Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Thermal Control Technology Space Missions”

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 NTRS2020

Pterodactyl: Thermal Protection System for Integrated Control Design of a Mechanically Deployed Entry Vehicle

The need for precision landing of high mass payloads on Mars and the return of sensitive samples from other planetary bodies to specific locations on Earth is driving the development of an innovative NASA technology referred to as the Deployable Entry Vehicle (DEV). A DEV has the potential to deliver an equivalent science payload with a stowed diameter 3 to 4 times smaller than a traditional rigid capsule configuration. However, the DEV design does not easily lend itself to traditional methods of directional control. The NASA Space Technology Mission Directorate (STMD)’s Pterodactyl project is currently investigating the effectiveness of three different Guidance and Control (G&C) systems – actuated flaps, Center of Gravity (CG) or mass movement, and Reaction Control System (RCS) – for use with a DEV using the Adaptable, Deployable, Entry, and Placement Technology (ADEPT) design. This paper details the Thermal Protection System (TPS) design and associated mass estimation efforts for each of the G&C systems. TPS is needed for the nose cap of the DEV and the flaps of the actuated flap control system. The development of a TPS selection, sizing, and mass estimation method designed to deal with the varying requirements for the G&C options throughout the trajectory is presented. The paper discusses the methods used to i) obtain heating environments throughout the trajectory with respect to the chosen control system and resulting geometry; ii) determine a suitable TPS material; iii) produce TPS thickness estimations; and, iv) determine the final TPS mass estimation based on TPS thickness, vehicle control system, vehicle structure, and vehicle payload.

Hays, Zane B.↗
NASA NTRS2013

Control Software for Piezo Stepping Actuators

A control system has been developed for the Space Interferometer Mission (SIM) piezo stepping actuator. Piezo stepping actuators are novel because they offer extreme dynamic range (centimeter stroke with nanometer resolution) with power, thermal, mass, and volume advantages over existing motorized actuation technology. These advantages come with the added benefit of greatly reduced complexity in the support electronics. The piezo stepping actuator consists of three fully redundant sets of piezoelectric transducers (PZTs), two sets of brake PZTs, and one set of extension PZTs. These PZTs are used to grasp and move a runner attached to the optic to be moved. By proper cycling of the two brake and extension PZTs, both forward and backward moves of the runner can be achieved. Each brake can be configured for either a power-on or power-off state. For SIM, the brakes and gate of the mechanism are configured in such a manner that, at the end of the step, the actuator is in a parked or power-off state. The control software uses asynchronous sampling of an optical encoder to monitor the position of the runner. These samples are timed to coincide with the end of the previous move, which may consist of a variable number of steps. This sampling technique linearizes the device by avoiding input saturation of the actuator and makes latencies of the plant vanish. The software also estimates, in real time, the scale factor of the device and a disturbance caused by cycling of the brakes. These estimates are used to actively cancel the brake disturbance. The control system also includes feedback and feedforward elements that regulate the position of the runner to a given reference position. Convergence time for smalland medium-sized reference positions (less than 200 microns) to within 10 nanometers can be achieved in under 10 seconds. Convergence times for large moves (greater than 1 millimeter) are limited by the step rate.

Shields, Joel F.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Thermal Protection Materials and Systems at NASA Ames Research Center

Thermal Protection Systems (TPS) are critical for enabling NASA missions involving high-speed atmospheric flight where the entries usually include descending into the atmosphere followed by a trajectory that aims to burn off energy and result in a controlled landing. NASA Ames focuses on qualifying and certifying TPS for current missions, sustaining TPS for future missions, and developing new TPS for upcoming missions where a heritage solution is not viable. More recently there is also a focus on advancing and transferring technologies that can benefit both commercial and government space needs.Developing mature thermal protection systems is a lengthy process involving advanced tools, extensive research, and testing. Design and analysis tools are used to predict aerothermal environments, aid the design of test and flight hardware, and support the testing for the thermal/mechanical response of thermal protection systems. More recently, advances in computational methods help reduce the time and cost of technological advances, aid in optimized material architecture design, and improve material properties and performance. While high-enthalpy testing that simulates the conditions of space flight remains essential for the evaluation and development of TPS materials, computational tools are already showing promise in reducing the need for widespread testing and can help fast-trackthe design cycle.With the exploration of new destinations EDL instrumentation remains an important element of the heatshield and NASA Ames and partners have developed and delivered instrumentation flight hardware in support of recent Mars missions,including Mars Science Lab (MSL) and Mars 2020 (M2020),as well as Artemis Orion. Sensors installed on the heatshield and backshell of spacecraft provide coveted information about the aerodynamic and aerothermal environment during entry.Overthe years NASA Ames has brought several reusable and ablative TPS materials to a level of readiness to hand off to missions and the Thermal Protection Materials branch continues to serve as a TPS steward for the agency.

