Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Propellant Delivery”

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 19 records
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS1996

Thermodynamic Vent System Applied as Propellant Delivery System for Air Force

Responding to a request from the Air Force, NASA Lewis Research Center engineers designed a combination pressure control and propellant delivery system based on thermodynamic vent system (TVS) technology. The Air Force is designing a new type of orbit transfer vehicle that uses energy from sunlight to both propel and power the vehicle. Because this vehicle uses propellant at a substantially slower rate than higher-energy rockets, it needed the Lewis-developed TVS technology for long-duration storage of cryogen propellants. Lewis engineers, in conjunction with industry partners, showed how this TVS technology could also be used to deliver propellant to the thruster. The Air Force has now begun the ground test demonstration phase. After successful completion of ground testing, the Air Force plans to use this technology in a space flight as early as 1999.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS2021

Propellant Delivery via VDC Driven Pump

The SMART (Scalable Mobile Autonomous Rocket engine Test) testbed system initiative at SSC was conceived to attempt to address many of the principal cost drivers in developing and maintaining a rocket engine test facility. The system (optimized to test engines and components generating up to 10K lbf nominal thrust) is serving as a testbed for innovative technologies and processes to provide lower cost test services with a rapid test cadence and expedient turnaround times. The system can also potentially be used as a testbed to test other related technologies relevant to surface situations (e.g., moon, Mars associated with crogenic fluid management, engine/component testing, autonomous operations, etc.). This FY20 CIF project, being conducted as part of the SMART testbed system, is developing and testing a propellant delivery system via electrically driven centrifugal pumps (obviating dependence upon Multi-Layer Pressure Vessels) with configuration and operation by a minimal number of personnel. During FY20 the team identified the requirements and worked with P3 and Masten Space Systems to develop the long lead (9 months after receipt of order) items, the 400 VDC pumps, for delivery in mid FY21. Since control of the 400 VDC pump motor is not well developed the team has established heuristics to control flows in LN2 at off nominal shaft speeds to allow deep throttling of the pump in flow test scenarios. Various test scenarios including nominal i.e. high flow high pressure, high flow low pressure, low flow high pressure, low flow low pressure, minimum throttle step change, and low inlet pressure cavitation testing were developed ahead of the anticipated hardware delivery and test. FY20 COVID Stage 3 conditions restricted access to the center and hindered lab work, so efforts focused on the system design and testing plans along with the project procurement paperwork for the hardware... now with its anticipated delivery in spring FY21. Some limited access to the center is expected by spring/summer FY21 for the continuing second year (FY21) CIF project effort meant to be focused upon system integration and initial testing.

Aaron Head↗
NASA NTRS2006

Overview of Propellant Delivery Systems at the NASA John C. Stennis Space Center

A wide range of rocket propulsion test work occurs at he NASA John C. Stennis Space Center (SSC) including full-scale engine test activities at test facilities A-1, A-2, B-1 and B-2 as well as combustion device research and development activities at the E-Complex (E-1, E-2. E-3 and E-4) test facilities. One of the greatest challenges associated with operating a test facility is maintaining the health of the primary propellant system and test-critical support systems. The challenge emerges due to the fact that the operating conditions of the various system components are extreme (e.g., low temperatures, high pressures) and due to the fact that many of the components and systems are unique. The purpose of this paper is to briefly describe the experience and modeling techniques that are used to operate the unique test facilities at NASA SSC that continue to support successful propulsion testing.

Haselmaier, L. Haynes↗
NASA NTRS2006

Characterization and Analyses of Valves, Feed Lines and Tanks used in Propellant Delivery Systems at NASA SSC

Accurate modeling of liquid rocket engine test processes involves assessing critical fluid mechanic and heat and mass transfer mechanisms within a cryogenic environment, and accurately modeling fluid properties such as vapor pressure and liquid and gas densities as a function of pressure and temperature. The Engineering and Science Directorate at the NASA John C. Stennis Space Center has developed and implemented such analytic models and analysis processes that have been used over a broad range of thermodynamic systems and resulted in substantial improvements in rocket propulsion testing services. In this paper, we offer an overview of the analyses techniques used to simulate pressurization and propellant fluid systems associated with the test stands at the NASA John C. Stennis Space Center. More specifically, examples of the global performance (one-dimensional) of a propellant system are provided as predicted using the Rocket Propulsion Test Analysis (RPTA) model. Computational fluid dynamic (CFD) analyses utilizing multi-element, unstructured, moving grid capability of complex cryogenic feed ducts, transient valve operation, and pressurization and mixing in propellant tanks are provided as well.

