Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “reaction control system”

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 127 records · Page 7
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS1988

Independent Orbiter Assessment (IOA): Assessment of the reaction control system, volume 1

The results of the Independent Orbiter Assessment (IOA) of the Failure Modes and Effects Analysis (FMEA) and Critical Items List (CIL) are presented. The IOA effort first completed an analysis of the aft and forward Reaction Control System (RCS) hardware, and Electrical Power Distribution and Control (EPD and C), generating draft failure modes and potential critical items. To preserve independence, this analysis was accomplished without reliance upon the results contained within the NASA FMEA/CIL documentation. The IOA results were then compared to the proposed Post 51-L NASA FMEA/CIL baseline. This report documents the results of that comparison for the Orbiter RCS hardware and EPD and C systems. The IOA product for the RCS analysis consisted of 208 hardware and 2064 EPD and C failure mode worksheets that resulted in 141 hardware and 449 EPD and C potential critical items (PCIs) being identified. A comparison was made of the IOA product to the NASA FMEA/CIL baseline. After comparison and discussions with the NASA subsystem manager, 96 hardware issues, 83 of which concern CIL items or PCIs, and 280 EPD and C issues, 158 of which concern CIL items or PCIs, and 280 EPD and C issues, 158 of which concern CIL items or PCIs, remain unresolved. Volume 1 contains the subsystem description, assessment results, and some of the IOA worksheets.

Prust, Chet D.↗
NASA NTRS1988

Independent Orbiter Assessment (IOA): Assessment of the reaction control system, volume 2

The results of the Independent Orbiter Assessment (IOA) of the Failure Modes and Effects Analysis (FMEA) and Critical Items List (CIL) are presented. The IOA effort first completed an analysis of the aft and forward Reaction Control System (RCS) hardware and Electrical Power Distribution and Control (EPD and C), generating draft failure modes and potential critical items. The IOA results were then compared to the proposed Post 51-L NASA FMEA/CIL baseline. This report documents the results of that comparison for the Orbiter RCS hardware and EPD and C systems. Volume 2 continues the presentation of IOA worksheets.

Prust, Chet D.↗
NASA NTRS1988

Independent Orbiter Assessment (IOA): Assessment of the reaction control system, volume 3

The results of the Independent Orbiter Assessment (IOA) of the Failure Modes and Effects Analysis (FMEA) and Critical Items List (CIL) are presented. The IOA effort first completed an analysis of the aft and forward Reaction Control System (RCS) hardware and Electrical Power Distribution and Control (EPD and C), generating draft failure modes and potential critical items. The IOA results were then compared to the proposed Post 51-L NASA FMEA/CIL baseline. This report documents the results of that comparison for the Orbiter RCS hardware and EPD and C systems. Volume 3 continues the presentation of IOA worksheets.

Prust, Chet D.↗
NASA NTRS1988

Independent Orbiter Assessment (IOA): Assessment of the reaction control system, volume 4

The results of the Independent Orbiter Assessment (IOA) of the Failure Modes and Effects Analysis (FMEA) and Critical Items List (CIL) are presented. The IOA effort first completed an analysis of the aft and forward Reaction Control System (RCS) hardware and Electrical Power Distribution and Control (EPD and C), generating draft failure modes and potential critical items. The IOA results were then compared to the proposed Post 51-L NASA FMEA/CIL baseline. This report documents the results of that comparison for the Orbiter RCS hardware and EPD and C systems. Volume 4 continues the presentation of IOA worksheets and contains the potential critical items list.

Prust, Chet D.↗
NASA NTRS1988

Independent Orbiter Assessment (IOA): Assessment of the reaction control system, volume 5

The results of the Independent Orbiter Assessment (IOA) of the Failure Modes and Effects Analysis (FMEA) and Critical Items List (CIL) are presented. The IOA effort first completed an analysis of the aft and forward Reaction Control System (RCS) hardware and Electrical Power Distribution and Control (EPD and C), generating draft failure modes and potential critical items. The IOA results were then compared to the proposed Post 51-L NASA FMEA/CIL baseline. This report documents the results of that comparison for the Orbiter RCS hardware and EPD and C systems. Volume 5 contains detailed analysis and superseded analysis worksheets and the NASA FMEA to IOA worksheet cross reference and recommendations.

