Results for “cryogenic rocket propellants” — Page 5

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

NASA's Space Launch System Begins Integration, Stacking in Preparation for Artemis I Launch

The Artemis era of human lunar exploration is nearing take-off as NASA’s new super heavy-lift launch vehicle, the Space Launch System (SLS), begins stack-ing and integration operations in mid-2020 at Kennedy Space Center (KSC) in Florida. With a planned upgrade path to progressively more powerful vehicles and availability in crew and cargo configurations, SLS provides a unique and flexible launch solution to send crew, large-scale infrastructure and robotic probes to deep space. The SLS Block 1 vehicle, the initial variant to fly, is optimized for lunar missions with a proven propulsion system consisting of four liquid hydrogen (LH2)/liquid oxygen (LOX)-fed RS-25 engines and twin five-segment solid rocket boosters (SRBs). The Block 1 vehicle can also be outfitted with an industry-standard 5 m-class payload fairing (the “cargo” configuration) and will launch at least 27 metric tons (t) of mass to trans-lunar injection (TLI). SLS is the backbone of NASA’s Artemis program, which will return the agency’s human spaceflight program to the Moon for the first time since 1972. For the Artemis I mission, SLS will send an uncrewed Orion spacecraft to TLI, where it will enter a distant retrograde lunar orbit and fly 38,000 nmi past the Moon – farther than any spacecraft built for humans has ever traveled. The SLS Block 1 vehicle for Artemis I completed manufacturing in 2019. Several elements, including the upper stage, have been delivered to the Exploration Ground Systems (EGS) program at KSC and are being prepped for integration and stack-ing. The five-segment solid rocket boosters – the largest and most powerful ever built for flight – are also complete. The booster motor segments for the Artemis I flight are scheduled to ship from prime contractor Northrop Grumman’s Utah facilities and begin stacking and integration at KSC in June 2020. The SLS core stage is the largest rocket stage NASA has ever built in terms of volume and height, and includes the avionics and the tanks that feed cryogenic propellant to the four RS-25s (formerly Space Shuttle Main Engines [SSMEs]). They have been modified with an updated controller and nozzle insulation to protect them from the hotter launch environment. The SLS core stage is currently being test-ed at NASA’s Stennis Space Center (SSC) in a series of “green run” tests to verify it meets design and performance requirements. Following the green run test series, which is scheduled to culminate with a full-duration hot-fire of the four RS-25 engines, the core stage will ship to KSC and be stacked between the sol-id rocket boosters in the Vehicle Assembly Building (VAB). Integration of the vehicle will continue with the upper stage, known as the Interim Cryogenic Propulsion Stage (ICPS) and the Launch Vehicle Stage Adapter (LVSA) on the core stage. Another adapter, the Orion Stage Adapter (OSA), connects SLS to Orion and provides housing for 13 6U CubeSat payloads manifested on Artemis I. The CubeSats will be released in deep space after Orion separates from the vehicle, and the flight marks the first ride share opportunity for independent small-sats to deep space. The second major SLS variant to come online, Block 1B, replaces the single-engine ICPS with a four-engine LH2/LOX Exploration Upper Stage (EUS). This more powerful upper stage, along with other vehicle up-grades, will enable the Block 1B vehicle to launch 38-42 t to TLI, depending on crew or cargo configuration. The final evolution of the vehicle, Block 2, will onramp evolved solid rocket boosters to increase mass to TLI to 43-46 t, de-pending on crew or cargo configuration. The Block 1B/Block 2 vehicles can be outfitted with an 8.4 m-diameter payload fairing in 19.1 m or 27.4 m lengths, to provide unprecedented volume for payloads. With the initial Block 1 vehicle completely manufactured and the core stage in final testing before shipping to KSC, the SLS Program and its industry partners have made significant progress manufacturing subsequent vehicles. For the second Block 1 vehicle, the solid rocket motor segments are complete, as are the RS-25 engines with controllers. All five major components of the Artemis II core stage – the forward skirt, LOX and LH2 tanks, intertank and engine section – are manufactured and technicians are installing subsystems at NASA’s rocket factory, Michoud Assembly Facility. The RL-10 engine for the Artemis II ICPS is complete and panels have been machined for its LH2 tank. In addition, panels are machined for the vehicle’s two adapters, with welding scheduled to begin in summer 2020. Flight hard-ware is also in production for the third SLS vehicle, with several booster motor segments cast. The pace of development on the EUS has increased, with the goal to complete Critical Design Review (CDR) in December 2020. Several EUS test rings have been machined at Michoud. The EUS is designed to exe-cute a variety of missions – human spaceflight, deployment of deep-space infra-structure, or high-C3 missions to the outer solar system – with crew and cargo configurations available beginning in the mid-2020s. The near-term goal for the nation’s powerful new space exploration asset, however, is to launch the Arte-mis program, and send the first woman and the next man to the lunar surface. At the Astrodynamics Specialist Conference, the SLS program will update the community on the progress of the initial Block 1 vehicle in final green run test-ing, integration and stacking. In addition, this paper will provide an update to the community on the manufacturing status of subsequent Block 1 and Block 1B vehicles.

