Results for “Chemical propulsion” — Page 6

NASA NTRS1972

Unmanned planetary spacecraft chemical rocket propulsion.

Review of some chemical propulsion technology advances suitable for future unmanned spacecraft applications. Discussed system varieties include liquid space-storable propulsion systems, advanced liquid monopropellant systems, liquid systems for rendezvous and landing applications, and low-thrust high-performance solid-propellant systems, as well as hybrid space-storable systems. To optimize the performance and operational characteristics of an unmanned interplanetary spacecraft for a particular mission, and to achieve high cost effectiveness of the entire system, it is shown to be essential that the type of spacecraft propulsion system to be used matches, as closely as possible the various requirements and constraints. The systems discussed are deemed to be the most promising candidates for some of the anticipated interplanetary missions.

Burlage, H., Jr.↗

NASA NTRS1967

Non-chemical space propulsion.

Replacement of chemical launching rockets by advanced propulsion system, with particular reference to nuclear rocket

NUCLEAR ROCKET↗

NASA NTRS1995

Optimal lunar trajectories for a combined chemical-electric propulsion spacecraft

Spacecraft which utilize electric propulsion (EP) systems are capable of delivering a greater payload fraction compared to spacecraft using conventional chemical propulsion systems. Several researchers have investigated numerous applications of low-thrust EP including a manned Mars mission, scientific missions to the outer planets, and lunar missions. In contrast, the study of optimal combined high and low-thrust spacecraft trajectories has been limited. In response to the release of NASA's 1994 Announcement of Opportunity (AO) for Discovery class interplanetary exploration missions, a preliminary investigation of a lunar comet rendezvous mission using a solar electric propulsion (SEP) spacecraft was performed. The Discovery mission (eventually named Diana) was envisioned to be a two-phase scientific exploration mission: the first phase involved exploration of the moon and second phase involved rendezvous with a comet. The initial phase began with a chemical propulsion translunar injection and chemical insertion into a lunar orbit, followed by a low-thrust SEP transfer to a circular, polar, low-lunar orbit (LLO). After scientific data was collected at the moon, the SEP spacecraft performed a spiral lunar escape maneuver to begin the interplanetary leg of the mission. After escape from the Earth-moon system, the SEP spacecraft maneuvered in interplanetary space and performed a rendezvous with a short period comet. An initial study that demonstrated the feasibility of using EP for the lunar and comet orbit transfer was performed under the grant NAG3-1581. This final report is a continuation of the initial research efforts in support of the Discovery mission proposal that was submitted to NASA Headquarters in October 1994. Section 2 discusses the lunar orbit transfer phase of the Diana mission which involves both chemical and electric propulsion stages. Section 3 discusses the chemical lunar orbit insertion (LOI) burn optimization. Finally, section 4 presents the conclusions of this research effort.

Kluever, Craig A.↗

NASA NTRS2015

Solar System Exploration Augmented by In-Situ Resource Utilization: Human Mercury and Saturn Exploration

Human and robotic missions to Mercury and Saturn are presented and analyzed. Unique elements of the local planetary environments are discussed and included in the analyses and assessments. Using historical studies of space exploration, in-situ resource utilization (ISRU), and industrialization all point to the vastness of natural resources in the solar system. Advanced propulsion benefitted from these resources in many way. While advanced propulsion systems were proposed in these historical studies, further investigation of nuclear options using high power nuclear thermal and nuclear pulse propulsion as well as advanced chemical propulsion can significantly enhance these scenarios. Updated analyses based on these historical visions will be presented. Nuclear thermal propulsion and ISRU enhanced chemical propulsion landers are assessed for Mercury missions. At Saturn, nuclear pulse propulsion with alternate propellant feed systems and Titan exploration with chemical propulsion options are discussed.