Prust, Chet D.↗
NASA NTRS2002

Modeling Reaction Control System Effects on Mars Odyssey

During the Mars 2001 Odyssey aerobraking mission, NASA Langley Research Center performed 6 degree of freedom (6-DOF) simulations to determine rotational motion of the spacecraft. The main objective of this study was to assess the reaction control system models and their effects on the atmospheric flight of Odyssey. Based on these models, a comparison was made between data derived from flight measurements to simulated rotational motion of the spacecraft during aerobraking at Mars. The differences between the simulation and flight derived Odyssey data were then used to adjust the aerodynamic parameters to achieve a better correlation.

Hanna, Jill L.↗
NASA NTRS2006

CFD Simulation of the Space Shuttle Launch Vehicle with Booster Separation Motor and Reaction Control System Plumes

The primary objective of this paper is to demonstrate the capability of computational fluid dynamics (CFD) to simulate a very complicated flow field encountered during the space shuttle ascent. The flow field features nozzle plumes from booster separation motor (BSM) and reaction control system (RCS) jets with a supersonic incoming cross flow at speed of Mach 4. The overset Navier-Stokes code OVERFLOW, was used to simulate the flow field surrounding the entire space shuttle launch vehicle (SSLV) with high geometric fidelity. The variable gamma option was chosen due to the high temperature nature of nozzle flows and different plume species. CFD predicted Mach contours are in good agreement with the schlieren photos from wind tunnel test. Flow fields are discussed in detail and the results are used to support the debris analysis for the space shuttle Return To Flight (RTF) task.

Gea, L. M.↗
NASA NTRS1994

YAV-8B reaction control system bleed and control power usage in hover and transition

Using a calibrated Rolls-Royce Pegasus engine and existing aircraft instrumentation and pressure taps, total and individual nozzle reaction control system (RCS) bleed flow rates have been measured on a YAV-8B Harrier during typical short takeoff, transition, hover, and vertical landing maneuvers. RCS thrust forces were calculated from RCS nozzle total pressure measurements, and control power was determined from the moments produced by these thrusts and the aircraft's moments of inertia. These data document the characteristics of the YAV-8B RCS with its basic stability augmentation system (SAS) engaged. Advanced control system designs for the YAV-8B can be compared to the original SAS based on the total bleed use and the percentage of available bleed used. In addition, the peak and mean values of the bleed and control power data can be used for sizing the reaction controls for a future short takeoff and vertical landing (STOVL) aircraft.

Borchers, Paul F.↗
NASA NTRS2011

NASA Ares I Launch Vehicle Roll and Reaction Control Systems Lessons Learned

On April 15, 2010 President Barak Obama made the official announcement that the Constellation Program, which included the Ares I launch vehicle, would be canceled. NASA s Ares I launch vehicle was being designed to launch the Orion Crew Exploration Vehicle, returning humans to the moon, Mars, and beyond. It consisted of a First Stage (FS) five segment solid rocket booster and a liquid J-2X Upper Stage (US) engine. Roll control for the FS was planned to be handled by a dedicated Roll Control System (RoCS), located on the connecting interstage. Induced yaw or pitch moments experienced during FS ascent would have been handled by vectoring of the booster nozzle. After FS booster separation, the US Reaction Control System (ReCS) would have provided the US Element with three degrees of freedom control as needed. The lessons learned documented in this paper will be focused on the technical designs and producibility of both systems along with the partnership between NASA and Boeing, who was on contract to build the Ares I US Element, which included the FS RoCS and US ReCS. In regards to partnership, focus will be placed on integration along with technical work accomplished by Boeing with special emphasis on each task order. In summary, this paper attempts to capture key lessons learned that should be helpful in the development of future launch vehicle RCS designs.

