SEARCH · Search NASA
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.
The Flexible Lunar Architecture for Exploration (FLARE) is an alternate approach to the planned Artemis mission design for delivering cargo and crew to the lunar surface. FLARE employs launch vehicles developed by NASA and commercial vendors then adds a SpaceTug element to transfer as-sets between Earth and lunar orbits.
The Lunar Architecture Team Phase 2 study defined and assessed architecture options for a Lunar Outpost at the Moon's South Pole. The Habitation Focus Element Team was responsible for developing concepts for all of the Habitats and pressurized logistics modules particular to each of the architectures, and defined the shapes, volumes and internal layouts considering human factors, surface operations and safety requirements, as well as Lander mass and volume constraints. The Structures Subsystem Team developed structural concepts, sizing estimates and mass estimates for the primary Habitat structure. In these studies, the primary structure was decomposed into a more detailed list of components to be sized to gain greater insight into concept mass contributors. Structural mass estimates were developed that captured the effect of major design parameters such as internal pressure load. Analytical and empirical equations were developed for each structural component identified. Over 20 different hard-shell, hybrid expandable and inflatable soft-shell Habitat and pressurized logistics module concepts were sized and compared to assess structural performance and efficiency during the study. Habitats were developed in three categories; Mini Habs that are removed from the Lander and placed on the Lunar surface, Monolithic habitats that remain on the Lander, and Habitats that are part of the Mobile Lander system. Each category of Habitat resulted in structural concepts with advantages and disadvantages. The same modular shell components could be used for the Mini Hab concept, maximizing commonality and minimizing development costs. Larger Habitats had higher volumetric mass efficiency and floor area than smaller Habitats (whose mass was dominated by fixed items such as domes and frames). Hybrid and pure expandable Habitat structures were very mass-efficient, but the structures technology is less mature, and the ability to efficiently package and deploy internal subsystems remains an open issue.
The Flexible Lunar Architecture for Exploration (FLARE) is a concept to deliver four crew to the lunar surface for a minimum of seven days and then return them safely to Earth. FLARE can be implemented whenever the component vehicles are operational. FLARE was developed as an alternative to NASA’s Human Landing System (HLS) reference architecture from the Design Analysis Cycle (DAC) #2 created in 2019. The DAC2 guidelines required utilization of the Gateway vehicle in a Near- Rectilinear Halo Orbit (NRHO). Instead, FLARE chooses a Low Lunar Frozen Polar Orbit (LLFPO) for lunar rendezvous of components, and an optional Gateway vehicle. The LLFPO provides a stable orbit that overflies the south pole every 2 h, ensuring easy access to the lunar surface for surface aborts with a much lower propellant requirement than NRHO. The minimum FLARE concept uses one Space Launch System (SLS) launch, one Orion, one European Service Module (ESM), and one human lander (launched on commercial vehicle(s)). FLARE adds the SpaceTug, based upon the mature and successful ULA “Common” Centaur Upper Stage vehicle, with modifications to create an Earth-Moon transfer vehicle. In the FLARE baseline mission, the SpaceTug provides propulsion needed to return the Orion + ESM from LLFPO to Earth. The SpaceTug also provides propulsion to deliver the separate human lander components – the Descent Element (DE) and the Ascent Element (AE) - from Low Earth Orbit (LEO) to LLFPO. The SLS Block 1 then launches the Orion + ESM and completes a rendezvous with the mated DE + AE components in LLFPO. FLARE offers optional phases beyond the baseline mission. The SpaceTug can deliver components of the planned Gateway, including the Power and Propulsion Element (PPE) and the Habitable and Logistics Outpost (HALO), to LLFPO. FLARE provides an option to deliver precursor equipment to the lunar surface to enhance and extend the human mission. With these components, including an inflatable habitation module and airlock, individual crew mobility vehicle(s), an In-Situ Resource Utilization (ISRU) demonstration, and science and technology experiments, the crew can explore and conduct science on the lunar surface for up to 14 days.