Palaszewski, Bryan↗

NASA NTRS2016

Solar System Exploration Augmented by In-Situ Resource Utilization: Mercury and Saturn Propulsion Investigations

Human and robotic missions to Mercury and Saturn are presented and analyzed with a range of propulsion options. Historical studies of space exploration, in-situ resource utilization (ISRU), and industrialization all point to the vastness of natural resources in the solar system. Advanced propulsion benefitted from these resources in many ways. While advanced propulsion systems were proposed in these historical studies, further investigation of nuclear options using high power nuclear thermal and nuclear pulse propulsion as well as advanced chemical propulsion can significantly enhance these scenarios. Updated analyses based on these historical visions will be presented. Nuclear thermal propulsion and ISRU enhanced chemical propulsion landers are assessed for Mercury missions. At Saturn, nuclear pulse propulsion with alternate propellant feed systems and Titan exploration with chemical propulsion options are discussed. In-situ resource utilization was found to be critical in making Mercury missions more amenable for human visits. At Saturn, refueling using local atmospheric mining was found to be difficult to impractical, while refueling the Saturn missions from Uranus was more practical and less complex.

space propulsion↗

NASA NTRS2020

Solar System Exploration Augmented by In-Situ Resource Utilization: Human Mercury and Saturn Exploration

Human and robotic missions to Mercury and Saturn are presented and analyzed. Unique elements of the local planetary environments are discussed and included in the analyses and assessments. Historical studies of space exploration, in-situ resource utilization (ISRU), and industrialization all point to the vastness of natural resources in the solar system. Advanced propulsion benefitted from these resources in many ways. While advanced propulsion systems were proposed in these historical studies, further investigation of nuclear options using high power nuclear thermal and nuclear pulse propulsion as well as advanced chemical propulsion can significantly enhance these scenarios. Updated analyses based on these historical visions will be presented. Nuclear thermal propulsion and ISRU enhanced chemical propulsion landers are assessed for Mercury missions. At Saturn, nuclear pulse propulsion with alternate propellant feed systems and Titan exploration with chemical propulsion options are discussed.

Palaszewski, Bryan A.↗

NASA NTRS2017

Solar System Exploration Augmented by In-Situ Resource Utilization: Human Planetary Base Issues for Mercury and Saturn

Human and robotic missions to Mercury and Saturn are presented and analyzed with a range of propulsion options. Historical studies of space exploration, planetary spacecraft, and astronomy, in-situ resource utilization (ISRU), and industrialization all point to the vastness of natural resources in the solar system. Advanced propulsion benefitted from these resources in many ways. While advanced propulsion systems were proposed in these historical studies, further investigation of nuclear options using high power nuclear thermal and nuclear pulse propulsion as well as advanced chemical propulsion can significantly enhance these scenarios. Updated analyses based on these historical visions are presented. Nuclear thermal propulsion and ISRU enhanced chemical propulsion landers are assessed for Mercury missions. At Saturn, nuclear pulse propulsion with alternate propellant feed systems and Saturn moon exploration with chemical propulsion and nuclear electric propulsion options are discussed. Issues with using in-situ resource utilization on Mercury missions are discussed. At Saturn, the best locations for exploration and the use of the moons Titan and Enceladus as central locations for Saturn moon exploration is assessed.

