Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Thermal control technology”

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.

zero boil-off↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Modeling and Simulation of Tank Pressure Control using Zero-Boiloff Active Thermal Control for LOXSAT Technology Demonstration Mission

To-date, research and modeling of cryogenic fluid management technologies (CFM) for spaceflight has been limited to ground tests, short-duration zero-g simulations (e.g. drop towers), and small-scale experiments on-orbit. There has not been a large-scale flight demonstration of a flight-like system. As future NASA missions to take humans further from Earth will require large, in-space cryogenic propulsion vehicles, it is imperative to begin collecting flight data for these systems to accurately model and design future vehicles. To meet this goal, NASA awarded tipping point technology demonstration awards to Eta Space, Lockheed Martin, Space Exploration Technologies (SpaceX), and United Launch Alliance (ULA) to demonstrate on-orbit storage and transfer of cryogenic propellant. For its award, Eta Space is developing LOXSAT-1. It is a small satellite that will be launched on a Rocket Lab Electron rocket. The spacecraft consists of a Rocket Lab Photon spacecraft bus with a primary payload of a spherical liquid oxygen (LOX) storage tank with thermodynamic control systems. The primary objective of the mission is to demonstrate zero-boil-off storage of liquid oxygen. To accomplish this objective, the payload is equipped with an active thermal control system fluid loop that consists of propellant management device (PMD), positive-displacement pump, heat exchanger connected to a cryocooler, and a spray bar mixing injector. When the fluid loop is operating, fluid is drawn from the tank by the PMD and pumped through the heat exchanger, lowering the fluid temperature below the fluid temperature in the tank. This subcooled liquid is then injected back into the tank through the spray bar. The subcooled injected liquid has two effects. If it is sprayed into the ullage space, the injected liquid will form into jets or droplets and exchange heat with the ullage gas. This will cool and condense the gas, reducing the pressure in the tank. Additionally, the liquid that is not sprayed through the ullage, as well as any remaining liquid spray from the ullage, will rejoin the liquid mass of the tank, lowering the bulk temperature of the liquid. These combines effects provide for zero-boil off pressure control by lowering the tank pressure and the liquid saturation pressure simultaneously, ensuring the liquid stays subcooled. To model these complex mechanics and predict the performance of the active thermal control system, NASA is providing Eta Space with 3 parallel models of the tank. The approach of providing 3 different models allows for cross-checking and comparisons between the three to better understand how different modeling assumptions and selection semi-empirical factors affects the modeling result. Additionally, developing 3 models provides three different schemes for numerical simulation, providing confidence that results depict real physical phenomenon and not numerical quirks of the program. Within the tank thermodynamics, there are two primary areas of heat transfer we concern ourselves with: the heat transfer between the ullage space and the droplet spray, and between the ullage space and bulk liquid. For the droplet heat transfer, there are multiple sets of assumptions that can be made and correlations that can be used. Currently, two working models - the TankSIM model and Easy5 model – provide for an overview of the different approaches available. The TankSIM model and Easy5 model use two different models for droplet heating and evaporation that illustrate how the models use different types of mechanisms to arrive at the same answer. For the TankSIM model, droplets are treated as spheres of constant radius. Heat is transferred from the ullage to the droplet and warms the droplet until it reaches saturation, then the droplet begins evaporating and reducing its radius and mass. To calculate the heat transfer coefficient between the droplet and ullage, the Ranz-Marshall correlation is used. To determine the number of droplets in the ullage, a resident mass approach is used. This approach averages the number of droplets such that residuals at the start-up and shut-off of the spray bar cancel out. This same approach is used in the Easy5 model. The GFSSP model implements a linked list to track individual droplet “nodes” within the model. For the Easy5 model, the droplet is assumed to have an interface at a temperature equal to the saturation temperature corresponding to the pressure of the gas phase. The heat transfer from the gas to the interface and the interface to the droplet bulk is then calculated, and the net mass transfer between the droplet and interface is determined by performing an energy balance across the interface. For the gas side of the interface, the Ranz-Marshall correlation is used. For the liquid side of the interface, a variety of correlations were tried, including Kronig and Brink (1950) and effective conductivity models. As a result of these assumptions, the Easy5 model currently predicts faster depressurization, as at saturated vapor conditions, the heat transfer coeffect on the liquid side for the Easy5 model is greater than the heat transfer coefficient predicted by Ranz-Marshall used in the TankSIM code. This greater heat flux translates into faster condensation of the saturated ullage gas. At the bulk liquid to ullage interface, the models are in much closer agreement. Both models model the ullage as a sphere centered within the bulk liquid in the tank, and both use the energy-jumping boundary condition to model heat and mass transfer across the interface. There are slight differences in how the interface temperature is calculated, however. The Easy5 model assumes the temperature of the interface is equal to the saturation temperature associated with the pressure of the gas phase. The TankSIM model calculates this temperature with Alabovskii’s equation, which provides a correction factor for interface temperatures. Analysis tasks are focused on determining rates of depressurization within the tank during active cooling operation. To maintain net positive suction head at the pump inlet, the tank pressure cannot fall faster than the saturation pressure associated with the temperature of the bulk liquid. Additionally, there is interest in analyzing the performance of the loop at different pump speeds and cryocooler input powers. Adjusting the flowrate affects both the performance of the heat exchanger between the cryocooler and pumped liquid, and the heat transfer between the droplet spray and the ullage. Ideally, a pump speed and cryocooler power can be selected that will allow the tank to operate in zero-boil-off mode with a very narrow range of storage pressure.

