Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “SPACECRAFT LAUNCH VEHICLES”

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 NTRS2019

Mars Ascent Vehicle - Payload?, Spacecraft?, Launch Vehicle? - A Systems Approach to MAV

Significant effort has been expended over the past few years in order to examine propulsion technologies for an eventual robotic Mars Ascent Vehicle (MAV). The recent emphasis on studies for an overall sample return campaign, and specifically the Sample Return Lander (SRL) includes the full slate of systems required to implement a MAV. Depending on your point of view, the MAV is a major SRL flight system payload, a Mars Surface Spacecraft, or a Launch Vehicle. We will examine the MAV from these three perspectives in order to tease out the key architectural trades required to be completed prior to the start of a project Phase A activity.

Jackman, Angie↗
NASA NTRS2014

Spacecraft Charging Issues for Launch Vehicles

Spacecraft charging is well known threat to successful long term spacecraft operations and instrument reliability in orbits that spend significant time in hot electron environments. In recent years, spacecraft charging has increasingly been recognized as a potentially significant engineering issue for launch vehicles used to deploy spacecraft using (a) low Earth orbit (LEO), high inclination flight trajectories that pass through the auroral zone, (b) geostationary transfer orbits that require exposures to the hot electron environments in the Earths outer radiation belts, and (c) LEO escape trajectories using multiple phasing orbits through the Earths radiation belts while raising apogee towards a final Earth escape geometry. Charging becomes an issue when significant areas of exposed insulating materials or ungrounded conductors are used in the launch vehicle design or the payload is designed for use in a benign charging region beyond the Earths magnetosphere but must survive passage through the strong charging regimes of the Earths radiation belts. This presentation will first outline the charging risks encountered on typical launch trajectories used to deploy spacecraft into Earth orbit and Earth escape trajectories. We then describe the process used by NASAs Launch Services Program to evaluate when surface and internal charging is a potential risk to a NASA mission. Finally, we describe the options for mitigating charging risks including modification of the launch vehicle andor payload design and controlling the risk through operational launch constraints to avoid significant charging environments.

Electrostatics↗
NASA NTRS2014

Spacecraft Charging Issues for Launch Vehicles

Spacecraft charging is well known threat to successful long term spacecraft operations and instrument reliability in orbits that spend significant time in hot electron environments. In recent years, spacecraft charging has increasingly been recognized as a potentially significant engineering issue for launch vehicles used to deploy spacecraft using (a) low Earth orbit (LEO), high inclination flight trajectories that pass through the auroral zone, (b) geostationary transfer orbits that require exposures to the hot electron environments in the Earths outer radiation belts, and (c) LEO escape trajectories using multiple phasing orbits through the Earths radiation belts while raising apogee towards a final Earth escape geometry. Charging becomes an issue when significant areas of exposed insulating materials or ungrounded conductors are used in the launch vehicle design or the payload is designed for use in a benign charging region beyond the Earths magnetosphere but must survive passage through the strong charging regimes of the Earths radiation belts. This presentation will first outline the charging risks encountered on typical launch trajectories used to deploy spacecraft into Earth orbit and Earth escape trajectories. We then describe the process used by NASAs Launch Services Program to evaluate when surface and internal charging is a potential risk to a NASA mission. Finally, we describe the options for mitigating charging risks including modification of the launch vehicle and/or payload design and controlling the risk through operational launch constraints to avoid significant charging environments

electrostatics↗
NASA NTRS2007

The Disposal of Spacecraft and Launch Vehicle Stages in Low Earth Orbit

Spacecraft and launch vehicle stages abandoned in Earth orbit have historically been a primary source of debris from accidental explosions. In the future, such satellites will become the principal cause of orbital debris via inadvertent collisions. To curtail both the near-term and far-term risks posed by derelict spacecraft and launch vehicle stages to operational space systems, numerous national and international orbital debris mitigation guidelines specifically recommend actions which could prevent or limit such future debris generation. Although considerable progress has been made in implementing these recommendations, some changes to existing vehicle designs can be difficult. Moreover, the nature of some missions also can present technological and budgetary challenges to be compliant with widely accepted orbital debris mitigation measures.

