SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “SERVICE MODULE”

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.

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 253 records · Page 14

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

NASA NTRS2009

Rocketdyne - Lunar Ascent Engine

The ascent engine was the last one from the moon, and I want to focus on the idea of redundancy and teams in regard to the engine. By teams, I mean teamwork - not just within Rocketdyne. It was teamwork within Rocketdyne; it was teamwork within Grumman; it was teamwork within NASA. These were all important elements leading to the successful development of the lunar excursion module (LEM) engine. Communication, rapid response, and cooperation were all important. Another aspect that went into the development of the ascent engine was the integration of technology and of lessons learned. We pushed all the above, plus technology and lessons learned, into a program, and that led to a successful result. One of the things that I like to think about - again in retrospect - is how it is very "in" now to have integrated product and process teams. These are buzzwords for teamwork in all program phases. That s where you combine a lot of groups into a single organization to get a job done. The ascent engine program epitomized that kind of integration and focus, and because this was the mid- to late-1960s; this was new ground for Rocketdyne, Grumman, and NASA. Redundancy was really a major hallmark of the Apollo Program. Everything was redundant. Once you got the rocket going, you could even lose one of the big F-1 engines, and it would still make it to orbit. And once the first stage separated from the rest of the vehicle, the second stage could do without an engine and still make a mission. This redundancy was demonstrated when an early Apollo launch shut down a J-2 second-stage engine. Actually, they shut down two J-2 engines on that flight. Even the third stage, with its single J-2 engine, was backed up because the first two stages could toss it into a recoverable orbit. If the third stage didn't work, you were circling the earth, and you had time to recover the command module and crew. Remember how on the Apollo 13 flight, there was sufficient system redundancy even when we lost the service module. That was a magnificent effort. TRW Inc. really ought to be proud of their engine for that. (See Slide 2, Appendix I) We had planned for redundancy; we had landed on the moon. However, weight restrictions in the architecture said, "You can t have redundancy for ascent from the moon. You've got one engine. It s got to work. There is no second chance. If that ascent engine doesn't work, you re stuck there." It would not have looked good for NASA. It wouldn't have looked good for the country. There was a letter written that President Richard Nixon would read if the astronauts got stuck on the moon, expressing how sorry we were and so forth. It was a scary letter, really. The ascent engine was an engine that had to work. (See Slide 3, Appendix I).

Harmon, Tim↗

NASA NTRS2001

MIR Solar Array Return Experiment: Power Performance Measurements and Molecular Contamination Analysis Results

A solar array segment was recently removed from the Mir core module and returned for ground-based analysis. The segment, which is similar to the ones the Russians have provided for the FGB and Service Modules, was microscopically examined and disassembled by US and Russian science teams. Laboratory analyses have shown the segment to he heavily contaminated by an organic silicone coating, which was converted to an organic silicate film by reactions with atomic oxygen within the. orbital flight environment. The source of the contaminant was a silicone polymer used by the Russians as an adhesive and bonding agent during segment construction. During its life cycle, the array experienced a reduction in power performance from approx. 12%, when it was new and first deployed, to approx. 5%, when it was taken out of service. However, current-voltage measurements of three contaminated cells and three pristine, Russian standard cells have shown that very little degradation in solar array performance was due to the silicate contaminants on the solar cell surfaces. The primary sources of performance degradation is attributed to "thermal hot-spotting" or electrical arcing; orbital debris and micrometeoroid impacts; and possibly to the degradation of the solar cells and interconnects caused by radiation damage from high energy protons and electrons.

Visentine, James↗

NASA NTRS1987

Space Station overview

This paper presents an overview of the Space Station, including program guidelines, international involvement, current baseline configuration, and utilization for science and application missions. Space Station configuration and capabilities, plus methods of utilizing the Space Station for scientific and engineering investigations, are described. The Space Station is being designed as a multipurpose facility to support a number of functions, such as a laboratory in space, a transportation node, an assembly facility, a staging base, etc. The description includes the baseline configuration, location of the pressurized modules, servicing and assembly facilities, and the work package structure for Space Station management. The Space Station will accommodate a wide variety of user requirements in laboratory modules and as attached payloads. To show the utility of the Space Station, a variety of science and application missions currently being studied for NASA at the Marshall Space Flight Center are discussed.