zero boil-off↗
NASA NTRS2006

Multiphase Flow Technology Impacts on Thermal Control Systems for Exploration

The Two-Phase Flow Facility (TPHIFFy) Project focused on bridging the critical knowledge gap by developing and demonstrating critical multiphase fluid products for advanced life support, thermal management and power conversion systems that are required to enable the Vision for Space Exploration. Safety and reliability of future systems will be enhanced by addressing critical microgravity fluid physics issues associated with flow boiling, condensation, phase separation, and system stability. The project included concept development, normal gravity testing, and reduced gravity aircraft flight campaigns, in preparation for the development of a space flight experiment implementation. Data will be utilized to develop predictive models that could be used for system design and operation. A single fluid, two-phase closed thermodynamic loop test bed was designed, assembled and tested. The major components in this test bed include: a boiler, a condenser, a phase separator and a circulating pump. The test loop was instrumented with flow meters, thermocouples, pressure transducers and both high speed and normal speed video cameras. A low boiling point surrogate fluid, FC-72, was selected based on scaling analyses using preliminary designs for operational systems. Preliminary results are presented which include flow regime transitions and some observations regarding system stability.

McQuillen, John↗
NASA NTRS2005

Foam core shield (FCS) systems : a new dual - purpose technology for shielding against meteoroid strike damage and for thermal control of spacecrafts/satellite components

A new technology is being developed that can protect spacecraft and satellite components against damage from meteoroid strikes and control the thermal environment of the protected components. This technology, called Foam Core Shield (FCS) systems, has the potential to replace the multi-layer insulation blankets (MLI) that have been used on spacecraft for decades. In order to be an attractive candidate for replacing MLI, FCS systems should not only provide superior protection against meteoroid strikes but also provide an equal or superior ability to control the temperature of the protected component. Properly designed FCS systems can provide these principal functions, meteoroid strike protection and thermal control, with lower system mass and a smaller system envelope than ML.

thermal environment↗
NASA NTRS2019

Challenges of Designing a Passive Thermal Control System for the Astrobotic Peregrine Lunar Lander

The Astrobotic Peregrine is a lunar lander currently undergoing design by Astrobotic Technology with help from NASA through the Lunar Cargo Transportation and Landing by Soft Touchdown (Lunar CATALYST) program. This paper will discuss the challenges of designing a passive thermal control system for the lander, and how the design has evolved from the initial passive concept. These challenges include drastically varying worst hot and worst cold case thermal environments, narrow temperature limits of critical components, limited available locations for spacecraft component mounting, and unexpected changes causing significant thermal impacts. The initial thermal control strategy was to cold bias the spacecraft by thermally coupling all spacecraft components to one mounting deck, which also doubled as a radiator, and using heaters to maintain each component’s temperature above its lower temperature limit when in the cold environments. As the design evolved, this strategy alone became inadequate. As heat dissipations increased and became more varying with the addition of components, the thermal design was changed and additional thermal control technologies added. Thermal control strategies incorporated into the design include dictating the lander orientation in demanding environments, defining locations for critical spacecraft components, limiting component operation when possible, and using technology to create variable thermal contacts. Additional design changes will occur as the design continues to evolve to optimize the most effective thermal control system. The thermal design of Peregrine is still in progress, with Critical Design Review (CDR) scheduled for December 2019.

