Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “solar program best practices”

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.

13 records
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Visualizing Geospatial Data through ESRI Story Maps for Earth Science Education: Lessons Learned from My NASA Data

For 20 years My NASA Data (MND) has curated NASA Earth science data and provided the data to educators in engaging learner-centered resources. MND has recently featured story maps as an innovative way to engage students in NASA Earth data. A story map is a cloud-based lesson that engages the learner in interactive geospatial maps using NASA data, and other multimedia content, text, and tasks that can be seamlessly incorporated in classroom instruction. This immersive technology eliminates the need for the user to move among tricky interfaces to access and visualize Earth science data, and no special software is required to be downloaded. Each story map integrates data from different NASA satellite missions, retrieved from Distributed Active Archive Centers (DAACs). Story maps also employ data analysis tools, such as time series options and swipe tools that allow learners to view and analyze relationships between scientific variables. MND has produced 25 story map lesson plans on the topics of air quality, the urban heat island effect, Earth’s energy budget, phytoplankton distribution, hurricane formation, solar eclipses, ocean circulation patterns, sea ice extent, and volcanic eruptions. Nine of them are extended story maps and written in the 5E format, which is internationally recognized as best practice based on how children learn science. Each story map resource is developed by the MND team featuring a GIS programming specialist, a lead scientist, and educational specialist/s to ensure the context, content, and methods are scientifically and educationally sound. The MND story maps are written for middle and high school science teachers and students as they connect with the Earth Systems Science phenomena featured in the Next Generation Science Standards. Each story map includes supporting resources for smooth integration in the classroom. During Fiscal Year 2023, The My NASA Data website received over 100,000 story map engagements during. These metrics highlight the interest in story maps as an Earth Science educational resource.

Desiray Wilson↗
NASA NTRS2016

Essential SpaceWire Hardware Capabilities for a Robust Network

The Geostationary Operational Environmental Satellite R-Series Program (GOES-R) mission is a joint program between National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and National Aeronautics & Space Administration (NASA) Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC). GOES-R project selected SpaceWire as the best solution to satisfy the desire for simple and flexible instrument to spacecraft command and telemetry communications. GOES-R development and integration is complete and the observatory is scheduled for launch October 2016. The spacecraft design was required to support redundant SpaceWire links for each instrument side, as well as to route the fewest number of connections through a Slip Ring Assembly necessary to support Solar pointing instruments. The final design utilized two different router designs. The SpaceWire standard alone does not ensure the most practical or reliable network. On GOES-R a few key hardware capabilities were identified that merit serious consideration for future designs. Primarily these capabilities address persistent port stalls and the prevention of receive buffer overflows. Workarounds were necessary to overcome shortcomings that could be avoided in future designs if they utilize the capabilities, discussed in this paper, above and beyond the requirements of the SpaceWire standard.

SpaceWire↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Dust Mitigation Technology to Enable Survive the Night Capabilities

