Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Gas liquid interfaces”

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 91 records · Page 5
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS1971

Liquid transfer demonstration on board Apollo 14 during transearth coast

The transfer of liquid from one container to another in a weightless environment was demonstrated by the crew of Apollo 14. A scale-model liquid-transfer system was used on board the spacecraft during the transearth coast period. The liquid transfer unit consisted of a surface tension baffled tank system containing two baffle designs. Liquid was transferred between tanks with a hand pump operated by the astronaut. The results showed that liquid was efficiently transferred to and from either baffled tank to within two percent of the design value residual liquid without reaching gas ingestion. The liquid-vapor interface in the receiver tank was positioned successfully with the gas located at the vent.

Abdalla, K. L.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Modeling and Simulation of Tank Pressure Control using Zero-Boil Off Active Thermal Control for LOXSAT Technology Demonstration Mission

To-date, research and modeling of cryogenic fluid management technologies (CFM) for spaceflight has been limited to ground tests, short-duration zero-g simulations (e.g. drop towers), and small-scale experiments on-orbit. There has not been a large-scale flight demonstration of a flight-like system. As future NASA missions to take humans further from Earth will require large, in-space cryogenic propulsion vehicles, it is imperative to begin collecting flight data for these systems to accurately model and design future vehicles. To meet this goal, NASA awarded tipping point technology demonstration awards to Eta Space, Lockheed Martin, Space Exploration Technologies (SpaceX), and United Launch Alliance (ULA) to demonstrate on-orbit storage and transfer of cryogenic propellant. For its award, Eta Space is developing LOXSAT-1. It is a small satellite that will be launched on a Rocket Lab Electron rocket. The spacecraft consists of a Rocket Lab Photon spacecraft bus with a primary payload of a spherical liquid oxygen (LOX) storage tank with thermodynamic control systems. The primary objective of the mission is to demonstrate zero-boil-off storage of liquid oxygen. To accomplish this objective, the payload is equipped with an active thermal control system fluid loop that consists of propellant management device (PMD), positive-displacement pump, heat exchanger connected to a cryocooler, and a spray bar mixing injector. When the fluid loop is operating, fluid is drawn from the tank by the PMD and pumped through the heat exchanger, lowering the fluid temperature below the fluid temperature in the tank. This subcooled liquid is then injected back into the tank through the spray bar. The subcooled injected liquid has two effects. If it is sprayed into the ullage space, the injected liquid will form into jets or droplets and exchange heat with the ullage gas. This will cool and condense the gas, reducing the pressure in the tank. Additionally, the liquid that is not sprayed through the ullage, as well as any remaining liquid spray from the ullage, will rejoin the liquid mass of the tank, lowering the bulk temperature of the liquid. These combines effects provide for zero-boil off pressure control by lowering the tank pressure and the liquid saturation pressure simultaneously, ensuring the liquid stays subcooled. To model these complex mechanics and predict the performance of the active thermal control system, NASA is providing Eta Space with 3 parallel models of the tank. The approach of providing 3 different models allows for cross-checking and comparisons between the three to better understand how different modeling assumptions and selection semi-empirical factors affects the modeling result. Additionally, developing 