Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “ESCAPE CAPSULE”

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.

46 records · Page 3
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2006

Simulation Assisted Risk Assessment: Blast Overpressure Modeling

A probabilistic risk assessment (PRA) approach has been developed and applied to the risk analysis of capsule abort during ascent. The PRA is used to assist in the identification of modeling and simulation applications that can significantly impact the understanding of crew risk during this potentially dangerous maneuver. The PRA approach is also being used to identify the appropriate level of fidelity for the modeling of those critical failure modes. The Apollo launch escape system (LES) was chosen as a test problem for application of this approach. Failure modes that have been modeled and/or simulated to date include explosive overpressure-based failure, explosive fragment-based failure, land landing failures (range limits exceeded either near launch or Mode III trajectories ending on the African continent), capsule-booster re-contact during separation, and failure due to plume-induced instability. These failure modes have been investigated using analysis tools in a variety of technical disciplines at various levels of fidelity. The current paper focuses on the development and application of a blast overpressure model for the prediction of structural failure due to overpressure, including the application of high-fidelity analysis to predict near-field and headwinds effects.

Lawrence, Scott L.↗
NASA NTRS2011

Space Toxicology

Safe breathing air for space faring crews is essential whether they are inside an Extravehicular Mobility Suit (EMU), a small capsule such as Soyuz, or the expansive International Space Station (ISS). Sources of air pollution can include entry of propellants, excess offgassing from polymeric materials, leakage of systems compounds, escape of payload compounds, over-use of utility compounds, microbial metabolism, and human metabolism. The toxicological risk posed by a compound is comprised of the probability of escaping to cause air pollution and the magnitude of adverse effects on human health if escape occurs. The risk from highly toxic compounds is controlled by requiring multiple levels of containment to greatly reduce the probability of escape; whereas compounds that are virtually non-toxic may require little or no containment. The potential for toxicity is determined by the inherent toxicity of the compound and the amount that could potentially escape into the breathing air.

James, John T.↗
NASA NTRS1990

Project EGRESS: Earthbound Guaranteed Reentry from Space Station. the Design of an Assured Crew Recovery Vehicle for the Space Station

Unlike previously designed space-based working environments, the shuttle orbiter servicing the space station will not remain docked the entire time the station is occupied. While an Apollo capsule was permanently available on Skylab, plans for Space Station Freedom call for a shuttle orbiter to be docked at the space station for no more than two weeks four times each year. Consideration of crew safety inspired the design of an Assured Crew Recovery Vehicle (ACRV). A conceptual design of an ACRV was developed. The system allows the escape of one or more crew members from Space Station Freedom in case of emergency. The design of the vehicle addresses propulsion, orbital operations, reentry, landing and recovery, power and communication, and life support. In light of recent modifications in space station design, Project EGRESS (Earthbound Guaranteed ReEntry from Space Station) pays particular attention to its impact on space station operations, interfaces and docking facilities, and maintenance needs. A water-landing medium-lift vehicle was found to best satisfy project goals of simplicity and cost efficiency without sacrificing safety and reliability requirements. One or more seriously injured crew members could be returned to an earth-based health facility with minimal pilot involvement. Since the craft is capable of returning up to five crew members, two such permanently docked vehicles would allow a full evacuation of the space station. The craft could be constructed entirely with available 1990 technology, and launched aboard a shuttle orbiter.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS2014

Features of Afterbody Radiative Heating for Earth Entry

Radiative heating is identified as a major contributor to afterbody heating for Earth entry capsules at velocities above 10 km/s. Because of rate-limited electron-ion recombination processes, a large fraction of the electronically-excited N and O atoms produced in the high temperature/pressure forebody remain as they expand into the afterbody region, which results in significant afterbody radiation. Large radiative heating sensitivities to electron-impact ionization rates and escape factors are identified. Ablation products from a forebody ablator are shown to increase the afterbody radiation by as much as 40%. The tangent-slab radiation transport approach is shown to over-predict the radiative flux by as much as 40% in the afterbody, therefore making the more computationally expensive ray-tracing approach necessary for accurate radiative flux predictions. For the Stardust entry, the afterbody radiation is predicted to be nearly twice as large as the convective heating during the peak heating phase of the trajectory. Comparisons between simulations and the Stardust Echelle observation measurements, which are shown to be dominated by afterbody emission, indicate agreement within 20% for various N and O lines. Similarly, calorimeter measurements from the Fire II experiment are identified as a source of validation data for afterbody radiation. For the afterbody calorimeter measurement closest to the forebody, which experiences the largest afterbody radiative heating component, the convective heating alone is shown to under-predict the measurement, even for the fullycatalytic assumption. Agreement with the measurements is improved with the addition of afterbody radiation. These comparisons with Stardust and Fire II measurements provide validation that the significant afterbody radiation values proposed in this work are legitimate.

