Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “Space transportation system”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

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

At least 523 records · Page 29
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS1982

Columbia undergoes final shakedown during seven-day STS-4 mission

The launch preparations for the Space Transportation System 4 flight of the space shuttle Columbia are described. The details of the spacecraft's mission profile are given. Several experiments and payloads are described. An account of the remote manipulator system is given. Studies of long-term thermal extremes on the orbiter subsystems and a survey of orbiter induced contamination of the payload bay are identified as mission priorities.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS1985

Space Technology Experiments Platform (STEP) Status: an In-space Test Facility

Designed for utilization of the space transportation system for technology experiments in space, the space technology experiment platform (STEP) is a shuttle-borne experiment support facility for use primarily for structures, structural dynamics, and control flexible structures technology flight experiments. The STEP concept is discussed as well as shows its relationship to broad NASA goals and objectives. The development chronology is presented and the current system capability in block diagram format is described. The STEP development schedule is included.

Harris, J. E.↗
NASA NTRS1985

Research and technology

As the NASA Center responsible for assembly, checkout, servicing, launch, recovery, and operational support of Space Transportation System elements and payloads, Kennedy Space Center is placing increasing emphasis on the Center's research and technology program. In addition to strengthening those areas of engineering and operations technology that contribute to safe, more efficient, and more economical execution of our current mission, we are developing the technological tools needed to execute the Center's mission relative to Space Station and other future programs. The Engineering Development Directorate encompasses most of the laboratories and other Center resources that are key elements of research and technology program implementation and is responsible for implementation of the majority of the projects in this Kennedy Space Center 1985 Annual Report. The report contains brief descriptions of research and technology projects in major areas of Kennedy Space Center's disciplinary expertise.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS1986

Research and technology

As the NASA Center responsible for assembly, checkout, servicing, launch, recovery, and operational support of Space Transportation System elements and payloads, Kennedy Space Center is placing increasing emphasis on the Center's research and technology program. In addition to strengthening those areas of engineering and operations technology that contribute to safer, more efficient, and more economical execution of our current mission, we are developing the technological tools needed to execute the Center's mission relative to future programs. The Engineering Development Directorate encompasses most of the laboratories and other Center resources that are key elements of research and technology program implementation, and is responsible for implementation of the majority of the projects in this Kennedy Space Center 1986 Annual Report.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS1987

Research and technology 1987 annual report of the Kennedy Space Center

As the NASA Center responsible for assembly, checkout, servicing, launch, recovery, and operational support of Space Transportation System elements and payloads, Kennedy Space Center is placing increasing emphasis on the Center's research and technology program. In addition to strengthening those areas of engineering and operations technology that contribute to safer, more efficient, and more economical execution of our current mission, we are developing the technological tools needed to execute the Center's mission relative to future programs. The Engineering Development Directorate encompasses most of the laboratories and other Center resources that are key elements of research and technology program implementation, and is responsible for implementation of the majority of the projects of this Kennedy Space Center 1987 Annual Report.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS1988

Turnaround operations analysis for OTV. Volume 1: Executive summary

Anaylses performed for ground processing, both expendable and reusable ground-based Orbital Transfer Vehicles (OTVs) launched on the Space Transportation System (STS), a reusable space-based OTV (SBOTV) launched on the STS, and a reusable ground-based OTV (GBOTV) launched on an unmanned cargo vehicle and recovered by the Orbiter are summarized. Also summarized are the analyses performed for space processing the reusable SBOTV at the Space Station in low Earth orbit (LEO) as well as the maintenance and servicing of the SBOTV accommodations at the Space Station. In addition, the candidate OTV concepts, design and interface requirements, and the Space Station design, support, and interface requirements are summarized. A development schedule and associated costs for the required SBOTV accommodations at the Space Station are presented. Finallly, the technology development plan to develop the capability to process both GBOTVs and SBOTVs are summarized.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS1988

