Engine (CECE) program was selected by NASA in November 2004 to begin technology development and demonstration toward a deep throttling, cryogenic engine supporting ongoing trade studies for NASA s Lunar Lander descent stage. The CECE program leverages the maturity and previous investment of a flight-proven hydrogen/oxygen expander cycle engine, the PWR RL10, to develop technology and demonstrate an unprecedented combination of reliability, safety, durability, throttlability, and restart capabilities in a high-energy cryogenic engine. The testbed selected for the deep throttling demonstration phases of this program was a minimally modified RL10 engine, allowing for maximum current production engine commonality and extensibility with minimum program cost. Three series of demonstrator engine tests, the first in April-May 2006, the second in March-April 2007 and the third in November-December 2008, have demonstrated up to 13:1 throttling (104% to 8% thrust range) of the hydrogen/oxygen expander cycle engine. The first two test series explored a propellant feed system instability ("chug") environment at low throttled power levels. Lessons learned from these two tests were successfully applied to the third test series, resulting in stable operation throughout the 13:1 throttling range. The first three tests have provided an early demonstration of an enabling cryogenic propulsion concept, accumulating over 5,000 seconds of hot fire time over 27 hot fire tests, and have provided invaluable system-level technology data toward design and development risk mitigation for the NASA Altair and future lander propulsion system applications. This paper describes the results obtained from the highly successful third test series as well as the test objectives and early results obtained from a fourth test series conducted over March-May 2010

Giuliano, Victor J.↗

NASA NTRS1972

Space shuttle system program definition. Volume 2: Technical report

The Phase B Extension of the Space Shuttle System Program Definition study was redirected to apply primary effort to consideration of space shuttle systems utilizing either recoverable pressure fed liquids or expendable solid rocket motor boosters. Two orbiter configurations were to be considered, one with a 15x60 foot payload bay with a 65,000 lb, due East, up-payload capability and the other with a 14x45 payload bay with 45,000 lb, of due East, up-payload. Both were to use three SSME engines with 472,000 lb of vacuum thrust each. Parallel and series burn ascent modes were to be considered for the launch configurations of primary interest. A recoverable pump-fed booster is included in the study in a series burn configuration with the 15x60 orbiter. To explore the potential of the swing engine orbiter configuration in the pad abort case, it is included in the study matrix in two launch configurations, a series burn pressure fed BRB and a parallel burn SRM. The resulting matrix of configuration options is shown. The principle objectives of this study are to evaluate the cost and technical differences between the liquid and solid propellant booster systems and to assess the development and operational cost savings available with a smaller orbiter.

Source record↗

NASA NTRS1993

Extended duration lunar lander

Selenium Technologies has been conducting preliminary design work on a manned lunar lander for use in NASA's First Lunar Outpost (FLO) program. The resulting lander is designed to carry a crew of four astronauts to a prepositioned habitat on the lunar surface, remain on the lunar surface for up to 45 days while the crew is living in the habitat, then return the crew to earth via direct reentry and land recovery. Should the need arise, the crew can manually guide the lander to a safe lunar landing site, and live in the lander for up to ten days on the surface. Also, an abort to earth is available during any segment of the mission. The main propulsion system consists of a cluster of four modified Pratt and Whitney RL10 rocket engines that use liquid methane (LCH4) and liquid oxygen (LOX). Four engines are used to provide redundancy and a satisfactory engine out capability. Differences between the new propulsion system and the original system include slightly smaller engine size and lower thrust per engine, although specific impulse remains the same despite the smaller size. Concerns over nozzle ground clearance and engine reliability, as well as more information from Pratt and Whitney, brought about this change. The power system consists of a combination of regenerative fuel cells and solar arrays. While the lander is in flight to or from the moon, or during the lunar night, fuel cells provide all electrical power. During the lunar day, solar arrays are deployed to provide electrical power for the lander as well as electrolyzers, which separate some water back into hydrogen and oxygen for later use by the fuel cells. Total storage requirements for oxygen, hydrogen, and water are 61 kg, 551 kg, and 360 kg, respectively. The lander is a stage-and-a-half design with descent propellant, cargo, and landing gear contained in the descent stage, and the main propulsion system, ascent propellant, and crew module contained in the ascent stage. The primary structure for both stages is a truss, to which all tanks and components are attached. The crew module is a conical shape similar to that of the Apollo Command Module, but significantly larger with a height and maximum diameter of six meters.

Babic, Nikola↗