Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Cryogenic Propellant Transfer”

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 109 records · Page 6
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
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.

Cameron J. Hines↗
NASA NTRS2015

Evolvable Cryogenics (ECRYO) Pressure Transducer Calibration Test

This paper provides a summary of the findings of recent activities conducted by Marshall Space Flight Center's (MSFC) In-Space Propulsion Branch and MSFC's Metrology and Calibration Lab to assess the performance of current "state of the art" pressure transducers for use in long duration storage and transfer of cryogenic propellants. A brief historical narrative in this paper describes the Evolvable Cryogenics program and the relevance of these activities to the program. This paper also provides a review of three separate test activities performed throughout this effort, including: (1) the calibration of several pressure transducer designs in a liquid nitrogen cryogenic environmental chamber, (2) the calibration of a pressure transducer in a liquid helium Dewar, and (3) the calibration of several pressure transducers at temperatures ranging from 20 to 70 degrees Kelvin (K) using a "cryostat" environmental chamber. These three separate test activities allowed for study of the sensors along a temperature range from 4 to 300 K. The combined data shows that both the slope and intercept of the sensor's calibration curve vary as a function of temperature. This homogeneous function is contrary to the linearly decreasing relationship assumed at the start of this investigation. Consequently, the data demonstrates the need for lookup tables to change the slope and intercept used by any data acquisition system. This ultimately would allow for more accurate pressure measurements at the desired temperature range. This paper concludes with a review of a request for information (RFI) survey conducted amongst different suppliers to determine the availability of current "state of the art" flight-qualified pressure transducers. The survey identifies requirements that are most difficult for the suppliers to meet, most notably the capability to validate the sensor's performance at temperatures below 70 K.

Diaz, Carlos E., Jr.↗
NASA NTRS2015

Modeling and Analysis of Chill and Fill Processes for the EDU Tank

NASA's future missions may require long-term storage and transfer of cryogenic propellants. The Engineering Development Unit (EDU), a NASA in-house effort supported by both Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) and Glenn Research Center (GRC), is a Cryogenic Fluid Management (CFM) test article that primarily serves as a manufacturing pathfinder and a risk reduction task for a future CFM payload. The EDU test article, comprises a flight like tank, internal components, insulation, and attachment struts. The EDU is designed to perform integrated passive thermal control performance testing with liquid hydrogen in a space-like vacuum environment. A series of tests, with liquid hydrogen as a testing fluid, was conducted at Test Stand 300 at MSFC during summer of 2014. The objective of this effort was to develop a thermal/fluid model for evaluating the thermodynamic behavior of the EDU tank during the chill and fill processes. Generalized Fluid System Simulation Program (GFSSP), an MSFC in-house general-purpose computer program for flow network analysis, was utilized to model and simulate the chill and fill portion of the testing. The model contained the liquid hydrogen supply source, feed system, EDU tank, and vent system. The modeling description and comparison of model predictions with the test data will be presented in the final paper.

Hedayat, A.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Modeling of Cryogenic Heated-Tube Flow Boiling Experiments of Hydrogen and Helium With the Generalized Fluid System Simulation Program

Accurate modeling of cryogenic boiling heat transfer is vital for the development of extended-duration space missions. Such missions may require the transfer of cryogenic propellants from in-space storage depots or the cooling of nuclear reactors. Purdue University in collaboration with NASA has assembled a database of cryogenic flow boiling data points from heated-tube experiments dating back to 1959, which has been used to develop new flow boiling correlations specifically for cryogens. Computational models of several of these experiments have been constructed in the Generalized Fluid System Simulation Program (GFSSP), a network flow code developed at NASA’s Marshall Space Flight Center. The new Purdue-developed universal correlations cover the full boiling curve: onset of nucleate boiling, nucleate boiling, critical heat flux, and film boiling. These correlations have been coded into GFSSP user subroutines. The fluids modeled in this study are liquid hydrogen and liquid helium. Predictions of local wall temperature and pressure drop are presented and compared to the test data.