Research and technology

As the NASA Center responsible for assembly, checkout, servicing, launch, recovery and operational support of Space Transportation System elements and payloads, Kennedy Space Center is placing emphasis on its research and technology program. In addition to strengthening those areas of engineering and operations technology that contribute to safer, more efficient, and more economical execution of our current mission, we are developing the technological tools needed to execute the Center's mission relative to future programs. The Engineering Development Directorate encompasses most of the laboratories and other Center resources that are key elements of research and technology program implementation, and is responsible for implementation of the majority of the projects in this Kennedy Space Center 1988 Annual Report.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS1990

Advanced recovery systems wind tunnel test report

Pioneer Aerospace Corporation (PAC) conducted parafoil wind tunnel testing in the NASA-Ames 80 by 120 test sections of the National Full-Scale Aerodynamic Complex, Moffett Field, CA. The investigation was conducted to determine the aerodynamic characteristics of two scale ram air wings in support of air drop testing and full scale development of Advanced Recovery Systems for the Next Generation Space Transportation System. Two models were tested during this investigation. Both the primary test article, a 1/9 geometric scale model with wing area of 1200 square feet and secondary test article, a 1/36 geometric scale model with wing area of 300 square feet, had an aspect ratio of 3. The test results show that both models were statically stable about a model reference point at angles of attack from 2 to 10 degrees. The maximum lift-drag ratio varied between 2.9 and 2.4 for increasing wing loading.

Geiger, R. H.↗
NASA NTRS1990

A package for 3-D unstructured grid generation, finite-element flow solution and flow field visualization

A set of computer programs for 3-D unstructured grid generation, fluid flow calculations, and flow field visualization was developed. The grid generation program, called VGRID3D, generates grids over complex configurations using the advancing front method. In this method, the point and element generation is accomplished simultaneously, VPLOT3D is an interactive, menudriven pre- and post-processor graphics program for interpolation and display of unstructured grid data. The flow solver, VFLOW3D, is an Euler equation solver based on an explicit, two-step, Taylor-Galerkin algorithm which uses the Flux Corrected Transport (FCT) concept for a wriggle-free solution. Using these programs, increasingly complex 3-D configurations of interest to aerospace community were gridded including a complete Space Transportation System comprised of the space-shuttle orbitor, the solid-rocket boosters, and the external tank. Flow solutions were obtained on various configurations in subsonic, transonic, and supersonic flow regimes.

Parikh, Paresh↗
NASA NTRS1989

Research and technology at Kennedy Space Center

As the NASA Center responsible for assembly, checkout, servicing, launch, recovery, and operational support of Space Transportation System elements and payloads, Kennedy Space Center is placing increasing emphasis on the Center's research and technology program. In addition to strengthening those areas of engineering and operations technology that contribute to safer, more efficient, and more economical execution of current mission, the technical tools are developed needed to execute Center's mission relative to future programs. The Engineering Development Directorate encompasses most of the laboratories and other Center resources that are key elements of research and technology program implementation and is responsible for implementation of the majority of the projects in this Kennedy Space Center 1989 Annual Report.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS1990

Research and technology

As the NASA center responsible for assembly, checkout, servicing, launch, recovery, and operational support of Space Transportation System elements and payloads, Kennedy Space Center (KSC) is placing increasing emphasis on KSC's research and technology program. In addition to strengthening those areas of engineering and operations technology that contribute to safer, more efficient, and more economical execution of the current mission, the technological tools needed to execute KSC's mission relative to future programs are being developed. The Engineering Development Directorate encompasses most of the laboratories and other KSC resources that are key elements of research and technology program implementation and is responsible for implementation of the majority of the projects in this KSC 1990 annual report. Projects under the following topics are covered: (1) materials science; (2) hazardous emissions and contamination monitoring; (3) biosciences; (4) autonomous systems; (5) communications and control; (6) meteorology; (7) technology utilization; and (8) mechanics, structures, and cryogenics.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS2005

