Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Icing CFD”

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.

82 records · Page 5

Modeling and Analysis of Realistic Fire Scenarios in Spacecraft

An accidental fire inside a spacecraft is an unlikely, but very real emergency situation that can easily have dire consequences. While much has been learned over the past 25+ years of dedicated research on flame behavior in microgravity, a quantitative understanding of the initiation, spread, detection and extinguishment of a realistic fire aboard a spacecraft is lacking. Virtually all combustion experiments in microgravity have been small-scale, by necessity (hardware limitations in ground-based facilities and safety concerns in space-based facilities). Large-scale, realistic fire experiments are unlikely for the foreseeable future (unlike in terrestrial situations). Therefore, NASA will have to rely on scale modeling, extrapolation of small-scale experiments and detailed numerical modeling to provide the data necessary for vehicle and safety system design. This paper presents the results of parallel efforts to better model the initiation, spread, detection and extinguishment of fires aboard spacecraft. The first is a detailed numerical model using the freely available Fire Dynamics Simulator (FDS). FDS is a CFD code that numerically solves a large eddy simulation form of the Navier-Stokes equations. FDS provides a detailed treatment of the smoke and energy transport from a fire. The simulations provide a wealth of information, but are computationally intensive and not suitable for parametric studies where the detailed treatment of the mass and energy transport are unnecessary. The second path extends a model previously documented at ICES meetings that attempted to predict maximum survivable fires aboard space-craft. This one-dimensional model implies the heat and mass transfer as well as toxic species production from a fire. These simplifications result in a code that is faster and more suitable for parametric studies (having already been used to help in the hatch design of the Multi-Purpose Crew Vehicle, MPCV).

life support↗

NASA 5.2%-Scale High Lift Common Research Model (CRM-HL) Test in the National Transonic Facility (NTF)

Problem: Predicting CL,max and assessing transition, turbulence models, and Reynolds number effect predictions in CFD requires wind tunnel data for comparison. Objective: Expand the CFD validation database by running multiple models designed using the same reference geometry in various wind tunnels around the world. The wind tunnel data and model geometry will be open source to allow for CFD validation use. Approach: Run the NASA 5.2%-scale High Lift Common Research Model (CRM-HL) semi-span model at the National Transonic Facility (NTF). Test the model at chord Reynolds numbers (Rec) between 1.6 million and 30 million and at varying Q/Es to assess Reynolds number effects and aeroelasticity affects on the model, while collecting force and moment, pressure and wing deformation data. Test the model with ice shapes installed on the leading edges. Results: Ran eight model configurations, including four landing, two landing with ice shapes installed, and two takeoff configurations. Ran in air (120°F) and nitrogen operations (-50°F, -180°F and -250°F) at 7 different chord Reynolds numbers. The data compare well with previous tests of the same model at DLR (The Germany Aerospace Center) and the 14- by 22-Foot Subsonic Tunnel (14x22). Significance: Provided valuable high Reynolds number data on a high lift configuration to the worldwide research community. Provide icing data at flight Reynolds number to the research community.

CRM-HL↗

A Moving Discontinuous Galerkin Method with Interface Condition Enforcement for Reacting Hypersonic Flows

The necessity of enforcing conservation in computational elements or cells (element conservation) for discontinuous solutions is well understood and respected for solving conservation laws in computational fluid dynamics (CFD). In contrast, interface conservation, where the conservation across cell interfaces is enforced, is long ignored, and yet is also ruled and required by the underlying physics just like element conservation. Violation of the interface conservation across discontinuities is the root cause why an exact discontinuous solution can never be achieved in shock capturing methods. The interface conservation is examined and explored in this talk. Moving discontinuous Galerkin (MDG) finite element method with interface conservation enforcement (MDG-ICE) [1],[2] are then presented for solving compressible flow problems with discontinuities based on the observation that the interface conservation can only be satisfied, only when mesh interfaces are aligned with discontinuities. In the MDG-ICE formulation, both conservative quantities and grid geometry are considered as independent variables. A space-time DG formulation is used to solve the multi-material compressible Euler equations in the standard discontinuous solution space and the discrete grid geometry is solved using a variational formulation in a continuous space. A self-adaptive Levenberg-Marquardt method is utilized to solve the resulting over-determined system of nonlinear equations arising from the MDG-ICE formulation. A number of numerical experiments for a variety of flow problems are conducted to assess the accuracy and performance of the MDG-ICE method. Numerical results obtained indicate that the MDG-ICE method is able to deliver the designed order of both h- and p-convergence even for discontinuous solutions, and detect all types of interfaces, via interface condition enforcement and satisfy, via grid movement, the compressible Euler equations and the associated interface condition.