3 models provides three different schemes for numerical simulation, providing confidence that results depict real physical phenomenon and not numerical quirks of the program. Within the tank thermodynamics, there are two primary areas of heat transfer we concern ourselves with: the heat transfer between the ullage space and the droplet spray, and between the ullage space and bulk liquid. For the droplet heat transfer, there are multiple sets of assumptions that can be made and correlations that can be used. Currently, two working models - the TankSIM model and Easy5 model – provide for an overview of the different approaches available. The TankSIM model and Easy5 model use two different models for droplet heating and evaporation that illustrate how the models use different types of mechanisms to arrive at the same answer. For the TankSIM model, droplets are treated as spheres of constant radius. Heat is transferred from the ullage to the droplet and warms the droplet until it reaches saturation, then the droplet begins evaporating and reducing its radius and mass. To calculate the heat transfer coefficient between the droplet and ullage, the Ranz-Marshall correlation is used. To determine the number of droplets in the ullage, a resident mass approach is used. This approach averages the number of droplets such that residuals at the start-up and shut-off of the spray bar cancel out. This same approach is used in the Easy5 model. The GFSSP model implements a linked list to track individual droplet “nodes” within the model. For the Easy5 model, the droplet is assumed to have an interface at a temperature equal to the saturation temperature corresponding to the pressure of the gas phase. The heat transfer from the gas to the interface and the interface to the droplet bulk is then calculated, and the net mass transfer between the droplet and interface is determined by performing an energy balance across the interface. For the gas side of the interface, the Ranz-Marshall correlation is used. For the liquid side of the interface, a variety of correlations were tried, including Kronig and Brink (1950) and effective conductivity models. As a result of these assumptions, the Easy5 model currently predicts faster depressurization, as at saturated vapor conditions, the heat transfer coeffect on the liquid side for the Easy5 model is greater than the heat transfer coefficient predicted by Ranz-Marshall used in the TankSIM code. This greater heat flux translates into faster condensation of the saturated ullage gas. At the bulk liquid to ullage interface, the models are in much closer agreement. Both models model the ullage as a sphere centered within the bulk liquid in the tank, and both use the energy-jumping boundary condition to model heat and mass transfer across the interface. There are slight differences in how the interface temperature is calculated, however. The Easy5 model assumes the temperature of the interface is equal to the saturation temperature associated with the pressure of the gas phase. The TankSIM model calculates this temperature with Alabovskii’s equation, which provides a correction factor for interface temperatures. Analysis tasks are focused on determining rates of depressurization within the tank during active cooling operation. To maintain net positive suction head at the pump inlet, the tank pressure cannot fall faster than the saturation pressure associated with the temperature of the bulk liquid. Additionally, there is interest in analyzing the performance of the loop at different pump speeds and cryocooler input powers. Adjusting the flowrate affects both the performance of the heat exchanger between the cryocooler and pumped liquid, and the heat transfer between the droplet spray and the ullage. Ideally, a pump speed and cryocooler power can be selected that will allow the tank to operate in zero-boil-off mode with a very narrow range of storage pressure.