Steve Creech↗

NASA NTRS1994

Shadowgraphy of transcritical cryogenic fluids

The future of liquid-rocket propulsion depends heavily on continued development of high pressure liquid oxygen/hydrogen systems that operate near or above the propellant critical states; however, current understanding of transcritical/supercritical injection and combustion is yet lacking. The Phillips Laboratory and the United Technologies Research Center are involved in a collaborative effort to develop diagnostics for and make detailed measurements of transcritical droplet vaporization and combustion. The present shadowgraph study of transcritical cryogenic fluids is aimed at providing insight into the behavior of liquid oxygen or cryogenic stimulants as they are injected into a supercritical environment of the same or other fluids. A detailed history of transcritical injection of liquid nitrogen into gaseous nitrogen at reduced pressures of 0.63 (subcritical) to 1.05 (supercritical) is provided. Also, critical point enhancement due to gas phase solubility and mixture effects is investigated by adding helium to the nitrogen system, which causes a distinct liquid phase to re-appear at supercritical nitrogen pressures. Liquid oxygen injection into supercritical argon or nitrogen, however, does not indicate an increase in the effective critical pressure of the system.

Woodward, R. D.↗

NASA NTRS2003

Modeling and Validation of a Propellant Mixer for Controller Design

A mixing chamber used in rocket engine testing at the NASA Stennis Space Center is modelled by a system of two nonlinear ordinary differential equations. The mixer is used to condition the thermodynamic properties of cryogenic liquid propellant by controlled injection of the same substance in the gaseous phase. The three inputs of the mixer are the positions of the valves regulating the liquid and gas flows at the inlets, and the position of the exit valve regulating the flow of conditioned propellant. Mixer operation during a test requires the regulation of its internal pressure, exit mass flow, and exit temperature. A mathematical model is developed to facilitate subsequent controller designs. The model must be simple enough to lend itself to subsequent feedback controller design, yet its accuracy must be tested against real data. For this reason, the model includes function calls to thermodynamic property data. Some structural properties of the resulting model that pertain to controller design, such as uniqueness of the equilibrium point, feedback linearizability and local stability are shown to hold under conditions having direct physical interpretation. The existence of fixed valve positions that attain a desired operating condition is also shown. Validation of the model against real data is likewise provided.

Richter, Hanz↗

NASA NTRS1959

Materials Problems in Chemical Liquid-Propellant Rocket Systems

With the advent of the space age, new adjustments in technical thinking and engineering experience are necessary. There is an increasing and extensive interest in the utilization of materials for components to be used at temperatures ranging from -423 to over 3500 deg F. This paper presents a description of the materials problems associated with the various components of chemical liquid rocket systems. These components include cooled and uncooled thrust chambers, injectors, turbine drive systems, propellant tanks, and cryogenic propellant containers. In addition to materials limitations associated with these components, suggested research approaches for improving materials properties are made. Materials such as high-temperature alloys, cermets, carbides, nonferrous alloys, plastics, refractory metals, and porous materials are considered.