Discontinuous Galekin↗

NASA Tech Briefs, December 2013

Topics include: Microwave Kinetic Inductance Detector With; Selective Polarization Coupling; Flexible Microstrip Circuits for; Superconducting Electronics; CFD Extraction Tool for TecPlot From DPLR Solutions; RECOVIR Software for Identifying Viruses; Enhanced Contact Graph Routing (ECGR) MACHETE Simulation Model; Orbital Debris Engineering Model (ORDEM) v.3; Scatter-Reducing Sounding Filtration Using a Genetic Algorithm and Mean Monthly Standard Deviation; Thermo-Mechanical Methodology for Stabilizing Shape Memory Alloy Response; Hermetic Seal Designs for Sample Return Sample Tubes; Silicon Alignment Pins: An Easy Way To Realize a Wafer-to-Wafer Alignment; Positive-Buoyancy Rover for Under Ice Mobility; Electric Machine With Boosted Inductance to Stabilize Current Control; International Space Station-Based Electromagnetic Launcher for Space Science Payloads; Advanced Hybrid Spacesuit Concept Featuring Integrated Open Loop and Closed Loop Ventilation Systems; Data Quality Screening Service.

Source record↗

Analysis of Launch Vehicle Liftoff Debris: Historical Perspective from Space Shuttle and Application to Artemis I