De Sanctis, Carmine E.↗

NASA NTRS2000

STS-106 Crew Activity Report / Flight Day Highlights Day 2

STS-106 was launched on Sept 8, 2000 at 8:45 a.m. The crew was commanded by Terrence W. Wilcutt, the pilot was Scott D. Altman. The mission specialists were Daniel C. Burbank, Edward T. Lu, Richard A. Mastracchio, Yuri Ivanovich Malenchenko, and Boris V. Morukov. During the 11-day mission, the crew spent a week inside the International Space Station (ISS) unloading supplies from both a double SPACEHAB cargo module in the rear of the Atlantis cargo bay and from a Russian Progress M-1 resupply craft docked to the aft end of the Zvezda Service Module. The videotape shows the activities of the second day of the flight and the preparations for docking with the ISS. Shown on the video are shots of the flight deck on the shuttle, the shuttle payload arm, and shots of the crew eating lunch.

Source record↗

NASA NTRS1971

Command module/service module reaction control subsystem assessment

Detailed review of component failure histories, qualification adequacy, manufacturing flow, checkout requirements and flow, ground support equipment interfaces, subsystem interface verification, protective devices, and component design did not reveal major weaknesses in the command service module (CSM) reaction control system (RCS). No changes to the CSM RCS were recommended. The assessment reaffirmed the adequacy of the CSM RCS for future Apollo missions.

Weary, D. P.↗

NASA NTRS2000

STS-106 Crew Activities Report/Flight Day 3 Highlights

On this third day of the STS-106 Atlantis mission, the flight crew, Commander Terrence W. Wilcutt, Pilot Scott D. Altman, and Mission Specialists Daniel C. Burbank, Edward T. Lu, Richard A. Mastracchio, Yuri Ivanovich Malenchenko, and Boris V. Morukov are seen as they approach the International Space Station (ISS). Also shown are views of the rendezvous taken from both the Zarya Control Module and the Atlantis spacecraft. Final preparation for the docking includes checking of tools and equipment needed to support the rendezvous and docking, as well as equipment for the scheduled space walk. After docking over Western Kazakhstan, the Zarya and Zvezda Service Module is seen from the external cameras of Atlantis. Also shown is footage of the crew before and during the rendezvous.

Source record↗

NASA NTRS1976

Lunar escape systems feasibility study

Results are presented for a study conducted to determine the feasibility of simple lunar escape system concepts, to develop a spectrum of operational data, and to identify techniques and configurations suitable for the emergency escape mission. The study demonstrated the feasibility of the lunar emergency escape-to-orbit system (LESS) designed to provide a means for the two-man crew of a lunar module (LM) or extended-stay LM (ELM) to escape from the lunar surface in the event that the LM/ELM ascent stage becomes unsafe or is otherwise unable to take off. The LESS is to carry the two astronauts to a safe lunar orbit, where the Apollo command and service modules (CSM) are to be used for rendezvous and rescue, all within the lifetime of the backpack life support system (about 4 hr). It is concluded that simple manual control modes are sufficient, that simple boost profiles are acceptable, and that one man can deploy and set up the LESS. Initial guidance data can be calculated for the LESS by Mission Control and transmitted via the LM/ELM uplink.