Introduction: As we return to the Moon, the lunar regolith (i.e. lunar dust) covering the surface will be an obstacle to nominal operations. Accounts from Apollo astronauts and analysis of hardware returned from the surface illustrate just how deleterious the dust can be [1]. During Apollo missions, the lunar dust adhered to hardware mechanically and electrostatically [2]. Surviving the Night: Mitigating the lunar dust will be critical to surviving the night. Going hand-in-hand with other extreme environment considerations, dust mitigation is critical to mission success. Dust Impacts on Other Systems: The lunar dust can have negative implications for power, thermal, mechanisms, and several other systems or sub-systems. For example, Apollo encountered marked degradation of performance in heat rejection systems for the lunar roving vehicle, science packages, and other components because of the lunar dust [1]. For power alone, dust can cause internal clogging for power connectors, heat rejection issues, excessive dust on reflective surfaces, reduced power output for solar arrays, and so on. Dust Mitigation Strategy: In addition to considering technology solutions, it is important for hardware, systems, and or components to have a dust mitigation strategy. At a high level, hardware that will encounter the lunar dust should consider these things when defining a dust mitigation strategy: • Understand Natural Environment • Understand Induced Environment • Understand Tolerance to Dust • Write Dust Requirements • Select Dust Mitigation Solutions • Test Hardware in Dusty Environment More information on each of these can be provided to hardware owners. Dust Mitigation Technology Development: NASA has a series of technologies that may be available for hardware that needs to survive the lunar night. Many of these solutions are leveraging dust mitigation technology development efforts from NASA’s Space Technology Mission Directorate (STMD), as well as efforts from ESDMD programs, industry, and academia. Through a series of STMD programs (both internal to NASA and through partnerships), there are several technologies in development as considerations as dust mitigation solutions for hardware. Within STMD, the Game Changing Development Program (GCD) has funded several internal dust mitigation projects including low to mid TRL development, demonstrations on CLPS landers of high TRL solutions, and creating standards and best practices for dust mitigation. STMD dust mitigation efforts also include a series of partnerships for developing technologies and advancing the state of dust mitigation at NASA. This includes the Lunar Surface Innovation Consortium (LSIC), Small Business Innovation Research, Early Stage Innovations (ESI), Space Technology Research Grants (STRG), Announcement of Collaboration Opportunities (ACOs) and Tipping Points (TPs), and Challenges and Crowdsourcing, among others. There are also a series of dust mitigation solutions that have been widely used terrestrially, or during Apollo. In recent years, several studies have produced more data on the efficacy of these potential solutions in the lunar environment. Dust Mitigation Solutions: Dust mitigation solutions generally fall into four categories: • Dust Tolerant Mechanisms • Passive Dust Mitigation Capabilities • Active Dust Mitigation Capabilities • Dust Measurement Capabilities There are a series of solutions that may prove beneficial for hardware that needs to survive the lunar night, including new technology development as well as proven, terrestrial solutions. This presentation will discuss in more detail what some of these solutions are for payloads going to the surface. References: [1] J. R. Gaier, NASA/TM—2005-213610, The Effects of Lunar Dust on EVA Systems During the Apollo Missions [2] T. J. Stubbs, et al. Impact of Dust on Lunar Exploration, 2005

dust mitigation↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Survive the Dust: Dust Mitigation Technology to Enable Survive the Night Capabilities

Introduction: As we return to the Moon, the lunar regolith (i.e. lunar dust) covering the surface will be an obstacle to nominal operations. Accounts from Apollo astronauts and analysis of hardware returned from the surface illustrate just how deleterious the dust can be [1]. During Apollo missions, the lunar dust adhered to hardware mechanically and electrostatically [2]. Surviving the Night: Mitigating the lunar dust will be critical to surviving the night. Going hand-in-hand with other extreme environment considerations, dust mitigation is critical to mission success. Dust Impacts on Other Systems: The lunar dust can have negative implications for power, thermal, mechanisms, and several other systems or sub-systems. For example, Apollo encountered marked degradation of performance in heat rejection systems for the lunar roving vehicle, science packages, and other components because of the lunar dust [1]. For power alone, dust can cause internal clogging for power connectors, heat rejection issues, excessive dust on reflective surfaces, reduced power output for solar arrays, and so on. Dust Mitigation Strategy: In addition to considering technology solutions, it is important for hardware, systems, and or components to have a dust mitigation strategy. At a high level, hardware that will encounter the lunar dust should consider these things when defining a dust mitigation strategy: • Understand Natural Environment • Understand Induced Environment • Understand Tolerance to Dust • Write Dust Requirements • Select Dust Mitigation Solutions • Test Hardware in Dusty Environment More information on each of these can be provided to hardware owners. Dust Mitigation Technology Development: NASA has a series of technologies that may be available for hardware that needs to survive the lunar night. Many of these solutions are leveraging dust mitigation technology development efforts from NASA’s Space Technology Mission Directorate (STMD), as well as efforts from ESDMD programs, industry, and academia. Through a series of STMD programs (both internal to NASA and through partnerships), there are several technologies in development as considerations as dust mitigation solutions for hardware. Within STMD, the Game Changing Development Program (GCD) has funded several internal dust mitigation projects including low to mid TRL development, demonstrations on CLPS landers of high TRL solutions, and creating standards and best practices for dust mitigation. STMD dust mitigation efforts also include a series of partnerships for developing technologies and advancing the state of dust mitigation at NASA. This includes the Lunar Surface Innovation Consortium (LSIC), Small Business Innovation Research, Early Stage Innovations (ESI), Space Technology Research Grants (STRG), Announcement of Collaboration Opportunities (ACOs) and Tipping Points (TPs), and Challenges and Crowdsourcing, among others. There are also a series of dust mitigation solutions that have been widely used terrestrially, or during Apollo. In recent years, several studies have produced more data on the efficacy of these potential solutions in the lunar environment. Dust Mitigation Solutions: Dust mitigation solutions generally fall into four categories: • Dust Tolerant Mechanisms • Passive Dust Mitigation Capabilities • Active Dust Mitigation Capabilities • Dust Measurement Capabilities There are a series of solutions that may prove beneficial for hardware that needs to survive the lunar night, including new technology development as well as proven, terrestrial solutions. This presentation will discuss in more detail what some of these solutions are for payloads going to the surface. References: [1] J. R. Gaier, NASA/TM—2005-213610, The Effects of Lunar Dust on EVA Systems During the Apollo Missions [2] T. J. Stubbs, et al. Impact of Dust on Lunar Exploration, 2005