Ryan, Harry M.↗
NASA NTRS2015

MAST Propellant and Delivery System Design Methods

A Mars Aerospace Taxi (MAST) concept and propellant storage and delivery case study is undergoing investigation by NASA's Element Design and Architectural Impact (EDAI) design and analysis forum. The MAST lander concept envisions landing with its ascent propellant storage tanks empty and supplying these reusable Mars landers with propellant that is generated and transferred while on the Mars surface. The report provides an overview of the data derived from modeling between different methods of propellant line routing (or "lining") and differentiate the resulting design and operations complexity of fluid and gaseous paths based on a given set of fluid sources and destinations. The EDAI team desires a rough-order-magnitude algorithm for estimating the lining characteristics (i.e., the plumbing mass and complexity) associated different numbers of vehicle propellant sources and destinations. This paper explored the feasibility of preparing a mathematically sound algorithm for this purpose, and offers a method for the EDAI team to implement.

Taxi↗
NASA NTRS2019

Cost Breakeven Analysis of Lunar ISRU for Human Lunar Surface Architectures

The return of humans to the lunar surface encompasses a range of possible architectures from brief Apollo-like sorties to long-term sustainment of human presence. Any architecture in this span requires propellant for the crew’s ascent from the lunar surface, as well as consumables to support their presence on the Moon. Oxygen and hydrogen are candidates for the propellant for the ascent vehicle due to their high specific impulse and potential for production from lunar resources and also constitute important consumables for the crew. Thus, the production of oxygen and/or hydrogen from lunar resources could significantly reduce the mass that must be sent from Earth to enable future human lunar missions. To assess the merits of using lunar resources, the costs associated with developing, producing, launching, operating, and maintaining those systems must be considered relative to the costs of delivering the needed resources from Earth. The demand for those resources depends upon the nature of the lunar mission, while the costs of both Earth-derived and lunar-derived resources depend on the performance requirements and technology capabilities associated with each approach. Thus, determining which approach is more cost efficient requires modeling the performance and cost of the associated systems as well as the range of possible architectures over which such a determination might apply. This research proposes a model that parametrically captures the factors influencing the relevant costs of providing propellant and crew consumables on the lunar surface from Earth and from the Moon. Two ISRU system models are assessed relative to propellant delivery from Earth. In this model, lunar ISRU breaks even with propellant delivery from Earth at high propellant demands and mission durations with multi-year ISRU system lifetimes; however, the costs of developing the necessary technologies to support a highly reliable and autonomous lunar ISRU system were not included.

ISRU↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Cost Breakeven Analysis of Lunar In-Situ Propellant Production for Human Missions to the Moon and Mars

NASA is preparing to return humans to the lunar surface as a first step to a human exploration campaign of Mars. Both a sustained lunar campaign and a campaign of missions to Mars will require tens to hundreds of tonnes of propellant. Although this propellant could be delivered from Earth, an alternative approach is to use the potentially vast quantities of lunar ice to enable in-situ propellant production on the lunar surface. This study evaluates the cost breakeven for using lunar-derived propellants, as opposed to those delivered from Earth, in support of an extended human exploration campaign with both a multi-year presence on the Moon as well as multiple crewed missions to Mars. In so doing, the value of lunar propellant production is considered in the context of future exploration priorities, addressing the question: over what range of human missions to the lunar surface and Mars does in-situ propellant production trade favorably with propellant delivery from Earth on the basis of cost? The results of this analysis show that the magnitude and duration of the lunar campaign, more so than the Mars campaign, drive the breakeven and that without long lifetime ISRU systems, with greater than 5 years of autonomous operation before replacement, the demand in cis-lunar space for a Mars campaign favors propellant delivery from Earth.

Christopher A Jones↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Cost Breakeven Analysis of Lunar In-Situ Propellant Production for Human Missions to the Moon and Mars

NASA is preparing to return humans to the lunar surface as a first step to a human exploration campaign of Mars. Both a sustained lunar campaign and a campaign of missions to Mars will require tens to hundreds of tonnes of propellant. Although this propellant could be delivered from Earth, an alternative approach is to use the potentially vast quantities of lunar ice to enable in-situ propellant production on the lunar surface. This study evaluates the cost breakeven for using lunar-derived propellants, as opposed to those delivered from Earth, in support of an extended human exploration campaign with both a multi-year presence on the Moon as well as multiple crewed missions to Mars. In so doing, the value of lunar propellant production is considered in the context of future exploration priorities, addressing the question: over what range of human missions to the lunar surface and Mars does in-situ propellant production trade favorably with propellant delivery from Earth on the basis of cost? The results of this analysis show that the magnitude and duration of the lunar campaign, more so than the Mars campaign, drive the breakeven and that without long lifetime ISRU systems, with greater than 5 years of autonomous operation before replacement, the demand in cis-lunar space for a Mars campaign favors propellant delivery from Earth.