Butt, Adam↗
NASA NTRS2012

Best Practices from the Design and Development of the Ares I Launch Vehicle Roll and Reaction Control Systems

On April 15, 2010 President Barak Obama made the official announcement that the Constellation Program, which included the Ares I launch vehicle, would be canceled. NASA s Ares I launch vehicle was being designed to launch the Orion Crew Exploration Vehicle, returning humans to the moon, Mars, and beyond. It consisted of a First Stage (FS) five segment solid rocket booster and a liquid J-2X Upper Stage (US) engine. Roll control for the FS was planned to be handled by a dedicated Roll Control System (RoCS), located on the connecting interstage. Induced yaw or pitch moments experienced during FS ascent would have been handled by vectoring of the booster nozzle. After FS booster separation, the US Reaction Control System (ReCS) would have provided the US Element with three degrees of freedom control as needed. The best practices documented in this paper will be focused on the technical designs and producibility of both systems along with the partnership between NASA and Boeing, who was on contract to build the Ares I US Element, which included the FS RoCS and US ReCS. In regards to partnership, focus will be placed on integration along with technical work accomplished by Boeing. This will include detailed emphasis on task orders developed between NASA and Boeing that were used to direct specific work that needed to be accomplished. In summary, this paper attempts to capture key best practices that should be helpful in the development of future launch vehicle and spacecraft RCS designs.

Butt, Adam↗
NASA NTRS1994

Discovering operating modes in telemetry data from the Shuttle Reaction Control System

This paper addresses the problem of detecting and diagnosing faults in physical systems, for which suitable system models are not available. An architecture is proposed that integrates the on-line acquisition and exploitation of monitoring and diagnostic knowledge. The focus is on the component of the architecture that discovers classes of behaviors with similar characteristics by observing a system in operation. A characterization of behaviors based on best fitting approximation models is investigated. An experimental prototype has been implemented to test it. Preliminary results in diagnosing faults of the reaction control system of the space shuttle are presented. The merits and limitations of the approach are identified and directions for future work are set.

Manganaris, Stefanos↗
NASA NTRS2010

NASA Ares I Launch Vehicle Upper Stage Reaction Control System (ReCS) Cold Flow Development Test Overview

NASA s Ares I launch vehicle, consisting of a five segment solid rocket booster first stage and a liquid bi-propellant J2-X engine Upper Stage, is the vehicle that s been chosen to launch the Orion Crew Module, which will return humans to the Moon, Mars, and beyond. After First Stage booster separation, the Reaction Control System (ReCS), a monopropellant hydrazine system, will provide the Upper Stage element with three degrees of freedom control as needed. This paper provides an overview of the system level development testing that has taken place on the Ares I launch vehicle Upper Stage ReCS. The ReCS System Development Test Article (SDTA) was built as a flight representative water flow test article whose primary test objective was to obtain fluid system performance data to evaluate the integrate system performance characteristics and verify analytical models. Water is the industry standard for cold flow testing of hydrazine systems, because the densities are very close and the speeds of sound are well characterized. The completion of this development level test program was considered necessary to support the ReCS Critical Design Review. This paper will address the design approach taken in building the test article, the objectives of the test program, types of testing completed, general results, the ability of the program to meet the test objectives, and lessons learned

Dervan, Melanie↗
NASA NTRS1975

Commonality Study of the Pressure-Volume-Temperature Based Propellant Gaging Software Modules for the Auxiliary Power Unit, Reaction Control System, and Orbital Maneuvering System

Computer storage requirements can be reduced if areas of commonality exist in two or more programs placed in the same computer and identical code can be used by more than one program. The pressure-volume-temperature (P-V-T) relationship for the propellant tank pressurant agent is utilized as the basis for either a primary of a backup propellant gaging program for the auxiliary power unit (APU), the reaction control system (RCS), and the orbital maneuvering system (OMS). These three propellant gaging programs were investigated. It was revealed that a very limited degree of software commonality exits among them. An examination of this common software indicated that only the computation of the helium compressibility factor in an external function subprogram accessible to both the RCS and OMS propellant gaging programs appears to offer a savings in computer storage requirements.