Thermal protection materials↗
NASA NTRS2012

Cryogenic Propellant Storage and Transfer Technology Demonstration For Long Duration In-Space Missions

The high specific impulse of cryogenic propellants can provide a significant performance advantage for in-space transfer vehicles. The upper stages of the Saturn V and various commercial expendable launch vehicles have used liquid oxygen and liquid hydrogen propellants; however, the application of cryogenic propellants has been limited to relatively short duration missions due to the propensity of cryogens to absorb environmental heat resulting in fluid losses. Utilizing advanced cryogenic propellant technologies can enable the efficient use of high performance propellants for long duration missions. Crewed mission architectures for beyond low Earth orbit exploration can significantly benefit from this capability by developing realistic launch spacing for multiple launch missions, by prepositioning stages and by staging propellants at an in-space depot. The National Aeronautics and Space Administration through the Office of the Chief Technologist is formulating a Cryogenic Propellant Storage and Transfer Technology Demonstration Mission to mitigate the technical and programmatic risks of infusing these advanced technologies into the development of future cryogenic propellant stages or in-space propellant depots. NASA is seeking an innovative path for human space exploration, which strengthens the capability to extend human and robotic presence throughout the solar system. This mission will test and validate key cryogenic technological capabilities and has the objectives of demonstrating advanced thermal control technologies to minimize propellant loss during loiter, demonstrating robust operation in a microgravity environment, and demonstrating efficient propellant transfer on orbit. The status of the demonstration mission concept development, technology demonstration planning and technology maturation activities in preparation for flight system development are described.

Meyer, Michael 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 NTRSDate not supplied

Thermal Protection Materials and Systems at NASA Ames Research Center

Thermal Protection Systems (TPS) are critical for enabling NASA missions involving high-speed atmospheric flight where the entries usually include descending into the atmosphere followed by a trajectory that aims to burn off energy and result in a controlled landing. NASA Ames focuses on qualifying and certifying TPS for current missions, sustaining TPS for future missions, and developing new TPS for upcoming missions where a heritage solution is not viable. More recently there is also a focus on advancing and transferring technologies that can benefit both commercial and government space needs. Developing mature thermal protection systems is a lengthy process involving advanced tools, extensive research, and testing. Design and analysis tools are used to predict aerothermal environments, aid the design of test and flight hardware, and support the testing for the thermal/mechanical response of thermal protection systems. More recently, advances in computational methods help reduce the time and cost of technological advances, aid in optimized material architecture design, and improve material properties and performance. While high-enthalpy testing that simulates the conditions of space flight remains essential for the evaluation and development of TPS materials, computational tools are already showing promise in reducing the need for widespread testing and can help fast-track the design cycle. With the exploration of new destinations EDL instrumentation remains an important element of the heatshield and NASA Ames and partners have developed and delivered instrumentation flight hardware in support of recent Mars missions (MSL and M2020) as well as Artemis Orion. Sensors installed on the heatshield and backshell of spacecraft provide coveted information about the aerodynamic and aerothermal environment during entry. Over the years NASA Ames has brought several reusable and ablative TPS materials to a level of readiness to hand off to missions and the branch continues to serve as a TPS steward for the agency. This presentation will cover current developments in the above areas that have enabled recent missions, and look to future TPS needs for missions such as Ice Giants.

thermal protection materials↗
NASA NTRS2001

Development of the Variable Emittance Thermal Suite for the Space Technology 5 Microsatellite