Cameron J. Hines↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Modeling and Simulation of Tank Pressure Control using Zero-Boil Off Active Thermal Control for LOXSAT Technology Demonstration Mission

To-date, research and modeling of cryogenic fluid management technologies (CFM) for spaceflight has been limited to ground tests, short-duration zero-g simulations (e.g. drop towers), and small-scale experiments on-orbit. There has not been a large-scale flight demonstration of a flight-like system. As future NASA missions to take humans further from Earth will require large, in-space cryogenic propulsion vehicles, it is imperative to begin collecting flight data for these systems to accurately model and design future vehicles. To meet this goal, NASA awarded tipping point technology demonstration awards to Eta Space, Lockheed Martin, Space Exploration Technologies (SpaceX), and United Launch Alliance (ULA) to demonstrate on-orbit storage and transfer of cryogenic propellant. For its award, Eta Space is developing LOXSAT-1. It is a small satellite that will be launched on a Rocket Lab Electron rocket. The spacecraft consists of a Rocket Lab Photon spacecraft bus with a primary payload of a spherical liquid oxygen (LOX) storage tank with thermodynamic control systems. The primary objective of the mission is to demonstrate zero-boil-off storage of liquid oxygen. To accomplish this objective, the payload is equipped with an active thermal control system fluid loop that consists of propellant management device (PMD), positive-displacement pump, heat exchanger connected to a cryocooler, and a spray bar mixing injector. When the fluid loop is operating, fluid is drawn from the tank by the PMD and pumped through the heat exchanger, lowering the fluid temperature below the fluid temperature in the tank. This subcooled liquid is then injected back into the tank through the spray bar. The subcooled injected liquid has two effects. If it is sprayed into the ullage space, the injected liquid will form into jets or droplets and exchange heat with the ullage gas. This will cool and condense the gas, reducing the pressure in the tank. Additionally, the liquid that is not sprayed through the ullage, as well as any remaining liquid spray from the ullage, will rejoin the liquid mass of the tank, lowering the bulk temperature of the liquid. These combines effects provide for zero-boil off pressure control by lowering the tank pressure and the liquid saturation pressure simultaneously, ensuring the liquid stays subcooled. To model these complex mechanics and predict the performance of the active thermal control system, NASA is providing Eta Space with 3 parallel models of the tank. The approach of providing 3 different models allows for cross-checking and comparisons between the three to better understand how different modeling assumptions and selection semi-empirical factors affects the modeling result. Additionally, developing 3 models provides three different schemes for numerical simulation, providing confidence that results depict real physical phenomenon and not numerical quirks of the program. Within the tank thermodynamics, there are two primary areas of heat transfer we concern ourselves with: the heat transfer between the ullage space and the droplet spray, and between the ullage space and bulk liquid. For the droplet heat transfer, there are multiple sets of assumptions that can be made and correlations that can be used. Currently, two working models - the TankSIM model and Easy5 model – provide for an overview of the different approaches available. The TankSIM model and Easy5 model use two different models for droplet heating and evaporation that illustrate how the models use different types of mechanisms to arrive at the same answer. For the TankSIM model, droplets are treated as spheres of constant radius. Heat is transferred from the ullage to the droplet and warms the droplet until it reaches saturation, then the droplet begins evaporating and reducing its radius and mass. To calculate the heat transfer coefficient between the droplet and ullage, the Ranz-Marshall correlation is used. To determine the number of droplets in the ullage, a resident mass approach is used. This approach averages the number of droplets such that residuals at the start-up and shut-off of the spray bar cancel out. This same approach is used in the Easy5 model. The GFSSP model implements a linked list to track individual droplet “nodes” within the model. For the Easy5 model, the droplet is assumed to have an interface at a temperature equal to the saturation temperature corresponding to the pressure of the gas phase. The heat transfer from the gas to the interface and the interface to the droplet bulk is then calculated, and the net mass transfer between the droplet and interface is determined by performing an energy balance across the interface. For the gas side of the interface, the Ranz-Marshall correlation is used. For the liquid side of the interface, a variety of correlations were tried, including Kronig and Brink (1950) and effective conductivity models. As a result of these assumptions, the Easy5 model currently predicts faster depressurization, as at saturated vapor conditions, the heat transfer coeffect on the liquid side for the Easy5 model is greater than the heat transfer coefficient predicted by Ranz-Marshall used in the TankSIM code. This greater heat flux translates into faster condensation of the saturated ullage gas. At the bulk liquid to ullage interface, the models are in much closer agreement. Both models model the ullage as a sphere centered within the bulk liquid in the tank, and both use the energy-jumping boundary condition to model heat and mass transfer across the interface. There are slight differences in how the interface temperature is calculated, however. The Easy5 model assumes the temperature of the interface is equal to the saturation temperature associated with the pressure of the gas phase. The TankSIM model calculates this temperature with Alabovskii’s equation, which provides a correction factor for interface temperatures. Analysis tasks are focused on determining rates of depressurization within the tank during active cooling operation. To maintain net positive suction head at the pump inlet, the tank pressure cannot fall faster than the saturation pressure associated with the temperature of the bulk liquid. Additionally, there is interest in analyzing the performance of the loop at different pump speeds and cryocooler input powers. Adjusting the flowrate affects both the performance of the heat exchanger between the cryocooler and pumped liquid, and the heat transfer between the droplet spray and the ullage. Ideally, a pump speed and cryocooler power can be selected that will allow the tank to operate in zero-boil-off mode with a very narrow range of storage pressure.

zero boil-off↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Modeling and Simulation of Tank Pressure Control using Zero-Boil Off Active Thermal Control for LOXSAT Technology Demonstration Mission

