Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “RS-25”

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

Green Run Modal Test of the NASA Space Launch System Core Stage

The Core Stage of the new NASA Space Launch System (SLS) is a 212-foot tall rocket assembly—consisting primarily of two fuel tanks, an engine section, and four RS-25 rocket engines—capable of sending crew and large payloads to the moon and beyond with 1.6 million pounds of thrust. Currently, the Core Stage is in the B2 Test Stand at Stennis Space Center, undergoing a series of structural and functional tests, designated the Green Run test series. The ultimate goal of Green Run is to verify analytical models and confirm proper subsystem operation of the Core Stage. In January 2020, Green Run testing began with an experimental modal analysis test performed by the Marshal Space Flight Center modal test team. The desired free boundary condition of the Core Stage was achieved by suspending the massive spacecraft from the B2 Test Stand crane. Modal excitation was provided by a pair of 250-lb electro-dynamic shakers for multi-shaker random vibration testing, as well as a 12-pound impact hammer for impact testing. Modal response was measured with 550 accelerometers channels distributed on both the Core Stage and the B2 Test Stand crane. Following one very long night of testing, frequency response functions were calculated from the measured time histories in the target mode frequency range of 2.5 Hz to 15 Hz, and mode shapes, frequencies, and damping values were successfully extracted. The case-study presented in this paper will discuss the SLS Core Stage, the modal test setup and procedure, as well as a brief overview of the test results. Challenges associated with testing such a large, suspended structure in an outdoor environment will be discussed as well.

Green Run↗

NASA’s Space Launch System: Progress Toward Launch

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

John Honeycutt↗

Rocket Propulsion Test Design and Analysis

As the small satellite launch vehicle (SSLV) market grows and NASA continues to prepare for upcoming missions in the Artemis program, John C. Stennis Space Center’s (SSC) testing facilities must adapt to the increasing demand in liquid rocket engine testing. The Rocket Propulsion Test Design and Analysis Project for this rotation focused in both of this areas through two separate subprojects, the creation of a Private Rocket Engine Database and the automatization of the A1-Set Point Prediction Model. To identify the testing requirements of future Stennis Space Center (SSC) costumers, an excel spread sheet was commissioned as a database to collect technical and non-technical features of over one hundred privately developed liquid and hybrid rocket engine. Similarly, The A-1 Set Point Sheet Model is used to satisfy Aerojet Rocketdyne’s testing requirements of Net Positive Suction Pressure (NPSP) for the RS-25 staged combustion cycle engine. To expand the capabilities of this prediction model, a feed back loop was programmed to automate the search of setpoints using Excel Visual Basic for Applications (VBA).

John Paul Ortiz↗

NASA Space Launch System Completes Green Run Testing, Begins Assembly

NASA’s Space Launch System (SLS) Program is poised in 2021 to shift its focus to the launch site with the completion of its last major integrated hardware and software test. SLS is NASA’s evolvable super heavy-lift launch vehicle for deep space exploration. Using proven propulsion technologies, SLS will be the most powerful launch vehicle in the world. That capability translates not only into more mass and volume to destinations but also simplified payload design and mission operations and greater opportunity for mission success. These capabilities will be important for the Artemis program, NASA’s plan to return humans to the Moon to stay in a sustainable way in order to develop and test technologies and operations needed for human missions to Mars and other destinations. SLS will anchor the transportation leg of an innovative, sustainable program of lunar exploration with commercial and international partners as the first step of human exploration of deep space. While all major hardware and software efforts made significant progress in 2020 and 2021, the most visible was the Green Run test series of the Artemis I core stage conducted at NASA’s Stennis Space Center (SSC) on the B-2 test stand. The series validated core stage design, performance, workmanship, and readiness for shipment to NASA Kennedy Space Center (KSC) for final processing, integration and launch. The core stage provides the backbone for SLS’ main propulsion system, consisting of two five-segment solid rocket boosters and four RS-25 liquid hydrogen (LH2)/liquid oxygen (LOX) engines. SLS also includes an Interim Cryogenic Propulsion Stage (ICPS) that will insert the Orion crew spacecraft into a lunar trajectory.

