Engineering PapersSearch

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “Launch authorization”

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.

189 records · Page 11

Using Open Innovation in Reducing Risk to Crews

In the exploration of destinations outside of Earth's neighborhood, specifically Mars, scientific and engineering inquiries have occurred by two means; observations from satellites and observations by landed spacecraft. Satellite observations (Mariner, MRO, Mars Odyssey, provide global-scale spatial and temporal data while landed spacecraft (Viking, Mars Pathfinder, Spirit, Opportunity, Phoenix Mars Lander) investigate highly localized areas of the surface of the planet. In preparation for human exploration, extensive knowledge of the surface and atmospheric environments should be known before the first human leaves Earth. The primary goal of performing reconnaissance on Mars on a sub-global scale is to know as much as possible about the environment to which crews will be subjected. At the current rate of launching and landing probes to Mars, it will take a very long time to understand the surface and atmospheric conditions associated with the regions where prospective crews may land. Meanwhile electronics and electrical systems are rapidly getting smaller. One can argue that to acquire the knowledge of the region, one must take hundreds, maybe thousands of measurements simultaneously. One means to perform such a task is to deploy a swarm of sensors. Such a swarm would perform an in-situ assessment of the region. Imagine a close flyby mission to Mars for example, where mini- to micro-sensors are deposited into the atmosphere over half an orbit or more. The sensors, captured by the atmospheric drag and Martian gravity slowly descend buffeted about by Martian winds and weather until they settle on the surface a great time later (think of how long dust takes to settle). As they descend they communicate a vast array of data; temperature, chemistry, pressure, radiation dose, electric or magnetic properties from a region of the planet and an individual sensor need not measure the same quantity as its neighbors. Initially, they could move at the whim of the environment but later versions could have locomotion or propulsion mechanisms. Humans wouldn't need to decide where the sensors go, the sensors do that for themselves. This is a key strength of a sensor swarm. The intelligence relies on the group not on a decision maker on earth. Real time sensor inputs direct what the swarm considers most interesting to investigate resulting in emergent behavior. We issued a $20,000 challenge to the global innovators to provide solutions as to how such a swarm could be initialized and by what protocols and methodologies by which they operate. Over 400 innovators from 49 countries took a look at the problem, with three receiving partial awards for solutions.

Mel Ferebee

Nuclear Safety [Vol. 33, No. 4, October-December 1992]

Nuclear Safety is a review journal that covers significant developments in the field of nuclear safety. Its scope includes the analysis and control of hazards associated with nuclear energy, operations involving fissionable materials, and the products of nuclear fission and their effects on the environment. Primary emphasis is on safety in reactor design, construction, and operation; however, the safety aspects of the entire fuel cycle, including fuel fabrication, spent-fuel processing, nuclear waste disposal, handling of radioisotopes, and environmental effects of these operations, are also treated. Table of Contents for this issue follows. GENERAL SAFETY CONSIDERATIONS: 499 Technical Note: Nuclear Regulatory Commission’s Examination Question Bank System, C. L Jensen and N. L. Skinner; 506 Report on the Specialists’ Meeting on Passive and Active Safety Features of Liquid-Metal Fast Breeder Reactors Organized by the International Atomic Energy Agency at Oarai Engineering Centre of Power Reactor and Nuclear Development Corporation, Japan, November 5-7,1991, S. R. Paranjpe; ACCIDENT ANALYSIS: 514 A Review of Hydrogen Production During Melt/Water Interaction in LWRs, D. F. Fletcher, B. D. Turland, and S. P. A. Lawrence; 535 A Review of the U 3 0 8 -Al Reaction as a Potential Heat Source in Research and Test Reactor Accidents, J. L. Snelgrove; CONTROL AND INSTRUMENTATION: 543 Multilevel Interfaces for Power Plant Control Rooms II: A Preliminary Design Space, K. J. Vicente; DESIGN FEATURES: 549 Twenty-Second DOE/NRC Nuclear Air Cleaning and Treatment Conference, R. R. Bellamy, D. W. Moeller, and M. W. First; 562 Book Review: Safety Assessment of Unit 5 (WWER-440/W-213) of the Greifswald Nuclear Power Station, M. H. Fontana; WASTE AND SPENT FUEL MANAGEMENT: 576 Activities Related to Waste and Spent Fuel Management, M. D. Muhlheim and E. G. Silver; OPERATING EXPERIENCES: 586 Analysis of Corrective Actions Applied to Nuclear Power Plant Operations, A. E. Cross; 593 Reactor Shutdown Experience, Compiled by J. W. Cletcher; 596 Operating U.S. Power Reactors, Compiled by M. D. Muhlheim and E. G. Silver; 609 Non-Commercial Power Operating Experience; 614 World Nuclear Performance, Compiled by M. D. Muhlheim; RECENT DEVELOPMENTS: 623 General Administrative Activities, Compiled by M. D. Muhlheim and E. G. Silver; 635 Reports, Standards, and Safety Guides, D. S. Queener; 639 Proposed Rule Changes as of June 30, 1992; ANNOUNCEMENTS: 513 Fourth International Conference on Nuclear Fuel Reprocessing and Waste Management RECOD '94; 585 International Topical Meeting on Advanced Reactors Safety; 622 International Workshop on Implementation of ALARA at Nuclear Power Plants; 648 Short Course on Nuclear Criticality Safety; 648 8th Topical Meeting on Problems in Reactor Physics MEPhi-VOLGA-93; 643 The Authors; 646 Reviewers of Nuclear Safety, Vol. 33