Lunar↗

NASA NTRS2021

Compass Final Report: Nuclear Electric Propulsion (NEP)-Chemical Vehicle 1.2

Many previous studies have examined sending crews to and from Mars. The most economical involved a ‘conjunction’ class whereby the crew spends around 500 days on Mars waiting for a ‘cheap’ return. The total mission time results in over a 1000-day mission duration (about 3 years). Given the current experience level of only one year on the International Space Station (ISS), it of interest to reduce that time to only two years, thus reducing risk and minimizing required Mars surface infrastructure. The Phase 1.1 Study goal was stated as follows, “Determine the feasibility of a two-year roundtrip class Mars mission concept of operation that enables boots on Mars no later than 2036.” While the Phase1 study did show feasibility for the NEP-Chemical option, the 2036 Opposition opportunity was found to stress the schedule due to proposed technology development schedules. A 2039 Opposition (which requires even more energy than the 2036 case) was chosen as representative for Phase 1.2. Phase 1.2 also sought to further refine the concept, building on the feasibility, but addressing several challenges brought by the red team and habitat team. Given the date of 2039, nearer term technologies, primarily nuclear thermal and nuclear electric were deemed as the most viable for these missions. As will be shown, the energy required to perform such a mission in only two years (for the 2039 opportunity at least) is about three times that of the three-year conjunction mission. The rocket equation shows that this mission would then require several times the propellant of the three-year mission unless the specific impulse (ISP) of the propulsion system can be increased. Based on lunar needs, a limit of five Space Launch System (SLS) launchers with 8.4m fairings was imposed for the piloted transportation portion of the mission, limiting the size of the system. When using nuclear electric propulsion, the main limiting factor was packaging the required radiator area. The higher Isp nuclear electric propulsion (NEP) system option is described herein but with a twist: in order to keep the size of radiators packageable in one SLS and use proven reactor power system technology (~1200K reactor outlet temperature and superalloy-class Brayton) the NEP system had to be combined with a chemical propulsion system. This combination of electric propulsion and high thrust chemical was found to be useful in previous design studies combining solar electric propulsion (SEP) and chemical propulsion. Such a combination allowed the low-thrust system to provide significant change in velocity (∆V) during the interplanetary portions of the mission, thereby notably reducing the ∆V required by the high thrust system to capture and depart from the Mars gravity well. Here the high thrust ‘impulsive’ system is more efficient due to the Oberth Effect. A plethora of trades, both at the mission and system level, as well as the subsystem level were performed to develop these vehicle concepts. An entire family of NEP-Chemical transportation vehicles is described herein. The main driver and the primary focus was the piloted vehicle but additional concepts for cargo were performed using the same ‘building blocks’ in order to reduce costs and provide commonality.

Nuclear Power↗

NASA NTRS2005

Preliminary Assessment of Thrust Augmentation of NEP Based Missions

Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC), with support from NASA Marshall Space Flight Center, has conducted a preliminary study to compare options for augmenting the thrust of a conventional nuclear electric propulsion (NEP) system. These options include a novel nuclear propulsion system concept known as Hybrid Indirect Nuclear Propulsion (HINP) and conventional chemical propulsion. The utility and technical feasibility of the HINP concept are assessed, and features and potential of this new in-space propulsion system concept are identified. As part of the study, SAIC developed top-level design tools to model the size and performance of an HINP system, as well as for several chemical propulsion options, including liquid and gelled propellants. A mission trade study was performed to compare a representative HINP system with chemical propulsion options for thrust augmentation of NEP systems for a mission to Saturn's moon Titan. Details pertaining to the approach, features, initial demonstration results for HINP model development, and the mission trade study are presented. Key technology and design issues associated with the HINP concept and future work recommendations are also identified.

Chew, Gilbert↗

NASA NTRS1996

Design of a power management and distribution system for a thermionic-diode powered spacecraft

The Electrical Systems Development Branch of the Power Technology Division at the NASA Lewis Research Center in Cleveland, Ohio is designing a Power Management and Distribution (PMAD) System for the Air Force's Integrated Solar Upper Stage (ISUS) Engine Ground Test Demonstration (EGD). The ISUS program uses solar-thermal propulsion to perform orbit transfers from Low Earth Orbit (LEO) to Geosynchronous Orbit (GEO) and from LEO to Molnya. The ISUS uses the same energy conversion receiver to perform the LEO to High Earth Orbit (HEO) transfer and to generate on-orbit electric power for the payloads. On-orbit power generation is accomplished via two solar concentrators heating a dual-cavity graphite-core which has Thermionic Diodes (TMD's) encircling each cavity. The graphite core and concentrators together are called the Receiver and Concentrator (RAC). The TDM-emitters reach peak temperatures of approximately 2200K, and the TID-collectors are run at approximately 1000K. Because of the high Specific Impulse (I(sup sp)) of solar thermal propulsion relative to chemical propulsion, and because a common bus is used for communications, GN&C, power, etc., a substantial increase in payload weight is possible. This potentially allows for a stepdown in the required launch vehicle size or class for similar payload weight using conventional chemical propulsion and a separate spacecraft bus. The ISUS power system is to provide 1000W(sub e) at 28+/-6V(sub dc) to the payload/spacecraft from a maximum TID generation capability of 1070W(sub e) at 2200K. Producing power with this quality, protecting the spacecraft from electrical faults and accommodating operational constraints of the TID's are the responsibilities of the PMAD system. The design strategy and system options examined along with the proposed designs for the Flight and EGD configurations are discussed herein.