To-date, research and modeling of cryogenic fluid management technologies (CFM) for spaceflight has been limited to ground tests, short-duration zero-g simulations (e.g. drop towers), and small-scale experiments on-orbit. There has not been a large-scale flight demonstration of a flight-like system. As future NASA missions to take humans further from Earth will require large, in-space cryogenic propulsion vehicles, it is imperative to begin collecting flight data for these systems to accurately model and design future vehicles. To meet this goal, NASA awarded tipping point technology demonstration awards to Eta Space, Lockheed Martin, Space Exploration Technologies (SpaceX), and United Launch Alliance (ULA) to demonstrate on-orbit storage and transfer of cryogenic propellant. For its award, Eta Space is developing LOXSAT-1. It is a small satellite that will be launched on a Rocket Lab Electron rocket. The spacecraft consists of a Rocket Lab Photon spacecraft bus with a primary payload of a spherical liquid oxygen (LOX) storage tank with thermodynamic control systems. The primary objective of the mission is to demonstrate zero-boil-off storage of liquid oxygen. To accomplish this objective, the payload is equipped with an active thermal control system fluid loop that consists of propellant management device (PMD), positive-displacement pump, heat exchanger connected to a cryocooler, and a spray bar mixing injector. When the fluid loop is operating, fluid is drawn from the tank by the PMD and pumped through the heat exchanger, lowering the fluid temperature below the fluid temperature in the tank. This subcooled liquid is then injected back into the tank through the spray bar. The subcooled injected liquid has two effects. If it is sprayed into the ullage space, the injected liquid will form into jets or droplets and exchange heat with the ullage gas. This will cool and condense the gas, reducing the pressure in the tank. Additionally, the liquid that is not sprayed through the ullage, as well as any remaining liquid spray from the ullage, will rejoin the liquid mass of the tank, lowering the bulk temperature of the liquid. These combines effects provide for zero-boil off pressure control by lowering the tank pressure and the liquid saturation pressure simultaneously, ensuring the liquid stays subcooled. To model these complex mechanics and predict the performance of the active thermal control system, NASA is providing Eta Space with 3 parallel models of the tank. The approach of providing 3 different models allows for cross-checking and comparisons between the three to better understand how different modeling assumptions and selection semi-empirical factors affects the modeling result. Additionally, developing 3 models provides three different schemes for numerical simulation, providing confidence that results depict real physical phenomenon and not numerical quirks of the program. Within the tank thermodynamics, there are two primary areas of heat transfer we concern ourselves with: the heat transfer between the ullage space and the droplet spray, and between the ullage space and bulk liquid. For the droplet heat transfer, there are multiple sets of assumptions that can be made and correlations that can be used. Currently, two working models - the TankSIM model and Easy5 model – provide for an overview of the different approaches available. The TankSIM model and Easy5 model use two different models for droplet heating and evaporation that illustrate how the models use different types of mechanisms to arrive at the same answer. For the TankSIM model, droplets are treated as spheres of constant radius. Heat is transferred from the ullage to the droplet and warms the droplet until it reaches saturation, then the droplet begins evaporating and reducing its radius and mass. To calculate the heat transfer coefficient between the droplet and ullage, the Ranz-Marshall correlation is used. To determine the number of droplets in the ullage, a resident mass approach is used. This approach averages the number of droplets such that residuals at the start-up and shut-off of the spray bar cancel out. This same approach is used in the Easy5 model. The GFSSP model implements a linked list to track individual droplet “nodes” within the model. For the Easy5 model, the droplet is assumed to have an interface at a temperature equal to the saturation temperature corresponding to the pressure of the gas phase. The heat transfer from the gas to the interface and the interface to the droplet bulk is then calculated, and the net mass transfer between the droplet and interface is determined by performing an energy balance across the interface. For the gas side of the interface, the Ranz-Marshall correlation is used. For the liquid side of the interface, a variety of correlations were tried, including Kronig and Brink (1950) and effective conductivity models. As a result of these assumptions, the Easy5 model currently predicts faster depressurization, as at saturated vapor conditions, the heat transfer coeffect on the liquid side for the Easy5 model is greater than the heat transfer coefficient predicted by Ranz-Marshall used in the TankSIM code. This greater heat flux translates into faster condensation of the saturated ullage gas. At the bulk liquid to ullage interface, the models are in much closer agreement. Both models model the ullage as a sphere centered within the bulk liquid in the tank, and both use the energy-jumping boundary condition to model heat and mass transfer across the interface. There are slight differences in how the interface temperature is calculated, however. The Easy5 model assumes the temperature of the interface is equal to the saturation temperature associated with the pressure of the gas phase. The TankSIM model calculates this temperature with Alabovskii’s equation, which provides a correction factor for interface temperatures. Analysis tasks are focused on determining rates of depressurization within the tank during active cooling operation. To maintain net positive suction head at the pump inlet, the tank pressure cannot fall faster than the saturation pressure associated with the temperature of the bulk liquid. Additionally, there is interest in analyzing the performance of the loop at different pump speeds and cryocooler input powers. Adjusting the flowrate affects both the performance of the heat exchanger between the cryocooler and pumped liquid, and the heat transfer between the droplet spray and the ullage. Ideally, a pump speed and cryocooler power can be selected that will allow the tank to operate in zero-boil-off mode with a very narrow range of storage pressure.

zero boil-off↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Modeling and Simulation of Tank Pressure Control using Zero-Boiloff Active Thermal Control for LOXSAT Technology Demonstration Mission