Matzenauer, J. O.↗

NASA NTRS2007

Extravehicular Activity (EVA) 101: Constellation EVA Systems

A viewgraph presentation on Extravehicular Activity (EVA) Systems is shown. The topics include: 1) Why do we need space suits? 2) Protection From the Environment; 3) Primary Life Support System (PLSS); 4) Thermal Control; 5) Communications; 6) Helmet and Extravehicular Visor Assy; 7) Hard Upper Torso (HUT) and Arm Assy; 8) Display and Controls Module (DCM); 9) Gloves; 10) Lower Torso Assembly (LTA); 11) What Size Do You Need?; 12) Boot and Sizing Insert; 13) Boot Heel Clip and Foot Restraint; 14) Advanced and Crew Escape Suit; 15) Nominal & Off-Nominal Landing; 16) Gemini Program (mid-1960s); 17) Apollo EVA on Service Module; 18) A Bold Vision for Space Exploration, Authorized by Congress; 19) EVA System Missions; 20) Configurations; 21) Reduced Gravity Program; and 22) Other Opportunities.

Jordan, Nicole C.↗

NASA NTRS2008

NASA Propulsion Investments for Exploration and Science

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) invests in chemical and electric propulsion systems to achieve future mission objectives for both human exploration and robotic science. Propulsion system requirements for human missions are derived from the exploration architecture being implemented in the Constellation Program. The Constellation Program first develops a system consisting of the Ares I launch vehicle and Orion spacecraft to access the Space Station, then builds on this initial system with the heavy-lift Ares V launch vehicle, Earth departure stage, and lunar module to enable missions to the lunar surface. A variety of chemical engines for all mission phases including primary propulsion, reaction control, abort, lunar ascent, and lunar descent are under development or are in early risk reduction to meet the specific requirements of the Ares I and V launch vehicles, Orion crew and service modules, and Altair lunar module. Exploration propulsion systems draw from Apollo, space shuttle, and commercial heritage and are applied across the Constellation architecture vehicles. Selection of these launch systems and engines is driven by numerous factors including development cost, existing infrastructure, operations cost, and reliability. Incorporation of green systems for sustained operations and extensibility into future systems is an additional consideration for system design. Science missions will directly benefit from the development of Constellation launch systems, and are making advancements in electric and chemical propulsion systems for challenging deep space, rendezvous, and sample return missions. Both Hall effect and ion electric propulsion systems are in development or qualification to address the range of NASA s Heliophysics, Planetary Science, and Astrophysics mission requirements. These address the spectrum of potential requirements from cost-capped missions to enabling challenging high delta-v, long-life missions. Additionally, a high specific impulse chemical engine is in development that will add additional capability to performance-demanding space science missions. In summary, the paper provides a survey of current NASA development and risk reduction propulsion investments for exploration and science.

Smith, Bryan K.↗

NASA NTRS2008

Lunar Soil Erosion Physics for Landing Rockets on the Moon

To develop a lunar outpost, we must understand the blowing of soil during launch and landing of the new Altair Lander. For example, the Apollo 12 Lunar Module landed approximately 165 meters from the deactivated Surveyor Ill spacecraft, scouring its surfaces and creating numerous tiny pits. Based on simulations and video analysis from the Apollo missions, blowing lunar soil particles have velocities up to 2000 m/s at low ejection angles relative to the horizon, reach an apogee higher than the orbiting Command and Service Module, and travel nearly the circumference of the Moon [1-3]. The low ejection angle and high velocity are concerns for the lunar outpost.