John Honeycutt↗

Development and Testing of Pulse Guns for Combustion Instability Testing

To test liquid rocket engines (LREs) for combustion instabilities, devices such as bombs are often used to create pressure wave disturbances. Bombs, while effective, are inherently dangerous, expensive, and difficult to procure. Over the years, pulse guns have been used as a safer and more cost-effective way to generate controlled pressure disturbances in engine chambers. In anticipation of the need for stability testing of prototype LREs at NASA Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC), a set of pulse guns have been designed, fabricated, tested, and characterized. The pulse gun program is funded by the RS-25 Engine Program managed out of MSFC and funded by NASA’s Space Launch System (SLS) through the MSFC Liquid Engines Office (LEO). A pulse gun is a simple device – like a traditional gun, it has a breech and barrel section. However, unlike a traditional gun, there is no bullet, as the purpose of the pulse gun is strictly to fire a high pressure pulse. Instead of a firing pin and primer that would normally be used in a traditional gun, an initiator is used to activate the gun powder. The initiator is a highly reliable pyrotechnic initiator. For this study, clone versions of the NASA Standard Initiator (NSI) were used. The initiator is used to ignite a pre-measured amount of gun powder loaded into the breech. When the pressure of the burnt gun powder exceeds the set point of a downstream burst disk, the disk ruptures, allowing the high pressure pulse to travel downstream through the barrel section. A ballistic pressure transducer located in the breech section is used to measure the short duration, high pressure pulse. Some configurations of the pulse gun have barrel sections that include one or more additional ballistic pressure transducers. These additional pressure measurements help track the degradation and damping of the pulse as it travels out of the barrel section. The measurements may also be used to determine the velocity of pulse. The objective of this paper is to present the different variants of this newly-developed pulse gun and characterize performance over a range of parameters. The parameters include breech diameter, barrel length, amount of gun powder used, the way the gun powder is packed, and the pressure setting of the burst disk. There are a total of six pulse guns: three with the 0.25 inch breech and three different length barrels, and three with the 0.40 inch breech and three different length barrels. For both breech sizes, the associated barrels are referred to as standard, one-port, and two-port barrels. The standard barrel has no instrumentation and is likely the barrel that will be used for engine stability testing. The one- and two-port barrels were designed specifically for pulse gun component testing to allow measurements of the magnitude and timing of the high pressure pulse as it makes its way through the pulse gun. The burst disks tested were commercially-available burst disks designed to rupture at 8,000, 16,000, and 24,000 psid. Testing was accomplished by firing the pulse gun into a test chamber pressurized with nitrogen at about 2300 psig. A total of four Model 113B23 High frequency ICP® pressure sensors (10k psi) were mounted in the test chamber, in the same plane as the pulse gun. Two of the sensors had “trimmed” adapters, and two did not. Given the symmetrical configuration of the sensors within the test chamber, different amplitudes of pressure measurements are attributed to the use of trimmed versus untrimmed adapters. The untrimmed adapters, with their narrower passages, tended to amplify the pressure amplitudes by as much as 50%. In total, 41 pulse gun tests have been conducted.Data are still being analyzed, but some trends are apparent. For example, measurements taken within the pulse gun are shown in Figures 3 and 4 for Hot-fires (HFs) # 11 and 39, respectively. Both tests were identical in that the 0.40 inch ID breech, two-port barrel, 8,000 psid burst disk, and same amount of gunpowder (6.639 grains for HF# 11, and 6.576 grains for HF# 39) were used, and the back pressure in the nitrogen test chamber was ~2300 psig. Despite keeping all these variables constant, the results from these two tests look quite different. For both tests, the first pressure peak shown in the P2111 trace within the breech is the firing of the initiator. The second peak and any subsequent peaks are from the combustion of the gunpowder. It should be noted that because the sensors are dynamic, the ~2300 psig baseline static pressure is not shown in the figures. For HF# 11, the burst disk clearly ruptured in a little over 0.1 ms from the time the initiator was fired. This is evident from the abrupt rise in pressure for P2112 followed by another abrupt rise in pressure for P2113. The sensors track the movement of the high pressure pulse through the pulse gun. For HF# 39, however, there was nearly 1 ms delay between the initiator firing and the burst disk rupturing. The only difference between these two tests was the way in which the gunpowder was packed within the breech. For HF# 11, the gunpowder was poured directly into the breech, atop the initiator, and held in place with a vegetable fiber wad appropriately sized for the barrel diameter. Once in place, the wad firmly held the gunpowder in place. For HF# 39, the gunpowder was rolled within cigarette paper with the ends of the paper twisted. The rolled gunpowder was gently pushed down into the breech, toward the initiator, and no wad was used. This method of loading the gunpowder consistently produced longer delays in the rupture of the burst disk, presumably because there was a steady, fuller burning of the gunpowder. The burst disk was rated for 8,000 psid, which means that the burst disk should not have opened until the pressure in the breech reached ~10,300 since there was ~2300 psig back pressure in the test chamber. In the case of HF# 11, the breech pressure only reached roughly 4200 psi before there was leakage either through or past the burst disk, but for HF#39, the breech pressure reached 10,600 psi prior to the burst disk opening. The temperature of the burst disk is certainly a factor in determining when the burst disk will rupture. A sharp rise in the burst disk temperature could weaken it and cause it to stray from the designed set point burst pressure. The burst disks are manufactured of Inconel to try to reduce their sensitivity to temperature, but how the burst disks perform above 900°F is not documented. All burst disks were engineered and tested by the manufacturer for ambient temperature conditions. One theory for why rolling the gunpowder in cigarette paper may produce better results is related to a more controlled temperature environment. The cigarette paper may act as a sheath that protects the burst disk from excessive temperatures during the rapid buildup of pressure in the breech. The ultimate benefit of not breeching the burst disk prematurely is shown in Figures 5 and 6, which graphs the resultant pressure pulse produced in the test chamber. For HF #11, the peak pressure on the P2123 trimmed adapter is about 270 psi, while for HF# 39 it is 343 psi, which is about 1.27 times greater in magnitude. In either case, the pressure pulse is ~20 μs in width once it reaches the test chamber. Another pressure rise about 100 μs later can be seen on the sensors located across from the pulse gun port, P2124 and P2121. These pressures are lower due to attenuation of the pressure wave as it moves across the test chamber. After the wave encounters the wall, it reflects back and forth within the chamber until it completely dissipates.