Christopher A. Jones↗
NASA NTRS2012

The Direction of Fluid Dynamics for Liquid Propulsion at NASA Marshall Space Flight Center

Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) is the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA)-designated center for the development of space launch systems. MSFC is particularly known for propulsion system development. Many engineering skills and technical disciplines are needed to accomplish this mission. This presentation will focus on the work of the Fluid Dynamics Branch (ER42). ER42 resides in the Propulsion Systems Department at MSFC. The branch is responsible for all aspects of the discipline of fluid dynamics applied to propulsion or propulsion-induced loads and environments. This work begins with design trades and parametric studies, and continues through development, risk assessment, anomaly investigation and resolution, and failure investigations. Applications include the propellant delivery system including the main propulsion system (MPS) and turbomachinery; combustion devices for liquid engines and solid rocket motors; coupled systems; and launch environments. An advantage of the branch is that it is neither analysis nor test centric, but discipline centric. Fluid dynamics assessments are made by analysis, from lumped parameter modeling through unsteady computational fluid dynamics (CFD); testing, which can be cold flow or hot fire; or a combination of analysis and testing. Integration of all discipline methods into one branch enables efficient and accurate support to the projects. To accomplish this work, the branch currently employs approximately fifty engineers divided into four teams -- Propellant Delivery CFD, Combustion Driven Flows CFD, Unsteady and Experimental Flows, and Acoustics and Stability. This discussion will highlight some of the work performed in the branch and the direction in which the branch is headed.

Griffin, Lisa W.↗
NASA NTRS2016

Cis-Lunar Reusable In-Space Transportation Architecture for the Evolvable Mars Campaign

Human exploration missions to Mars or other destinations in the solar system require large quantities of propellant to enable the transportation of required elements from Earth's sphere of influence to Mars. Current and proposed launch vehicles are incapable of launching all of the requisite mass on a single vehicle; hence, multiple launches and in-space aggregation are required to perform a Mars mission. This study examines the potential of reusable chemical propulsion stages based in cis-lunar space to meet the transportation objectives of the Evolvable Mars Campaign and identifies cis-lunar propellant supply requirements. These stages could be supplied with fuel and oxidizer delivered to cis-lunar space, either launched from Earth or other inner solar system sources such as the Moon or near Earth asteroids. The effects of uncertainty in the model parameters are evaluated through sensitivity analysis of key parameters including the liquid propellant combination, inert mass fraction of the vehicle, change in velocity margin, and change in payload masses. The outcomes of this research include a description of the transportation elements, the architecture that they enable, and an option for a campaign that meets the objectives of the Evolvable Mars Campaign. This provides a more complete understanding of the propellant requirements, as a function of time, that must be delivered to cis-lunar space. Over the selected sensitivity ranges for the current payload and schedule requirements of the 2016 point of departure of the Evolvable Mars Campaign destination systems, the resulting propellant delivery quantities are between 34 and 61 tonnes per year of hydrogen and oxygen propellant, or between 53 and 76 tonnes per year of methane and oxygen propellant, or between 74 and 92 tonnes per year of hypergolic propellant. These estimates can guide future propellant manufacture and/or delivery architectural analysis.

McVay, Eric S.↗
NASA NTRS1993

Generic propellant transfer unit: A project update

Currently, most satellite programs use dedicated hypergolic propellant ground servicing equipment. These 'carts' are typically program specific (non-interchangeable), costly, and non-Department of Transportation (DOT) compliant. They require safety waivers when used on government property and must be emptied before off-site transport. The emptying process usually generates large amounts of Hazardous Wastes. Fuel carts are usually loaded from multiple 208-liter (55 gallon) drums and oxidizer carts from 909-kg (2000 lb) cylinders. This further increases operating costs due to additional container samples and cart-filling transfers. NASA, Kennedy Space Center has developed reusable, generic, DOT compliant propellant delivery containers as possible replacements for the propellant-tank portion of servicing carts. Our ultimate goal is to reduce operating expenses by minimizing propellant transfers, samples, and waste generation through use of bulk propellant operations, minimizing drum or cylinder operations. This has the added benefit of increasing operating safety by decreasing overall propellant operations.