Clegg, Ryan N.↗

NASA NTRS1995

A Simple Space Station Rescue Vehicle

Early in the development of the Space Station it was determined that there is a need to have a vehicle which could be used in the event that the Space Station crew need to quickly depart and return to Earth when the Space Shuttle is not available. Unplanned return missions might occur because of a medical emergency, a major Space Station failure, or if there is a long-term interruption in the delivery of logistics to the Station. The rescue vehicle ms envisioned as a simple capsule-type spacecraft which would be maintained in a dormant state at the Station for several years and be quickly activated by the crew when needed. During the assembly phase for the International Space Station, unplanned return missions will be performed by the Russian Soyuz vehicle, which can return up to three people. When the Station assembly is complete there will be a need for rescue capability for up to six people. This need might be met by an additional Soyuz vehicle or by a new vehicle which might come from a variety of sources. This paper describes one candidate concept for a Space Station rescue vehicle. The proposed rescue vehicle design has the blunt-cone shape of the Apollo command module but with a larger diameter. The rescue vehicle would be delivered to the Station in the payload bay of the Space Shuttle. The spacecraft design can accommodate six to eight people for a one-day return mission. All of the systems for the mission including deorbit propulsion are contained within the conical spacecraft and so there is no separate service module. The use of the proven Apollo re-entry shape would greatly reduce the time and cost for development and testing. Other aspects of the design are also intended to minimize development cost and simplify operations. This paper will summarize the evolution of rescue vehicle concepts, the functional requirements for a rescue vehicle, and describe the proposed design.

Petro, Andrew↗

NASA NTRS2007

Orion Entry Flight Control Stability and Performance

The Orion Spacecraft will be required to perform entry and landing functions for both Low Earth Orbit (LEO) and Lunar return missions, utilizing only the Command Module (CM) with its unique systems and GN&C design. This paper presents the current CM Flight Control System (FCS) design to support entry and landing, with a focus on analyses that have supported its development to date. The CM FCS will have to provide for spacecraft stability and control while following guidance or manual commands during exo-atmospheric flight, after Service Module separation, translational powered flight required of the CM, atmospheric flight supporting both direct entry and skip trajectories down to drogue chute deploy, and during roll attitude reorientation just prior to touchdown. Various studies and analyses have been performed or are on-going supporting an overall FCS design with reasonably sized Reaction Control System (RCS) jets, that minimizes fuel usage, that provides appropriate command following but with reasonable stability and control margin. Results from these efforts to date are included, with particular attention on design issues that have emerged, such as the struggle to accommodate sub-sonic pitch and yaw control without using excessively large jets that could have a detrimental impact on vehicle weight. Apollo, with a similar shape, struggled with this issue as well. Outstanding CM FCS related design and analysis issues, planned for future effort, are also briefly be discussed.

Strahan, Alan L.↗

NASA NTRS2007

Orion Orbit Control Design and Analysis

The analysis of candidate thruster configurations for the Crew Exploration Vehicle (CEV) is presented. Six candidate configurations were considered for the prime contractor baseline design. The analysis included analytical assessments of control authority, control precision, efficiency and robustness, as well as simulation assessments of control performance. The principles used in the analytic assessments of controllability, robustness and fuel performance are covered and results provided for the configurations assessed. Simulation analysis was conducted using a pulse width modulated, 6 DOF reaction system control law with a simplex-based thruster selection algorithm. Control laws were automatically derived from hardware configuration parameters including thruster locations, directions, magnitude and specific impulse, as well as vehicle mass properties. This parameterized controller allowed rapid assessment of multiple candidate layouts. Simulation results are presented for final phase rendezvous and docking, as well as low lunar orbit attitude hold. Finally, on-going analysis to consider alternate Service Module designs and to assess the pilot-ability of the baseline design are discussed to provide a status of orbit control design work to date.

Jackson, Mark↗

NASA NTRS2010

Ares I-X Flight Test Vehicle: Stack 5 Modal Test

Ares I-X was the first flight test vehicle used in the development of NASA's Ares I crew launch vehicle. The Ares I-X used a 4-segment reusable solid rocket booster from the Space Shuttle heritage with mass simulators for the 5th segment, upper stage, crew module and launch abort system. Three modal tests were defined to verify the dynamic finite element model of the Ares I-X flight test vehicle. Test configurations included two partial stacks and the full Ares I-X flight test vehicle on the Mobile Launcher Platform. This report focuses on the first modal test that was performed on the top section of the vehicle referred to as Stack 5, which consisted of the spacecraft adapter, service module, crew module and launch abort system simulators. This report describes the test requirements, constraints, pre-test analysis, test operations and data analysis for the Ares I-X Stack 5 modal test.