Human exploration-class launch vehicles are inherently prone to debris due to the extreme environments generated during pre-launch operations, liftoff, and flight. The use of cryogenic propellants often requires thermal protection system (TPS) coatings, typically foam, to maintain the propellant conditions in the tank and prevent an accumulation ice on the external surface of the vehicle. Some ice growth is to be expected at umbilical interfaces, vents, flanges, or brackets where it is difficult to apply TPS. This ice may come loose at any time due to wind on the launch pad, structural vibration and acoustics after rocket ignition, or aerodynamic forces during flight. This phenomena is especially apparent on vehicles with no TPS, such as the Saturn V rockets used in the Apollo Program, see Figure 1. During propellant tanking, the thermal contraction of the underlying substrate may generate cracks in the TPS (Figure 1). Chunks of TPS can release due to the expansion of ingested gas from cryopumping or from aerodynamic forces if the crack creates an offset surface. Most foams will also have a certain amount of “popcorning” where small pieces of foam will pop off during flight because of the differential between the static surface pressure and the pressure of the gas trapped in the foam cell structure. There are a number of other coating or closeout materials that may be shed from the vehicle and become debris. During pre-launch operations and liftoff, the vehicle may also be exposed to debris originating from the launch pad or ground support equipment. This debris is separate from foreign object debris, or FOD, which is not intended to be present and is strictly controlled through operations and maintenance procedures. In this case, debris is generated from hardware and materials that are necessary for launch and are subject to the intense vibration, acoustics, and direct plume impingement of the launch environment. Examples include ice from umbilicals, tape and tie wraps that protect cables, and rust or corrosion from the launch platform. While NASA has historically been aware of debris as a potential issue that could cause a failure resulting in loss of mission, loss of vehicle, or loss of crew, the likelihood and severity of that risk was not always well understood or given sufficient weight in program and flight decisions. After the Space Shuttle Columbia accident (STS-107), the investigation found that foam TPS debris shed from the external tank was the proximate cause of the damage to the orbiter wing. Six previous observations of debris released from the foam ramp that covered the bipod connecting the forward end of the orbiter to the external tank resulted in minor changes or were determined to be accepted flight risks. Two occurrences of bipod ramp foam loss were not identified until the STS-107 investigation. Despite the damage inflicted by these debris strikes, the Shuttle Program Requirements Control Board deemed the vehicle safe to fly. During the Return to Flight effort following the Columbia disaster, NASA Engineering developed a process for the assessment of debris transport, impact, and damage tolerance to support independent assessments of risk by NASA Safety and Mission Assurance (S&MA). Under this system, each element (vehicle or ground system) defines a catalog of all expected debris based on launch history, component testing, or analysis. Debris transport analysis (DTA) is conducted using the debris catalog characteristics and potential flow transport mechanisms (e.g., vehicle aerodynamics, gravity, wind, plume-driven). The predicted debris impact locations and velocities are provided to the hardware owners, who use available test data and analysis to determine whether each component can withstand the impacts. In cases where the element hardware may be severely damaged or fail, the options are to mitigate the debris source through some change in design or operation, or to work with S&MA to try to characterize the