Kimnach, Greg L.↗

NASA NTRS2021

Martian Moons and Space Transportation Using Chemical and Electric Propulsion Options

Using chemical and nuclear electric propulsion for the exploration of the Martian moons will be investigated. Both oxygen/hydrogen chemical propulsion and nuclear electric propulsion with 500 kilowatt electric (kWe) to 10 megawatt electric (MWe) reactors will be assessed. The initial masses, propellant masses, and trip times for a variety of space vehicle payload masses will be compared. For high energy orbital transfer, the nuclear electric propulsion vehicles required a small fraction of the propellant mass over oxygen/hydrogen orbital transfer vehicles (OTVs). The moons, Phobos and Deimos, may hold resources for refueling future space vehicles. In-situ resource utilization (ISRU) can be a powerful method of reducing Earth dependence on space vehicle propellants, liquid water, and breathing gases. Historical studies have identified the potential of water in carbonaceous chondrites on the moons. The moon-derived propellants OTVs that move payloads between the moons and to other important operational Mars orbits. Also, the propellants have been suggested to support reusable Mars landers. To extract the water, the mined mass, its volume and the mining time were estimated. The water mass fraction may be as low as 2x10 −4 . Very large masses were needed to be extracted for up to 100 MT of water.

In-situ resource utilization↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Space Nuclear Propulsion for Deep Space Science Missions

The use of nuclear thermal propulsion (NTP) 1 and nuclear electric propulsion (NEP) 2 systems on deep space science missions to the outer planets and into the interstellar medium 3 can yield significant spacecraft system and mission performance benefits and improvements relative to the use of conventional chemical propulsion systems. Several recent and ongoing programs are developing the technologies and systems required to realize a near-term deep space nuclear propulsion capability. NTP provides improved propulsion efficiencies compared to chemical propulsion, while also providing substantial thrust. This combination of high thrust and increased specific impulse (I_sp) provides high acceleration and extended thrusting periods, enabling greatly reduced trip-times on certain types of missions compared to various propulsive alternatives. For examples, compared to a baseline mission using chemical propulsion, NTP-powered missions to Jupiter or Uranus could deliver approximately 2.4-3.6 times more payload (in the case of Jupiter, the payload delivery is significantly larger than the Juno spacecraft). In this comparison, the higher end of the payload advantage is obtained when the trip time is held equal for the NTP-powered vehicle and a vehicle using a chemical propulsion departure stage. NTP systems are presently under development by multiple government agencies. NASA’s Space Nuclear Propulsion (SNP) project aims to demonstrate a hydrogen-fed NTP engine at 900 s specific impulse (I_sp) and approximately 10-15 klb_f of thrust. DARPA’s Demonstration Rocket for Agile Cislunar Operations (DRACO) program is targeting a demonstration of an NTP system in the cislunar space between the Earth and the Moon. An appropriately phased development plan that applies the development of the reactor technology for an NTP engine in this performance class and leverages mature, existing liquid rocket component hardware provides a path to a lower cost propulsion system that can be realized on a shorter development schedule. NEP, with high Isp in the 2,000-8,000 s range, can also provide advantages over chemical propulsion, including a much greater payload delivery mass and the flexibility for planners to trade between delivered mass and a wider window of mission trajectory options. Electric propulsion (EP) systems have demonstrated great utility, performing notably on the Dawn mission to enable rendezvous and orbital insertion at two separate bodies, Vesta and Ceres. An NEP-powered vehicle would have a similar capability to visit multiple bodies, loitering at each before moving to the next. A 10 kW_e NEP system provides a power- rich environment on the spacecraft that is simply not possible using present radioisotope power systems, giving mission planners more scientific instrument and communication hardware options. Several programs and projects are presently developing NEP systems and subsystems in the 10 kW_e power range, leveraging past reactor work and recent nuclear power generation risk-reduction demonstration activities such as the Demonstration Using Flattop Fission (DUFF) and the Kilopower Reactor Using Stirling TechnologY (KRUSTY). The goal of the Air Force Research Laboratory’s Joint Energy Technology Supplying On-Orbit Nuclear Power (JETSON) program is an in-space demonstration vehicle that has a 10 kW_e -class fission power source. These past and present efforts can be combined with the ongoing development of 10 kW_e -class electric propulsion systems (notably the NEXT-C ion thruster or the Hall-effect thrusters for Power and Propulsion Element of the Lunar Gateway) to provide a pathway to a low-cost, reliable NEP system for deep space science application.