Johnston, Christopher O.↗
NASA NTRS2013

Mars Sample Return Landed with Red Dragon

A Mars Sample Return (MSR) mission is the highest priority science mission for the next decade as recommended by the recent Decadal Survey of Planetary Science. However, an affordable program to carry this out has not been defined. This paper describes a study that examined use of emerging commercial capabilities to land the sample return elements, with the goal of reducing mission cost. A team at NASA Ames examined the feasibility of the following scenario for MSR: A Falcon Heavy launcher injects a SpaceX Dragon crew capsule and trunk onto a Trans Mars Injection trajectory. The capsule is modified to carry all the hardware needed to return samples collected on Mars including a Mars Ascent Vehicle (MAV), an Earth Return Vehicle (ERV) and Sample Collection and Storage hardware. The Dragon descends to land on the surface of Mars using SuperSonic Retro Propulsion (SSRP) as described by Braun and Manning [IEEEAC paper 0076, 2005]. Samples are acquired and deliverd to the MAV by a prelanded asset, possibly the proposed 2020 rover. After samples are obtained and stored in the ERV, the MAV launches the sample-containing ERV from the surface of Mars. We examined cases where the ERV is delivered to either low Mars orbit (LMO), C3 = 0 (Mars escape), or an intermediate energy state. The ERV then provides the rest of the energy (delta V) required to perform trans-Earth injection (TEI), cruise, and insertion into a Moon-trailing Earth Orbit (MTEO). A later mission, possibly a crewed Dragon launched by a Falcon Heavy (not part of the current study) retrieves the sample container, packages the sample, and performs a controlled Earth re-entry to prevent Mars materials from accidentally contaminating Earth. The key analysis methods used in the study employed a set of parametric mass estimating relationships (MERs) and standard aerospace analysis software codes modified for the MAV class of launch vehicle to determine the range of performance parameters that produced converged spacecraft designs capable of meeting mission requirements. Subsystems modeled in this study included structures, power system, propulsion system, nose fairing, thermal insulation, actuation devices, and GN&C. Best practice application of loads and design margins for all resources were used. Both storable and cryogenic propellant systems were examined. The landed mass and lander capsule size provide boundary conditions for the MAV design and packaging. We estimated the maximum mass the Dragon capsule is capable of landing. This and the volume capability to store the MAV was deduced from publically available data from SpaceX as well as our own engineering and aerodynamic estimates. Minimum gross-liftoff mass (GLOM) for the MAV were obtained for configurations that used pump-fed storable bi-propellant rocket engines for both the MAV and the ERV stage. The GLOM required fits within our internal estimate of the mass that Dragon can land at low elevation/optimal seasons on Mars. Based on the analysis, we show that a single Mars launch sample return mission is feasible using current commercial capabilities to deliver the return spacecraft assets.

Mars Ascent Vehicle (MAV)↗
NASA NTRS1972

Study of radioisotope safety devices for electric propulsion system, Volume 1: Summary report

A new reference design was prepared for the 5 kW(e) thermionic power supply. The safety equipment in this design is a passive containment system which does not rely on the operation of any mechanisms such as a launch escape rocket or deployment of parachutes. It includes: (1) a blast shield to protect against the explosion of the launch vehicle; (2) a combination of refractory thermal insulation and heat storage material to protect against a sustained launch pad fire; (3) a reentry body with a spherical nose and a large conical flare at the aft end to stabilize the reentry attitude and lower the terminal velocity in air; (4) composite graphite thermal protection to sustain the reentry heat pulse; (5) crushable honeycomb behind the nose to limit the deceleration of the radioisotope source due to impact on land at terminal velocity; (6) a double-walled secondary containment vessel surrounding the isotopic capsules; (7) neutron shielding to reduce external dose rates; (8) an auxiliary cooling system employing redundant heat pipes to remove the radioactive decay heat from the heat source and reject it to the surroundings or to a forced convection loop.

Bradshaw, G. B.↗
NASA NTRS2005

Experiments With Small Animals Rarely Go This Well

In the mid-1950s, a young U.S. Air Force engineer named Clark Beck began work with what is now one of NASA s most prolific spinoffs, the radiant barrier technology. Beck s work involved creating materials that could withstand the immense heat created by passage through the Earth s atmosphere. He was working on structures and resources that could withstand the fluctuations in temperature created by a skip reentry, where a craft would skip along the surface of the atmosphere, gradually making inroads sufficient for reentry, a process that took the craft from extreme heat to frigid cold every few seconds. The material also needed to withstand millions of pounds of pressure per inch of bending without twisting, the simulated force of reentry. Without reflective material, the craft would get what Beck refers to as "red hot wings," and without the required flexibility, the craft would break apart. One result of Beck s work was the discovery of the useful properties of radiant barrier material. The Space Agency used Beck s design work for the materials that went into building the space capsules, heat resistant instrument panels, and, in conjunction with the Air Force, an early spacecraft prototype, the DynaSoar, that looks remarkably similar to the present-day Space Shuttle. NASA used the thin, shiny, silver material to protect the first space explorers from the harsh environment of space, which could range from -460 F to 541 F. If the engineers had used conventional insulation for the space suits, the fabric would have been 7-feet thick, a little awkward for even the most nimble of astronauts to maneuver. Radiant barrier technology was clearly the solution. It reflected the astronaut s body heat back into the suit to keep him warm, while at the same time reflecting radiant energy from the Sun outward to keep him cool. The radiant barrier material reflected more than 95 percent of the radiant energy away from the wearer, while tiny holes in the fabric allowed moisture to escape and longer heat waves to get through. This amazing fabric had an added benefit that made it ideal for its space-bound application: It weighed only 17 pounds per 1,000 square feet. NASA has used this material ever since the Gemini and Apollo missions, on virtually all of its spacecraft, and even on unmanned missions as thermal protection for instruments.