dust mitigation↗
NASA NTRS2021

Pointing Error Budget Development and Methodology on the Psyche Project

The Psyche mission was selected by NASA as the 14th mission in the Discovery Program in 2017. The Psyche spacecraft utilizes solar electric propulsion, and will journey to the asteroid (16) Psyche during a 3.5 year trajectory after its planned 2022 launch. The spacecraft instrument suite includes a magnetometer, a multispectral imager, a gamma ray neutron spectrometer, and an X-band radio telecommunications system. It also includes the Deep Space Optical Communication technical demonstration. These instruments along with other spacecraft components require pointing accuracy to meet their scientific and engineering performance requirements. Early on in the project development, the team established a methodology by which pointing accuracy (knowledge and control) is analyzed against the system requirements by means of pointing error budgets and requirement allocations. A margin policy was implemented to ensure the instrument and engineering component pointing accuracy requirements will be met during verification and in flight. Psyche’s pointing management framework defines detailed rationales for the system and subsystem error allocations of the top level pointing accuracy requirements, with sufficient project level pointing margin, and supports end-to-end pointing requirement verification. This paper will present an overview of the Psyche project’s pointing error budget development process, and discuss the rationale behind the methodology. Psyche’s pointing budget methodology integrates best practices and lessons learned from heritage missions, while focusing on the specific needs of the Psyche spacecraft and its science instruments. Key challenges in the pointing error budget development will be reviewed, and a deep dive into two key Psyche pointing budgets are presented. The systems engineering of Psyche’s pointing budget methodology outlined in this paper will serve as a resource for future deep space missions.

Lai, Peter↗
NASA NTRS2014

Lunar Station: The Next Logical Step in Space Development

The International Space Station (ISS) is the product of the efforts of sixteen nations over the course of several decades. It is now complete, operational, and has been continuously occupied since November of 20001. Since then the ISS has been carrying out a wide variety of research and technology development experiments, and starting to produce some pleasantly startling results. The ISS has a mass of 420 metric tons, supports a crew of six with a yearly resupply requirement of around 30 metric tons, within a pressurized volume of 916 cubic meters, and a habitable volume of 388 cubic meters. Its solar arrays produce up to 84 kilowatts of power. In the course of developing the ISS, many lessons were learned and much valuable expertise was gained. Where do we go from here? The ISS offers an existence proof of the feasibility of sustained human occupation and operations in space over decades. It also demonstrates the ability of many countries to work collaboratively on a very complex and expensive project in space over an extended period of time to achieve a common goal. By harvesting best practices and lessons learned, the ISS can also serve as a useful model for exploring architectures for beyond low-­‐ earth-­‐orbit (LEO) space development. This paper will explore the concept and feasibility for a Lunar Station. The Station concept can be implemented by either putting the equivalent capability of the ISS down on the surface of the Moon, or by developing the required capabilities through a combination of delivered materials and equipment and in situ resource utilization (ISRU). Scenarios that leverage existing technologies and capabilities as well as capabilities that are under development and are expected to be available within the next 3-­5 years, will be examined. This paper will explore how best practices and expertise gained from developing and operating the ISS and other relevant programs can be applied to effectively developing Lunar Station.