multi-phase flow↗
NASA NTRS2016

Vented Chill / No-Vent Fill of Cryogenic Propellant Tanks

Architectures for extended duration missions often include an on-orbit replenishment of the space vehicle's cryogenic liquid propellants. Such a replenishment could be accomplished via a tank-to-tank transfer from a dedicated tanker or a more permanent propellant depot storage tank. Minimizing the propellant loss associated with transfer line and receiver propellant tank thermal conditioning is essential for mass savings. A new methodology for conducting tank-to-tank transfer while minimizing such losses has been demonstrated. Charge-Hold-Vent is the traditional methodology for conducting a tank-to-tank propellant transfer. A small amount of cryogenic liquid is introduced to chill the transfer line and propellant tank. As the propellant absorbs heat and undergoes a phase change, the tank internal pressure increases. The tank is then vented to relieve pressure prior to another charge of cryogenic liquid being introduced. This cycle is repeated until the transfer lines and tank are sufficiently chilled and the replenishment of the propellant tank is complete. This method suffers inefficiencies due to multiple chill and vent cycles within the transfer lines and associated feed system components. Additionally, this system requires precise measuring of cryogenic fluid delivery for each transfer, multiple valve cycling events, and other complexities associated with cycled operations. To minimize propellant loss and greatly simplify on-orbit operations, an alternate methodology has been designed and demonstrated. The Vented Chill / No Vent Fill method is a simpler, constant flow approach in which the propellant tank and transfer lines are only chilled once. The receiver tank is continuously vented as cryogenic liquid chills the transfer lines, tank mass and ullage space. Once chilled sufficiently, the receiver tank valve is closed and the tank is completely filled. Interestingly, the vent valve can be closed prior to receiver tank components reaching liquid saturation temperature. An incomplete fill results if insufficient energy is removed from the tank's thermal mass and ullage space. The key to successfully conducting the no vent fill is to assure that sufficient energy is removed from the system prior to closing the receiver tank vent valve. This paper will provide a description of the transfer methodology and test article, and will provide a discussion of test results.

Rhys, Noah O.↗
NASA NTRS2015

Reduced Boil-Off System Sizing

NASA is currently developing cryogenic propellant storage and transfer systems for future space exploration and scientific discovery missions by addressing the need to raise the technology readiness level of cryogenic fluid management technologies. Cryogenic propellants are baselined in many propulsion systems due to their inherently high specific impulse; however, their low boiling points can cause substantial boil-off losses over time. Recent efforts such as the Reduced Boil-off Testing and the Active Thermal Control Scaling Study provide important information on the benefit of an active cooling system applied to LH2 propellant storage. Findings show that zero-boil off technologies can reduce overall mass in LH2 storage systems when low Earth orbit loiter periods extend beyond two months. A significant part of this mass reduction is realized by integrating two stages of cooling: a 20 K stage to intercept heat at the tank surface, and a 90 K stage to reduce the heat entering the less efficient 20 K stage. A missing element in previous studies, which is addressed in this paper, is the development of a direct method for sizing the 90 K cooling stage. Such a method requires calculation of the heat entering both the 90 K and 20 K stages as compared to the overall system masses, and is reliant upon the temperature distribution, performance, and unique design characteristics of the system in question. By utilizing the known conductance of a system without active thermal control, the heat being intercepted by a 90 K stage can be calculated to find the resultant lift and mass of each active thermal control stage. Integral to this is the thermal conductance of the cooling straps and the broad area cooling shield, key parts of the 90 K stage. Additionally, a trade study is performed to show the ability of the 90 K cooling stage to reduce the lift on the 20 K cryocooler stage, which is considerably less developed and efficient than 90 K cryocoolers.

Cryogenic fluid management↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Modeling Autogenous Pressurization and Draining of a Cryogenic Storage Tank in Normal Gravity

A two-phase CFD model for autogenous pressurization and draining of a cryogenic storage tank is presented using both the Sharp Interface and Volume-Of-Fluid (VOF) approaches for capturing the front and the associated interfacial heat, mass and momentum transfer between the liquid and vapor regions. Both models are validated against data provided by the Cryogenic Propellant Storage and Transfer (CPST) Engineering Development Unit (EDU) experiment. The results of the autogenous pressurization are presented first, focusing on the phase change and turbulence effects on the tank pressure and temperature predictions. Both the Sharp Interface (SI-CFD) and VOF (VOF-CFD) multiphase models predict tank pressure during pressurization within 3% of the measured values. The sensitivity of key physical and numerical parameters of the problem are tested using the Sharp Interface model. Effects of the accommodation coefficient (AC), and the computational grid structure are studied. The second part of this paper is devoted to validating the SI-VOF model, with an enhanced capability of moving the liquid-vapor interface, against the draining segment of the EDU experiment. The VOF-CFD model was also used to simulate tank draining and its results were compared with the results of the Sharp Interface model with the moving interface. Both models predict tank pressure during draining within 3.5% of the measured values. Pressure decrease rate is underpredicted by both models during the first 100 seconds of draining but matches the experimental rate for the rest of the simulation.