Pulse Gun↗

Large-scale Additive Manufacturing for Exploration

Additive Manufacturing (AM) is emerging as a mainstream manufacturing technology, and demand for large part manufacturing is getting stronger. Direct Metal Deposition (DMD) is a DED technology based on laser and powder metal application using a closed-loop-feedback control system. This webinar focuses on additive manufacturing of NASA’s RS-25 engine nozzle liner using DMD technology. This liner (10ft in height and 8ft in diameter) is beyond the print capability of existing 3D printing processes. To print this part, significant advancements were made to the DMD technology by deploying two process heads in the machine and expanding the machine work envelop to allow manufacturing of such large parts in a safe and efficient environment. A successful demonstration of the AM of the RS25 engine nozzle liner marks a new era in 3D printing and elevates the current 3D printing technology to a new level for affordable manufacturing of large metal parts.

Additive Manufacturing↗

Advanced Modeling of Control-Structure Interaction in Thrust Vector Control Systems

The Space Launch System (SLS) Core Stage (CS) Thrust Vector Control (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. Two actuators are used to move each engine in two planes perpendicular to one another (i.e., pitch and yaw). The TVC system design leverages hardware from the Space Shuttle program as well as new hardware designed specifically for the Core Stage. During the development of the SLS TVC system, a family of advanced dynamics models were developed to extend and compliment the simplified quasi-linear “simplex” model historically used for flight control design and stability analysis. The importance of these advanced models became increasingly evident after ambient and hot fire testing of the Core Stage, which revealed a number of findings associated with the dynamic response of the TVC integrated system. Test responses suggested that the TVC did not meet its performance specifications and its step and frequency responses exhibited unexpected departures from prior lab tests and modeled behavior. One driving factor for these results was a higher-than-expected degree of coupling between the TVC system, the engine dynamics, and the Core Stage structure. This paper is the third 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, a new method of modeling rocket vehicle thrust vectoring servoelastic dynamics is presented. In this approach, the load dynamics are replaced by a detailed finite element model containing both the rigid body and elastic modes. A partitioning technique is used to compute the effective compliance from the modal data and obtain accurate simulation results using a reduced number of generalized coordinates. Coupled backup structure and nozzle attach compliance effects on multiple engines are captured in higher fidelity than with a spring approximation, eliciting novel effects due to the complex load paths involved in the Core Stage structure. Validation of the model is demonstrated using a variety of structural/modal, laboratory, and full-scale hot fire test data.