Lunar↗
NASA NTRS2014

Dividing the Concentrator Target From the Genesis Mission

The Genesis spacecraft, launched in 2001, traveled to a Lagrangian point between the Earth and Sun to collect particles from the solar wind and return them to Earth. However, during the return of the spacecraft in 2004, the parachute failed to open during descent, and the Genesis spacecraft crashed into the Utah desert. Many of the solar wind collectors were broken into smaller pieces, and the field team rapidly collected the capsule and collector pieces for later assessment. On each of the next few days, the team discovered that various collectors had survived intact, including three of four concentrator targets. Within a month, the team had imaged more than 10,000 fragments and packed them for transport to the Astromaterials Acquisition and Curation Office within the ARES Directorate at JSC. Currently, the Genesis samples are curated along with the other extraterrestrial sample collections within ARES. Although they were broken and dirty, the Genesis solar wind collectors still offered the science community the opportunity to better understand our Sun and the solar system as a whole. One of the more highly prized concentrator collectors survived the crash almost completely intact. The Genesis Concentrator was designed to concentrate the solar wind by a factor of at least 20 so that solar oxygen and nitrogen isotopes could be measured. One of these materials was the Diamond-on-Silicon (DoS) concentrator target. Unfortunately, the DoS concentrator broke on impact. Nevertheless, the scientific value of the DoS concentrator target was high. The Genesis Allocation Committee received a request for approximately 1 cm(sup 2) of the DoS specimen taken near the focal point of the concentrator for the analysis of solar wind nitrogen isotopes. The largest fragment, Genesis sample 60000, was designated for this allocation and needed to be precisely cut. The requirement was to subdivide the designated sample in a manner that prevented contamination of the sample and minimized the risk of losing or breaking the precious requested sample fragment. The Genesis curator determined that the use of laser scribing techniques to "cut" a precise line and subsequently cleave the sample (in a controlled break of the sample along that line) was the best method for accomplishing the sample subdivision. However, there were risks, including excess heating of the sample, that could cause some of the implanted solar wind to be lost via thermal diffusion. Accidentally breaking the sample during the handling and cleaving process was an additional risk. Early in fiscal year 2013, to address this delicate, complicated task, the ARES Directorate assembled its top scientists to develop a cutting plan that would ensure success when applied to the actual concentrator target wafer; i.e., to produce an approximately 1 cm(sup 2) piece from the requested area of the wafer. The team, subsequently referred to as the JSC Genesis Tiger Team, spent months researching and testing parameters and techniques related to scribing, cleaving, transporting, handling, and holding (i.e., mounting) the specimen. The investigation required considerable "thinking outside the box," and many, many trials using nonflight wafer analogs. After all preliminary testing, the following method was adopted as the final cutting plan. It was used in two final end-to-end practice runs before being used on the actual flight target wafer. The wafer was oriented on the laser cutting stage with the 100 and 010 directions of the wafer parallel to the corresponding X and Y directions of the cutting stage. The laser was programed to scribe 31 lines of the appropriate length along the Y stage direction. The programed scribe lines were separated by 5 micron in the X direction. The laser parameters were set as follows: (1) The laser power was 0.5 watts; (2) each line consisted of 50 passes, with the Z position being advanced 5 micron per pass; and (3) 30 s would elapse before the next line was scribed to allow for wafer cool down from any possible heating via the laser. The ablated material that "stuck" in the "scribe-cut" was removed from the "cut" using an ultrasonic micro-tool. After all the ablated silicon was removed from the wafer, the wafer was repositioned in exactly the same orientation on the laser stage. The laser was focused using the bottom of the wafer channel, and the 31-line scribing pattern described above was reprogrammed using the Z position of the groove bottom as the starting Z value instead of the top wafer surface, which was used previously. Upon completion of the second set of scribes, the ultrasonic micro-tool was again used to clean out the cut. The wafer was remounted on the stage in exactly the same orientation as before. The laser was again focused on the bottom of the groove. This time, however, the laser was.programed to scribe only one line down the exact center of the channel. The final scribe line consisted of 100 passes with a Z advance of 5 micron per pass and with the laser power set at 0.5 watts. As mentioned above, the final cutting plan was practiced in two end-to-end trials using non-flight, triangular-shaped silicon wafers similar in size and orientation to the actual DOS 60000 target sample. The actual scribing of the triangular-shaped wafers required scribing two lines and cleaving (i.e. scribe-cleave, then scribe-cleave) to obtain the piece requested for allocation. Early in December 2012, after many months of experiments and practicing and perfecting the techniques and procedures, the team successfully subdivided the Genesis DoS 60000 target sample, one of the most scientifically important samples from the Genesis mission (figure 2). On December 17, 2012, the allocated piece of concentrator target sample was delivered to the requesting principal investigator.The cutting plan developed for the subdivision of this sample will be used as the model for subdividing future requested Genesis flight wafers (appropriately modified for different wafer types).