To-date, research and modeling of cryogenic fluid management technologies (CFM) for spaceflight has been limited to ground tests, short-duration zero-g simulations (e.g. drop towers), and small-scale experiments on-orbit. There has not been a large-scale flight demonstration of a flight-like system. As future NASA missions to take humans further from Earth will require large, in-space cryogenic propulsion vehicles, it is imperative to begin collecting flight data for these systems to accurately model and design future vehicles. To meet this goal, NASA awarded tipping point technology demonstration awards to Eta Space, Lockheed Martin, Space Exploration Technologies (SpaceX), and United Launch Alliance (ULA) to demonstrate on-orbit storage and transfer of cryogenic propellant. For its award, Eta Space is developing LOXSAT-1. It is a small satellite that will be launched on a Rocket Lab Electron rocket. The spacecraft consists of a Rocket Lab Photon spacecraft bus with a primary payload of a spherical liquid oxygen (LOX) storage tank with thermodynamic control systems. The primary objective of the mission is to demonstrate zero-boil-off storage of liquid oxygen. To accomplish this objective, the payload is equipped with an active thermal control system fluid loop that consists of propellant management device (PMD), positive-displacement pump, heat exchanger connected to a cryocooler, and a spray bar mixing injector. When the fluid loop is operating, fluid is drawn from the tank by the PMD and pumped through the heat exchanger, lowering the fluid temperature below the fluid temperature in the tank. This subcooled liquid is then injected back into the tank through the spray bar. The subcooled injected liquid has two effects. If it is sprayed into the ullage space, the injected liquid will form into jets or droplets and exchange heat with the ullage gas. This will cool and condense the gas, reducing the pressure in the tank. Additionally, the liquid that is not sprayed through the ullage, as well as any remaining liquid spray from the ullage, will rejoin the liquid mass of the tank, lowering the bulk temperature of the liquid. These combines effects provide for zero-boil off pressure control by lowering the tank pressure and the liquid saturation pressure simultaneously, ensuring the liquid stays subcooled. To model these complex mechanics and predict the performance of the active thermal control system, NASA is providing Eta Space with 3 parallel models of the tank. The approach of providing 3 different models allows for cross-checking and comparisons between the three to better understand how different modeling assumptions and selection semi-empirical factors affects the modeling result. Additionally, developing 3 models provides three different schemes for numerical simulation, providing confidence that results depict real physical phenomenon and not numerical quirks of the program. Within the tank thermodynamics, there are two primary areas of heat transfer we concern ourselves with: the heat transfer between the ullage space and the droplet spray, and between the ullage space and bulk liquid. For the droplet heat transfer, there are multiple sets of assumptions that can be made and correlations that can be used. Currently, two working models - the TankSIM model and Easy5 model – provide for an overview of the different approaches available. The TankSIM model and Easy5 model use two different models for droplet heating and evaporation that illustrate how the models use different types of mechanisms to arrive at the same answer. For the TankSIM model, droplets are treated as spheres of constant radius. Heat is transferred from the ullage to the droplet and warms the droplet until it reaches saturation, then the droplet begins evaporating and reducing its radius and mass. To calculate the heat transfer coefficient between the droplet and ullage, the Ranz-Marshall correlation is used. To determine the number of droplets in the ullage, a resident mass approach is used. This approach averages the number of droplets such that residuals at the start-up and shut-off of the spray bar cancel out. This same approach is used in the Easy5 model. The GFSSP model implements a linked list to track individual droplet “nodes” within the model. For the Easy5 model, the droplet is assumed to have an interface at a temperature equal to the saturation temperature corresponding to the pressure of the gas phase. The heat transfer from the gas to the interface and the interface to the droplet bulk is then calculated, and the net mass transfer between the droplet and interface is determined by performing an energy balance across the interface. For the gas side of the interface, the Ranz-Marshall correlation is used. For the liquid side of the interface, a variety of correlations were tried, including Kronig and Brink (1950) and effective conductivity models. As a result of these assumptions, the Easy5 model currently predicts faster depressurization, as at saturated vapor conditions, the heat transfer coeffect on the liquid side for the Easy5 model is greater than the heat transfer coefficient predicted by Ranz-Marshall used in the TankSIM code. This greater heat flux translates into faster condensation of the saturated ullage gas. At the bulk liquid to ullage interface, the models are in much closer agreement. Both models model the ullage as a sphere centered within the bulk liquid in the tank, and both use the energy-jumping boundary condition to model heat and mass transfer across the interface. There are slight differences in how the interface temperature is calculated, however. The Easy5 model assumes the temperature of the interface is equal to the saturation temperature associated with the pressure of the gas phase. The TankSIM model calculates this temperature with Alabovskii’s equation, which provides a correction factor for interface temperatures. Analysis tasks are focused on determining rates of depressurization within the tank during active cooling operation. To maintain net positive suction head at the pump inlet, the tank pressure cannot fall faster than the saturation pressure associated with the temperature of the bulk liquid. Additionally, there is interest in analyzing the performance of the loop at different pump speeds and cryocooler input powers. Adjusting the flowrate affects both the performance of the heat exchanger between the cryocooler and pumped liquid, and the heat transfer between the droplet spray and the ullage. Ideally, a pump speed and cryocooler power can be selected that will allow the tank to operate in zero-boil-off mode with a very narrow range of storage pressure.