The advent of very small satellites, such as nano and microsatellites, logically leads to a requirement for smaller thermal control subsystems. In addition, the thermal control needs of the smaller spacecraft/instrument may well be different from more traditional situations. For example, power for traditional heaters may be very limited or unavailable, mass allocations may be severely limited, and fleets of nano/microsatellites will require a generic thermal design as the cost of unique designs will be prohibitive. Some applications may require significantly increased power levels while others may require extremely low heat loss for extended periods. Small spacecraft will have low thermal capacitance thus subjecting them to large temperature swings when either the heat generation rate changes or the thermal sink temperature changes. This situation, combined with the need for tighter temperature control, will present a challenging situation during transient operation. The use of "off-the-shelf" commercial spacecraft buses for science instruments will also present challenges. Older thermal technology, such as heaters, thermostats, and heat pipes, will almost certainly not be sufficient to meet the requirements of these new spacecraft/instruments. They are generally too heavy, not scalable to very small sizes, and may consume inordinate amounts of power. Hence there is a strong driver to develop new technology to meet these emerging needs. Variable emittance coatings offer an exciting alternative to traditional control methodologies and are one of the technologies that will be flown on Space Technology 5, a mission of three microsatellites designed to validate "enabling" technologies. Several studies have identified variable emittance coatings as applicable to a wide range of spacecraft, and to potentially offer substantial savings in mass and/or power over traditional approaches. This paper discusses the development of the variable emittance thermal suite for ST-5. More specifically, it provides a description of and the infusion and validation plans for the variable emittance coatings.

Douglas, Donya M.↗
NASA NTRS2004

Advanced Controller for the Free-Piston Stirling Convertor

The free-piston Stirling power convertor is being considered as an advanced power conversion technology to be used for future NASA deep space missions requiring long life radioisotope power systems. This technology has a conversion efficiency of over 25%, which is significantly higher than the efficiency of the Radioisotope Thermal-electric Generators (RTG) now in use. The NASA Glenn Research Center has long been recognized as a leader in Stirling technology and is responsible for the development of advanced technologies that are intended to significantly improve key characteristics of the Stirling convertor. The advanced technologies identified for development also consider the requirements of potential future missions and the new capabilities that have become available in the associated technical areas. One of the key areas identified for technology development is the engine controller. To support this activity, an advanced controller is being developed for the Stirling power convertor. This controller utilizes active power factor correction electronics and microcontroller-based controls. The object of this paper is to present an overview of the advanced controller concept with modeling, simulation and hardware test data.

Gerber, Scott S.↗
NASA NTRS2001

Flight Computer Design for the Space Technology 5 (ST-5) Mission

As part of NASA's New Millennium Program, the Space Technology 5 mission will validate a variety of technologies for nano-satellite and constellation mission applications. Included are: a miniaturized and low power X-band transponder, a constellation communication and navigation transceiver, a cold gas micro-thruster, two different variable emittance (thermal) controllers, flex cables for solar array power collection, autonomous groundbased constellation management tools, and a new CMOS ultra low-power, radiation-tolerant, +0.5 volt logic technology. The ST-5 focus is on small and low-power. A single-processor, multi-function flight computer will implement direct digital and analog interfaces to all of the other spacecraft subsystems and components. There will not be a distributed data system that uses a standardized serial bus such as MIL-STD-1553 or MIL-STD-1773. The flight software running on the single processor will be responsible for all real-time processing associated with: guidance, navigation and control, command and data handling (C&DH) including uplink/downlink, power switching and battery charge management, science data analysis and storage, intra-constellation communications, and housekeeping data collection and logging. As a nanosatellite trail-blazer for future constellations of up to 100 separate space vehicles, ST-5 will demonstrate a compact (single board), low power (5.5 watts) solution to the data acquisition, control, communications, processing and storage requirements that have traditionally required an entire network of separate circuit boards and/or avionics boxes. In addition to the New Millennium technologies, other major spacecraft subsystems include the power system electronics, a lithium-ion battery, triple-junction solar cell arrays, a science-grade magnetometer, a miniature spinning sun sensor, and a propulsion system.

Speer, David↗
NASA NTRS2005

Spherical Primary Optical Telescope (SPOT): An Architecture Demonstration for Cost-effective Large Space Telescopes

This paper summarizes efforts underway at the Goddard Space Flight Center to demonstrate a new type of space telescope architecture that builds on the rigid, segmented telescope heritage of the James Webb Space Telescope but that solves several key challenges for future space telescopes. The architecture is based on a cost-effective segmented spherical primary mirror combined with a unique wavefront sensing and control system that allows for continuous phasing of the primary mirror. The segmented spherical primary allows for cost-effective 3-meter class (eg, Midex and Discovery) missions as well as enables 30-meter telescope solutions that can be manufactured in a reasonable amount of time and for a reasonable amount of money. The continuous wavefront sensing and control architecture enables missions in low-earth-orbit and missions that do not require expensive stable structures and thermal control systems. For the 30-meter class applications, the paper discusses considerations for assembling and testing the telescopes in space. The paper also summarizes the scientific and technological roadmap for the architecture and also gives an overview of technology development, design studies, and testbed activities underway to demonstrate it s feasibility.

