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.
Drawings are presented for equipment designed and fabricated to affect the integration of controllers, displays and manipulators with a remote maneuvering unit. Schematic diagrams of the master and level controllers are also included for reference.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Two Mars Exploration Rover spacecraft were dispensed to red planet in 2003, culminating in a phenomenally successful prime science mission. Twin cruise stage propulsion systems were developed in record time, largely through heritage with Mars Pathfinder. As expected, consumable usage was minimal during the short seven-month cruise for both spacecraft. Propellant usage models based on pressure and temperature agreed with throughput models with in a few percent. Trajectory correction maneuver performance was nominal, allowing the cancellation of near-Mars maneuvers. Spin thruster delivered impulse was 10-12% high vs. ground based models for the intial spin-down maneuvers, while turn performance was XX-XX% high/low vs. expectations. No clear indications for pressure transducer drift were noted during the brief MER missions.
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. The independent analysis results for the Orbital Maneuvering System (OMS) hardware are documented. The OMS provides the thrust to perform orbit insertion, orbit circularization, orbit transfer, rendezvous, and deorbit. The OMS is housed in two independent pods located one on each side of the tail and consists of the following subsystems: Helium Pressurization; Propellant Storage and Distribution; Orbital Maneuvering Engine; and Electrical Power Distribution and Control. The IOA analysis process utilized available OMS hardware drawings and schematics for defining hardware assemblies, components, and hardware items. Each level of hardware was evaluted and analyzed for possible failure modes and effects. Criticality was asigned based upon the severity of the effect for each failure mode.
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 (PCIs). To preserve indepedence, this analysis was accomplished without reliance upon the results contained within the NASA FMEA/CIL documentation. This report documents the independent analysis results corresponding to the Manned Maneuvering Unit (MMU) hardware. The MMU is a propulsive backpack, operated through separate hand controllers that input the pilot's translational and rotational maneuvering commands to the control electronics and then to the thrusters. The IOA analysis process utilized available MMU hardware drawings and schematics for defining hardware subsystems, assemblies, components, and hardware items. Final levels of detail were evaluated and analyzed for possible failure modes and effects. Criticality was assigned based upon the worst case severity of the effect for each identified failure mode. The IOA analysis of the MMU found that the majority of the PCIs identified are resultant from the loss of either the propulsion or control functions, or are resultant from inability to perform an immediate or future mission. The five most severe criticalities identified are all resultant from failures imposed on the MMU hand controllers which have no redundancy within the MMU.
The Transiting Exoplanet Survey Satellite (TESS) is a National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) mission, scheduled to be launched in 2017. TESS will travel in a highly eccentric orbit around Earth, with initial perigee radius near 17 Earth radii (Re) and apogee radius near 59 Re. The orbit period is near 2:1 resonance with the Moon, with apogee nearly 90 degrees out-of-phase with the Moon, in a configuration that has been shown to be operationally stable. TESS will execute phasing loops followed by a lunar flyby, with a final maneuver to achieve 2:1 resonance with the Moon. The goals of a resonant orbit with long-term stability, short eclipses and limited oscillations of perigee present significant challenges to the trajectory design. To rapidly assess launch opportunities, we adapted the Schematics Window Methodology (SWM76) launch window analysis tool to assess the TESS mission constraints. To understand the long-term dynamics of such a resonant orbit in the Earth-Moon system we employed Dynamical Systems Theory in the Circular Restricted 3-Body Problem (CR3BP). For precise trajectory analysis we use a high-fidelity model and multiple shooting in the General Mission Analysis Tool (GMAT) to optimize the maneuver delta-V and meet mission constraints. Finally we describe how the techniques we have developed can be applied to missions with similar requirements. Keywords: resonant orbit, stability, lunar flyby, phasing loops, trajectory optimization
THe microwave Anisotropy Probe (MAP) ia the second Medium Class Explorer (MIDEX) mission of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA). The main goal of the MAP observatory is to measure the temperature fluctuations, known as anisotropy, of the cosmic microwave background (CBG) radiation over the entire sky and to produce a map of the CMB anisotropies with an angular resolution of approximately 3 degrees. MAP was launched from the Cape Canaveral Air Force Station Complex 17 aboard a Delta II 7425-10 expendable launch vehicle at exactly 19:46:46.183 UTC on June 30, 20001. The spacecraft receiver a nominal direct insertion by the Delta expendable launch vehicle into a 185-km circular orbit with a 28.7 deg. inclination. MAP was than maneuvered into a sequence of phasing loops designed to set up a lunar gravity-assisted acceleration of the spacecraft onto a transfer trajectory to a lissajous orbit about the Earth-Sun L2 Lagrange point, about 1.5 million km from Earth. The science mission minimum lifetime is two years of observations at L2 with a desired lifetime of 4 years. The MAP transfer orbit consisted of 3.5 phasing loops.The MAP trajectory schematic all the way through L2 is shown. The first loop had a period of 7 days, the second and third loops were 10 days long, and the last half loop was 5 days. The periselene (i.e., lunar encounter or swingby) took place approximately 30 days after launch. After the periselene, the spacecraft cruised for approximately 60 days before it arrived in the vicinity of the L2 libration point. Two mid-course correction (MCC) maneuvers were performed to refine MAP's post-launch trajectory-one after periselene and one prior to arrival at vicinity of L2. Now that MAP is at its operational L2 lissajous orbit, the MAP satellite is commanded to perform occasional station-keeping (SK) maneuvers in order to maintain its orbit around L2. Because of its complex orbital characteristics, the mission provided a unique challenge to orbit determination (OD) support in many orbital regimes.