Space Shuttle Pad Exposure Period Meteorological Parameters STS-1 Through STS-107

During the 113 missions of the Space Transportation System (STS) to date, the Space Shuttle fleet has been exposed to the elements on the launch pad for approx. 4,195 days. The Natural Environments Branch at Marshall Space Flight Center archives atmospheric environments to which the Space Shuttle vehicles are exposed. This Technical Memorandum (TM) provides a summary of the historical record of the meteorological conditions encountered by the Space Shuttle fleet during the pad exposure period. Parameters included in this TM are temperature, relative humidity, wind speed, wind direction, sea level pressure, and precipitation. Extremes for each of these parameters for each mission are also summarized. Sources for the data include meteorological towers and hourly surface observations. Data are provided from the first launch of the STS in 1981 through the launch of STS-107 in 2003.

Overbey, B. G.↗
NASA NTRS2010

EVA 2010: Preparing for International Space Station EVA Operations Post-Space Shuttle Retirement

The expected retirement of the NASA Space Transportation System (also known as the Space Shuttle ) by 2011 will pose a significant challenge to Extra-Vehicular Activities (EVA) on-board the International Space Station (ISS). The EVA hardware currently used to assemble and maintain the ISS was designed assuming that it would be returned to Earth on the Space Shuttle for refurbishment, or if necessary for failure investigation. With the retirement of the Space Shuttle, a new concept of operations was developed to enable EVA hardware (Extra-vehicular Mobility Unit (EMU), Airlock Systems, EVA tools, and associated support hardware and consumables) to perform ISS EVAs until 2015, and possibly beyond to 2020. Shortly after the decision to retire the Space Shuttle was announced, the EVA 2010 Project was jointly initiated by NASA and the OneEVA contractor team. The challenges addressed were to extend the operating life and certification of EVA hardware, to secure the capability to launch EVA hardware safely on alternate launch vehicles, to protect for EMU hardware operability on-orbit, and to determine the source of high water purity to support recharge of PLSSs (no longer available via Shuttle). EVA 2010 Project includes the following tasks: the development of a launch fixture that would allow the EMU Portable Life Support System (PLSS) to be launched on-board alternate vehicles; extension of the EMU hardware maintenance interval from 3 years (current certification) to a minimum of 6 years (to extend to 2015); testing of recycled ISS Water Processor Assembly (WPA) water for use in the EMU cooling system in lieu of water resupplied by International Partner (IP) vehicles; development of techniques to remove & replace critical components in the PLSS on-orbit (not routine); extension of on-orbit certification of EVA tools; and development of an EVA hardware logistical plan to support the ISS without the Space Shuttle. Assumptions for the EVA 2010 Project included no more than 8 EVAs per year for ISS EVA operations in the Post-Shuttle environment and limited availability of cargo upmass on IP launch vehicles. From 2010 forward, EVA operations on-board the ISS without the Space Shuttle will be a paradigm shift in safely operating EVA hardware on orbit and the EVA 2010 effort was initiated to accommodate this significant change in EVA evolutionary history.