Duhon, D. D.↗
NASA NTRS1980

Orbiter subsystem hardware/software interaction analysis. Volume 8: AFT reaction control system, part 2

The orbiter subsystems and interfacing program elements which interact with the orbiter computer flight software are analyzed. The failure modes identified in the subsystem/element failure mode and effects analysis are examined. Potential interaction with the software is examined through an evaluation of the software requirements. The analysis is restricted to flight software requirements and excludes utility/checkout software. The results of the hardware/software interaction analysis for the forward reaction control system are presented.

Becker, D. D.↗
NASA NTRS1987

Independent Orbiter Assessment (IOA): Analysis of the reaction control system, volume 1

The results of the Independent Orbiter Assessment (IOA) of the Failure Modes and Effects Analysis (FMEA) and Critical Items List (CIL) are presented. The IOA approach features a top-down analysis of the hardware to determine failure modes, criticality, and potential critical items. To preserve independence, this analysis was accomplished without reliance upon the results contained within the NASA FMEA/CIL documentation. This report documents the independent analysis results for the Reaction Control System (RCS). The purpose of the RCS is to provide thrust in and about the X, Y, Z axes for External Tank (ET) separation; orbit insertion maneuvers; orbit translation maneuvers; on-orbit attitude control; rendezvous; proximity operations (payload deploy and capture); deorbit maneuvers; and abort attitude control. The RCS is situated in three independent modules, one forward in the orbiter nose and one in each OMS/RCS pod. Each RCS module consists of the following subsystems: Helium Pressurization Subsystem; Propellant Storage and Distribution Subsystem; Thruster Subsystem; and Electrical Power Distribution and Control Subsystem. Of the failure modes analyzed, 307 could potentially result in a loss of life and/or loss of vehicle.

Burkemper, V. J.↗
NASA NTRS1987

Independent Orbiter Assessment (IOA): Analysis of the reaction control system, volume 2

The results of the Independent Orbiter Assessment (IOA) of the Failure Modes and Effects Analysis (FMEA) and Critical Items List (CIL) are presented. The IOA approach features a top-down analysis of the hardware to determine failure modes, criticality, and potential critical items. To preserve independence, this analysis was accomplished without reliance upon the results contained within the NASA FMEA/CIL documentation. This report documents the independent analysis results for the Reaction Control System (RCS). The RCS is situated in three independent modules, one forward in the orbiter nose and one in each OMS/RCS pod. Each RCS module consists of the following subsystems: Helium Pressurization Subsystem; Propellant Storage and Distribution Subsystem; Thruster Subsystem; and Electrical Power Distribution and Control Subsystem. Volume 2 continues the presentation of IOA analysis worksheets.

Burkemper, V. J.↗
NASA NTRS1987

Independent Orbiter Assessment (IOA): Analysis of the reaction control system, volume 3

The results of the Independent Orbiter Assessment (IOA) of the Failure Modes and Effects Analysis (FMEA) and Critical Items List (CIL) are presented. The IOA approach features a top-down analysis of the hardware to determine failure modes, criticality, and potential critical items. To preserve independence, this analysis was accomplished without reliance upon the results contained within the NASA FMEA/CIL documentation. This report documents the independent analysis results for the Reaction Control System (RCS). The RCS is situated in three independent modules, one forward in the orbiter nose and one in each OMS/RCS pod. Each RCS module consists of the following subsystems: Helium Pressurization Subsystem; Propellant Storage and Distribution Subsystem; Thruster Subsystem; and Electrical Power Distribution and Control Subsystem. Volume 3 continues the presentation of IOA analysis worksheets and the potential critical items list.

Burkemper, V. J.↗