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS

Nuclear Safety [Vol. 32, No. 4, October-December 1991]

Nuclear Safety is a review journal that covers significant developments in the field of nuclear safety. Its scope includes the analysis and control of hazards associated with nuclear energy, operations involving fissionable materials, and the products of nuclear fission and their effects on the environment. Primary emphasis is on safety in reactor design, construction, and operation; however, the safety aspects of the entire fuel cycle, including fuel fabrication, spent-fuel processing, nuclear waste disposal, handling of radioisotopes, and environmental effects of these operations, are also treated. Table of Contents for this issue follows. GENERAL SAFETY CONSIDERATIONS: 477 Report on the International Symposium on the Use of Probabilistic Safety Assessment for Operational Safety—PSA '91, S. Chakraborty and M. Khatib-Rahbar; 488 Good Relationships Are Pivotal in Nuclear Data Bases, A. S. Heger and B. V. Koen; 494 Technical Note: The Interagency Nuclear Safety Review Panel's Evaluation of the Ulysses Space Mission, J. A. Sholtis, Jr., D. A. Huff, L. B. Gray, N. P. Klug, and R. O. Winchester; ACCIDENT ANALYSIS: 502 The Severe Accident Analysis Program for the Savannah River Nuclear Production Reactors, M. L. Hyder; CONTROL AND INSTRUMENTATION: 511 A Framework for Selecting Suitable Control Technologies for Nuclear Power Plant Systems, R. A. Kisner; DESIGN FEATURES: 521 Containments for Gas-Cooled Power Reactors History and Status, P.W. Williams; ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS: 537 Indoor Radon: A Natural Risk, N. H. Harley and J.H. Harley; On the Importance of the Atmospheric Parameters in the Fission Products Distribution of a Severe Reactor Accident, M. C. Barla and A. R. Bayulken; Book Review: Health Effects of Exposure to Low Levels of Ionizing Radiation BEIR V, C. R. Richmond; WASTE AND SPENT FUEL MANAGEMENT: 555 Activities Related to Waste and Spent Fuel Management, M. D. Muhlheim and E. G. Silver OPERATING EXPERIENCES: 567 Effects of Component Aging on the Westhinghouse Control Rod Drive System, K. Sullivan and W. Gunther; 577 Reactor Shutdown Experience, Compiled by J. W. Cletcher, 580 Selected Safety-Related Events, Compiled by G. A. Murphy; 582 Operating U 8 Power Reactors, Compiled by M. D. Muhlheim and E. G. Silver, RECENT DEVELOPMENTS: 596 General Administrative Activities, Compiled by M. D. Muhlheim and E. G. Silver; 610 Reports, Standards, and Safety Guides, D. S. Queener; 614 Proposed Rule Changes as of June 30, 1991; ANNOUNCEMENTS: 520 Workshop on PC PRAISE: A Probabilistic Fracture Mechanics Personal Computer Code for Nuclear Power Plant Piping Reliability Assessment; 536 Fifth Workshop on Nuclear Power Plant Containment Integrity; 624 New OECD "International Information System on Occupational Exposure (ISOE)"; 625 Harvard School of Public Health Announces Short Courses; 625 Eighth Power Plant Dynamics, Control and Testing Symposium; 626 Second Training Course on Off-Site Emergency Planning and Response for Nuclear Accidents; 618 The Authors; 622 Reviewers of Nuclear Safety, Vol 32.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS

Nuclear Safety [Vol. 35, No. 2, July-December 1994]

Nuclear Safety is a journal that covers significant issues in the field of nuclear safety. Its primary scope is safety in the design, construction, operation, and decommissioning of nuclear power reactors worldwide and the research and analysis activities that promote this goal, but it also encompasses the safety aspects of the entire nuclear fuel cycle, including fuel fabrication, spent-fuel processing and handling, and nuclear waste disposal, the handling of fissionable materials and radioisotopes, and the environmental effects of all these activities. Table of Contents for this issue follows. GENERAL SAFETY CONSIDERATIONS: 179 Consideration of Postaccident Consequences in the Determination of Safety Objectives for Future Nuclear Power Plants in France, D. Queniart, A. Sugier, and J. Lochard; ACCIDENT ANALYSIS: 187 Nuclear Safety Research: The Phebus FP Severe Accident Experimental Program, P. von der Hardt, A. V. Jones, C. Lecomte, and A. Tattegrain; 205 Containment Performance Analysis of the Advanced Neutron Source Reactor at the Oak Ridge National Laboratory, S. H. Kim, R. P. Taleyarkhan, and V. Georgevich; 213 Assessment of Fission Product Deposits in the Reactor Coolant System: The DEVAP Program, G. Le Marois and M. Megnin; 222 Erratum to “A Review of the Available Information on the Triggering Stage of a Steam Explosion," Vol. 35, No. 1, CONTROL AND INSTRUMENTATION: 223 Effects of Normal Aging on Calibration and Response Time of Nuclear Plant Resistance Temperature Detectors and Pressure Sensors, H. M. Hashemian; DESIGN FEATURES: 235 Defense in Depth Against the Hydrogen Risk—A European Research Program, F. Fineschi; ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS: 246 Technical Note: A Preliminary Analysis of the Risks to Hong Kong Resulting from Potential Accidents of Daya Bay Nuclear Power Plant, Z. Shi and X. Wei; OPERATING EXPERIENCES: 253 Reactor Shutdown Experience, Compiled by J. W. Cletcher; SPECIAL SECTION ON TMI-2 VESSEL INVESTIGATION PROJECT: 256 Three Mile Island—New Findings 15 Years After the Accident A. M. Rubin and E. Beckjord; 269 Relocation of Molten Material to the TMI-2 Lower Head, J. R. Wolf, D. W. Akers, and L. A. Neimark; 280 Insight Into the TMI-2 Core Material Relocation Through Examination of Instrument Tube Nozzles, L. A. Neimark; 288 Physical and Radiochemical Examinations of Debris from the TMI-2 Lower Head, D. W. Akers and B. K. Schuetz; 301 Results of Metallographic Examinations and Mechanical Tests of Pressure Vessel Samples from the TMI-2 Lower Head, D. R. Diercks and G. E. Korth; 313 Margin-to-Failure Calculations for the TMI-2 Vessel, J. Rempe, L. Stickler, S. Chavez, G. Thinnes, R. Witt, and M. Corradini; U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION INFORMATION AND ANALYSES: 328 1993 Accident Sequence Precursor (ASP) Program Results, L. N. Vanden Heuvel, J. W. Cletcher, D. A. Copinger, J. W. Minarick, B. W. Dolan, and P. D. O’Reilley; RECENT DEVELOPMENTS: 339 Reports, Standards, and Safety Guides, D. S. Queener; 345 Proposed Rule Changes as of June 30, 1994; ANNOUNCEMENTS: 234 Thirty-First Annual Meeting of the National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements; 356 1995 International Incineration Conference; 358 Fifth International Controls and Instrumentation Conference; 359 ANS International Topical Meeting on Safety of Operating Reactors; 359 Fifth International Conference on Nuclear Criticality Safety; 360 International Conference on Probabilistic Safety Assessment Methodology and Applications; 351 The Authors; 357 Reviewers of Nuclear Safety, Vol. 35.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS

Prototype Demonstration of Solar-Carbothermal System to Extract Oxygen From Regolith

The Carbothermal Reduction Demonstration (CaRD) project was an effort to develop a prototype system to demonstrate the extraction of oxygen from simulated lunar regolith using concentrated solar energy and a carbothermal reaction. The prototype consisted of a deployable solar concentrator capable of tracking the sun, carbothermal reactor, fluid system, gas analysis, and a solar concentrator control system consisting of avionics and software. These subsystems were developed by multiple NASA centers and a private industry partner, Sierra Space. The various teams worked together to define requirements and interfaces to successfully assemble the complex system and demonstrate an integrated solar carbothermal process. The solar concentrator developed at Glenn Research Center (GRC) was designed to be stowed for a launch environment then deployed on the lunar surface. It utilized a crossed dragone configuration of composite mirrors to direct horizontal sunlight onto a target 90° from the incoming sunlight. The key performance parameters for the solar concentrator were efficiency and power density. The carbothermal reactor was developed by Sierra Space through a separate project called the Carbothermal Oxygen Production Reactor (COPR) where it successfully demonstrated a fully automated process in a thermal vacuum environment [1]. The fluid system needed for the carbothermal reaction was also developed by Sierra Space and successfully demonstrated in the same thermal vacuum test. The gas analysis system was developed at Kennedy Space Center (KSC) and was required to determine the amount of oxygen extracted during each test. The gas analysis system was based on the Mass Spectrometer Observing Lunar Operations (MSOLO) instrument. Avionics and software for the CaRD prototype were also developed at KSC and based on experience with MSOLO avionics and software. The control system was designed to stow, deploy, track the sun, and perform beam alignment of the concentrated light. The prototype subsystems were integrated and tested at Johnson Space Center’s (JSC) Energy Systems Test Area. A heliostat was used to direct sunlight toward the prototype in a way that is representative of the sunlight conditions at the south pole of the Moon. When concentrated sunlight was focused on simulated lunar regolith within the reactor, the gas analysis team confirmed the presence of carbon monoxide gas, which confirmed that a solar carbothermal reaction took place. The key performance parameter for the integrated prototype was grams of oxygen extracted per kilowatt hour of energy arriving at the concentrator primary mirror. The prototype design successfully demonstrated end-to-end capability and further steps to achieve a flight capable system have been defined. With lunar data, engineers would be able to design a scaled-up system capable of extracting oxygen from regolith at useful quantities for crew life support and rocket propellant. On the long term, this method of In-Situ Resource Utilization could be used to drastically reduce the cost and risk of a sustained human presence on the Moon by reducing the amount of oxygen that would have to be delivered.

Koorosh R Araghi

Prototype Demonstration of Solar Carbothermal System to Extract Oxygen from Regolith