zero boil-off↗
NASA NTRS1992

Evolution of a phase separated gravity independent bioreactor

The evolution of a phase-separated gravity-independent bioreactor is described. The initial prototype, a zero head-space manifold silicone membrane based reactor, maintained large diffusional resistances. Obtaining oxygen transfer rates needed to support carbon-recycling aerobic microbes is impossible if large resistances are maintained. Next generation designs (Mark I and II) mimic heat exchanger design to promote turbulence at the tubing-liquid interface, thereby reducing liquid and gas side diffusional resistances. While oxygen transfer rates increased by a factor of ten, liquid channeling prevented further increases. To overcome these problems, a Mark III reactor was developed which maintains inverted phases, i.e., media flows inside the silicone tubing, oxygen gas is applied external to the tubing. This enhances design through changes in gas side driving force concentration and liquid side turbulence levels. Combining an applied external pressure of 4 atm with increased Reynolds numbers resulted in oxygen transfer intensities of 232 mmol O2/l per hr (1000 times greater than the first prototype and comparable to a conventional fermenter). A 1.0 liter Mark III reactor can potentially deliver oxygen supplies necessary to support cell cultures needed to recycle a 10-astronaut carbon load continuously.

Villeneuve, Peter E.↗
NASA NTRS1977

Behavior of fluids in a weightless environment

Fluid behavior in a low-g environment is controlled primarily by surface tension forces. Certain fluid and system characteristics determine the magnitude of these forces for both a free liquid surface and liquid in contact with a solid. These characteristics, including surface tension, wettability or contact angle, system geometry, and the relationships governing their interaction, are discussed. Various aspects of fluid behavior in a low-g environment are then presented. This includes the formation of static interface shapes, oscillation and rotation of drops, coalescence, the formation of foams, tendency for cavitation, and diffusion in liquids which were observed during the Skylab fluid mechanics science demonstrations. Liquid reorientation and capillary pumping to establish equilibrium configurations for various system geometries, observed during various free-fall (drop-tower) low-g tests, are also presented. Several passive low-g fluid storage and transfer systems are discussed. These systems use surface tension forces to control the liquid/vapor interface and provide gas-free liquid transfer and liquid-free vapor venting.

Fester, D. A.↗
NASA NTRS1966

Hydrodynamics of liquid surfaces

Hydrodynamics of liquids and gases, surface tension forces, and liquid-vapor interfaces for coasting space vehicles

GAS DYNAMICS↗
NASA NTRS1986

Equilibrium fluid interfaces in the absence of gravity

Mathematical properties of capillary surfaces under zero gravity conditions are examined in the framework of the Laplace-Young theory, considering the equilibrium interface between a liquid and a gas or between two immiscible liquids for a cylindrical container of general cross section. The predicted liquid surface behavior is compared with the results obtained in a drop-tower experiment in the Zero-G Facility at the NASA Lewis Research Center.

Concus, P.↗
NASA NTRS1992

An optical method for determining level in two-phase cryogenic fluids

A method was evaluated to measure the liquid-gas and the liquid-slush interfaces in two-phase cryogen systems using optical means. This method makes use of the attenuation of a directed light beam caused by the difference in the index of refraction between the solid particles and the surrounding liquid. Preliminary experimental results obtained in slush nitrogen are shown. The possibility of extending this technique to include a measure of solid fraction is also discussed.

Oberle, Lawrence G.↗
NASA NTRS1999

Cryogenic Fuel Tank Draining Analysis Model

One of the technological challenges in designing advanced hypersonic aircraft and the next generation of spacecraft is developing reusable flight-weight cryogenic fuel tanks. As an aid in the design and analysis of these cryogenic tanks, a computational fluid dynamics (CFD) model has been developed specifically for the analysis of flow in a cryogenic fuel tank. This model employs the full set of Navier-Stokes equations, except that viscous dissipation is neglected in the energy equation. An explicit finite difference technique in two-dimensional generalized coordinates, approximated to second-order accuracy in both space and time is used. The stiffness resulting from the low Mach number is resolved by using artificial compressibility. The model simulates the transient, two-dimensional draining of a fuel tank cross section. To calculate the slosh wave dynamics the interface between the ullage gas and liquid fuel is modeled as a free surface. Then, experimental data for free convection inside a horizontal cylinder are compared with model results. Finally, cryogenic tank draining calculations are performed with three different wall heat fluxes to demonstrate the effect of wall heat flux on the internal tank flow field.