A comparative analysis of the on-orbit dynamic performance of four large anetanna concepts is presented. Among the antenna concepts evaluated are: the box truss; tetrahedral truss; warp-radial rib; and the hoop and column antenna designs. The characteristics and magnitudes of the antennas' dynamic response were evaluated in terms of structural displacements and member loads incurred during various slew-rate maneuvers. The results of the dynamic response analysis are compared to the design requirements of the Land Mobile Satellite System (LMSS) with respect to surface accuracy, decenter, defocus, and angular rocking. Comments are made on the effectiveness of structural damping and the application of active controls for vibrational response reduction. Schematic illustrations of the antenna design concepts are provided.
The Aviation Environmental Technical Branch produces many various types of aeronautical research that benefits the NASA mission for space exploration and in turn, produces new technology for our nation. One of the present goals of the Aviation Environmental Technical Branch is to create better engines for airplanes by testing supersonic jet propulsion and safe fuel combustion. During the summer of 2004, I was hired by Vincent Sattenvhite Chief executive of the Aviation Environmental Technical Branch to Assist Yves Lamothe with a fuel igniter circuit. Yves Lamothe is an electrical engineer who is currently working on safe fuel combustion testing. This testing is planned to determine the minimum ignition energy for fuel and air vapors of current and alternative fuels under simulated flight conditions. An air temperature bath will provide simulated flight profile temperatures and the heat fluxes to the test chamber. I was assigned with Yves to help complete the igniter circuit which consists of a 36k voltage supply an oscilloscope, and a high voltage transistor switch. During my tenure in the L.E.C.I.R.P. program I studied the basics of electricity and circuitry along with two other projects that I completed. In the beginning of my internship, I devote all of my time to research the aspects of circuitry so that I would be prepared for the projects that I was assigned to do. I read about lessons on; the basic physical concepts of electronics, Electrical units, Basic dc circuits, direct current circuit analysis, resistance and cell batteries, various types of magnetism , Alternating current basics, inductance, and power supplies. I received work sheets and math equations from my Mentor so that I could be able to apply these concepts into my work. After I complete my studies, I went on to construct a LED chaser circuit which displays a series of light patterns using a 555 timer. I incorporated a switch and motion detector into the circuit to create basic alarm system. This project challenged my ability to interpret a schematic and expand it. While I was still completing the LED chaser circuit I Also was given A Basic Stamp Toddler Robot to build and program. The Toddler robot can walk in 36 various styles using advanced robotics. I used many different programs to create movement and direction of the robot. Also the Toddler can use infrared vision to sense objects. This enables the robot to maneuver indefinitely without running into objects. During my tenure at the NASA Glen Research Center I definite utilized the NASA mission to educate. I learned valuable information to help in my up coming year as a freshman in college.
This paper describes a Modeling and Simulation of an Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) Collision Avoidance System, capable of representing different types of scenarios for UAS collision avoidance. Commercial and military piloted aircraft currently utilize various systems for collision avoidance such as Traffic Alert and Collision A voidance System (TCAS), Automatic Dependent Surveillance-Broadcast (ADS-B), Radar and ElectroOptical and Infrared Sensors (EO-IR). The integration of information from these systems is done by the pilot in the aircraft to determine the best course of action. In order to operate optimally in the National Airspace System (NAS) UAS have to work in a similar or equivalent manner to a piloted aircraft by applying the principle of "detect-see and avoid" (DSA) to other air traffic. Hence, we have taken these existing sensor technologies into consideration in order to meet the challenge of researching the modeling and simulation of an approximated DSA system. A Schematic Model for a UAS Collision Avoidance System (CAS) has been developed ina closed loop block diagram for that purpose. We have found that the most suitable software to carry out this task is the Satellite Tool Kit (STK) from Analytical Graphics Inc. (AGI). We have used the Aircraft Mission Modeler (AMM) for modeling and simulation of a scenario where a UAS is placed on a possible collision path with an initial intruder and then with a second intruder, but is able to avoid them by executing a right tum maneuver and then climbing. Radars have also been modeled with specific characteristics for the UAS and both intruders. The software provides analytical, graphical user interfaces and data controlling tools which allow the operator to simulate different conditions. Extensive simulations have been carried out which returned excellent results.