Gilbert, L. L.↗

NASA NTRS2010

A Heat Transfer Investigation of Liquid and Two-Phase Methane

A heat transfer investigation was conducted for liquid and two-phase methane. The tests were conducted at the NASA Glenn Research Center Heated Tube Facility (HTF) using resistively heated tube sections to simulate conditions encountered in regeneratively cooled rocket engines. This testing is part of NASA s Propulsion and Cryogenics Advanced Development (PCAD) project. Nontoxic propellants, such as liquid oxygen/liquid methane (LO2/LCH4), offer potential benefits in both performance and safety over equivalently sized hypergolic propulsion systems in spacecraft applications. Regeneratively cooled thrust chambers are one solution for high performance, robust LO2/LCH4 engines, but cooling data on methane is limited. Several test runs were conducted using three different diameter Inconel 600 tubes, with nominal inner diameters of 0.0225-, 0.054-, and 0.075-in. The mass flow rate was varied from 0.005 to 0.07 lbm/sec. As the current focus of the PCAD project is on pressure fed engines for LO2/LCH4, the average test section outlet pressures were targeted to be 200 psia or 500 psia. The heat flux was incrementally increased for each test condition while the test section wall temperatures were monitored. A maximum average heat flux of 6.2 Btu/in.2 sec was achieved and, at times, the temperatures of the test sections reached in excess of 1800 R. The primary objective of the tests was to produce heat transfer correlations for methane in the liquid and two-phase regime. For two-phase flow testing, the critical heat flux values were determined where the fluid transitions from nucleate boiling to film boiling. A secondary goal of the testing was to measure system pressure drops in the two-phase regime.

VanNoord, Jonathan↗

NASA NTRS1999

A Flight Demonstration of Plasma Rocket Propulsion

The Advanced Space Propulsion Laboratory at the Johnson Space Center has been engaged in the development of a magneto-plasma rocket for several years. This type of rocket could be used in the future to propel interplanetary spacecraft. One advantageous feature of this rocket concept is the ability to vary its specific impulse so that it can be operated in a mode which maximizes propellant efficiency or a mode which maximizes thrust. This presentation will describe a proposed flight experiment in which a simple version of the rocket will be tested in space. In addition to the plasma rocket, the flight experiment will also demonstrate the use of a superconducting electromagnet, extensive use of heat pipes, and possibly the transfer of cryogenic propellant in space.

Petro, Andrew↗

NASA NTRS2004

Taming Liquid Hydrogen: The Centaur Upper Stage Rocket, 1958-2002

During its maiden voyage in May 1962, a Centaur upper stage rocket, mated to an Atlas booster, exploded 54 seconds after launch, engulfing the rocket in a huge fireball. Investigation revealed that Centaur's light, stainless-steel tank had split open, spilling its liquid-hydrogen fuel down its sides, where the flame of the rocket exhaust immediately ignited it. Coming less than a year after President Kennedy had made landing human beings on the Moon a national priority, the loss of Centaur was regarded as a serious setback for the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA). During the failure investigation, Homer Newell, Director of Space Sciences, ruefully declared: "Taming liquid hydrogen to the point where expensive operational space missions can be committed to it has turned out to be more difficult than anyone supposed at the outset." After this failure, Centaur critics, led by Wernher von Braun, mounted a campaign to cancel the program. In addition to the unknowns associated with liquid hydrogen, he objected to the unusual design of Centaur. Like the Atlas rocket, Centaur depended on pressure to keep its paper-thin, stainless-steel shell from collapsing. It was literally inflated with its propellants like a football or balloon and needed no internal structure to give it added strength and stability. The so-called "pressure-stabilized structure" of Centaur, coupled with the light weight of its high- energy cryogenic propellants, made Centaur lighter and more powerful than upper stages that used conventional fuel. But, the critics argued, it would never become the reliable rocket that the United States needed.