Computational Fluid Dynamics↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Modeling Autogenous Pressurization and Draining of a Cryogenic Storage Tank in Normal Gravity

A two-phase CFD model for autogenous pressurization and draining of a cryogenic storage tank is presented using both the Sharp Interface and Volume-Of-Fluid (VOF) approaches for capturing the front and the associated interfacial heat, mass and momentum transfer between the liquid and vapor regions. Both models are validated against data provided by the Cryogenic Propellant Storage and Transfer (CPST) Engineering Development Unit (EDU) experiment1. The results of the autogenous pressurization are presented first, focusing on the phase change and turbulence effects on the tank pressure and temperature predictions. Both the Sharp Interface (SI-CFD) and VOF (VOF-CFD) multiphase models predict tank pressure during pressurization within 3% of the measured values. The sensitivity of key physical and numerical parameters of the problem are tested using the Sharp Interface model. Effects of the accommodation coefficient (AC), and the computational grid structure are studied. The second part of this paper is devoted to validating the SI-VOF model, with an enhanced capability of moving the liquid-vapor interface, against the draining segment of the EDU experiment. The VOF-CFD model was also used to simulate tank draining and its results were compared with the results of the Sharp Interface model with the moving interface. Both models predict tank pressure during draining within 3.5% of the measured values. Pressure decrease rate is underpredicted by both models during the first 100 seconds of draining but matches the experimental rate for the rest of the simulation.

Computational Fluid Dynamics↗
NASA NTRS1990

Cryogenic propellant management architectures to support the Space Exploration Initiative

The initial results of a current study to develop fuel system architectures to support the lunar requirements of the Space Exploration Initiative (SEI) are reported. The study includes the development and assessment of propellant management facility concepts, supporting infrastructure, operations analysis, and identification of impact on current programs, including Space Station Freedom, Earth-to-Orbit vehicles, and the Space Transfer Vehicle. The cryogenic propellant management architectures are evaluated using criteria that have been defined to provide for minimum subjective assessment and effective data reliability.

Cady, E. C.↗
NASA NTRS2013

No Vent Tank Fill and Transfer Line Chilldown Analysis by Generalized Fluid System Simulation Program (GFSSP)

The purpose of the paper is to present the analytical capability developed to model no vent chill and fill of cryogenic tank to support CPST (Cryogenic Propellant Storage and Transfer) program. Generalized Fluid System Simulation Program (GFSSP) was adapted to simulate charge‐holdvent method of Tank Chilldown. GFSSP models were developed to simulate chilldown of LH2 tank in K‐site Test Facility and numerical predictions were compared with test data. The report also describes the modeling technique of simulating the chilldown of a cryogenic transfer line and GFSSP models were developed to simulate the chilldown of a long transfer line and compared with test data.

Majumdar, Alok↗
NASA NTRS2014

Recent Ground Hold and Rapid Depressurization Testing of Multilayer Systems

In the development of flight insulation systems for large cryogenic orbital storage (spray on foam and multilayer insulation), testing need include all environments that are experienced during flight. While large efforts have been expended on studying, bounding, and modeling the orbital performance of the insulation systems, little effort has been expended on the ground hold and ascent phases of a mission. Historical cryogenic in-space systems that have flown have been able to ignore these phases of flight due to the insulation system being within a vacuum jacket. In the development phase of the Nuclear Mars Vehicle and the Shuttle Nuclear Vehicle, several insulation systems were evaluated for the full mission cycle. Since that time there had been minimal work on these phases of flight until the Constellation program began investigating cryogenic service modules and long duration upper stages. With the inception of the Cryogenic Propellant Storage and Transfer Technology Demonstration Mission, a specific need was seen for the data and as such, several tests were added to the Cryogenic Boil-off Reduction System liquid hydrogen test matrix to provide more data on a insulation system. Testing was attempted with both gaseous nitrogen (GN2) and gaseous helium (GHe) backfills. The initial tests with nitrogen backfill were not successfully completed due to nitrogen liquefaction and solidification preventing the rapid pumpdown of the vacuum chamber. Subsequent helium backfill tests were successful and showed minimal degradation. The results are compared to the historical data.