Launch Vehicles↗

Advanced Modeling of Control-Structure Interaction in Thrust Vector Control Systems

The Space Launch System (SLS) Core Stage (CS) Thrust Vector Control (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. Two actuators are used to move each engine in two planes perpendicular to one another (i.e., pitch and yaw). The TVC system design leverages hardware from the Space Shuttle program as well as new hardware designed specifically for the Core Stage. During the development of the SLS TVC system, a family of advanced dynamics models were developed to extend and compliment the simplified quasi-linear “simplex” model historically used for flight control design and stability analysis. The importance of these advanced models became increasingly evident after ambient and hot fire testing of the Core Stage, which revealed a number of findings associated with the dynamic response of the TVC integrated system. Test responses suggested that the TVC did not meet its performance specifications and its step and frequency responses exhibited unexpected departures from prior lab tests and modeled behavior. One driving factor for these results was a higher-than-expected degree of coupling between the TVC system, the engine dynamics, and the Core Stage structure. This paper is the third 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, a new method of modeling rocket vehicle thrust vectoring servoelastic dynamics is presented. In this approach, the load dynamics are replaced by a detailed finite element model containing both the rigid body and elastic modes. A partitioning technique is used to compute the effective compliance from the modal data and obtain accurate simulation results using a reduced number of generalized coordinates. Coupled backup structure and nozzle attach compliance effects on multiple engines are captured in higher fidelity than with a spring approximation, eliciting novel effects due to the complex load paths involved in the Core Stage structure. Validation of the model is demonstrated using a variety of structural/modal, laboratory, and full-scale hot fire test data.

Launch Vehicles↗

Space Launch System Core Stage Green Run Base Heating: Anomaly, Mitigation and Flight Redesign

The NASA Space Launch System (SLS) vehicle is composed of four RS-25 liquid oxygen and hydrogen rocket engines in the Core Stage (CS). The SLS Core Stage went through Green Run hot-fire testing at NASA Stennis Space Center’s B-2 test facility in 2021. The main goal of this testing was to confirm Core Stage tanking, propulsion and thrust vector control systems operations and performance to verify with predicted models. Two hot-fire (HF) test sequences were performed with the first one (HF1) in January for a test duration of 70 seconds and the second (HF2) testing completed in March for a test duration of 500 seconds. This paper focuses on the base heating anomalies observed during HF1 and HF2 where an extensive fire was observed along the Core Stage base heat shield during test operations. This environment was not anticipated and led to extensive unplanned damage to the thermal protection system which was augmented for flight. Green Run observations also led to a reassessment of flight environments for Artemis I. This paper discusses the potential cause of the anomalies, the flow physics, the reconstructed base environments, and mitigation plans for HF2 and flight.

aerothermodynamics↗

Structural Dynamics Observations in Space Launch System Green Run Hot Fire Testing