In late fiscal year 2020, the Space Nuclear Propulsion (SNP) project began the process of formulating an investment strategy to support development of the technologies required for a high-power (megawatt-class) nuclear electric propulsion (NEP) system capable of performing human-scale missions. This activity was initiated concurrent with several high-level studies and assessments were either under way or had just concluded. Studies of human-scale Mars missions have been performed several times over the past two decades. One of the most recent studies examined opposition-class human Mars missions to occur in the late 2030s timeframe [1,2]. The mission architecture assumed a hybrid NEP/chem-propelled vehicle that used a high specific impulse (Isp) NEP-system and a liquid oxygen (LOx)-liquid methane high thrust chemical stage (two 110 kN (25 klbf) thrust, 365 s Isp engines) for maneuvers performed to enter and exit gravity wells. Trajectory analyses performed in this study showed that such a mission could be performed with 2-4 MWe directed into the electric propulsion system (operating for 20,000+ hours), with the large range representing different opposition-class Mars mission opportunities and permutations on the trajectory design, concept of operations, and technology choices. In 2020, the NASA Engineering and Safety Center (NESC) performed a study to evaluate the maturity of the different technologies required for nuclear propulsion systems [3]. The executive summary of this report provided the following top-level conclusions: • “The majority of critical technologies for… NEP/Chem… systems are relatively immature” • “TRLs [technology readiness levels] in the literature are often overestimated” • “The majority of critical technologies… for NEP/Chem… systems are at a relatively high level of advancement degree of difficulty (AD2 > 4) for maturation, requiring a dual development approach” • “The proper assessment of baseline TRL and AD2 values and the estimation of requirements and resources required for advancement have been consistent issues for NEP,” • “Non-advocate reviews should occur at the start of a technology program and at all key milestones.” In 2021, the National Academies of Science, Engineering, and Medicine (NASEM) issued a separate report [4] identifying the “primary technical and programmatic challenges, merits, and risks for maturing space nuclear propulsion technologies of interest to a future human Mars exploration mission.” That work contained several important findings, including: • “Developing a MWe-class NEP system for the baseline mission would require increasing power by orders of magnitude relative to NEP system flight- or ground-based technology demonstrations completed to date.” • “Subscale in-space flight testing of NEP systems cannot address many of the risks and potential failure modes associated with the baseline mission NEP system. With sufficient M&S [modeling & simulation] and ground testing, including modular subsystem tests at full scale and power, flight qualification requirements can be met by the cargo missions that will precede the first crewed mission to Mars. Fully integrated ground testing may not be required.” • “As a result of low and intermittent investment over the past several decades, it is unclear if even an aggressive program would be able to develop an NEP system capable of executing the baseline mission in 2039.” These efforts motivated the SNP project to investigate the technologies available for a megawatt-class high power nuclear electric propulsion system. That system is illustrated schematically in Figure 1 and is comprised of five separate top-level critical technology elements (CTEs). 1. Nuclear Reactor – Thermal power source for the system, utilizing high-assay low enriched uranium (HALEU) as the nuclear fuel. Reactor radiation shielding is also included in this CTE. 2. Power Conversion – Operates as a thermodynamic cycle, accepting nuclear reactor thermal power as an input and converting it to mechanical power. 3. Power Management and Distribution (PMAD) – Accepts as an input mechanical power from the power conversion system, which is used to generate electrical power. The PMAD system also distributes the generated electrical power to all other parts of the spacecraft, including the high-power EP system. The PMAD system may also perform duties such as isolation, fault detection, and power transformation/rectification for different spacecraft systems, including the thrusters. 4. Electric Propulsion (EP) – Accepts as an input electrical power, which is used to accelerate a propellant to high speeds to produce thrust. This system includes the power processing unit (PPU), which converts the power it receives to the correct current and voltage required by the thrusters, and the propellant storage and feed systems, which contain and meter the flow of propellant to the thrusters. 5. Thermal Management (Radiators/Heat Rejection) – The cold side of the thermodynamic power conversion cycle, accepts thermal power from the power conversion system and radiatively rejects that heat to space. In this paper, we describe the SNP project formulation and investment strategy that aims to accomplish the research and development required to advance the technology readiness for each CTE. The strategy relies heavily upon experimental testing supported by modeling and simulation to yield realistic assessments of the technologies, which in turn will be used to inform future NEP system-level design decisions and any potential technology downselects.