Feinberg, Lee↗
NASA NTRS2004

Spherical Primary Optical Telescope (SPOT): An Architecture Demonstration for Cost-effective Large Space Telescopes

This paper summarizes efforts underway at the Goddard Space Flight Center to demonstrate a new type of space telescope architecture that builds on the rigid segmented telescope heritage of the James Webb Space Telescope but that solves several key challenges for future space telescopes. The architecture is based on a cost-effective segmented spherical primary mirror combined with a unique wavefront sensing and control system that allows for continuous phasing of the primary mirror. The segmented spherical primary allows for cost-effective 3-meter class (e.g., Midex and Discovery) missions as well as enables 30-meter telescope solutions that can be manufactured in a reasonable amount of time and for a reasonable amount of money. The continuous wavefront sensing and control architecture enables missions in low-earth-orbit and missions that do not require expensive stable structures and thermal control systems. For the 30-meter class applications, the paper discusses considerations for assembling and testing the telescopes in space. The paper also summarizes the scientific and technological roadmap for the architecture and also gives an overview of technology development, design studies, and testbed activities underway to demonstrate its feasibility.

Feinberg, Lee D.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Development of Additive Manufacturing Technologies for 3D Printing of Spacecraft Heat Shields

Introduction: Ablative heat shields are an enabling technology for entry into planetary atmospheres. From the PICA heatshields used for several Mars rovers to the carbon phenolic material used for Galileo’s Jupiter entry probe, the heat shield manages the heat load transferred to the payload, protecting the sensitive scientific instruments carried on entry probes. The Additive Manufacturing of Thermal Protection Systems (AMTPS) project, an Early Career Initiative (ECI) funded by NASA’s Space Technology Mission Directorate and led by NASA Johnson Space Center, seeks to develop materials and processes for 3D printing ablative heat shields for spacecraft. Current methods for producing ablative heat shields are extremely labor intensive and re-quire extensive hands-on processes and quality control characterization. Additive manufacturing (AM) offers the possibility of reduced production times, improved reliability, and enhanced performance via graded compositions. Costs will also be reduced by reducing the time and labor required for heat shield production. Direct integration of the heat shield onto the structure during processing simplifies integration and reduces risk. Material Development: A critical challenge for the project is development of a material system that can (1) be printed in a near-net shape process and (2) perform well as an ablator. Achieving printability requires the material to flow under applied pressure, but maintain its shape once extruded from the printer nozzle. Ablative performance is measured by a multitude of markers, including char yield, char strength, thermal conductivity, and recession rate. Furthermore, there are several mechanical and thermal property considerations for vehicle integration including coefficient of thermal expansion (CTE) and residual stress. AM technology will be leveraged to grade the material formulation and properties through the thickness of the heat shield, an architecture not possible with current manufacturing processes. To this end, “robust” material formulations have been pre-pared with higher density for use on the surface where most ablation will occur. “Insulative” material formulations, with lower density and lower thermal conductivity, are prepared for use in the depth of the heat shield. This graded architecture will re-duce the overall mass of the heat shield and reduce costs and/or increase scientific payload capacities. To achieve a material system with the required properties, multiple resins have been investigated in collaboration with NASA Ames Research Center. To tune printability and performance, resin additives were studied to improve flexibility of the cured material while maintaining acceptable ablative performance. Material coupons were printed and studied via a suite of mechanical and thermal characterization methods. Arc jet testing was conducted at NASA Ames Research Center to evaluate ablative performance and thermal protection under conditions expected in atmospheric entry. Manufacturing Scale-Up: A partnership with Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) aims to enable full-scale fabrication of a 3D printed heat shield. Leveraging expertise in manufacturing and 3D printing at ORNL, a mid-scale manufacturing demonstration unit will be built and tested, using a dual-layer ablative system printed directly onto the titanium structure. Work on robotic system integration is ongoing and efforts to scale up material mixing with a material compound will ensure accurate and homogenous composition. Flight Test: A hypersonic sub-orbital flight test will provide a rigorous test of material performance ranging from ablation, thermal management, and mechanical integrity. Design of the capsule has taken place in collaboration with the University of Kentucky. Data collected from the flight will inform future design efforts in material formulation, printing methodology, and heat shield-capsule integration.