Chullen, Cinda↗
NASA NTRS2010

Post-Shuttle EVA Operations on ISS

The expected retirement of the NASA Space Transportation System (also known as the Space Shuttle ) by 2011 will pose a significant challenge to Extra-Vehicular Activities (EVA) on-board the International Space Station (ISS). The EVA hardware currently used to assemble and maintain the ISS was designed assuming that it would be returned to Earth on the Space Shuttle for refurbishment, or if necessary for failure investigation. With the retirement of the Space Shuttle, a new concept of operations was developed to enable EVA hardware (Extra-vehicular Mobility Unit (EMU), Airlock Systems, EVA tools, and associated support hardware and consumables) to perform ISS EVAs until 2015, and possibly beyond to 2020. Shortly after the decision to retire the Space Shuttle was announced, the EVA 2010 Project was jointly initiated by NASA and the One EVA contractor team. The challenges addressed were to extend the operating life and certification of EVA hardware, to secure the capability to launch EVA hardware safely on alternate launch vehicles, to protect for EMU hardware operability on-orbit, and to determine the source of high water purity to support recharge of PLSSs (no longer available via Shuttle). EVA 2010 Project includes the following tasks: the development of a launch fixture that would allow the EMU Portable Life Support System (PLSS) to be launched on-board alternate vehicles; extension of the EMU hardware maintenance interval from 3 years (current certification) to a minimum of 6 years (to extend to 2015); testing of recycled ISS Water Processor Assembly (WPA) water for use in the EMU cooling system in lieu of water resupplied by International Partner (IP) vehicles; development of techniques to remove & replace critical components in the PLSS on-orbit (not routine); extension of on-orbit certification of EVA tools; and development of an EVA hardware logistical plan to support the ISS without the Space Shuttle. Assumptions for the EVA 2010 Project included no more than 8 EVAs per year for ISS EVA operations in the Post-Shuttle environment and limited availability of cargo upmass on IP launch vehicles. From 2010 forward, EVA operations on-board the ISS without the Space Shuttle will be a paradigm shift in safely operating EVA hardware on orbit and the EVA 2010 effort was initiated to accommodate this significant change in EVA evolutionary history. 1

West, William↗
NASA NTRS2011

The MSFC Collaborative Engineering Process for Preliminary Design and Concept Definition Studies

This paper describes a collaborative engineering process developed by the Marshall Space Flight Center's Advanced Concepts Office for performing rapid preliminary design and mission concept definition studies for potential future NASA missions. The process has been developed and demonstrated for a broad range of mission studies including human space exploration missions, space transportation system studies and in-space science missions. The paper will describe the design team structure and specialized analytical tools that have been developed to enable a unique rapid design process. The collaborative engineering process consists of integrated analysis approach for mission definition, vehicle definition and system engineering. The relevance of the collaborative process elements to the standard NASA NPR 7120.1 system engineering process will be demonstrated. The study definition process flow for each study discipline will be will be outlined beginning with the study planning process, followed by definition of ground rules and assumptions, definition of study trades, mission analysis and subsystem analyses leading to a standardized set of mission concept study products. The flexibility of the collaborative engineering design process to accommodate a wide range of study objectives from technology definition and requirements definition to preliminary design studies will be addressed. The paper will also describe the applicability of the collaborative engineering process to include an integrated systems analysis approach for evaluating the functional requirements of evolving system technologies and capabilities needed to meet the needs of future NASA programs.