probability of the impact and damage for program risk acceptance. Because of the differences in debris characteristics and transport, the DTA has been divided between the Liftoff and Ascent regimes. The development and application of Liftoff DTA methodology from the Shuttle Program to the current Artemis Program is the subject of this paper. Liftoff DTA covers the time from the start of pre-launch operations at the launch pad, up until the vehicle clears the launch tower and there is no longer any interaction with ground systems. Debris transport during this period is broadly classified as either gravity, wind, and plume-entrained (GWPE) or plume driven (PD). GWPE debris is generally lower speed, travelling in a forward-to-aft direction. PD transport includes flow features from the rocket ignition transient, as well as plume impingement and recirculation that occur as the vehicle lifts off the launch platform. In these cases, the debris typically moves in an aft-to-forward direction at higher speeds. The applicable transport mechanisms must be considered for each piece of debris depending on the material, and release location and time. For example, rust or metallic debris from the tower could fall (GWPE) and impact the vehicle before landing on the launch platform deck where it could be also be transported by plume impingement (PD). However, falling ice (GWPE) from an umbilical is unlikely to survive impact with the vehicle or launch platform and be available for PD transport. Modeling of debris transport is accomplished using a set of DTA tools which simulate debris trajectories subject to a reference frame acceleration (i.e., gravity) and aerodynamic drag. Where the trajectory encounters a solid surface, the debris is allowed to rebound with a specified coefficient of restitution. The drag is calculated by interpolating the fluid state at each point in the debris trajectory from high-fidelity computational fluid dynamics (CFD) simulations of the launch vehicle and pad. The CFD data may either be static (steady state or time averaged), typically for GWPE transport, or dynamic (time-accurate) for PD flow features like the ignition transient. Examples of the CFD flow field solutions for the Space Launch System (SLS) rocket and launch pad are shown in Figure 2. Typical SLS debris trajectory predictions from DTA are illustrated in Figure 3. The final version of this paper will include a more detailed examination of the Liftoff DTA process developed during the Shuttle Program, and how it has been augmented and applied to the SLS rocket under the Artemis Program. Comparisons with debris observations from the Artemis I launch will demonstrate validation of the tools and methodology.

Debris↗

SSME fuel preburner phase 1/phase 2+ comparison

An analytical comparison of the predicted combustion flowfields for the Phase 1 and Phase 2+ fuel preburner configurations using an advanced CFD combustion code is currently underway at Rocketdyne. The Phase 2+ injector has a modified element design. The redesigned element provides for improved atomization through a shift in the injector element/face bleed flow split while maintaining an acceptable pressure drop. Cold-flow tests of the new design have been encouraging. As a complement to those tests, the Advanced Rocket Injector Combustor Code (ARICC) was selected to conduct a detailed combustion flowfield simulation. ARICC models two-dimensional (or axisymmetric), transient, turbulent, two-phase mixing and combustion flowfields. It is derived from a member of the Los Alamos ICEd-ALE family of codes. Unique features of ARICC include explicit representation of the coaxial LOX jet and hydrogen gas flows, distributed atomization processes, droplet breakup, and supercritical vaporation processes. Predictions of temperature and OH concentration profiles for the Phase 1 and Phase 2+ injector flowfields indicate a trend toward more uniform temperature distributions and shorter flame lengths with the Phase 2+ design.