Visions of lunar outposts often depict a collection of fixed elements such as pressurized habitats, in and around which human inhabitants spend the large majority of their surface stay time. In such an outpost, an efficient deployment of environmental control and life support equipment can be achieved by centralizing certain functions within one or a minimum number of habitable elements and relying on the exchange of gases and liquids between elements via atmosphere ventilation and plumbed interfaces. However, a rigidly fixed outpost can constrain the degree to which the total lunar landscape can be explored. The capability to enable widespread access across the landscape makes a lunar architecture with a high degree of surface mobility attractive. Such mobility presents unique challenges to the efficient deployment of environmental control and life support functions in multiple elements that may for long periods of time be operated independently. This paper describes some of those anticipated challenges.
Since the cancellation of the Constellation Program, NASA officially has been focused on Mars as the next step for human exploration. Yet many in the space community believe that returning humans to the moon is more logical. Often-cited reasons for this include: (1) should Nature prove to be favorable, the moon could be the basis for expanding the space economy through Off-Earth Mining (OEM) and other commercial endeavors; (2) the moon is scientifically interesting and could serve as a platform for scientific facilities; and (3) useful experience could be gained there for the human journey to Mars. With this in mind, JPL’s A-Team (Architecture Team) was tasked with developing conceptual lunar surface architectures that could simultaneously provide “living on another world” proving ground experience, but would also be affordable and offer truly significant commercial and international partnering opportunities. The task also required that the resulting architectures must eventually lead to and flow seamlessly into planning for human missions to Mars in the 2030s/2040s, if “things go well.” This aspect has been critically missing in other lunar architecture proposals.
The Flexible Lunar Architecture for Exploration (FLARE) is a concept to deliver four crew to the lunar surface for 7 to 14 days and then return them safely to Earth by 2024. This meets NASA’s internal 2024 lunar landing deadline directed by President Trump (Trump, 2017) and the “5-year” goal set forth by Vice President Pence (Pence, 2019). FLARE is an alternative to NASA’s Human Landing System reference architecture from the Design Analysis Cycle (DAC) #2 (NASA, 2019b). The minimum FLARE concept uses one Space Launch System launch, one Orion, one European Service Module (ESM), and one human lander to deliver four crew to the Moon for a minimum surface duration of 7 days and return them to Earth. FLARE adds a new capability, called the SpaceTug, based upon the mature and successful United Launch Alliance “Common” Centaur Upper Stage vehicle, with modifications. In FLARE, the SpaceTug provides propulsion needed to return the Orion+ESM from the Moon to Earth. The SpaceTug also provides propulsion to deliver the human lander Descent Element (DE) and Ascent Element (AE) separately to lunar orbit. The Orion+ESM then completes a rendezvous with the mated DE+AE in lunar orbit. FLARE also offers optional phases to the Moon 2024 mission. The SpaceTug can also deliver components of the planned Gateway - including the Power and Propulsion Element and the Habitation and Logistics Outpost - to lunar orbit; however, the planned FLARE destination is a Low Lunar Frozen Polar Orbit unlike the NASA DAC2 plan for a Near Rectilinear Halo Orbit. FLARE also provides an option to deliver precursor equipment - including a habitation module, crew mobility devices and an In-Situ Resource Utilization demonstration - to the lunar surface for enhanced crew exploration and science with the extended 14-day surface mission.
In view of the superior environmental and operational conditions that are thought to exist in lava tubes, popular visions of permanent settlements built upon the lunar surface may prove to be entirely romantic. The factors that will ultimately come together to determine the design of a lunar base are complex and interrelated, and they call for a radical architectural solution. Whether lunar surface-deployed superstructures can answer these issues is called into question. One particularly troublesome concern in any lunar base design is the need for vast amounts of space, and the ability of man-made structures to provide such volumes in a reliable pressurized habitat is doubtful. An examination of several key environmental design issues suggests that the alternative mode of subselene development may offer the best opportunity for an enduring and humane settlement.