Dawson, Virginia P.↗

NASA NTRS1991

Lightning protection for shuttle propulsion elements

The results of lightning protection analyses and tests are weighed against the present set of waivers to the NASA lightning protection specification. The significant analyses and tests are contrasted with the release of a new and more realistic lightning protection specification, in September 1990, that resulted in an inordinate number of waivers. A variety of lightning protection analyses and tests of the Shuttle propulsion elements, the Solid Rocket Booster, the External Tank, and the Space Shuttle Main Engine, were conducted. These tests range from the sensitivity of solid propellant during shipping to penetration of cryogenic tanks during flight. The Shuttle propulsion elements have the capability to survive certain levels of lightning strikes at certain times during transportation, launch site operations, and flight. Changes are being evaluated that may improve the odds of withstanding a major lightning strike. The Solid Rocket Booster is the most likely propulsion element to survive if systems tunnel bond straps are improved. Wiring improvements were already incorporated and major protection tests were conducted. The External Tank remains vulnerable to burn-through penetration of its skin. Proposed design improvements include the use of a composite nose cone and conductive or laminated thermal protection system coatings.

Goodloe, Carolyn C.↗

NASA NTRS2003

Evaluation of Impinging Stream Vortex Chamber Concepts for Liquid Rocket Engine Applications

NASA Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) and the U. S. Army are jointly investigating vortex chamber concepts for cryogenic oxygen/hydrocarbon fuel rocket engine applications. One concept, the Impinging Stream Vortex Chamber Concept (ISVC), has been tested with gel propellants at AMCOM at Redstone Arsenal, Alabama. A version of this concept for the liquid oxygen (LOX)/hydrocarbon fuel (RP-1) propellant system is derived from the one for the gel propellant. An unlike impinging injector is employed to deliver the propellants to the chamber. MSFC has also designed two alternative injection schemes, called the chasing injectors, associated with this vortex chamber concept. In these injection techniques, both propellant jets and their impingement point are in the same chamber cross-sectional plane. One injector has a similar orifice size with the original unlike impinging injector. The second chasing injector has small injection orifices. The team has achieved their objectives of demonstrating the self-cooled chamber wall benefits of ISVC and of providing the test data for validating computational fluids dynamics (CFD) models. These models, in turn, will be used to design the optimum vortex chambers in the future.

Trinh, Huu↗

NASA NTRS1999

Low-Cost, High-Performance Cryocoolers for In-Situ Propellant Production

A key feature of many In-Situ Resource Utilization (ISRU) schemes is the production of rocket fuel and oxidizer from the Martian atmosphere. Many of the fuels under consideration will require cryogenic cooling for efficient long-term storage. Although significant research has been focused on the techniques for producing the fuels from Martian resources, little effort has been expended on the development of cryocoolers to efficiently liquefy these fuels. This paper describes the design of a pulse tube liquefier optimized for liquefying oxygen produced by an In-Situ Propellant Production (ISPP) plant on Mars.

Martin, J. L.↗

NASA NTRS1999

Low-Cost High-Performance Cryocoolers for In-Situ Propellant Production

A key feature of many In-Situ Resource Utilization (ISRU) schemes is the production of rocket fuel and oxidizer from the Martian atmosphere. Many of the fuels under consideration will require cryogenic cooling for efficient long-term storage. Although significant research has been focused on the techniques for producing the fuels from Martian resources, little effort has been expended on the development of cryocoolers to efficiently liquefy these fuels. This paper describes the design of a pulse tube liquefier optimized for liquefying oxygen produced by an In-Situ Propellant Production (ISPP) plant on Mars.

Martin, J. L.↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Autogenous Pressurization of a Cryogenic Tank Using Computational Fluid Dynamics

Well-validated simulation tools can be used to predict long-term storage and transfer of cryogenic propellants, which are essential to NASA’s mission plan to return to the Moon and continue to Mars. Autogenous pressurization of propellant tanks is used to supply rocket engine turbopumps with pressurized liquid fuel and oxidizer, preventing cavitation. Additionally, autogenous pressurization can be used to pressurize propellant tanks to support on-orbit propellant transfer. In lieu of expensive tests conducted on-orbit, accurate predictive computational models of these processes can be used to reduce system and propellant mass as well as mission risk. Using simulation tools also reduces the cost of analyzing and developing this technology. This study presents a multiphase computational fluid dynamics model capable of simulating autogenous pressurization of a large cryogenic tank using the commercial code STAR-CCM+. Experimental data from a full-scale tank pressurization test under terrestrial gravity is compared to simulation results using transient error metrics. Comparisons show good agreement and give confidence in using these and other validated simulation tools to develop cryogenic pressurization systems.