Mulqueen, Jack↗
NASA NTRS2017

Methodology for Assessing Reusability of Spaceflight Hardware

In 2011 the Space Shuttle, the only Reusable Launch Vehicle (RLV) in the world, returned to earth for the final time. Upon retirement of the Space Shuttle, the United States (U.S.) no longer possessed a reusable vehicle or the capability to send American astronauts to space. With the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) out of the RLV business and now only pursuing Expendable Launch Vehicles (ELV), not only did companies within the U.S. start to actively pursue the development of either RLVs or reusable components, but entities around the world began to venture into the reusable market. For example, SpaceX and Blue Origin are developing reusable vehicles and engines. The Indian Space Research Organization is developing a reusable space plane and Airbus is exploring the possibility of reusing its first stage engines and avionics housed in the flyback propulsion unit referred to as the Advanced Expendable Launcher with Innovative engine Economy (Adeline). Even United Launch Alliance (ULA) has announced plans for eventually replacing the Atlas and Delta expendable rockets with a family of RLVs called Vulcan. Reuse can be categorized as either fully reusable, the situation in which the entire vehicle is recovered, or partially reusable such as the National Space Transportation System (NSTS) where only the Space Shuttle, Space Shuttle Main Engines (SSME), and Solid Rocket Boosters (SRB) are reused. With this influx of renewed interest in reusability for space applications, it is imperative that a systematic approach be developed for assessing the reusability of spaceflight hardware. The partially reusable NSTS offered many opportunities to glean lessons learned; however, when it came to efficient operability for reuse the Space Shuttle and its associated hardware fell short primarily because of its two to four-month turnaround time. Although there have been several attempts at designing RLVs in the past with the X-33, Venture Star and Delta Clipper Experimental (DC-X), reusability within the spaceflight arena is still in its infancy. With unlimited resources (namely, time and money), almost any launch vehicle and its associated hardware can be made reusable. However, an endless supply of funds for space exploration is not the case in today's economy for neither government agencies nor their commercial counterparts. Therefore, any organization wanting to be a leader in space exploration and remain competitive in this unforgiving space faring industry must confront shrinking budgets with more cost conscious and efficient designs. Therefore, standards for developing reusable spaceflight hardware need to be established. By having standards available to existing and emerging companies, some of the potential roadblocks and limitations that plagued previous attempts at reuse may be minimized or completely avoided.

Childress-Thompson, Rhonda↗
NASA NTRS2019

The NASA Orbital Debris Engineering Model 3.1: Development, Verification, and Validation

The NASA Orbital Debris Program Office has developed the Orbital Debris Engineering Model (ORDEM) primarily as a tool for spacecraft designers and other users to understand the long-term risk of collisions with orbital debris. The newest version, ORDEM 3.1, incorporates the latest and highest fidelity datasets available to build and validate representative orbital debris populations encompassing low Earth orbit (LEO) to geosynchronous orbit (GEO) altitudes for the years 2016-2050. ORDEM 3.1 models fluxes for object sizes > 10 μm within or transiting LEO and > 10 cm in GEO. The deterministic portion of the populations in ORDEM 3.1 is based on the U.S. Space Surveillance Network (SSN) catalog, which provides coverage down to approximately 10 cm in LEO and 1 m in GEO. Observational datasets from radar, in situ, and optical sources provide a foundation from which the model populations are statistically extrapolated to smaller sizes and orbit regions that are not well-covered by the SSN catalog, yet may pose the greatest threat to operational spacecraft. Objects in LEO ranging from approximately 5 mm to 10 cm are modeled using observational data from ground-based radar, namely the Haystack Ultrawideband Satellite Imaging Radar (HUSIR – formerly known as Haystack). The LEO population smaller than approximately 3 mm in size is characterized based on a reanalysis of in situ data from impacts to the windows and radiators of the U.S. Space Transportation System orbiter vehicle, i.e., the Space Shuttle. Data from impacts on the Hubble Space Telescope are also used to validate the sub-millimeter model populations in LEO. Debris in GEO with sizes ranging from 10 cm to 1 m is modeled using optical measurement data from the Michigan Orbital DEbris Survey Telescope (MODEST). Specific, major debris-producing events, including the Fengyun-1C, Iridium 33, and Cosmos 2251 debris clouds, and unique populations, such as sodium-potassium droplets, have been re-examined and are modeled and added to the ORDEM environment separately. The debris environment greater than 1 mm is forecast using NASA’s LEO-to- GEO ENvironment Debris model (LEGEND). Future explosions of intact objects and collisions involving objects greater than 10 cm are assessed statistically, and the NASA Standard Satellite Breakup Model is used to generate fragments from these events. Fragments smaller than 10 cm are further differentiated based on material density categories, i.e., high-, medium-, and low-density, to better characterize the potential debris risk posed to spacecraft. The future projection of the sub-millimeter environment is computed using a special small-particle degradation model where small particles are created from intact spacecraft and rocket bodies. This work discusses the development, features, and capabilities of the ORDEM 3.1 model; the ne new data analyses used to build the model populations; and sample verification and validation results.

Matney, M.↗