Buehrle, Ralph D.↗

NASA NTRS2016

Cubesat Application for Planetary Entry (CAPE) Missions: Micro-Return Capsule (MIRCA)

The Cubesat Application for Planetary Entry Missions (CAPE) concept describes a high-performing Cubesat system which includes a propulsion module and miniaturized technologies capable of surviving atmospheric entry heating, while reliably transmitting scientific and engineering data. The Micro Return Capsule (MIRCA) is CAPE's first planetary entry probe flight prototype. Within this context, this paper briefly describes CAPE's configuration and typical operational scenario, and summarizes ongoing work on the design and basic aerodynamic characteristics of the prototype MIRCA vehicle. CAPE not only opens the door to new planetary mission capabilities, it also offers relatively low-cost opportunities especially suitable to university participation. In broad terms, CAPE consists of two main functional components: the "service module" (SM), and "CAPE's entry probe" (CEP). The SM contains the subsystems necessary to support vehicle targeting (propulsion, ACS, computer, power) and the communications capability to relay data from the CEP probe to an orbiting "mother-ship". The CEP itself carries the scientific instrumentation capable of measuring atmospheric properties (such as density, temperature, composition), and embedded engineering sensors for Entry, Descent, and Landing (EDL). The first flight of MIRCA was successfully completed on 10 October 2015 as a "piggy-back" payload onboard a NASA stratospheric balloon launched from Ft. Sumner, NM.

Cubesat↗

NASA NTRS2019

Operations of the Optical Communications Demonstration for the Orion EM-2 Mission

The GSFC implementation of an Optical Communication System to demonstrate an operational optical communication link for Orion EM-2. It will serve as a base for providing an operational optical communications capability for future Orion missions. GSFC plans to maintain a development path for the optical communication flight terminal to allow commercialization and implementation on future Orion missions. The Orion optical module part of the optical communications flight terminal and its control electronics have a common architecture with the ILLUMA-T optical terminal provided by GSFC for use on the ISS. The plan is to flow data from Orion through the Optical Communication Fight Terminal to the Optical Communication Ground Terminal and reverse. NASA's Orion spacecraft is an exploratory vehicle designed for longer-duration flights beyond the Moon. Following Orion's Exploration Mission-1 (EM-1), during which the spacecraft will travel beyond the Moon, enter a distant retrograde orbit around the Moon and return to Earth unmanned, Exploration Mission-2 (EM-2) will see a crewed spacecraft complete a slightly different flight path. First crewed test flight of the Orion spacecraft, currently targeting a June 30, 2022 launch. The mission involves: One revolution in Low Earth Orbit (LEO) parking orbit to verify basic Orion systems functionality and deploy solar arrays. A single 42-hour Highly Elliptical Orbit (HEO) intermediate checkout orbit allows characterization of the Orion vehicle system performance prior to committing to a cis-lunar flight. Trans Lunar Injection (TLI) burn using Orion Service Module (SM) main engine, which sends Orion on a lunar flyby and free return. Skip reentry at lunar return velocities to splashdown off the coast of San Diego. Total mission duration is approximately 10 days. EM-2 is the first crewed mission of the Orion Spacecraft that crew brings more video up/downloads, file transfers, and real-time chats with family back home and high-rate communications enables live HD streaming for Crew conferences, Public Affairs Office (PAO) events, and significant mission events. Also still collecting vehicle data on numerous Orion subsystems via Development Flight Instrumentation (DFI) allows large data volume returns sooner for DFI and future science payloads, as opposed to waiting for end-of-mission. O2O is a demonstration of operational utility system tested as a Developmental Test Objective (DTO) and not required to meet mission requirements/success/ Flight Test Objectives (FTO). EM-2 architecture is as close to future mission operational architecture as possible.Orion subsystems (video, DFI, etc.) expected to generate ~250 GB of data in the first 24 hours of flight. Total data generated over the mission estimated to be more than 400 GBUsing S-Band alone, Orion limited to ~ 6GB of data downlink per day. Because of this limitation, Orion is planning to limit live video downlinks on EM-1 in order to downlink high priority fileswith 1 hour/day of Optical Communication, Orion could downlink ~6x more data per day (~ 36GB/day).The optical communication system is capable of multiple data rates up to at least 80 Mbps downlink for the transfer of Orion data to Earth while Orion is operating in the lunar vicinity.