Lauer, H. V., Jr.↗
NASA NTRS2026

Adaptive Curation at NASA Johnson Space Center: Preparing for Artemis Samples by Leveraging Proven Practices and Innovative Solution

The proper curation of returned astromaterial samples is essential to ensure that high-quality scientific investigations can be conducted for decades, enabling future generations to address evolving research questions. The Astromaterials Acquisition and Curation Office at NASA Johnson Space Center (hereafter JSC Curation) is responsible for curating all of NASA’s extraterrestrial samples. Under the governing document, NASA Procedural Requirement (NPR) 7100.5 “Curation of Extraterrestrial Materials”, JSC Curation is charged with “The curation of all extraterrestrial material under NASA control, including future NASA missions.” The Directive goes on to define Curation as including “...documentation, preservation, preparation, and distribution of samples for research, education, and public outreach.” JSC Curation has a long-standing legacy of curating extraterrestrial materials, including but not limited to Apollo and Luna lunar samples, Genesis solar wind samples, Stardust comet samples, asteroid samples (Hayabusa1, Hayabusa2, and OSIRIS-REx), and Antarctic Meteorite samples from a variety of parent bodies. Building on this foundation, the Artemis program introduces new challenges and opportunities for sample curation, requiring both the application of proven practices and the development of innovative solutions. The Artemis Collection will be curated using established protocols refined through decades of experience with Apollo and subsequent sample collections, including but not limited to the utilization of cleanrooms, custom nitrogen gloveboxes, specialized storage containers and tools; all of which have strict material utilization and prohibition requirements. These practices provide a robust framework for contamination control, documentation, and long-term preservation. However, Artemis samples may present unique scientific and operational requirements, including enhanced contamination control measures (relative to Apollo) driven by evolving science objectives. To meet these needs, JSC Curation is actively developing new technologies and protocols that extend beyond traditional approaches, ensuring that the integrity of samples is maintained under increasingly stringent standards. One critical area of innovation is the development of cold sample curation capabilities. Certain Artemis samples, particularly those from Permanently Shadowed Regions (PSRs) and cold environments, are expected to contain ices and volatile components that require preservation and handling at sub-zero or even cryogenic temperatures. JSC Curation is leveraging best practices from the cold and cryogenic sample industries, as well as other government agencies and academic experts, to design facilities and handling procedures that maintain sample integrity while enabling scientific access. The goal is to develop capabilities to allow researchers to investigate volatiles and other temperature-sensitive materials while minimizing chemical and physical alterations from their returned state. In summary, adaptive curation at JSC combines the reliability of proven methodologies with forward-looking innovations to meet the scientific and operational demands of Artemis. Through enhanced contamination control, advanced cold curation capabilities, and an understanding of known and evolving future science priorities, NASA is preparing to maximize the scientific return from Artemis samples and preserve their value for generations of researchers.