The Carbothermal Reduction Demonstration (CaRD) project was an effort to develop a prototype system to demonstrate the extraction of oxygen from simulated lunar regolith using concentrated solar energy and a carbothermal reaction. The prototype consisted of a deployable solar concentrator capable of tracking the sun, carbothermal reactor, fluid system, gas analysis, and a solar concentrator control system consisting of avionics and software. These subsystems were developed by multiple NASA centers and a private industry partner, Sierra Space. The various teams worked together to define requirements and interfaces to successfully assemble the complex system and demonstrate an integrated solar carbothermal process. The solar concentrator developed at Glenn Research Center (GRC) was designed to be stowed for a launch environment then deployed on the lunar surface. It utilized a crossed dragone configuration of composite mirrors to direct horizontal sunlight onto a target 90° from the incoming sunlight. The key performance parameters for the solar concentrator were efficiency and power density. The carbothermal reactor was developed by Sierra Space through a separate project called the Carbothermal Oxygen Production Reactor (COPR) where it successfully demonstrated a fully automated process in a thermal vacuum environment. The fluid system needed for the carbothermal reaction was also developed by Sierra Space and successfully demonstrated in the same thermal vacuum test. The gas analysis system was developed at Kennedy Space Center (KSC) and was required to determine the amount of oxygen extracted during each test. The gas analysis system was based on the Mass Spectrometer Observing Lunar Operations (MSOLO) instrument. Avionics and software for the CaRD prototype were also developed at KSC and based on experience with MSOLO avionics and software. The control system was designed to stow, deploy, track the sun, and perform beam alignment of the concentrated light. The prototype subsystems were integrated and tested at Johnson Space Center’s (JSC) Energy Systems Test Area. A heliostat was used to direct sunlight toward the prototype in a way that is representative of the sunlight conditions at the south pole of the Moon. When concentrated sunlight was focused on simulated lunar regolith within the reactor, the gas analysis team confirmed the presence of carbon monoxide gas, which confirmed that a solar carbothermal reaction took place. The key performance parameter for the integrated prototype was grams of oxygen extracted per kilowatt hour of energy arriving at the concentrator primary mirror. The prototype design successfully demonstrated end-to-end capability and further steps to achieve a flight capable system have been defined. With lunar data, engineers would be able to design a scaled-up system capable of extracting oxygen from regolith at useful quantities for crew life support and rocket propellant. On the long term, this method of In-Situ Resource Utilization could be used to drastically reduce the cost and risk of a sustained human presence on the Moon by reducing the amount of oxygen that would have to be delivered.

Aaron Paz

Prototype Demonstration of an Integrated Solar Concentrator System and Carbothermal Reactor Using Solar Energy to Extract Oxygen from Regolith

The Carbothermal Reduction Demonstration (CaRD) project was an effort to develop a prototype system to demonstrate the extraction of oxygen from simulated lunar regolith using concentrated solar energy and a carbothermal reaction. The prototype consisted of a deployable solar concentrator capable of tracking the sun, carbothermal reactor, fluid system, gas analysis, and a solar concentrator control system consisting of avionics and software. These subsystems were developed by multiple NASA centers and a private industry partner, Sierra Space. The various teams worked together to define requirements and interfaces to successfully assemble the complex system and demonstrate an integrated solar carbothermal process. The solar concentrator developed at Glenn Research Center (GRC) was designed to be stowed for a launch environment then deployed on the lunar surface. It utilized a crossed dragone configuration of composite mirrors to direct horizontal sunlight onto a target 90° from the incoming sunlight. The key performance parameters for the solar concentrator were efficiency and power density. The carbothermal reactor was developed by Sierra Space through a separate project called the Carbothermal Oxygen Production Reactor (COPR) where it successfully demonstrated a fully automated process in a thermal vacuum environment. The fluid system needed for the carbothermal reaction was also developed by Sierra Space and successfully demonstrated in the same thermal vacuum test. The gas analysis system was developed at Kennedy Space Center (KSC) and was required to determine the amount of oxygen extracted during each test. The gas analysis system was based on the Mass Spectrometer Observing Lunar Operations (MSOLO) instrument. Avionics and software for the CaRD prototype were also developed at KSC and based on experience with MSOLO avionics and software. The control system was designed to stow, deploy, track the sun, and perform beam alignment of the concentrated light. The prototype subsystems were integrated and tested at Johnson Space Center’s (JSC) Energy Systems Test Area. A heliostat was used to direct sunlight toward the prototype in a way that is representative of the sunlight conditions at the south pole of the Moon. When concentrated sunlight was focused on simulated lunar regolith within the reactor, the gas analysis team confirmed the presence of carbon monoxide gas, which confirmed that a solar carbothermal reaction took place. The key performance parameter for the integrated prototype was grams of oxygen extracted per kilowatt hour of energy arriving at the concentrator primary mirror. The prototype design successfully demonstrated end-to-end capability and further steps to achieve a flight capable system have been defined. With lunar data, engineers would be able to design a scaled-up system capable of extracting oxygen from regolith at useful quantities for crew life support and rocket propellant. On the long term, this method of In-Situ Resource Utilization could be used to drastically reduce the cost and risk of a sustained human presence on the Moon by reducing the amount of oxygen that would have to be delivered.