The Space Launch System (SLS) Core Stage (CS) Thrust Vector Control (TVC) system is comprised of eight mechanical feedback Shuttle heritage Type III TVC actuators and four RS-25 engines, each attached to a Shuttle heritage gimbal block/bearing. Two actuators are used to move each engine in two planes perpendicular to one another (i.e., pitch and yaw). The TVC system design leverages hardware from the Space Shuttle program as well as new hardware designed specifically for the Core Stage. The Green Run Hot Fire (GRHF) of the SLS Core Stage provided a flight-like ground test environment for verification of integrated vehicle TVC performance. A TVC model coupled to a vehicle structural dynamic model has been developed previously and incrementally validated in subsystem tests and simulations. Still, some aspects of TVC performance in GRHF were not anticipated. The ensuing investigation demonstrated the need for well-instrumented test environments, various levels of modeling fidelity, test-representative structural models, and caution in reuse of legacy components. This paper is the sixth installment in a seven-paper series surveying the design, engineering, test validation, and flight performance of the Core Stage Thrust Vector Control system. It introduces the salient structural dynamic phenomena uncovered in ambient and hot fire testing. During the Green Run test campaign, a comparison of ambient and hot fire step responses showed a significant change in apparent damping due to the presence of friction, challenging long standing assumptions that friction could be neglected. Additionally, the characteristic response of the engine and thrust structure during GRHF proved to be more complex than anticipated, as evidenced by the available actuator, thrust structure, and engine measurements. While the string-potentiometer based test instrumentation was intended to allow for reconstruction of the engine angles along the two control axes, the geometric placement, location uncertainty, and responses in overlapping frequency spectra revealed additional phenomena requiring further analysis and post-processing. The observations from both modal and frequency response testing during the Green Run ambient and hot fire configurations led to Engine and Core Stage FEM (finite element model) updates. When evidence of unexpected engine motion was found in engine section accelerometer data, the authors pursued additional structural analysis leading to FEM updates associated with the TVC gimbal and thrust structure. Through collaboration between structures, TVC, and flight control disciplines, the test-informed models and root-cause analysis led to confident flight rationale for the first flight of the SLS launch vehicle.

Richard K. Moore↗

Design, Instrumentation, and Data Analysis for the SLS Core Stage Green Run Test Series

The Space Launch System (SLS) Core Stage (CS) Thrust Vector Control (TVC) system is comprised of eight mechanical feedback Shuttle heritage Type III TVC actuators and four RS-25 engines, each attached to a Shuttle heritage gimbal block/bearing. The actuators are powered by a Shuttle-derived hydraulic Core Auxiliary Power Unit (CAPU), and integrated with an all-new Core Stage thrust structure. The actuators are interfaced to the SLS Vehicle Management (VM) software via an all-new TVC Actuator Control (TAC) avionics subsystem. Despite the significant test and flight experience of the Shuttle hardware, the SLS Green Run ambient and hot fire test activities revealed a number of new findings associated with the dynamic response of the TVC integrated system. Test responses suggested that the TVC system did not meet its performance specifications and its step and frequency responses exhibited unexpected departures from prior lab tests and modeled behavior. This paper is the fifth 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 design of the TVC analyses conducted during the Core Stage Green Run test series are discussed in detail. Throughout the course of the test activities, the SLS flight control team worked diligently with the Core Stage contractor to revise test command profiles and ensure sufficient instrumentation was available to collect data. Post-test analysis combined the Green Run modal, ambient, and hot fire test data, MSFC 2- axis Core Stage TVC Inertial Load Simulator (ILS) data, Hardware-In-the-Loop (HWIL) Systems Integration Lab (SIL) results, and actuator Acceptance Testing Procedure (ATP) responses. These data were used to characterize the response, validate critical math models of the TVC subsystem, and isolate the probable cause of the unexpected responses. Through comprehensive analysis of the available test data sources, the integrated team identified the dominant contributors to the observed response and developed test-correlated rationale for vehicle flight control system performance, ultimately leading to a confident posture for the Artemis I mission.