Andrea D Harrington↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

NASA Gateway Refueling Architecture and Concept of Operation

The Lunar Gateway is a deep space orbiting outpost being developed by NASA in partnership with ESA and other domestic and international partners. It is a critical component of NASA’s Artemis program supporting long-term human exploration of the moon and is designed to be refueled, requiring the on-orbit transfer of propellants. The first two modules of Gateway to be launched will be the Power and Propulsion Element (PPE) and the Habitation and Logistics Outpost (HALO). The PPE contains the bipropellant chemical and electrical propulsion systems that will provide attitude control and orbit raising capability for Gateway. The reaction control system (RCS) utilizes monomethylhydrazine (MMH) and mixed oxides of nitrogen-3 (MON-3) as the fuel and oxidizer, respectively. Helium is used as a pressurant. The Advanced Electric Propulsion Systems (AEPS) and Busek hall thrusters that comprise the solar electric propulsion (SEP) system use xenon as the propellent. The ESPRIT Refueling Module, provided by ESA, will supply the propellant refueling function to Gateway’s propulsion systems. On-orbit refueling is a complex, technically challenging operation that is key to enabling sustainable crewed Lunar and Martian exploration. Numerous systems may be involved in the refueling operation. Also numerous systems are required to enable the successful ability for Gateway to refuel such as, SEP, RCS, Structure & Mechanisms (S&M), Guidance, Navigation and Control (GNC), Thermal, Software, Vehicle System Manager (VSM), Flight Ops, Extra Vehicular Robotics (EVR), Communication and Tracking (C&T), Avionics, and more. This paper will detail the design architecture, concept of operations, and challenges associated with the Gateway refueling system. The methodologies used in Gateway will be compared to those implemented in OSAM-1 and the best practices documented by AIAA and CONFERS (Consortium For Execution Of Rendezvous And Servicing Operations).

Brandie L. Rhodes↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Technology Assessment for Producing Propellant From Lunar Water

Introduction: The presence of water ice in permanently shadowed regions (PSRs) on the lunar surface may enable a sustained human presence on the Moon with minimal need for consumables. One of the most valuable uses of lunar water is to produce rocket propellant. A sustained human presence on the Moon will re-quire frequent launches from the lunar surface, and each launch will require tons of propellant. However, many other volatiles are likely to be present in the areas where lunar water is stable1. Producing propellant from lunar water in-situ will require the separation and purification of water before it can be electrolyzed into oxygen and hydrogen gas. The Resource Exploration and Science of OUR Cosmic Environment (RESOURCE) project, funded by the Solar System Exploration Research Virtual Institute (SSERVI) program, includes a task to demonstrate the end-to-end process of water extraction, capture, purification and electrolysis to produce pure/dry oxygen gas sourced from an icy regolith mixture. Water Purification: The requirements for water purity are driven by the type of water electrolyzer used. For example, the water electrolyzer currently used on the International Space Station is based on proton ex-change membrane (PEM) technology. PEM-based electrolyzers require water to be ultrapure and deionized (>10 MegaOhm-cm) so that electrical conductivity is limited to the membranes themselves, where electrical current is used to convert H2O into H2 and O2.. A practical first step toward purifying water that is sourced from a lunar PSR is to use freeze distillation to separate water from other volatiles2. A sub-micronic filter can also be used to ensure that a minimal amount of dust is present in any lunar water that is captured. The combination of freeze distillation and sub-micronic filtration will result in relatively pure water but would require a deionization step if being fed into a PEM electrolyzer. Water Electrolysis: An alternative to PEM electrolysis is to use a Solid Oxide Electrolyzer (SOE). This technology operates at a much higher operating temperature (~800oC) and has a limited pressure range but does not require water to be ultrapure and deionized. Another advantage of SOE technology is that it produces pure dry oxygen gas without the need of an additional drying step. PEM electrolyzers produce humid oxygen gas and the humidity must be removed prior to liquefaction. Assessment: In order to compare PEM and SOE technologies side-by-side, they must be compared at a system level that includes water purification and gas drying steps. Engineers at the Johnson Space Center up-dated and utilized a detailed In-Situ Resource Utilization (ISRU) system model to compare and select the best option for the RESOURCE project which will conclude with a laboratory demonstration of the process of producing pure/dry oxygen from an icy regolith mixture in 2025.