Oxygen from Regolith

High-Order Methods in NASA’s Next Generation of Computational Fluid Dynamics Tools

The missions of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) routinely produce unique requirements and challenges for development and application of Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) methods. NASA presently embodies four distinct Mission Directorates: Aeronautics Research, Exploration Systems, Science, and Space Operations. These missions generate requirements for systems that operate in a wide variety of environments. They range from the high-speed flight of aerodynamically optimized vehicles operating in the earth’s atmosphere to spacecraft designed for missions that don’t favor aerodynamic optimization, some operating in the atmosphere of planets and planetary moons such as Mars and Venus or Saturn’s moon Titan. Systems supporting these vehicles, such as rocket and jet propulsion, reaction control systems, fluid and thermal transfer systems, etc. can also generate their own unique set of flow phenomena that challenge today’s CFD methodology. Through the NASA Engineering and Safety Center (NESC), NASA annually conducts state-of-the-discipline assessments in fifteen distinct engineering disciplines. These assessments are performed by the NASA Technical Fellows that lead Technical Discipline Teams (TDT) of recognized experts in these fifteen areas. In the Aerosciences discipline, three topics have been identified as the top challenges for the discipline: aero-plume interaction prediction, unsteady separated flows, and aerothermodynamic prediction. These challenge areas are defined by the Agency’s high-risk projects and problems on which the NESC is requested to perform independent testing, analysis, and assessments. When viewed as a whole, these tests, analyses, and assessments provide a clear view of the recurring technical challenges facing Agency engineers and researchers and can be used to guide future research and technology development. The present state-of-the-art in the application of CFD at NASA is the use of Reynolds-Averaged Navier- Stokes (RANS) solvers, primarily executed in a steady-state mode of operation. In isolated cases, Unsteady RANS (URANS) solvers have been employed when steady RANS solutions produce poorly converging or oscillating results or in cases, such as aeroelastic analysis, which require unsteady aerodynamic simulation. For most traditional external and internal aerodynamic flows, structured overset grids or unstructured grids are employed to minimize geometric modeling and grid generation times. Grid adaptation, primarily as a series of coarse-grain intermediate processing steps is also seeing use on particularly complex flow problems and configurations. In the case of aerothermodynamic flows, engineers have been forced to continue to employ structured grid techniques as the present unstructured grid methodology has proven inadequate in the prediction of surface heating. In the area of aero-plume interaction modeling, two-gas, frozen chemistry simulation is generally the state-of-the- art, with some production solvers capable of predicting flows with only a single gas component. Prediction of flows falling into the afore-mentioned top Aerosciences technical challenges have severely stressed the present state-of-the-art in CFD prediction and for some problems, such as unsteady separated flows and aero-plume interaction cases, engineers have begun employing Large Eddy Simulation (LES) and Hybrid RANS/LES techniques. In some isolated aero-propulsion interaction cases, chemically reacting flow simulations have been applied. These methods are highly evolutionary and engineers have little experience in their application, so they cannot be heavily relied upon in today’s application environment. Therefore, this leads one to muse over which numerical technologies will be included in the CFD tools that will be employed 30 years in the future. This presentation will describe specific technical problems that have stressed NASA’s traditional CFD methods to their breaking point and will link these issues to the Agency’s top Aerosciences technical challenges. The discussion will then shift to the characteristics of future CFD solvers that will be required to attack these challenges and how these characteristics differ from the present state-of-the- art. High-order methods certainly appear to have a place in the development of future CFD tools and some of the physical characteristics of our most challenging problems suggest that high-order methods are the only way to effectively solve them. But there are some relatively severe implementation issues that face these methods, particularly in the area of general applicability and robust operation as an engineering tool. Desired characteristics of next-generation CFD solvers will be discussed and the author’s view of which emerging numerical technologies might be employed to address these attributes will also be presented

David M Schuster

An Overview of Experiments and Modeling of Polysiloxane-Coated Thermal Protection Systems for Missions to Mars, Titan, and Beyond.