John H. Wall↗

Structural Dynamics Observations in Space Launch System Green Run Hot Fire Testing

The Space Launch System (SLS) Core Stage (CS) Thrust Vector Control (TVC) system is comprised of eight mechanical feedback Shuttle heritage Type III TVC actuators and four RS-25 engines, each attached to a Shuttle heritage gimbal block/bearing. Two actuators are used to move each engine in two planes perpendicular to one another (i.e., pitch and yaw). The TVC system design leverages hardware from the Space Shuttle program as well as new hardware designed specifically for the Core Stage. The Green Run Hot Fire (GRHF) of the SLS Core Stage provided a flight-like ground test environment for verification of integrated vehicle TVC performance. A TVC model coupled to a vehicle structural dynamic model has been developed previously and incrementally validated in subsystem tests and simulations. Still, some aspects of TVC performance in GRHF were not anticipated. The ensuing investigation demonstrated the need for well-instrumented test environments, various levels of modeling fidelity, test-representative structural models, and caution in reuse of legacy components. This paper is the sixth installment in a seven-paper series surveying the design, engineering, test validation, and flight performance of the Core Stage Thrust Vector Control system. It introduces the salient structural dynamic phenomena uncovered in ambient and hot fire testing. During the Green Run test campaign, a comparison of ambient and hot fire step responses showed a significant change in apparent damping due to the presence of friction, challenging long standing assumptions that friction could be neglected. Additionally, the characteristic response of the engine and thrust structure during GRHF proved to be more complex than anticipated, as evidenced by the available actuator, thrust structure, and engine measurements. While the string-potentiometer based test instrumentation was intended to allow for reconstruction of the engine angles along the two control axes, the geometric placement, location uncertainty, and responses in overlapping frequency spectra revealed additional phenomena requiring further analysis and post-processing. The observations from both modal and frequency response testing during the Green Run ambient and hot fire configurations led to Engine and Core Stage FEM (finite element model) updates. When evidence of unexpected engine motion was found in engine section accelerometer data, the authors pursued additional structural analysis leading to FEM updates associated with the TVC gimbal and thrust structure. Through collaboration between structures, TVC, and flight control disciplines, the test-informed models and root-cause analysis led to confident flight rationale for the first flight of the SLS launch vehicle.

Richard Moore↗

Flight Performance and Stability of Space Launch System Core Stage Thrust Vector Control

The Space Launch System (SLS) Core Stage (CS) Thrust Vector Control (TVC) system is comprised of eight mechanical feedback Shuttle heritage Type III TVC actuators and four RS-25 engines, each attached to a Shuttle heritage gimbal block/bearing. The Core Stage TVC shares vehicle control authority with the SLS 5-segment Solid Rocket Boosters (SRBs) during boost phase flight, and is the sole means of vehicle flight control during in exoatmospheric flight following SRB separation. TVC responses during Green Run Hot Fire (GRHF) testing revealed that the TVC did not meet its performance specifications. Step and frequency responses exhibited unexpected departures from prior laboratory data and modeled behavior. Post-test analysis determined that the characteristics of the structure and gimbal friction are significantly influenced by the thrust-loaded conditions, and the command avionics exhibited a small but important gain nonlinearity. Using the available test data, the design team augmented the flight control TVC models to bound the observed results and include the additional fidelity needed for vehicle flight control analysis so as to build sufficient rationale for flight certification. Prior to the Green Run tests, “simplex” linear models typically used for flight control analysis did not include gimbal friction and other nonlinearities owing to long-standing assumptions that these effects were negligible in the Shuttle Orbiter TVC system. Following the Green Run findings, simulation analysis of the flight dynamics in the time and frequency domain revealed the propensity for a flight control limit cycle oscillation (LCO) if friction and structural compliances fell near the edges of test-predicted bounds. While the “most probable” models did not predict an in-flight LCO, the SLS Program conservatively proceeded with a system-wide evaluation and ultimate acceptance of the possibility for a small amplitude, low-frequency TVC LCO in flight. A final validation of the extensive test and modeling effort occurred when the first flight of SLS successfully demonstrated the fully integrated performance of the vehicle’s TVC system This paper is the final 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 development of flight rationale in light of the TVC responses observed in Green Run is discussed, along with a review of the flight telemetry illustrating the correlation of the preflight predictions with the observed performance.