Kurt A. Polzin↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Space Nuclear Propulsion for Deep Space Science Missions

The use of nuclear thermal propulsion (NTP) 1 and nuclear electric propulsion (NEP) 2 systems on deep space science missions to the outer planets and into the interstellar medium 3 can yield significant spacecraft system and mission performance benefits and improvements relative to the use of conventional chemical propulsion systems. Several recent and ongoing programs are developing the technologies and systems required to realize a near-term deep space nuclear propulsion capability. NTP provides improved propulsion efficiencies compared to chemical propulsion, while also providing substantial thrust. This combination of high thrust and increased specific impulse (I_sp) provides high acceleration and extended thrusting periods, enabling greatly reduced trip-times on certain types of missions compared to various propulsive alternatives. For examples, compared to a baseline mission using chemical propulsion, NTP-powered missions to Jupiter or Uranus could deliver approximately 2.4-3.6 times more payload (in the case of Jupiter, the payload delivery is significantly larger than the Juno spacecraft). In this comparison, the higher end of the payload advantage is obtained when the trip time is held equal for the NTP-powered vehicle and a vehicle using a chemical propulsion departure stage. NTP systems are presently under development by multiple government agencies. NASA’s Space Nuclear Propulsion (SNP) project aims to demonstrate a hydrogen-fed NTP engine at 900 s specific impulse (I_sp) and approximately 10-15 klb_f of thrust. DARPA’s Demonstration Rocket for Agile Cislunar Operations (DRACO) program is targeting a demonstration of an NTP system in the cislunar space between the Earth and the Moon. An appropriately phased development plan that applies the development of the reactor technology for an NTP engine in this performance class and leverages mature, existing liquid rocket component hardware provides a path to a lower cost propulsion system that can be realized on a shorter development schedule. NEP, with high Isp in the 2,000-8,000 s range, can also provide advantages over chemical propulsion, including a much greater payload delivery mass and the flexibility for planners to trade between delivered mass and a wider window of mission trajectory options. Electric propulsion (EP) systems have demonstrated great utility, performing notably on the Dawn mission to enable rendezvous and orbital insertion at two separate bodies, Vesta and Ceres. An NEP-powered vehicle would have a similar capability to visit multiple bodies, loitering at each before moving to the next. A 10 kW_e NEP system provides a power- rich environment on the spacecraft that is simply not possible using present radioisotope power systems, giving mission planners more scientific instrument and communication hardware options. Several programs and projects are presently developing NEP systems and subsystems in the 10 kW_e power range, leveraging past reactor work and recent nuclear power generation risk-reduction demonstration activities such as the Demonstration Using Flattop Fission (DUFF) and the Kilopower Reactor Using Stirling TechnologY (KRUSTY). The goal of the Air Force Research Laboratory’s Joint Energy Technology Supplying On-Orbit Nuclear Power (JETSON) program is an in-space demonstration vehicle that has a 10 kW_e -class fission power source. These past and present efforts can be combined with the ongoing development of 10 kW_e -class electric propulsion systems (notably the NEXT-C ion thruster or the Hall-effect thrusters for Power and Propulsion Element of the Lunar Gateway) to provide a pathway to a low-cost, reliable NEP system for deep space science application.