Jensen, R. J.↗

Thermal Protection System to Enable Ice Giant Aerocapture Mission for Delivering Both an Orbiter and an In Situ Probe

The Ice Giants have been identified as high priority science destinations in the last Decadal Survey [1] and could benefit from aerocapture as the primary method for orbit insertion [2]. A mass-efficient aerocapture system will enable the delivery of an orbiter along with an atmospheric probe (for in situ measurements to anchor global data collected by the orbiter) and possibly a lander at Triton [3]. Aerocapture could be executed either using low L/D rigid aeroshell with lift modulation (LMA) [4] or using deployable aeroshell using drag modulation (DMA) [3]. Nearly two decades ago, a NASA-funded team performed Neptune-Triton aerocapture studies with a mid-L/D lifting configuration [5] for achieving orbit using LMA. This study showed aerocapture challenges. Due to very high peak entry conditions combined with very high heat-load, a suite of TPS materials was required and this suite was deemed problematic from a qualification perspective, due test facility limitations. In the past 20 years, progress made in GN&C for lift-guided entry missions such as MSL, Orion EFT1, Mars 2020 and the upcoming Artemis missions, and the expertise in blunt body aerodynamics at large scale (~ 5m) has led the EDL community to conclude that aerocapture is a “go do” engineering activity and most technologies are in hand to propose missions with aerocapture [6] [7]. Aerocapture using DMA, currently in development, is an option for Ice Giant Missions. While DMA is simpler in some sense, due to ballistic entry and no need for lift-guided maneuvering, it has challenges and it’s maturity is lower. LMA and DMA both require one or more ablative Thermal Protection System (TPS) materials for the rigid aeroshell element. The ablative TPS needs to be robust and mass efficient due to the high heat loads and size of the rigid aeroshell. Currently, there are capable ablative thermal protection materials, e.g., Heatshield for Extreme Entry Environments Technology (HEEET), 3-D woven Mid-Density Carbon- Phenolic (3MDCP), and PICA (Phenolic-Impregnated Carbon Ablator) that are mature, i.e., at TRL 6 or higher. NASA also invested in Conformal PICA that was matured to TRL 5. Our goal is to evaluate the applicability of high TRL TPS and consider other design options. We first establish bounding aerocapture trajectories for a wide range of arrival conditions and the associated aerothermal environment. Based on the environments, we then determine the predicted TPS mass for the aeroshell [4]. In this presentation, we will outline the process by which we establish bounding aerocapture trajectories for hyperbolic excess velocities ranging from 27 km/s to 35 km/s, which are shown to be a range of velocities that can reduce the trip time from ~14 years to 8 years. The above velocity range translates to ~12 km/s to ~24 km/s arrival velocities at the planetary entry interface [2]. The velocity reduction required to achieve orbit ranges between ~2.5 km/s to 9.5 km/s for both Neptune and Triton. Propulsive insertion alone, due to the amount of fuel required to achieve the required velocity reduction, limits the science returned [2]. We establish the bounding aerocapture trajectories for a low L/D (~ 0.4) configuration for three different ballistic coefficients. The ballistic coefficient range is determined from three different aeroshell diameters of 3m, 4m and 5m and with an entry system mass of 2200 kg. With the above range of design parameters, we then determine conservative/bounding estimates of aerothermal environments by using a combination of CFD simulations and stagnation point heating estimates [7]. This engineering approach allows us to first assess the TPS need vs. TPS capability and determine the applicability of existing TPS. Once an applicable suite of TPS is determined, the TPS thickness and mass are computed. We show that the TPS mass fraction can be as low as 5% to as high as 20%, depending on total trip time reduction and other design parameters for a range of TPS. This is a large range for TPS mass fraction. We show PICA and HEEET can indeed enable aerocapture missions, but the missions incur a mass penalty. TPS mass savings, can be further reduced with the use of conformal PICA. Advancing the development of Conformal PICA to make it robust across the entire aerothermal environment (peak heat-flux, pressure and shear) range will result in TPS mass fractions of < 10% for Ice Giant aerocapture missions such as the Neptune-Triton mission. Aerocapture allows for not only shortening the trip time but enables larger mass to be placed in orbit. Furthermore, probes deployed from orbit will benefit in reduced entry environments allowing for a lower risk TPS implementation as compared to mission designs where the probe is released prior to orbit insertion. One of the challenges for the Ice Giant community is to ensure mission designs that maximize science and allow flexibility in the placement of the entry probe. The traditional approach to release the probe ahead of the orbiter may not optimize returned science. In this presentation, we will make the case for mature TPS such as HEEET and PICA. While these materials can enable aerocapture missions, completing the development of conformal PICA and extending Conformal PICA to be more robust, will have significant impact to TPS mass efficiency and significantly enhance science return for future Gas- and Ice-Giant missions.