Phenolic Impregnated Carbon Ablator (PICA) gained heritage during the historic Stardust mission, where it successfully returned samples from a comet’s tail and has since been instrumental in delivering payloads to the surface of Mars [1-3]. Most recently, PICA enabled the safe return of samples collected from asteroid Bennu as part of the OSIRIS-REx mission. This rich legacy underscores PICA’s critical role in allowing NASA’s most ambitious exploration missions. However, the friable nature of its phenolic phase presents challenges during handling and pre-launch activities. To mitigate this issue, PICA is coated with a polysiloxane resin system, which serves to suppress particulate dispersion and thereby safeguard spacecraft components. A comprehensive understanding of the polysiloxane resin’s behavior is imperative, as it profoundly shapes the material response of PICA during atmospheric entry by influencing its thermal and oxidative stability. This influence extends to thermocouple plugs embedded within thermal protection systems. These plugs have demonstrated their significance in missions such as Mars Science Laboratory (MSL) and Mars 2020, where the MEDLI and MEDLI2 instrumentation suites delivered in-valuable insights into the performance of thermal protection systems during entry into the Martian atmosphere [4]. Looking ahead, missions such as Dragonfly, set to descend into Titan’s dense atmosphere, aim to leverage advanced sensor technologies to further refine our understanding of thermal protection response [5]. Moreover, thermocouple plugs play an essential role in validating cutting-edge material response models, such as those pioneered under NASA’s Entry Systems Modeling Project (ESM), designed, in-part, to predict the operational integrity of thermal protection systems under the extreme stresses of atmospheric entry. To achieve these modeling goals, ground-based experiments are crucial to provide the foundational data necessary for developing and refining these predictive tools. To this end, an extensive test campaign was conducted at the Hypersonic Materials Environmental Test System (HyMETS) to investigate the high-temperature behavior of the polysiloxane resin in an air environment [6]. These experiments revealed critical phenomena, including the formation of a silicon oxycarbide layer that enhances oxidation resistance, moderates surface temperatures, and alters in-depth thermal response. Building on these findings, subsequent tests were designed to simulate atmospheric entry conditions in reactive gases, such as CO2 and N2, to mimic the environments of Mars and Titan, respectively, as well as non-reactive gases representing the atmospheres of the Ice Giants (Neptune and Uranus). A heating rate dependent decomposition mechanism has been identified for the polysiloxane resin under oxidizing conditions (Fig. 1). In the initial stage, the resin and the underlying thermal protection system undergo pyrolysis, rapidly generating a thin amorphous silicon oxycarbide interwoven with carbonaceous char and residual fibers from PICA. During the second stage, the nascent oxide layer establishes a robust, oxidation-resistant thermal barrier coating, which significantly impedes heat transfer to the underlying carbonaceous char, resulting in a stagnation of the surface temperature. A key factor contributing to this thermal resistance is the low recombination efficiency of atomic oxygen (γ), which further diminishes the heat load on the material’s interior layers [7]. Moreover, as the surface temperature stagnates, the silicon oxycarbide phase separates into distinct regions of silica and free graphite. Ultimately, when the heat flux reaches a critical threshold, a third stage is triggered, leading to the breakdown of the coating through carbothermal reduction, exposing the underlying char layer. This exposure leads to a dramatic surface temperature spike, driven by highly exothermic reactions between atomic oxygen and the char layer, further accelerating material degradation. A detailed mass and heat transfer model of PICA coated with polysiloxane resin was implemented in the Porous material Analysis Toolbox based on OpenFOAM, PATO [8]. The initial stage was considered negligible in this model because the resin decomposition occurs rapidly within a thin surface layer. Instead, the coating was directly considered as an oxygen-resistant thermal barrier coating. For the second stage, the thin amorphous silicon oxycarbide was treated as a pure silica surface to simplify the thermochemical behavior. The model ac-counts for surface equilibrium processes using representative elements of the coating-environment system. For the third stage, specific boundary conditions were developed to estimate the onset and progression of the coating removal. Two-dimensional material response simulations were conducted to compare uncoated and coated PICA using boundary conditions calibrated with HyMETS data. Fig. 2 illustrates that the simulations closely align with experimental data, successfully reproducing measured temperature profiles. This work will include the latest advancements in the coating model, including the calibration of recombination of atomic oxygen at the surface during the second phase. These simulated results will be further validated against additional CO2 data points from HyMETS, reinforcing the models’ predictive capabilities. These mechanisms and their effects on thermal protection systems, including thermochemical behavior and thermocouple probe performance in extreme environments, provide crucial insights for optimizing spacecraft designs that safeguard scientific payload and ensure mission success in future planetary exploration endeavors.

Active Oxidation