The National Aeronautics and Space Administrations (NASA) Constellation Program is currently designing a new transportation system to replace the Space Shuttle, support human missions to both the International Space Station (ISS) and the Moon, and enable the eventual establishment of an outpost on the lunar surface. The present Constellation architecture is designed to meet nominal capability requirements and provide flexibility sufficient for handling a host of contingency scenarios including (but not limited to) launch delays at the Earth. This report summarizes a body of work performed in support of the Review of U.S. Human Space Flight Committee. It analyzes three lunar orbit rendezvous dual-launch architecture options which incorporate differing methodologies for mitigating the effects of launch delays at the Earth. NASA employed the recently-developed Mission Assessment Post Processor (MAPP) tool to quickly evaluate vehicle performance requirements for several candidate approaches for conducting human missions to the Moon. The MAPP tool enabled analysis of Earth perturbation effects and Earth-Moon geometry effects on the integrated vehicle performance as it varies over the 18.6-year lunar nodal cycle. Results are provided summarizing best-case and worst-case vehicle propellant requirements for each architecture option. Additionally, the associated vehicle payload mass requirements at launch are compared between each architecture and against those of the Constellation Program. The current Constellation Program architecture assumes that the Altair lunar lander and Earth Departure Stage (EDS) vehicles are launched on a heavy lift launch vehicle. The Orion Crew Exploration Vehicle (CEV) is separately launched on a smaller man-rated vehicle. This strategy relaxes man-rating requirements for the heavy lift launch vehicle and has the potential to significantly reduce the cost of the overall architecture over the operational lifetime of the program. The crew launch occurs first, four days prior to the optimal trans-lunar injection (TLI) departure window. This is done to allow for launch delays in the Altair/EDS launch. During this time, the Orion vehicle is required to conduct orbit maintenance while loitering in low Earth orbit (LEO). The alternative architectures presented aim to eliminate the need for costly orbit maintenance maneuvers while loitering in LEO. In all of the alternative architectures considered, it is assumed that the Altair and Orion vehicles are nominally launched 90 minutes apart, depart the Earth separately, and complete the rendezvous and docking sequence at the Moon. In this lunar orbit rendezvous (LOR) strategy, both the Altair and Orion vehicles will require separate EDS stages, and each will be required to perform lunar orbit insertion (LOI). This has the effect of balancing payload requirements between the two launch vehicles at the Earth. In this case, the overall payload mass is increased slightly, but the increased mission costs could potentially be offset by requiring the construction of two rockets similar in size and nature, unlike the current Constellation architecture. Three dual-launch architecture options with LOR were evaluated, which incorporate differing methodologies for mitigating the effects of launch delays at the Earth. Benefits and drawbacks of each of the dual-launch architecture options with LOR are discussed and the overall mission performance is compared with that of the existing Constellation Program lunar architecture.
The lunar surface habitat will serve as the astronauts' home on the moon, providing a pressurized facility for all crew living functions and serving as the primary location for a number of crew work functions. Adequate volume is required for each of these functions in addition to that devoted to housing the habitat systems and crew consumables. The time constraints of the LAT-2 schedule precluded the Habitation Team from conducting a complete "bottoms-up" design of a lunar surface habitation system from which to derive true volumetric requirements. The objective of this analysis was to quickly derive an estimated total pressurized volume and pressurized net habitable volume per crewmember for a lunar surface habitat, using a principled, methodical approach in the absence of a detailed design. Five "heuristic methods" were used: historical spacecraft volumes, human/spacecraft integration standards and design guidance, Earth-based analogs, parametric "sizing" tools, and conceptual point designs. Estimates for total pressurized volume, total habitable volume, and volume per crewmember were derived using these methods. All method were found to provide some basis for volume estimates, but values were highly variable across a wide range, with no obvious convergence of values. Best current assumptions for required crew volume were provided as a range. Results of these analyses and future work are discussed.
Human civilization and architecture have defined each other for over 5000 years on Earth. Even in the novel environment of space, persistent issues of human urbanism will eclipse, within a historically short time, the technical challenges of space settlement that dominate our current view. By adding modern topics in space engineering, planetology, life support, human factors, material invention, and conservation to their already renaissance array of expertise, urban designers can responsibly apply ancient, proven standards to the exciting new opportunities afforded by space. Inescapable facts about the Moon set real boundaries within which tenable lunar urbanism and its component architecture must eventually develop.