Kurt A. Polzin↗

NASA NTRS2011

Past and Present Large Solid Rocket Motor Test Capabilities

A study was performed to identify the current and historical trends in the capability of solid rocket motor testing in the United States. The study focused on test positions capable of testing solid rocket motors of at least 10,000 lbf thrust. Top-level information was collected for two distinct data points plus/minus a few years: 2000 (Y2K) and 2010 (Present). Data was combined from many sources, but primarily focused on data from the Chemical Propulsion Information Analysis Center s Rocket Propulsion Test Facilities Database, and heritage Chemical Propulsion Information Agency/M8 Solid Rocket Motor Static Test Facilities Manual. Data for the Rocket Propulsion Test Facilities Database and heritage M8 Solid Rocket Motor Static Test Facilities Manual is provided to the Chemical Propulsion Information Analysis Center directly from the test facilities. Information for each test cell for each time period was compiled and plotted to produce a graphical display of the changes for the nation, NASA, Department of Defense, and commercial organizations during the past ten years. Major groups of plots include test facility by geographic location, test cells by status/utilization, and test cells by maximum thrust capability. The results are discussed.

Kowalski, Robert R.↗

NASA NTRS1967

Non-chemical space propulsion

Space mission requirements and technical feasibility of non-chemical space propulsion system

SPACE MISSION↗

NASA NTRS1971

Comparative performance of nuclear and cryogenic chemical space propulsion systems

Comparative performance of solid core nuclear and cryogenic chemical space propulsion systems

Dugan, D. W.↗

NASA NTRS2014

Advanced Compatibility Characterization Of AF-M315E With Spacecraft Propulsion System Materials Project

All spacecraft require propulsion systems for thrust and maneuvering. Propulsion systems can be chemical, nuclear, electrical, cold gas or combinations thereof. Chemical propulsion has proven to be the most reliable technology since the deployment of launch vehicles. Performance, storability, and handling are three important aspects of liquid chemical propulsion. Bipropellant systems require a fuel and an oxidizer for propulsion, but monopropellants only require a fuel and a catalyst for propulsion and are therefore simpler and lighter. Hydrazine is the state of the art propellant for monopropellant systems, but has drawbacks because it is highly hazardous to human health, which requires extensive care in handling, complex ground ops due to safety and environmental considerations, and lengthy turnaround times for reusable spacecraft. All users of hydrazine monopropellant must contend with these issues and their associated costs. The development of a new monopropellant, intended to replace hydrazine, has been in progress for years. This project will apply advanced techniques to characterize the engineering properties of materials used in AF-M315E propulsion systems after propellant exposure. AF-M315E monopropellant has been selected HQ's Green Propellant Infusion Mission (GPIM) to replace toxic hydrazine for improved performance and reduce safety and health issues that will shorten reusable spacecraft turn-around time. In addition, this project will fundamentally strengthen JSC's core competency to evaluate, use and infuse liquid propellant systems.

McClure, Mark B.↗

NASA NTRS1987

Geosynchronous earth orbit base propulsion - Electric propulsion options

Electric propulsion and chemical propulsion requirements for a geosynchronous earth orbit (GEO) base were analyzed. The base is resupplied from the Space Station's low earth orbit. Orbit-transfer Delta-Vs, nodal-regression Delta-Vs and orbit-maintenance Delta-Vs were considered. For resupplying the base, a cryogenic oxygen/hydrogen (O2/H2) orbital transfer vehicle (OTV) is currently-baselined. Comparisons of several electric propulsion options with the O2/H2 OTV were conducted. Propulsion requirements for missions related to the GEO base were also analyzed. Payload data for the GEO missions were drawn from current mission data bases. Detailed electric propulsion module designs are presented. Mission analyses and propulsion analyses for the GEO-delivered payloads are included.

Palaszewski, B.↗