E Venkatapathy↗

NASA Tech Briefs, September 2006

Topics covered include: Improving Thermomechanical Properties of SiC/SiC Composites; Aerogel/Particle Composites for Thermoelectric Devices; Patches for Repairing Ceramics and Ceramic- Matrix Composites; Lower-Conductivity Ceramic Materials for Thermal-Barrier Coatings; An Alternative for Emergency Preemption of Traffic Lights; Vehicle Transponder for Preemption of Traffic Lights; Automated Announcements of Approaching Emergency Vehicles; Intersection Monitor for Traffic-Light-Preemption System; Full-Duplex Digital Communication on a Single Laser Beam; Stabilizing Microwave Frequency of a Photonic Oscillator; Microwave Oscillators Based on Nonlinear WGM Resonators; Pointing Reference Scheme for Free-Space Optical Communications Systems; High-Level Performance Modeling of SAR Systems; Spectral Analysis Tool 6.2 for Windows; Multi-Platform Avionics Simulator; Silicon-Based Optical Modulator with Ferroelectric Layer; Multiplexing Transducers Based on Tunnel-Diode Oscillators; Scheduling with Automated Resolution of Conflicts; Symbolic Constraint Maintenance Grid; Discerning Trends in Performance Across Multiple Events; Magnetic Field Solver; Computing for Aiming a Spaceborne Bistatic- Radar Transmitter; 4-Vinyl-1,3-Dioxolane-2-One as an Additive for Li-Ion Cells; Probabilistic Prediction of Lifetimes of Ceramic Parts; STRANAL-PMC Version 2.0; Micromechanics and Piezo Enhancements of HyperSizer; Single-Phase Rare-Earth Oxide/Aluminum Oxide Glasses; Tilt/Tip/Piston Manipulator with Base-Mounted Actuators; Measurement of Model Noise in a Hard-Wall Wind Tunnel; Loci-STREAM Version 0.9; The Synergistic Engineering Environment; Reconfigurable Software for Controlling Formation Flying; More About the Tetrahedral Unstructured Software System; Computing Flows Using Chimera and Unstructured Grids; Avoiding Obstructions in Aiming a High-Gain Antenna; Analyzing Aeroelastic Stability of a Tilt-Rotor Aircraft; Tracking Positions and Attitudes of Mars Rovers; Stochastic Evolutionary Algorithms for Planning Robot Paths; Compressible Flow Toolbox; Rapid Aeroelastic Analysis of Blade Flutter in Turbomachines; General Flow-Solver Code for Turbomachinery Applications; Code for Multiblock CFD and Heat-Transfer Computations; Rotating-Pump Design Code; Covering a Crucible with Metal Containing Channels; Repairing Fractured Bones by Use of Bioabsorbable Composites; Kalman Filter for Calibrating a Telescope Focal Plane; Electronic Absolute Cartesian Autocollimator; Fiber-Optic Gratings for Lidar Measurements of Water Vapor; Simulating Responses of Gravitational-Wave Instrumentation; SOFTC: A Software Correlator for VLBI; Progress in Computational Simulation of Earthquakes; Database of Properties of Meteors; Computing Spacecraft Solar-Cell Damage by Charged Particles; Thermal Model of a Current-Carrying Wire in a Vacuum; Program for Analyzing Flows in a Complex Network; Program Predicts Performance of Optical Parametric Oscillators; Processing TES Level-1B Data; Automated Camera Calibration; Tracking the Martian CO2 Polar Ice Caps in Infrared Images; Processing TES Level-2 Data; SmaggIce Version 1.8; Solving the Swath Segment Selection Problem; The Spatial Standard Observer; Less-Complex Method of Classifying MPSK; Improvement in Recursive Hierarchical Segmentation of Data; Using Heaps in Recursive Hierarchical Segmentation of Data; Tool for Statistical Analysis and Display of Landing Sites; Automated Assignment of Proposals to Reviewers; Array-Pattern-Match Compiler for Opportunistic Data Analysis; Pre-Processor for Compression of Multispectral Image Data; Compressing Image Data While Limiting the Effects of Data Losses; Flight Operations Analysis Tool; Improvement in Visual Target Tracking for a Mobile Robot; Software for Simulating Air Traffic; Automated Vectorization of Decision-Based Algorithms; Grayscale Optical Correlator Workbench; "One-Stop Shopping" for Ocean Remote-Sensing and Model Data; State Analysis Database Tool; Generating CAHV and CAHVOmages with Shadows in ROAMS; Improving UDP/IP Transmission Without Increasing Congestion; FORTRAN Versions of Reformulated HFGMC Codes; Program for Editing Spacecraft Command Sequences; Flight-Tested Prototype of BEAM Software; Mission Scenario Development Workbench; Marsviewer; Tool for Analysis and Reduction of Scientific Data; ASPEN Version 3.0; Secure Display of Space-Exploration Images; Digital Front End for Wide-Band VLBI Science Receiver; Multifunctional Tanks for Spacecraft; Lightweight, Segmented, Mostly Silicon Telescope Mirror; Assistant for Analyzing Tropical-Rain-Mapping Radar Data; and Anion-Intercalating Cathodes for High-Energy- Density Cells.