Davis, C. L.↗
NASA NTRS2014

System Administration Support/SWORDS G2

The Soldier-Warfighter Operationally Responsive Deployer for Space (SWORDS) rocket is a dedicated small satellite launcher that will minimize danger and complexity in order to allow soldiers in the field to put payloads of up to 25kg into orbit from the field. The SWORDSG2 project is the development of a model, simulation, and ultimately a working application that will control and monitor the cryogenic fluid delivery to the SWORDS rocket for testing purposes. To accomplish this, the project is using the programming language environment Gensym G2. The environment is an all-inclusive application that allows development, testing, modeling, and finally operation of the unique application through graphical and programmatic methods. In addition, observation of the current cryogenic fluid delivery system in the Kennedy Space Center Cry Lab has allowed me to gain valuable experience of fluid systems and propelant delivery that is valuable to our team when developing amd modeling our own system.The ultimate goal of having a test-ready application to show to the heads of the project, and demonstrating G2's capabilities, by late 2014 will require hard work and intense study and understanding of not only the programming aspect but also the physical phenomena we want to model, observe, and control.

cryogenic fluids↗
NASA NTRS2017

Cryogenic Fluid Management Technology Development Roadmaps

Advancement in Cryogenic Fluid Management (CFM) Technologies is essential for achieving NASA's future long duration missions. Propulsion systems utilizing cryogens are necessary to achieve mission success. Current State Of the Art (SOA) CFM technologies enable cryogenic propellants to be stored for several hours. However, some envisioned mission architectures require cryogens to be stored for two years or longer. The fundamental roles of CFM technologies are long term storage of cryogens, propellant tank pressure control and propellant delivery. In the presence of heat, the cryogens will "boil-off" over time resulting in excessive pressure buildup, off-nominal propellant conditions, and propellant loss. To achieve long term storage and tank pressure control, the CFM elements will intercept and/or remove any heat from the propulsion system. All functions are required to perform both with and without the presence of a gravitational field. Which CFM technologies are required is a function of the cryogens used, mission architecture, vehicle design and propellant tank size. To enable NASA's crewed mission to the Martian surface, a total of seventeen CFM technologies have been identified to support an In-Space Stage and a Lander/Ascent Vehicle. Recognizing that FY2020 includes a Decision Point regarding the In-Space Stage Architecture, a set of CFM Technology Development Roadmaps have been created identifying the current Technology Readiness Level (TRL) of each element, current technology "gaps", and existing technology development efforts. The roadmaps include a methodical approach and schedule to achieve a flight demonstration in FY2023, hence maturing CFM technologies to TRL 7 for infusion into the In-Space Stage Preliminary Design.

Stephens, J. R.↗
NASA NTRS2018

NASA's Cryogenic Fluid Management Technology Development Roadmaps

The maturation of Cryogenic Fluid Management (CFM) Technologies is essential for achieving NASA's future long duration missions. Propulsion systems utilizing cryogens are necessary to achieve NASA's exploration missions to the moon, Mars, and beyond. Current State Of the Art (SOA) CFM technologies enable cryogenic propellants to be stored for several hours prior to their use. However, some envisioned mission architectures require that cryogens to be stored for two years or longer. The fundamental roles of CFM technologies are long term storage of cryogens, propellant tank pressure control and propellant delivery. In the presence of heat, the cryogens will "boil-off" over time resulting in excessive pressure buildup, off-nominal propellant conditions for engine consumption, and propellant loss. To achieve long term storage and tank pressure control, the CFM elements will intercept and/or remove any heat from the propulsion system. All functions are required to be performed both with and without the presence of a gravitational field. Which CFM technologies are required is a function of the cryogens used, mission architecture, vehicle design and propellant tank size. To enable NASA's crewed missions beyond Low Earth Orbit, a total of twenty-seven CFM technologies have been identified to support various In-Space Stages and Lander/Ascent Vehicles. A set of CFM Technology Development Roadmaps have been created identifying the current Technology Readiness Level (TRL) of each element, current technology "gaps", and existing technology development efforts. The roadmaps include a methodical approach and schedule to achieve a flight demonstration, hence maturing CFM technologies to TRL 6/7 for infusion into the NASA's exploration elements. Additionally, a survey of the aerospace industry was completed to understand their views on the various technologies and how they would be infused. This does not cover all possible technologies, but rather those that are of interest to NASA specifically.