Optical Communication↗

NASA NTRS2010

Radiation Measured with Different Dosimeters for ISS-Expedition 18-19/ULF2 on Board International Space Station during Solar Minimum

Radiation field of particles in low Earth orbit (LEO) is mainly composed of galactic cosmic rays (GCR), solar energetic particles and particles in SAA (South Atlantic Anomaly). GCR are modulated by solar activity, at the period of solar minimum activity, GCR intensity is at maximum and the main contributor for space radiation is GCR. At present for space radiation measurements conducted by JSC (Johnson Space Center) SRAG (Space Radiation Analysis Group), the preferred active dosimeter sensitive to all LET (Linear Energy Transfer) is the tissue equivalent proportional counter (TEPC); the preferred passive dosimeters are thermoluminescence dosimeters (TLDs) and optically stimulated luminescence dosimeters (OSLDs) sensitive to low LET as well as CR-39 plastic nuclear track detectors (PNTDs) sensitive to high LET. For the method using passive dosimeters, radiation quantities for all LET can be obtained by combining radiation results measured with TLDs/OSLDs and CR-39 PNTDs. TEPC, TLDs/OSLDs and CR-39 detectors were used to measure the radiation field for the ISS (International Space Station) - Expedition 18-19/ULF2 space mission which was conducted from 15 November 2008 to 31 July 2009 - near the period of the recent solar minimum activity. LET spectra (differential and integral fluence, absorbed dose and dose equivalent) and radiation quantities were measured for positions TEPC, TESS (Temporary Sleeping Station, inside the polyethylene lined sleep station), SM-P 327 and 442 (Service Module - Panel 327 and 442). This paper presents radiation LET spectra measured with TEPC and CR-39 PNTDs and radiation dose measured with TLDs/OSLDs as well as the radiation quantities combined from results measured with passive dosimeters.

Zhou, Dazhuang↗

DOE OSTI2021

Cohesive and adhesive degradation in PET-based photovoltaic backsheets subjected to ultraviolet accelerated weathering

Delamination between layers in photovoltaic (PV) backsheets is often reported in the literature, causing voids that can collect moisture, diminish module backside heat dissipation, and reduce the backsheet’s effectiveness as a physical barrier. While backsheets with weathering-resistant fluoropolymer outer layers have traditionally been used in modules, more recent backsheets using non-fluoropolymer outer layers, such as polyethylene terephthalate (PET), have been developed. These backsheets have shown signs of premature degradation, and their adhesion degradation, in particular, has not been widely studied. In the present work, the single cantilever beam (SCB) adhesion test was used to quantify the adhesion energy in two commercially available PET-based backsheets. To study the effect of minor changes in formulation, the backsheets were obtained from same manufacturer and product line but during different years. To study the effect of environmental variables on adhesion degradation, the backsheets were subjected to artificial weathering at controlled temperature, humidity, and ultraviolet (UV) radiation in an indoor weathering chamber, and the adhesion energy was quantified at several intervals of exposure time. Layering structure, composition, and adhesion failure mode were compared between the backsheets, using Raman and infrared spectroscopy and thermogravimetric analysis. The results show a large difference in initial (unexposed) adhesion energy between the backsheets, despite very similar structures and compositions. Following exposure, adhesion energy dropped significantly, primarily due to thermo-hydrolytic degradation of the polyurethane (PU)-based adhesive layers. Significant UV-induced adhesion degradation of the PET outer layer surface was also observed. The study represents an important step in understanding adhesion degradation in PET-based backsheets, suggesting ways in which adhesion integrity – and, correspondingly, module service life – can be improved.

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