Cryogenics↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Autogenous Pressurization of a Cryogenic Tank using Computational Fluid Dynamics

Well-validated simulation tools can be used to predict long-term storage and transfer of cryogenic propellants, which are essential to NASA’s mission plan to return to the Moon and continue to Mars. Autogenous pressurization of propellant tanks is used to supply rocket engine turbopumps with pressurized liquid fuel and oxidizer, preventing cavitation. Additionally, autogenous pressurization can be used to pressurize propellant tanks to support on-orbit propellant transfer. In lieu of expensive tests conducted on-orbit, accurate predictive computational models of these processes can be used to reduce system and propellant mass as well as mission risk. Using simulation tools also reduces the cost of analyzing and developing this technology. This study presents a multiphase computational fluid dynamics model capable of simulating autogenous pressurization of a large cryogenic tank using the commercial code STAR-CCM+. Experimental data from a full-scale tank pressurization test under terrestrial gravity is compared to simulation results using transient error metrics. Comparisons show good agreement and give confidence in using these and other validated simulation tools to develop cryogenic pressurization systems. Note: There is no audio file included or available for this presentation.

cryogenics↗

NASA NTRS1989

Evaluation of on-board hydrogen storage methods for hypersonic vehicles

Hydrogen is the foremost candidate as a fuel for use in high speed transport. Since any aircraft moving at hypersonic speeds must have a very slender body, means of decreasing the storage volume requirements below that for liquid hydrogen are needed. The total performance of the hypersonic plane needs to be considered for the evaluation of candidate fuel and storage systems. To accomplish this, a simple model for the performance of a hypersonic plane is presented. To allow for the use of different engines and fuels during different phases of flight, the total trajectory is divided into three phases: subsonic-supersonic, hypersonic and rocket propulsion phase. The fuel fraction for the first phase is found be a simple energy balance using an average thrust to drag ratio for this phase. The hypersonic flight phase is investigated in more detail by taking small altitude increments. This approach allowed the use of flight profiles other than the constant dynamic pressure flight. The effect of fuel volume on drag, structural mass and tankage mass was introduced through simplified equations involving the characteristic dimension of the plane. The propellant requirement for the last phase is found by employing the basic rocket equations. The candidate fuel systems such as the cryogenic fuel combinations and solid and liquid endothermic hydrogen generators are first screened thermodynamically with respect to their energy densities and cooling capacities and then evaluated using the above model.

Akyurtlu, Ates↗

NASA NTRS1999

Liquid Methane/Oxygen Injector Study for Mars Ascent Engines

As a part of the advancing technology of the cryogenic propulsion system for the Mars exploration mission, this effort aims at evaluating propellant injection concepts for liquid methane/liquid oxygen (LOX) rocket engines. Split-triplet and unlike impinging injectors were selected for this study. A total of four injector configurations were tested under combustion conditions in a modular combustor test article (MCTA), equipped with optically accessible windows, at MSFC. A series of forty hot-fire tests, which covered a wide range of engine operating conditions with the chamber pressure ranging from 320 to 510 and the mixture ratio from 1.5 to 3.5, were conducted. The test matrix also included a variation in the combustion chamber length for the purpose of investigating its effects on the combustion performance and stability. Initial assessments of the test results showed that the injectors provided stable combustion and there were no injector face overheating problems under all operating conditions. The Raman scattering signal measurement method was successfully demonstrated for the hydrocarbon/oxygen reactive flow field. The near-injector face flow field was visually observed through the use of an infrared camera. Chamber wall temperature, high frequency chamber pressure, and average throat section heat flux were also recorded throughout the test series. Assessments of the injector performance are underway.

Trinh, Huu Phuoc↗

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↗