Cryogenic fluid management↗
NASA NTRS2016

Architecture Study for a Fuel Depot Supplied from Lunar Assets

This architecture study sought to determine the optimum architecture for a fuel depot supplied from lunar assets. Four factors - the location of propellant processing (on the Moon or on the depot), the depot location (on the Moon, L1, GEO, or LEO), the propellant transfer location (L1, GEO, or LEO), and the propellant transfer method (bulk fuel or canister exchange) were combined to identify 18 candidate architectures. Two design reference missions (DRMs) - a commercial satellite servicing mission and a Government cargo mission to Mars - created demand for propellants, while a propellant delivery DRM examined supply issues. The study concluded Earth-Moon L1 is the best location for an orbiting depot. For all architectures, propellant boiloff was less than anticipated, and was far overshadowed by delta-v requirements and resulting fuel consumption. Bulk transfer is the most flexible for both the supplier and customer. However, since canister exchange bypasses the transfer of bulk cryogens and necessary chilldown losses, canister exchange shows promise and merits further investigation. Overall, this work indicates propellant consumption and loss is an essential factor in assessing fuel depot architectures.

Perrin, Thomas M.↗
NASA NTRS2016

Architecture Study for a Fuel Depot Supplied from Lunar Resources

Heretofore, discussions of space fuel depots assumed the depots would be supplied from Earth. However, the confirmation of deposits of water ice at the lunar poles in 2009 suggests the possibility of supplying a space depot with liquid hydrogen/liquid oxygen produced from lunar ice. This architecture study sought to determine the optimum architecture for a fuel depot supplied from lunar resources. Four factors - the location of propellant processing (on the Moon or on the depot), the location of the depot (on the Moon or in cislunar space), and if in cislunar space, where (LEO, GEO, or Earth-Moon L1), and the method of propellant transfer (bulk fuel or canister exchange) were combined to identify 18 potential architectures. Two design reference missions (DRMs) - a satellite servicing mission and a cargo mission to Mars - were used to create demand for propellants, while a third DRM - a propellant delivery mission - was used to examine supply issues. The architectures were depicted graphically in a network diagram with individual segments representing the movement of propellant from the Moon to the depot, and from the depot to the customer

Perrin, Thomas M.↗
NASA NTRS2016

Architecture Study for a Fuel Depot Supplied from Lunar Resources

Heretofore, discussions of space fuel depots assumed the depots would be supplied from Earth. However, the confirmation of deposits of water ice at the lunar poles in 2009 suggests the possibility of supplying a space depot with liquid hydrogen/liquid oxygen produced from lunar ice. This architecture study sought to determine the optimum architecture for a fuel depot supplied from lunar resources. Four factors - the location of propellant processing (on the Moon or on the depot), the location of the depot (on the Moon, or at L1, GEO, or LEO), the location of propellant transfer (L1, GEO, or LEO), and the method of propellant transfer (bulk fuel or canister exchange) were combined to identify 18 potential architectures. Two design reference missions (DRMs) - a satellite servicing mission and a cargo mission to Mars - were used to create demand for propellants, while a third DRM - a propellant delivery mission - was used to examine supply issues. The architectures were depicted graphically in a network diagram with individual segments representing the movement of propellant from the Moon to the depot, and from the depot to the customer.

Perrin, Thomas M.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Parametric Cost Analysis of Refueling Options in Cis-Lunar Space

Over the next several years NASA intends to develop and maintain a sustained human presence in cis-lunar space and on the surface of the moon. The sustained lunar presence will then serve as a stepping stone to human Mars missions. To propel the spacecraft taking humans and cargo to and from the lunar surface and to and from Mars will require on the order of hundreds of tons of propellant. Expendable, one-time use refueling elements maybe more cost effective for smaller campaigns, but as the propellant requirement grows, so does the cost benefit of reusable systems. This paper will analyze the cost of several different architectures for delivering propellant to cislunar space to determine the conditions in which each architecture is likely to be more cost effective. The first architecture relies on expendable elements for propellant delivery while the second one reuses every element including launch vehicle stages. In addition to these two basic approaches, trades will analyze alterations to the architectures such as mission design, level of thermal control, and the incorporation of buses,tugs, and depots, each with different propellants, sizes, and reusability assumptions.

Paul D Friz↗