As the space population grows over time, persistent issues of human urbanism will eclipse within a historically short time the technical challenges of space exploration that dominate current efforts. Although urban design teams will have to integrate many new disciplines into their already renaissance array of expertise, doing so will enable them to adapt ancient, proven solutions to opportunities afforded by expanding urbanism offworld. This paper updates the author's original 1988 treatment of the subject.
NASA’s Artemis missions will return humanity to the Moon, establishing a long-term presence there and opening more of the lunar surface to exploration than ever before. This rapid growth of lunar activity requires robust and resilient communications, navigation, and networking capabilities for crew safety, command and control of spacecraft, return of science data, and precise maneuvering of assets in space and on the lunar surface.
This paper investigates the trade-off between efficiency and habitability in lunar architectures. Five distinct lunar architectures are briefly presented and then critically examined in terms of spatial allocation and surface area to net and gross volume and in terms of four habitability criteria. Advantages and limitations of the basic concepts underlying each architecture are examined. A fundamental inverse relation is discovered between spatial efficiency (and thus cost containment) and habitability (and thus satisfaction and productivity). The most efficient architectures are described in detail, as are the most habitable architectures. This leads to a critical trade-off to be made in the design of any lunar architecture. Ways are suggested to integrate the concerns for efficiency with habitability.
A trade study was performed to compare the use of cryogenic liquid oxygen (LOX) with high pressure gaseous oxygen (GOX) and electrolysis approaches for Lunar outpost life support, which consists of a surface habitat and pressurized rover. This study presents the mission details pertaining to a Lunar outpost architecture, discusses the viable concept of operations for each architecture, and compares the equivalent system mass (ESM) of the cryogenic LOX, high pressure GOX, and electrolysis approaches across different parameter trades, e.g. mission duration or extravehicular activity frequency, for the single and 10-year mission architectures. For a single nominal mission, high pressure GOX is favored for short missions (< 50 days); cryogenic LOX is favored for a wide-range of mission durations (50 – 270 days); and the electrolysis approach is favored for long missions (> 270 days). However, when considering a 10-year mission architecture, each additional resupply negatively impacts cryogenic LOX due to the additional replacement tankage. Thus, over a 10-year mission, an electrolysis approach, which can provide all life support O2 utilizing solely recovered H2O, appears to be favored over cryogenic LOX. However, a real electrolysis system may need resupplied H2O due to incomplete closure of the air revitalization loop. Thus, the cryogenic LOX approach was compared with the electrolysis approaches utilizing 100% resupplied or 100% recovered H2O to approximate the resupplied to recovered H2O ratio, i.e. the degree of loop closure, where one approach trades over the other. Additionally, gaps were identified, which are expected to affect the viability and trade of cryogenic LOX. These include the development of cryogenic pumps and vaporizers to generate high pressure GOX from LOX as well as understanding payload limitations which can affect O2 resupply.
This paper provides an overview of the computational techniques used to characterize the viability of different lunar architectures and their ability to provide communication services to the lunar surface. This analysis was done with modern ray tracing techniques that allow for the computations to be done on Graphics Processing Unit (GPU) clusters for a high level of parallelism and severe reduction in computation time. The ray tracing computations were done with the GPU platform Compute Unified Device Architecture (CUDA) provided by NVIDIA which utilizes general-purpose computing on graphics processing units (GPGPU). This new method provides the advantage of being able to characterize a much larger portion of the lunar surface due to its computational efficiency as well as providing a more accurate representation of elevation angle limits instead of the typical and often inaccurate elevation angle mask. The Lunar surface can now be characterized with metrics such as contact time, outage time, and received data rate. With these metrics, different proposed Lunar architectures can be rapidly evaluated. This reduction in computation time not only leads to more accurate results but allows these results to be obtained in a time frame that allows for the complete characterization of the trade space. It is expected that these different architecture comparisons will lead to a conclusive determination of the optimal Lunar architecture and will allow for future Lunar missions to operate as close to real time as possible. In addition, this computation method can be used to recreate visibility figures generated by previous methods but with an increased level of accuracy.