additive manufacturing↗
NASA NTRS2020

Controlled Environmental Effects on Creep Test Data of Woven Fabric Webbings for Inflatable Space Modules

eveloping technologies for proposed lunar and Mars space exploration missions. Enhanced habitation sy g studied as potential habitats due to their inherent low mass and small launch volume. One goal of inflatable module research is quantification of the safe-life and end-of-life creep-strain spectrum. Full-scale pressurized inflatable modules are large, costly, and difficult to experimentally study. Therefore, material subcomponents are often studied as an alternative. An experimental thermally controlled long-term creep study of VectranTM webbings for application to inflatable modules is presented. Vectran fibers have high strength and low creep properties. High strength webbing materials are desirable for the load bearing restraint layer of inflatable modules because they are strong, flexible, and lightweight. Characterization of the creep behavior, safe-life, and end-of- life of webbing specimens will help quantify comparable life properties for inflatable modules. Several experimental multiple-year creep studies of webbing specimens in uncontrolled thermal environments have been conducted at NASA Langley Research Center. Experimental data obtained exhibits the classic creep-strain curve due to load, coupled with unique sinusoidal variation due to variation in temperature and humidity over daily and annual time periods. Results also have indicated that specimens fail within a year if the applied load is greater than 50 percent of the rated load. The primary goal of this study is to eliminate thermal effects from the creep data for a group of webbing specimens, and to allow uncontrolled thermal effects to influence the creep data of a second group of webbing specimens. Comparison of both sets of data will define how temperature influences creep data. A unique creep test facility was fabricated to facilitate the generation and comparison of the two sets of data. The facility consists of five creep test stands with an integrated heating and cooling system, and four creep test stands exposed to external environmental or ambient conditions. The facility contains displacement, temperature, humidity, and load sensors. Test specimens consist of one- inch wide, 48-inch long Vectran webbings rated at 12,500 pounds-per-inch. Experimental thermally controlled creep-strain data has been generated for two groups of webbing specimens. Applied load for all test stands was above 9000 lbs and greater than 50 percent of the rated load. Temperatures varied between 58˚F and 83˚F for the four test stands exposed to ambient conditions. Associated creep data exhibited the classic creep- strain profiles. The temperature was set to 72˚F for the five test stands in the controlled temperature environment. Creep data for tests with temperature control also exhibited the classic strain profiles. Data indicated that if the load is greater n thermal effects do not manifest. Therefore, creep tests with loads less than 50 percent of the rated load are planned for in the near future.

Kenner, Winfred S.↗
NASA NTRS2015

Early Operations Flight Correlation of the Lunar Laser Communications Demonstration (LLCD) on the Lunar Atmosphere and Dust Environment Explorer (LADEE)

The Lunar Atmosphere and Dust Environment Explorer (LADEE) mission launched on September 7, 2013 with a one month cruise before lunar insertion. The LADEE spacecraft is a power limited, octagonal, composite bus structure with solar panels on all eight sides with four vertical segments per side and 2 panels dedicated to instruments. One of these panels has the Lunar Laser Communications Demonstration (LLCD), which represents a furthering of the laser communications technology demonstration proved out by the Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter (LRO). LLCD increases the bandwidth of communication to and from the moon with less mass and power than LROs technology demonstrator. The LLCD Modem and Controller boxes are mounted to an internal cruciform composite panel and have no dedicated radiator. The thermal design relies on power cycling of the boxes and radiation of waste heat to the inside of the panels, which then reject the heat when facing cold space. The LADEE mission includes a slow roll and numerous attitudes to accommodate the challenging thermal requirements for all the instruments on board. During the cruise phase, the internal Modem and Controller avionics for LLCD were warmer than predicted by more than modeling uncertainty would suggest. This caused concern that if the boxes were considerably warmer than expected while off, they would also be warmer when operating and could limit the operational time when in lunar orbit. The thermal group at Goddard Space Flight Center evaluated the models and design for these critical avionics for LLCD. Upon receipt of the spacecraft models and audit was performed and data was collected from the flight telemetry to perform a sanity check of the models and to correlate to flight where possible. This paper describes the efforts to correlate the model to flight data and to predict the thermal performance when in lunar orbit and presents some lessons learned.

LADEE↗