Mauro, Stephanie↗
NASA NTRS2009

Overview of Altair's Thermal Control System and the Associated Technology Development Efforts

Abstract In early 2004, President Bush announced a bold vision for space exploration. One of the goals included in this vision is a return to the moon by 2020. In response to this vision, NASA established the Constellation Program, which includes several project offices. One of the Constellation projects is Altair, which is the next generation Lunar Lander. The future Altair missions are very different than the Lunar missions accomplished during the Apollo era. As such, there are several project risks and design challenges that have never before been addressed. Due to the unique thermal environment associated with this mission, many of these risks and design challenges are associated with the vehicle's thermal control system. NASA's Exploration Systems Mission Directorate (ESMD) includes the Exploration Technology Development Program (ETDP). ETDP consists of several technology development projects. The project chartered with mitigating the aforementioned risks and design challenges is the Thermal Control System Development for Exploration Project. The current paper will summarize the Altair mission profile, the operational phases, and the thermal design challenges unique to this particular vehicle. The paper will also describe the technology development efforts being performed to mitigate the risks and design challenges. The technology development project is performing a rigorous development effort that includes thermal control system fluids, evaporators, heat exchangers, and Lunar surface radiators. Constellation Program, there are several project offices. One of these projects includes the development of NASA's new lunar lander vehicle. The overall mission architecture for this vehicle, Altair, is very similar to Apollo's architecture. This paper will provide the reader with an overview of the Altair vehicle. In addition, Altair's thermal control system, including the functionality and the hardware, will be discussed. The paper will also describe the technology development process and the various technology developments currently underway.

Stephan, Ryan A.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Thermal Control System Architecture and Technology Challenges for a Lunar Surface Habitat

NASA’s current plans for exploration of the Lunar South Pole region include a Surface Habitat (SH) to provide up to 60-day habitability for a crew of four. The SH concept is comprised of several elements including an inflatable volume for the habitable space and a metallic airlock for access to a pressurized rover and other surface assets. A conceptual architecture for the SH Thermal Control System (TCS) is presented. A TCS dual loop design is utilized with a water/propylene glycol mix for the internal crew spaces and an external loop with low temperature coolant. The internal loop is partitioned into low and moderate temperature service with a sublimator available for operational scenarios prior to thermal radiator deployment (or redeployment). Waste heat is rejected through thermal radiators contained in the external loop. Optimization of the thermal radiator geometry/orientation as well as the TCS internal/external loop architecture is accomplished via analytical models of the system. Low mass, dust tolerant, deployable/retractable thermal radiators (in partial gravity) and thermal control surfaces, along with accommodating infrequent eclipse periods lasting up to 100 hours, present the major technology challenges. Mitigation strategies to reduce the energy needed to maintain the SH and associated systems above survival temperature limits during the eclipse period are considered in the paper. Options include retractable radiators, re-generable heat exchangers, temperature excursions, thermal energy storage and optimized inflatable optical properties. TCS sensitivity to potential SH Electrical Power System (EPS) growth is also a consideration for both operational and dormant mission phases.

Thermal Control System↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Thermal Control System Architecture and Technology Challenges for a Lunar Surface Habitat

NASA’s current plans for exploration of the Lunar South Pole region include a Surface Habitat (SH) to provide up to 60-day habitability for a crew of four. The SH concept is comprised of several elements including an inflatable volume for the habitable space and a metallic airlock for access to a pressurized rover and other surface assets. A conceptual architecture for the SH Thermal Control System (TCS) is presented. A TCS dual loop design is utilized with a water/propylene glycol mix for the internal crew spaces and an external loop with low temperature coolant. The internal loop is partitioned into low and moderate temperature service with a sublimator available for operational scenarios prior to thermal radiator deployment (or redeployment). Waste heat is rejected through thermal radiators contained in the external loop. Optimization of the thermal radiator geometry/orientation as well as the TCS internal/external loop architecture is accomplished via analytical models of the system. Low mass, dust tolerant, deployable/retractable thermal radiators (in partial gravity) and thermal control surfaces, along with accommodating infrequent eclipse periods lasting up to 100 hours, present the major technology challenges. Mitigation strategies to reduce the energy needed to maintain the SH and associated systems above survival temperature limits during the eclipse period are considered in the paper. Options include retractable radiators, re-generable heat exchangers, temperature excursions, thermal energy storage and optimized inflatable optical properties. TCS sensitivity to potential SH Electrical Power System (EPS) growth is also a consideration for both operational and dormant mission phases.