Johnson, Nicholas L.↗
NASA NTRS2014

Conceptual Launch Vehicle and Spacecraft Design for Risk Assessment

One of the most challenging aspects of developing human space launch and exploration systems is minimizing and mitigating the many potential risk factors to ensure the safest possible design while also meeting the required cost, weight, and performance criteria. In order to accomplish this, effective risk analyses and trade studies are needed to identify key risk drivers, dependencies, and sensitivities as the design evolves. The Engineering Risk Assessment (ERA) team at NASA Ames Research Center (ARC) develops advanced risk analysis approaches, models, and tools to provide such meaningful risk and reliability data throughout vehicle development. The goal of the project presented in this memorandum is to design a generic launch 7 vehicle and spacecraft architecture that can be used to develop and demonstrate these new risk analysis techniques without relying on other proprietary or sensitive vehicle designs. To accomplish this, initial spacecraft and launch vehicle (LV) designs were established using historical sizing relationships for a mission delivering four crewmembers and equipment to the International Space Station (ISS). Mass-estimating relationships (MERs) were used to size the crew capsule and launch vehicle, and a combination of optimization techniques and iterative design processes were employed to determine a possible two-stage-to-orbit (TSTO) launch trajectory into a 350-kilometer orbit. Primary subsystems were also designed for the crewed capsule architecture, based on a 24-hour on-orbit mission with a 7-day contingency. Safety analysis was also performed to identify major risks to crew survivability and assess the system's overall reliability. These procedures and analyses validate that the architecture's basic design and performance are reasonable to be used for risk trade studies. While the vehicle designs presented are not intended to represent a viable architecture, they will provide a valuable initial platform for developing and demonstrating innovative risk assessment capabilities.

Launch Vehicle↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Launch Vehicle and Spacecraft Transmitter Electromagnetic Compatibility

The Launch Services Program at NASA’s Kennedy Space Center (KSC) is the primary gate for acquiring commercial vehicles to provide a cost effective ride to space for NASA spacecraft. With the lunar Gateway, more human tended elements are planned for launch. One challenge facing the space industry is the proliferation of communication and science transmitters at frequencies beyond the qualification of space avionics and instruments. Studies have ensued to examine the intricacies of performing radiated susceptibility testing and analysis above 18 GHz. Changes in the launch vehicle communications interface to the range have also lead to new launch vehicle antenna systems and more reliance on GPS and telemetry systems. Finally, research initiated at KSC in the area of predicted electric field distributions in launch vehicle payload fairings have spawned Small Business Technology Transfer initiatives for industry to investigate statistical algorithm and computational improvements in large payload fairing modeling of transmitters at frequencies in the GHz range. These topics, along with electromagnetic compatibility testing for launch vehicles will be discussed.

Electromagnetic Testing Cavity Statistics↗
NASA NTRS2006

The Disposal of Spacecraft and Launch Vehicle Stages in Low Earth Orbit

As a result of the increasing number of debris in low Earth orbit (LEO), numerous national and international orbital debris mitigation guidelines recommend the removal of spacecraft and launch vehicle stages from LEO within 25 years after mission termination. The primary purpose of this action is to enhance space safety by significantly limiting the potential of future accidental collisions resulting in the creation of large numbers of new orbital debris. Likewise, the passivation of these objects, i.e., the removal of residual stored energies, while they remain in orbit is important to prevent the generation of debris via self-induced explosions. Characteristics and trends in the growth of the derelict spacecraft and launch vehicle stage populations in LEO are examined. Depending upon the final operational altitude of the vehicle, achieving the goal of orbital lifetime reduction can influence the design and deployment philosophy of a new space system. Some spacecraft and launch vehicle stages have combined their end-of-mission passivation operations with maneuvers to vacate long-lived orbital regimes. Perhaps the most dramatic demonstration of this type occurred in 2006 when a U.S. Delta IV second stage executed an unprecedented controlled-reentry maneuver from a circular orbit at an altitude near 850 km. For space systems in orbital regimes near the upper regions of LEO (i.e., between 1400 km and 2000 km altitude), maneuvers to place the vehicle above LEO might be more attractive than attempting to ensure an atmospheric reentry within 25 years, and at least one space system operator has selected this option. In some cases, careful consideration of natural orbital perturbations can also lead to reduced orbital lifetimes, although new launch constraints might need to be imposed.

Johnson, Nicholas L.↗
NASA NTRS2000

Contributions of the NASA Langley Transonic Dynamics Tunnel to Launch Vehicle and Spacecraft Development

The NASA Langley Transonic Dynamics Tunnel (TDT) has provided wind-tunnel experimental validation and research data for numerous launch vehicles and spacecraft throughout its forty year history. Most of these tests have dealt with some aspect of aeroelastic or unsteady-response testing, which is the primary purpose of the TDT facility. However, some space-related test programs that have not involved aeroelasticity have used the TDT to take advantage of specific characteristics of the wind-tunnel facility. In general. the heavy gas test medium, variable pressure, relatively high Reynolds number and large size of the TDT test section have made it the preferred facility for these tests. The space-related tests conducted in the TDT have been divided into five categories. These categories are ground wind loads, launch vehicle dynamics, atmospheric flight of space vehicles, atmospheric reentry. and planetary-probe testing. All known TDT tests of launch vehicles and spacecraft are discussed in this report. An attempt has been made to succinctly summarize each wind-tunnel test, or in the case of multiple. related tests, each wind-tunnel program. Most summaries include model program discussion, description of the physical wind-tunnel model, and some typical or significant test results. When available, references are presented to assist the reader in further pursuing information on the tests.

Cole, Stanley R.↗