Greer, Donald↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Interfacial thermodynamics of cryogenic fluids: The effect on non-condensable gas on fluid storage

Propellant tanks that contain cryogenic fluids (CFs) in low gravity conditions are usually pressurized with non-condensable (NC) gases for fast extraction. Unfortunately, the presence of NC gases causes CFs to exhibit higher boil-offs compared to pure CF systems. For optimal utilization of the cryogenic fuels, these higher boil-off rates must be minimized. Our goal is to quantify the effects NC gases have on the evaporation and condensation dynamics of CFs to develop strategies that mitigate the higher boil-offs. The hypothesis is that the NC gas accumulates around the CF’s liquid vapor interface in the Knudsen layer, creating a kinetic barrier for both evaporation and condensation. Testing this hypothesis with experimental methods is difficult due to the transient nature of the Knudsen layer, which is only a few nanometers thick. Furthermore, experimental capabilities are limited in low gravity conditions and extremely expensive. Accordingly, we approach this problem from a theoretical perspective. In this study, we employ molecular dynamics (MD) simulations to probe the interfacial mechanisms that affect CF’s evaporation and condensation at varying concentrations of NC gases. Specifically, we use nitrogen (N2) and oxygen (O2) as our CFs and neon (Ne) as our NC gas. Using MD simulations, we show that Ne accumulates at N2 liquid vapor interface across a wide range of Ne concentrations, thereby impeding mass transport of N2. Our simulations allow for direct computation of the molar flux as well as the mass accommodation coefficient (MAC) which can then be used as input parameters to continuum fluid dynamics (CFD) models for optimal storage tank design.

Michael Robert DeLyser↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Coupled Reactor Multiphysics and Mass Scalability Assessment for Crewed Megawatt-Class NEP System Architectures

Nuclear Electric Propulsion (NEP) is an in-space propulsion technology capable of enabling opposition and conjunction class crewed Mars missions. NEP subsystems include the reactor for heat generation, a power conversion system (PCS), power management and distribution, electric propulsion system, and heat rejection system. Specific mass, or α (kg/kWe), is a key performance parameter (KPP) of the propulsion system which is directly scalable with the performance and mass predictions for each individual component. To inform technology maturation planning activities, full system and component level parametric modeling is ongoing to explore the design trade space and illustrate the effect of subsystem design choices on the system KPPs. In this study, scaling of high-assay, low-enriched uranium reactor designs is assessed through coupled reactor physics and thermal hydraulics analyses. Scaling analyses evaluate the impact of system performance parameters (power level, interface temperatures) on mass for direct gas cooled, pumped liquid metal, and passively-cooled heat pipe reactor concepts. Each concept requires specific geometries, fluids, and power conversion interface conditions (temperature, pressure, flow rate) to meet desired performance and mass. The reactor assembly includes the active core (fuel, moderator, cladding, working fluid), axial and radial neutron reflectors, control drums, structural support / pressure vessel, and external radiation shielding. Each of these components are parametrically sized based on performance parameters for a megawatt-class power cycle. Results of this scaling analysis increase NEP propulsion system modeling fidelity and ultimately aim to support concept down-selection along with related technology development planning. The reactor and shield α are a function of several PCS and heat rejection system design choices, and reactor scaling with these parameters must be considered to enable an informed decision on an optimal reactor geometry and working fluid combination.

Nuclear Electric Propulsion↗
NASA NTRS1992

Scalar rate correlation at a turbulent liquid free surface - A two-regime correlation for high Schmidt numbers

An experimental correlation is derived for gas absorption at a turbulent, shear-free liquid interface. The correlation is expressed in terms of the liquid-side turbulence intensity, liquid-side macroscale, and the properties of the diffusing gas and solvent. The transfer coefficient increases linearly with rms velocity up to a point where the eddy Reynolds number reaches a critical (Schmidt number dependent) value. At higher velocities, there is a more rapid linear rise. The slope of the lower Reynolds number region is proportional to the square root of the diffusivity; at Reynolds numbers much higher than that of the break point, the slope becomes independent of diffusivity.