Source record↗

Next Generation Thermal Protection System for Outer Planet Probes and Orbiter

Saturn Probe and Ice Giant Orbiter along with in-situ Probe Missions continue to be very high priority mis-sions. A result of the advocacy by OPAG and other Analysis Groups, the 3D Woven, Dual-Layer HEEET thermal protection system, mature at TRL 6, has closed the TPS gap for extreme environment missions. A mid density follow on to DL HEEET, developed to meet earth entry requirements, is a Single Layer vari-ant of the 3D woven TPS, which provides a mass effi-cient single layer 3D Mid-Density TPS (3MDCP) that has been baselined as the heatshield for MSR EEV. Continued development of 3MDCP will elevate it to TRL 6 by 2025. Conformal-PICA (C-PICA) devel-opment was pursued to establish a more efficient and robust alternate to PICA, and it is at TRL 4+. Our rationale for the next generation of TPS de-velopment is based on the on the missions needs of the next decade Outer Planet missions that are unique and more demanding than any other destinations. Taking advantage of the recent planned development of sev-eral materials, the next generation of TPS offers a much more mass efficient option for small, medium, and large class Outer Planet missions. Saturn Probes: While mission designers are gen-erally interested in shallow entry to maintain the g-load during entry around 50g, the heat-load for shallow entry can range between (100 kJ/cm2 – 300 kJ/cm2), two orders of magnitude higher than Venus or Sample Return missions. TPS must not only offer protection but must be mass efficient to perform reasonable sci-ence. TPS mass can quickly become 50% or more of the mass of the entire entry system. Recent analysis performed shows Saturn Probe missions could signifi-cantly benefit from the single layer HEEET (SL-HEEET/3MDCP). A DL-HEEET based heatshield mass could be ~ (40% -50%), SL-HEEET can provide additional (30% - 50%) mass savings. At the same time, C-PICA can provide (30% - 50%) mass savings on the backshell. The combined mass savings can be significant enough to carry an additional probe, if de-sired. Ice Giant Aerocapture Missions: Aerocapture mission architectures can provide significant ad-vantage over traditional propulsive insertion missions in multiple ways. 1) Reduced trip time ~ (4- 6) years (30% -40%), 2) Enables placing the orbiter, probe, and lander, all together and 3) Allows for greater science mass (probes and landers) due to mass efficiency. The delivery of a probe from orbit makes it easier and eliminates mission design constraints by HEEET for direct entry [4] of probes and allows for more targeted in-situ science once the Orbiter is able to collect data. In the past 20 years, progress made in GN&C for lift-guided entry missions (MSL, Orion EFT1, Mars 2020) and the expertise in blunt body aerodynamics at large scale (~ 5m) has led the EDL community to conclude that aerocapture is a “go do” engineering activity. An aerocapture mission that will deplete the excess energy of a fast arrival mission will require a mass efficient TPS that can handle extreme heat-load, ~ (100 kJ/cm2 – 500 kJ/cm2). Hence TPS, feasibility as well as mass efficiency requires assessment. Utilizing the recent developments, a comprehensive, bounding analysis was done to establish the potential for SOA (HEEET) system as well as emerging new TPS such as SL-HEEET and C-PICA. In this proposed poster, we will outline the process by which we establish bounding aerocapture trajecto-ries for hyperbolic excess velocities ranging from 27 km/s to 35 km/s, for low L/D (~ 0.4) configurations and determine conservative/bounding estimate of aer-othermal environment by using a combination of CFD simulations and stagnation point heating estimates [7]. This engineering approach allows us to assess the TPS need vs. TPS capability and determine the applicability of existing TPS. Once an applicable suite of TPS is determined, the TPS thickness and mass are comput-ed. We show that the TPS mass fraction can be as low as 5% to as high as 20%, depending on the use of ad-vanced TPS, while HEEET is sufficient but will require 50% of the entry mass.

E Venkatapathy↗

Magnetohydrodynamics (MHD) Aerocapture System for Enabling Faster-Larger Planetary Science & Human Exploration Missions