Thermal Control System↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Thermal Vacuum and Vibration Testing of the Differential Thermal Expansion Thermal Switch

The Extended Stroke, Reverse Operation, Differential Expansion Thermal Switch for Extreme Variable Environments uses materials with both positive and negative coefficients of thermal expansion (CTE) arranged in concentric cylinders so that the thermal switch (TS) operates passively, opening a gap between interfaces to create a low thermal contact when cold, and closing the gap between interfaces to create a high thermal contact when hot. This paper details the testing of the TS at Marshall Space Flight Center including the pre-vibe thermal vacuum cycle test, vibration test, post-vibe thermal vacuum cycle test, and long duration thermal vacuum cycle test. The pre- and post-vibe thermal cycle and the long duration cycle test tested to hot and cold plateau initial temperatures of 40 °C, and -173 °C, respectively. The pre- and post-vibe tests required plateau holds of at least 2 hours, whereas the long duration cycle test required plateau holds of at least 20 hours. The tests each used a rate of temperature change of < 2 °C/min when transitioning between plateaus. The data collected from each thermal test is compared to show the operation of the TS both before and after the vibration test to GEVS levels, and throughout the long duration cycle test. From the data collected, the total conductance through the TS interfaces is calculated for both on (TS closed – during hot plateau) and off (TS open – during cold plateau) configurations, and the turndown ratio is also calculated. Challenges and lessons learned from the testing are also discussed.

thermal control technology↗
NASA NTRS1972

Recent advances in spacecraft thermal-control materials research.

The state-of-the-art of spacecraft thermal-control materials technology has been significantly advanced during the past 4 years. Selective black coatings are discussed together with black paints, dielectric films on metal surfaces, and white radiator coatings. Criteria for the selection of thermal-control surfaces are considered, giving attention to prelaunch protection, the capability of being measured, reproducibility, simulator response, and aspects of a nonindigenous space environment. Progress in space simulation is related to vacuum technology, ultraviolet sources, solar wind simulation, and the production of protons. Advances have been made in the protection against space environmental effects, and in the development of thermal-control surfaces and pigments.

Zerlaut, G. A.↗
NASA NTRS2023

Thermal Vacuum and Vibration Testing of the Differential Thermal Expansion Thermal Switch

The Extended Stroke, Reverse Operation, Differential Thermal Expansion (DTE) Thermal Switch (TS) for Extreme Variable Environments uses materials with both positive and negative coefficients of thermal expansion (CTE) arranged in concentric cylinders so that the TS operates passively, opening a gap between interfaces to create a low thermal contact when cold, and closing the gap between interfaces to create a high thermal contact when hot. This paper details the testing of the TS at Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) including the vibration (vibe) test, pre-vibe thermal vacuum (t-vac) cycle test, post-vibe t-vac cycle test, and long duration t-vac cycle test. The data collected from the pre- and post-vibe tests are compared to show the impact of the vibe test on performance. The data collected from the long duration test is used to calculate the total thermal contact conductance through the TS interfaces for both ‘on’ (TS closed, during hot plateau) and ‘off’ (TS open, during cold plateau) configurations, and the turndown ratio is also calculated. Challenges experienced throughout testing are also discussed.

Thermal control technology↗
NASA NTRS2023

Thermal Vacuum and Vibration Testing of the Differential Thermal Expansion Thermal Switch

The Extended Stroke, Reverse Operation, Differential Thermal Expansion (DTE) Thermal Switch (TS) for Extreme Variable Environments uses materials with both positive and negative coefficients of thermal expansion (CTE) arranged in concentric cylinders so that the TS operates passively, opening a gap between interfaces to create a low thermal contact when cold, and closing the gap between interfaces to create a high thermal contact when hot. This paper details the testing of the TS at Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) including the vibration (vibe) test, pre-vibe thermal vacuum (t-vac) cycle test, post-vibe t-vac cycle test, and long duration t-vac cycle test. The data collected from the pre- and post-vibe tests are compared to show the impact of the vibe test on performance. The data collected from the long duration test is used to calculate the total thermal contact conductance through the TS interfaces for both ‘on’ (TS closed, during hot plateau) and ‘off’ (TS open, during cold plateau) configurations, and the turndown ratio is also calculated. Challenges experienced throughout testing are also discussed.