Khoo, Boo-Cheong↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Coupled Reactor Multiphysics and Mass Scalability Assessment for Crewed Megawatt-Class NEP System Architectures

Nuclear Electric Propulsion (NEP) is an in-space propulsion technology capable of enabling opposition and conjunction class crewed Mars missions. NEP subsystems include the reactor for heat generation, a power conversion system (PCS), power management and distribution (PMAD), electric propulsion subsystem (EPS), and a primary heat rejection system. Specific mass, or αe (kg / kWe), is a key performance parameter (KPP) of the propulsion system which is directly scalable with the performance and mass estimates for individual components. To inform technology maturation planning, full system and component level parametric modeling is ongoing to explore the design trade space and illustrate the effect of subsystem design choices on the system KPPs. In this study, scaling of high-assay, low-enriched uranium (HALEU) reactor designs is assessed through coupled reactor physics and thermal hydraulics analyses. Scaling analyses evaluate the impact of system performance parameters (power level, interface temperatures) on mass for direct gas cooled, pumped liquid metal, and passively cooled heat pipe reactor concepts. Each concept requires specific geometries and working fluids to reach the performance goals of PCS interface conditions (temperature, pressure, flow rate) and system mass. The reactor assembly includes the active core (fuel, moderator, cladding, working fluid), axial and radial neutron reflectors, control drums, structural support / pressure vessel, and external radiation shielding. Each of these components are parametrically sized based on performance parameters for a megawatt-class power cycle. Results of this scaling analysis increase NEP propulsion system modeling fidelity and ultimately aim to support technology down-selection along with related technology development planning. The reactor and shield αe are a function of several PCS design choices, and reactor scaling with these parameters must be considered to enable an informed decision on reactor geometry and working fluid combination.

Nuclear Electric Propulsion↗
NASA NTRS1999

Long-Wavelength Rupturing Instability in Surface-Tension-Driven Benard Convection

A liquid layer with a free upper surface and heated from below is subject to thermocapillary-induced convective instabilities. We use very thin liquid layers (0.01 cm) to significantly reduce buoyancy effects and simulate Marangoni convection in microgravity. We observe thermocapillary-driven convection in two qualitatively different modes, short-wavelength Benard hexagonal convection cells and a long-wavelength interfacial rupturing mode. We focus on the long-wavelength mode and present experimental observations and theoretical analyses of the long-wavelength instability. Depending on the depths and thermal conductivities of the liquid and the gas above it, the interface can rupture downwards and form a dry spot or rupture upwards and form a high spot. Linear stability theory gives good agreement to the experimental measurements of onset as long as sidewall effects are taken into account. Nonlinear theory correctly predicts the subcritical nature of the bifurcation and the selection between the dry spot and high spots.

Swift, J. B.↗
NASA NTRS2010

Analytic Modeling of Pressurization and Cryogenic Propellant

An analytic model for pressurization and cryogenic propellant conditions during all mission phases of any liquid rocket based vehicle has been developed and validated. The model assumes the propellant tanks to be divided into five nodes and also implements an empirical correlation for liquid stratification if desired. The five nodes include a tank wall node exposed to ullage gas, an ullage gas node, a saturated propellant vapor node at the liquid-vapor interface, a liquid node, and a tank wall node exposed to liquid. The conservation equations of mass and energy are then applied across all the node boundaries and, with the use of perfect gas assumptions, explicit solutions for ullage and liquid conditions are derived. All fluid properties are updated real time using NIST Refprop.1 Further, mass transfer at the liquid-vapor interface is included in the form of evaporation, bulk boiling of liquid propellant, and condensation given the appropriate conditions for each. Model validation has proven highly successful against previous analytic models and various Saturn era test data and reasonably successful against more recent LH2 tank self pressurization ground test data. Finally, this model has been applied to numerous design iterations for the Altair Lunar Lander, Ares V Core Stage, and Ares V Earth Departure Stage in order to characterize Helium and autogenous pressurant requirements, propellant lost to evaporation and thermodynamic venting to maintain propellant conditions, and non-uniform tank draining in configurations utilizing multiple LH2 or LO2 propellant tanks. In conclusion, this model provides an accurate and efficient means of analyzing multiple design configurations for any cryogenic propellant tank in launch, low-acceleration coast, or in-space maneuvering and supplies the user with pressurization requirements, unusable propellants from evaporation and liquid stratification, and general ullage gas, liquid, and tank wall conditions as functions of time.

Corpening, Jeremy H.↗