Since our completing the NIAC Phase I NIAC on this Advanced Aerocapture System, NASA Langley Research Center has funded or supported a number of studies and code enhancements through its Center Innovation Fund (CIF) and NASA’s NSTGRO and Internship Programs to mature the analysis capabilities and quantify the merits of the MHD Aerocapture System technology. These efforts have resulted in a plug and play analysis capability for assessing MHD aerocapture system performance for arrival at many planetary bodies of interest. Our efforts have especially focused on the potential mass savings for improving the capacity for science observations at Neptune and Triton. A re-cent Forbes article published “‘Orbital mechanics is probably going to decide for us whether we go to Uranus or Neptune because we need to flyby Jupiter,’ said Kunio Sayanagi at Hampton University, Virginia, who also worked on the Neptune Odyssey proposal…. Exactly when a mission can be sent to Uranus, or Neptune, depends on the relative position of Jupiter, which can help give a spacecraft a gravitational slingshot. That drastically shortens the cruise phase.” [1] Since shortening the cruise phase is important for these science missions, any mass savings enabled by the MHD Aerocapture System could be reallocated to increasing Thermal Protection System mass to allow faster arrival speeds and/or for onboarding additional payloads such as science instruments, batteries, or propellant for conducting more science for longer durations in the desired orbits. The analysis steps and codes for conducting trades and sizing vehicles for aerocapture are as follows: Step 1 is to conduct aeroheating analysis using LAURA of the selected entry vehicle shape to identify locations on the forebody where ionization and flow velocity are sufficient for producing Lo-rentz forces. LAURA is a multiblock structured grid finite-volume CFD solver developed at the NASA Langley Research Center. [2] LAURA has been used for aerothermal analysis support of the entry, de-scent and landing (EDL) phase of interplanetary missions over the last three decades [3-7]. Step 2 is to port the LAURA results into CFDWARP to calcu-late electrical and thermal conductivities of ionized flow for sizing MHD patch system and calculating Lorentz forces needed for controls analysis. CFDWARP is a CFD code that uses advanced nu-merical methods that enable the simulation of the full coupling between the aerodynamics, the magne-tohydrodynamics, and the non-neutral plasma sheaths. CFDWARP has the unique capability to simulate efficiently the non-neutral sheaths (near the electrodes) in coupled form with the quasi-neutral bulk MHD flow [8-11]. Step 3 is to link re-sults from LAURA and CFDWARP into POST2 for calculating entry trajectories and comparing MHD control results with other aerodynamic control strategies. The Program to Optimize Simulated Tra-jectories II (POST2) is a generalized point mass, discrete parameter targeting and optimization pro-gram. POST2 provides the capability to target and optimize point mass trajectories for multiple pow-ered or un-powered vehicles near an arbitrary rotat-ing, oblate planet [12]. Step 4: TPS sizing was per-formed using the Fully Implicit Ablation and Ther-mal-response code (FIAT) tool which computes the transient one-dimensional thermal response and surface thermochemistry of a multilayer stackup of thermal protection, bonding, and structural materi-als subject to aeroheating on one surface [13]. The sizing and margining methodology used was based on the approach documented by Mahzari and Milos [14] for the dual-layered heatshield for extreme entry environment technology (DL-HEEET) TPS concept. TPS analysis utilizes trajectory information from POST2. Using this step-wise plug and play MHD Aerocapture performance assessment process, our analysis targets a Neptune aerocapture trajectory that will place the spacecraft in an observation orbit for Triton. [15]. Magnetohydrodynamic (MHD) control of a 4.5-meter diameter MSL-style capsule resulted in TPS mass savings of nearly 2000 kg when using an MHD system mass of under 200 kg. The flight path for a vehicle using the MHD control strategy has a much lower heat rate and heat load compared to the conventional aerodynamic aerocapture strategies known as bank angle con-trolled (BAC) and direct force controlled (DFC). Both BAC and DFC have heat rates significantly greater than 1500 W/cm2 typically used as an upper limit for PICA. Thus, DL-HEEET TPS concept was required for the BAC and DFC control strategies. However, considering the more benign environ-ments for the MHD case, additional TPS concepts with improved mass efficiency were also assessed. PICA was considered for the MHD controlled strat-egy since the maximum heat rate was well within the limits (<1500 W/cm2) of PICA. TPS sizing re-sulted in a significant mass reduction. The PICA layer for this sizing case was about 7.8 cm. As a point of reference, the Mars 2020 mission, which used this same PICA concept, had a PICA thickness of 3.18 cm [16]. The trajectories used for the TPS sizing originat-ed from the POST2 simulations. The current, I, to an electromagnet configuration can be manipulated to allow for active control of the vehicle. Manipula-tion of the current, I, changes the magnetic field, B, which affects the Lorentz force and therefore the MHD drag force on the vehicle. Our analysis in-cluded both open-loop and close-loop control. Closed-loop control will enable improved overall performance when taking into account mission level uncertainties, such as interplanetary delivery errors and atmospheric modeling uncertainties. The open-loop and closed-loop MHD control cases do not dip as deep into the atmosphere as the aerodynamic cases. Three types of aerodynamic-only approach-es are investigated: bank angle modulation (BAM), director force control (DFC), and Drag Modulated. BAM and DFC make use of vehicle aerodynamic angles to steer the vehicle. Thus, changing the aer-odynamic forces acting on the vehicle for control, aerodynamic drag modulated case requires a vary-ing drag area to modulate the drag force. The MHD drag modulated case modulates MHD generated drag force that adds to the aerodynamic drag. This higher atmospheric activation of drag forces by the MHD patch results in significantly less heat flux on the vehicle. The MHD technology will enable shorter cruise times and deceleration of larger payloads for increasing the capacity for science at the Ice Giants or for returning astronauts to Earth from cislunar space or from Mars. The purpose of this presentation is to provide more details about this work and to highlight plans for further research and development including a flight demonstration.

R. W. Moses↗