Thermal control technology↗
NASA NTRS2011

Overview of NASA's Thermal Control System Development for Exploration Project

The now-cancelled Constellation Program included the Orion, Altair, and Lunar Surface Systems project offices. The first two elements, Orion and Altair, were planned to be manned space vehicles while the third element was much more diverse and included several sub-elements. Among other things, these sub-elements were Rovers and a Lunar Habitat. The planned missions involving these systems and vehicles included several risks and design challenges. Due to the unique thermal operating environment, many of these risks and challenges were associated with the vehicles thermal control system. NASA s Exploration Technology Development Program (ETDP) consisted of various technology development projects. The project chartered with mitigating the aforementioned thermal risks and design challenges was the Thermal Control System Development for Exploration Project. These risks and design challenges were being addressed through a rigorous technology development process that was planned to culminate with an integrated thermal control system test. Although the technologies being developed were originally aimed towards mitigating specific Constellation risks, the technology development process is being continued within a new program. This continued effort is justified by the fact that many of the technologies are generically applicable to future spacecraft thermal control systems. The current paper summarizes the development efforts being performed by the technology development project. The development efforts involve heat acquisition and heat rejection hardware including radiators, heat exchangers, and evaporators. The project has also been developing advanced phase change material heat sinks and performing a material compatibility assessment for a promising thermal control system working fluid. The to-date progress and lessons-learned from these development efforts will be discussed throughout the paper.

Stephan, Ryan A.↗
NASA NTRS2018

Working Fluid Trade Study for a Two-Phase Mechanically Pumped Loop Thermal Control System

NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory is investigating a two-phase mechanically pumped fluid loop (MPFL) technology for spacecraft thermal control for future planetary space science mission concepts. The two-phase technology combines the potential of single-phase MPFL and the passive two-phase heat pipe systems. Previous two-phase MPFL studies at JPL have identified an evaporator system with a separated flow architecture as providing a robust light mass thermal control system with very high spatial and temporal thermal stability required by the science instruments on these missions. These studies have further identified the thermophysical properties of the working fluid to be key to the performance of a two-phase fluid loop. This paper describes the methodology used in the selection of the working fluids for optimizing the performance of the two-phase MPFL. A high level model was developed that includes the constraints and boundaries driven by the system components. The performance of fluids from the REFPROP database are investigated and rated for this system. The working fluid attributes such as cost, hazardous properties, and heritage were taken into account in this selection. A typical spacecraft dissipating 1000 W and a fluid loop consisting of an evaporator, accumulator, radiator, and associated tubing components is used as an example in this study.

Daimaru, Takuro↗
NASA NTRS2018

Working Fluid Trade Study for a Two-Phase Mechanically Pumped Loop Thermal Control System

NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory is investigating a two-phase mechanically pumped fluid loop (MPFL) technology for spacecraft thermal control for future planetary space science mission concepts. The two-phase technology combines the potential of single-phase MPFL and the passive two-phase heat pipe systems. Previous two-phase MPFL studies4,5 at JPL have identified an evaporator system with a separated flow architecture as providing a robust light mass thermal control system with very high spatial and temporal thermal stability required by the science instruments on these missions. These studies have further identified the thermophysical properties of the working fluid to be key to the performance of a two-phase fluid loop. This paper describes the methodology used in the selection of the working fluids for optimizing the performance of the two-phase MPFL. A high level model was developed that includes the constraints and boundaries driven by the system components. The performance of fluids from the REFPROP database were investigated and rated for this system. The working fluid attributes such as cost, hazardous properties, and heritage were taken into account in this selection. A typical spacecraft dissipating 1000 W and a fluid loop consisting of an evaporator, accumulator, radiator, and associated tubing components was used as an example in this study.

Daimaru, Takuro↗