Space Environment Simulation↗
NASA NTRS2012

In-Space Propellant Production Using Water

A new era of space exploration is being planned. Manned exploration architectures under consideration require the long term storage of cryogenic propellants in space, and larger science mission directorate payloads can be delivered using cryogenic propulsion stages. Several architecture studies have shown that in-space cryogenic propulsion depots offer benefits including lower launch costs, smaller launch vehicles, and enhanced mission flexibility. NASA is currently planning a Cryogenic Propellant Storage and Transfer (CPST) technology demonstration mission that will use existing technology to demonstrate long duration storage, acquisition, mass gauging, and transfer of liquid hydrogen in low Earth orbit. This mission will demonstrate key technologies, but the CPST architecture is not designed for optimal mission operations for a true propellant depot. This paper will consider cryogenic propellant depots that are designed for operability. The operability principles considered are reusability, commonality, designing for the unique environment of space, and use of active control systems, both thermal and fluid. After considering these operability principles, a proposed depot architecture will be presented that uses water launch and on orbit electrolysis and liquefaction. This could serve as the first true space factory. Critical technologies needed for this depot architecture, including on orbit electrolysis, zero-g liquefaction and storage, rendezvous and docking, and propellant transfer, will be discussed and a developmental path forward will be presented. Finally, use of the depot to support the NASA Science Mission Directorate exploration goals will be presented.

Notardonato, William↗
NASA NTRS2005

In-Space Cryogenic Propellant Depot Stepping Stone

An In-Space Cryogenic Propellant Depot (ISCPD) is an important stepping stone to provide the capability to preposition, store, manufacture, and later use the propellants for Earth-Neighborhood campaigns and beyond. An in-space propellant depot will provide affordable propellants and other similar consumables to support the development of sustainable and affordable exploration strategies as well as commercial space activities. An in-space propellant depot not only requires technology development in key areas such as zero boil-off storage and fluid transfer, but in other areas such as lightweight structures, highly reliable connectors, and autonomous operations. These technologies can be applicable to a broad range of propellant depot concepts or specific to a certain design. In addition, these technologies are required for spacecraft and orbit transfer vehicle propulsion and power systems, and space life support. Generally, applications of this technology require long-term storage, on-orbit fluid transfer and supply, cryogenic propellant production from water, unique instrumentation and autonomous operations. This paper discusses the reasons why such advances are important to future affordable and sustainable operations in space. This paper also discusses briefly R&D objectives comprising a promising approach to the systems planning and evolution into a meaningful stepping stone design, development, and implementation of an In-Space Cryogenic Propellant Depot. The success of a well-planned and orchestrated approach holds great promise for achieving innovation and revolutionary technology development for supporting future exploration and development of space.

Howell, Joe T.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Nodal Modeling of Submerged Helium Injection Pressurization of a Cryogenic Propellant Tank

Subcooling of cryogenic propellant by helium injection is one of the most effective methods for suppressing bulk boiling and keeping subcooled propellant conditions for pre-launch, launch, and post-launch pressurization applications. For tank pressurization, submerged helium injection can substantially reduce helium consumption by infusing gaseous propellant into the tank ullage. This paper describes a thermodynamic model of the helium bubbling process in liquid oxygen to estimate the amount of oxygen vapor absorbed by the rising helium bubbles and the amount of subcooling of liquid oxygen due to evaporative heat and mass transfer. The physics of helium dissolution during the pressurization process is also modeled, primarily for liquid hydrogen propellant where the dissolution is more significant. The analyses were performed in a simulation model of tank pressurization built with Generalized Fluid System Simulation Program (GFSSP), a general-purpose flow network code developed at NASA/Marshall Space Flight Center. The numerical predictions of subcooling have been compared with the experimental data of Cho et al. which investigated the propellant subcooling effect as a function of system pressure, helium injection temperature, and flowrate for a non-drained submerged injection system. The numerical predictions of helium consumption have been compared with the test data from a NASA Centaur test vehicle which included both direct and submerged injection with draining of propellants. Hydrogen propellant testing of the Cryogenic Propellant Storage and Transfer Engineering Developmental Unit (CPST EDU) conducted at NASA/Glenn Research Facility was also analyzed. The data used for the model validation were taken in 1-g, but the model was developed to be applicable in both multi-g and micro-g environments.

tank pressurization↗