A.J. Paz↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Technology Assessment for Producing Propellant From Lunar Water

Introduction: The presence of water ice in permanently shadowed regions (PSRs) on the lunar surface may enable a sustained human presence on the Moon with minimal need for consumables. One of the most valuable uses of lunar water is to produce rocket propellant. A sustained human presence on the Moon will re-quire frequent launches from the lunar surface, and each launch will require tons of propellant. However, many other volatiles are likely to be present in the areas where lunar water is stable1. Producing propellant from lunar water in-situ will require the separation and purification of water before it can be electrolyzed into oxygen and hydrogen gas. The Resource Exploration and Science of OUR Cosmic Environment (RESOURCE) project, funded by the Solar System Exploration Research Virtual Institute (SSERVI) program, includes a task to demonstrate the end-to-end process of water extraction, capture, purification and electrolysis to produce pure/dry oxygen gas sourced from an icy regolith mixture. Water Purification: The requirements for water purity are driven by the type of water electrolyzer used. For example, the water electrolyzer currently used on the International Space Station is based on proton ex-change membrane (PEM) technology. PEM-based electrolyzers require water to be ultrapure and deionized (>10 MegaOhm-cm) so that electrical conductivity is limited to the membranes themselves, where electrical current is used to convert H2O into H2 and O2.. A practical first step toward purifying water that is sourced from a lunar PSR is to use freeze distillation to separate water from other volatiles2. A sub-micronic filter can also be used to ensure that a minimal amount of dust is present in any lunar water that is captured. The combination of freeze distillation and sub-micronic filtration will result in relatively pure water but would require a deionization step if being fed into a PEM electrolyzer. Water Electrolysis: An alternative to PEM electrolysis is to use a Solid Oxide Electrolyzer (SOE). This technology operates at a much higher operating temperature (~800oC) and has a limited pressure range but does not require water to be ultrapure and deionized. Another advantage of SOE technology is that it produces pure dry oxygen gas without the need of an additional drying step. PEM electrolyzers produce humid oxygen gas and the humidity must be removed prior to liquefaction. Assessment: In order to compare PEM and SOE technologies side-by-side, they must be compared at a system level that includes water purification and gas drying steps. Engineers at the Johnson Space Center up-dated and utilized a detailed In-Situ Resource Utilization (ISRU) system model to compare and select the best option for the RESOURCE project which will conclude with a laboratory demonstration of the process of producing pure/dry oxygen from an icy regolith mixture in 2025.

ISRU↗
NASA NTRS2003

Magnetized Target Fusion in Advanced Propulsion Research

The Magnetized Target Fusion (MTF) Propulsion lab at NASA Marshall Space Flight Center in Huntsville, Alabama has a program in place that has adopted to attempt to create a faster, lower cost and more reliable deep space transportation system. In this deep space travel the physics and development of high velocity plasma jets must be understood. The MTF Propulsion lab is also in attempt to open up the solar system for human exploration and commercial use. Fusion, as compared to fission, is just the opposite. Fusion involves the light atomic nuclei combination to produce denser nuclei. In the process, the energy is created by destroying the mass according to the distinguished equation: E = mc2 . Fusion energy development is being pursued worldwide as a very sustainable form of energy that is environmentally friendly. For the purposes of space exploration fusion reactions considered include the isotopes of hydrogen-deuterium (D2) and tritium (T3). Nuclei have an electrostatic repulsion between them and in order for the nuclei to fuse this repulsion must be overcome. One technique to bypass repulsion is to heat the nuclei to very high temperatures. The temperatures vary according to the type of reactions. For D-D reactions, one billion degrees Celsius is required, and for D-T reactions, one hundred million degrees is sufficient. There has to be energy input for useful output to be obtained form the fusion To make fusion propulsion practical, the mass, the volume, and the cost of the equipment to produce the reactions (generally called the reactor) need to be reduced by an order of magnitude or two from the state-of-the-art fusion machines. Innovations in fusion schemes are therefore required, especially for obtaining thrust for propulsive applications. Magnetized target fusion (MTF) is one of the innovative fusion concepts that have emerged over the last several years. MSFC is working with Los Alamos National Laboratory and other research groups in studying the underlying principles involved in MTF. Magnetized Target Fusion is an attempt to combine MCF (magnetic confinement fusion) for energy confinement and ICF (inertial confinement fusion) for efficient compression heating and wall free containment of the fusing plasma. It also seeks to combine the best features to these two main commonplace approaches to fusion.