John H. Wall↗

Space Launch System Core Stage Green Run Base Heating: Anomaly, Mitigation and Flight Redesign

The NASA Space Launch System (SLS) vehicle is composed of four RS-25 liquid oxygen and hydrogen rocket engines in the Core Stage (CS). The SLS Core Stage went through Green Run hotfire testing at NASA Stennis Space Center’s B-2 test facility in 2021. The main goal of this testing was to confirm Core Stage tanking, propulsion and thrust vector control systems operations and performance to verify with predicted models. Two hot-fire (HF) test sequences were performed with the first one (HF1) in January for a test duration of 70 seconds and the second (HF2) testing completed in March for a test duration of 500 seconds. This paper focuses on the base heating anomalies observed during HF1 and HF2 where an extensive fire was observed along the Core Stage base heat shield during test operations. This environment was not anticipated and led to extensive unplanned damage to the thermal protection system which was augmented for flight. Green Run observations also led to a reassessment of flight environments for Artemis I. This paper discusses the potential cause of the anomalies, the flow physics, the reconstructed base environments, and mitigation plans for HF2 and flight.

aerothermodynamics↗

Identification of Noise Sources in a Rocket Engine Test Stand using Microphone Phased Array

A new, phased array of microphones, suitable for the harsh environment of a rocket launch, was built and tested during a static firing of a RS-25 engine. It uses 70 piezo-resistive, dynamic pressure sensors, optimally distributed on a 10.5ft diameter open frame dome structure, and has a 200-ft long cable bundle to carry the signals to a weather-protected cabinet containing the data systems. The test stand was imaged using an infra-red camera and a visible wavelength camera, and the beamformed noise maps were superimposed on the photographs. The first-time data from a full-scale engine test stand showed that the plume deflector at the bottom of the engine to be the primary noise source. The openings of the test stand around the nozzle exit were also found to be noise sources particularly at higher frequencies. The final goal is to use the array during NASA’s Artemis-II launch at Kennedy Space Center.

Identification of Noise Source↗

Liftoff Environments

A Launch Environment, or Liftoff Environment, fundamentally represents a source of loading during the hold-down or liftoff phase of a rocket launch. A launch vehicle is subjected to transient and oscillatory pressure loading on its exterior surfaces induced by engines and boosters during vehicle hold-down and liftoff. These pressure loads are a principal source of structural vibration which may result in the malfunction of vehicle components or the fatigue of exterior skin panels or component brackets. Additionally, the pressure loading gives rise to sound pressure levels inside the crew cabin which may impact the crew's health, safety, or ability to communicate. Liftoff Environments can have a significant impact on the launch vehicle or surrounding structures. For SLS, there are eight primary environments supported by the Liftoff Environments team. These are Liftoff Acoustics (LOA), Hold-down Acoustics (HDA), RS-25 Nozzle Flow Transient (NFT) Acoustics, Booster Ignition Overpressure (IOP) & Duct Overpressure (DOP), Igniter Shock, Core Stage Engine (CSE) Overpressure, Excess Hydrogen (H2) Pop, and Infrasonic Acoustics. These can be split generally into acoustics, which are sustained stationary events, and transients, which are short duration nonstationary events.

Matthew J Casiano↗

Artemis I Space Launch System Base Heat Shield Thermal Protection System Performance

The Space Launch System (SLS) Core Stage base heat shield experienced the highest external heating environments on the entire launch vehicle during Artemis I ascent flight. This result was consistent with design predictions. The base heat shield experiences P50 cork combustion dynamics at low altitudes, plume-induced recirculation at moderate altitudes and then in-space base flow physics out to Main Engine Cut-Off (MECO). The base heat shield thermal protection system (TPS) is composed of a P50 cork ablator which is bonded to a substrate. The heat shield protects the gimbal actuation system, RS-25 turbomachinery systems and other aft section sensitive components during ascent. This paper estimates the base heat shield TPS performance from Artemis I using flight data from the NASA Langley Research Center’s Scientifically Calibrated In-Flight Imagery (SCIFLI) Airborne Multispectral Imager (SAMI), development flight instrumentation (DFI) and other TPS recession flight measurements. Predictions from computational and ground test-derived engineering ablation models and observations are also applied. Since no base heat shield substrate thermocouple data were obtained for Artemis I, an estimate of the TPS performance data is derived here. This data assesses thermal margin of the SLS Core Stage base heat shield and best informs the Artemis II Crewed mission to the moon.

aerothermodynamics↗