Cylar, Rashad↗
NASA NTRS2001

Fusion for Space Propulsion

There is little doubt that humans will attempt to explore and develop the solar system in this century. A large amount of energy will be required for accomplishing this. The need for fusion propulsion is discussed. For a propulsion system, there are three important thermodynamical attributes: (1) The absolute amount of energy available, (2) the propellant exhaust velocity, and (3) the jet power per unit mass of the propulsion system (specific power). For human exploration and development of the solar system, propellant exhaust velocity in excess of 100 km/s and specific power in excess of 10 kW/kg are required. Chemical combustion can produce exhaust velocity up to about 5 km/s. Nuclear fission processes typically result in producing energy in the form of heat that needs to be manipulated at temperatures limited by materials to about 2,800 K. Using the energy to heat a hydrogen propellant increases the exhaust velocity by only a factor of about two. Alternatively the energy can be converted into electricity which is then used to accelerate particles to high exhaust velocity. The necessary power conversion and conditioning equipment, however, increases the mass of the propulsion system for the same jet power by more than two orders of magnitude over chemical system, thus greatly limits the thrust-to-weight ratio attainable. The principal advantage of the fission process is that its development is relatively mature and is available right now. If fusion can be developed, fusion appears to have the best of all worlds in terms of propulsion - it can provide the absolute amount, the propellant exhaust velocity, and the high specific jet power. An intermediate step towards pure fusion propulsion is a bimodal system in which a fission reactor is used to provide some of the energy to drive a fusion propulsion unit. The technical issues related to fusion for space propulsion are discussed. The technical priorities for developing and applying fusion for propulsion are somewhat different from those for terrestrial electrical power generation. Thus fusion schemes that are initially attractive for electrical power generation might not necessarily be attractive also for propulsion and vice versa, though the underlying fusion science and engineering enjoy much overlap. Parallel efforts to develop these qualitatively differently fusion schemes for the two applications could benefit greatly from each other due to the synergy in the underlying physics and engineering. Pulsed approaches to fusion have not been explored to the same degree as steady-state or long-pulse approaches to fusion in the fusion power research program. The concerns early on were several. One was that the pulsed power components might not have the service lifetimes meeting the requirements of a practical power generating plant. Another was that, for many pulsed fusion schemes, it was not clear whether the destruction of hardware per pulse could be minimized or eliminated or recycled to such an extent as to make economical electrical power generation feasible, Significant development of the underlying pulsed power component technologies have occurred in the last two decades because of defense and other energy requirements. The state of development of the pulsed power technologies are sufficiently advanced now to make it compelling to visit or re-visit pulsed fusion approaches for application to propulsion where the cost of energy is not so demanding a factor as in the case of terrestrial power application. For propulsion application, the overall mass of the fusion system is the critical factor. Producing fusion reactions require extreme states of matter. Conceptually, these extreme states of matter are more readily realizable in the pulsed states, at least within appropriate bounds, than in the steady states. Significant saving in system mass may result in such systems. Magnetic fields are effective in confining plasma energy, whereas inertial compression is an effective way of heating and containing the plasma. Intensive research in developing magnetic energy containment and inertial plasma compression are being pursued in distinctively different fusion experiments in the terrestrial fusion power program. Fusion schemes that attempt to combine the favorable attributes of these two aspects into one single integrated fusion scheme appear to have benefits that are worth exploring for propulsion application.

Thio, Y. C. Francis↗