Source record↗
DOE OSTI2026

Directional dependence of equilibrated TLD-400 chips in multiple radiation fields

Fielding of thermoluminescent dosimeters (TLDs) for measurement of photon radiation dose in experiments is the standard practice for γ-irradiation facilities, pulsed power x-ray facilities, and reactor facilities at Sandia National Laboratories (SNL). Due to the high-dose experimental conditions and the mixed ( 1 n, γ) fields in these facilities, SNL radiation metrologists have historically used CaF 2 :Mn TLDs (also known as TLD-400). Recent inquiries to the radiation metrology staff have raised concerns that the aluminum-equilibrated TLD-400 chips may exhibit a directionally dependent response. The metrologists were asked whether the dose measured by the chip may be impacted by the angle of incidence on the equilibrated TLD. To provide a thorough answer to this query, a set of adjoint Monte Carlo radiation transport calculations was performed for three different equilibrated TLDs as well as bare TLD chips using the Integrated Tiger Series (ITS) code. The key feature of the adjoint calculations performed in this study is that each photon escaping the modeled geometry was tallied into angular bins to provide information on both the energy and angular dependence of the equilibrated chip. After the adjoint Monte Carlo calculations were completed, the resulting energy-dependent response function for each angular bin was convolved with multiple photon energy spectra representing various radiation facilities at SNL. The radiation facilities selected for analysis span a range of photon energies from approximately 1 keV up to approximately 20 MeV. Thus, the presented results are applicable to a wide variety of radiation facilities around the world. Although the bare TLD-400 chip was expected to display the largest variation due to the photon angle of impact on the dosimeter, the dosimeter with the thinnest aluminum equilibrator (SNL thin equilibrated TLD-400) was determined to have the biggest differential between the impact angle with the maximum dose ( D max ) and the impact angle with the minimum dose ( D min ). However, the SNL normal equilibrated TLD-400 chip demonstrated a dramatic reduction in that differential between maximum and minimum dose angles. The reduction in this differential is one of the dominant factors in experimenters’ choice to field these dosimeters at SNL radiation facilities. The results from the PNNL (Hanford) energy-flattening field capsule are consistent with the previous publications. The differential dose responses due to the photon impact angle indicate that experimenters should strive to field their TLD-400 dosimeters in a consistent manner to avoid additional uncertainty in the measurements based on dosimeter orientation.

Adjoint radiation transport↗
NASA NTRS2016

Heart Rate Responses to Unaided Orion Side Hatch Egress in the Neutral Buoyancy Laboratory

NASA is developing the Orion capsule as a vehicle for transporting crewmembers to and from the International Space Station (ISS) and for future human space exploration missions. Orion and other commercial vehicles are designed to splash down in the ocean where nominally support personnel will assist crewmembers in egressing the vehicle. However, off-nominal scenarios will require crewmembers to egress the vehicle unaided, deploy survival equipment, and ingress a life raft. PURPOSE: To determine the heart rate (HR) responses to unaided Orion side hatch egress and raft ingress as a part of the NASA Crew Survival Engineering Team's evaluation of the PORT Orion mockup in the Neutral Buoyancy Laboratory (NBL). METHODS: Nineteen test subjects, including four astronauts (N=19, 14 males/5 females, 38.6+/-8.4 y, 174.4+/-9.6 cm, 75.7+/-13.1 kg), completed a graded maximal test on a cycle ergometer to determine VO2peak and HRpeak and were divided into five crews of four members each; one subject served on two crews. Each crew was required to deploy a life raft, egress the Orion vehicle from the side hatch, and ingress the life raft with two 8 kg emergency packs per crew. Each crew performed this activity one to three times; a total of ten full egresses were completed. Subjects wore a suit that was similar in form, mass, and function to the Modified Advanced Crew Escape Suit (MACES) including helmet, gloves, boots, supplemental O2 bottles, and a CO2-inflated life preserver (approx.18 kg); subjects began each trial seated supine in the PORT Orion mockup with seat belts and mockup O2 and communication connections and ended each trial with all four crewmembers inside the life raft. RESULTS: VO2peak was 40.8+/-6.8 mL/kg/min (3.1+/-0.7 L/min); HRpeak was 181+/-10 bpm. Total egress time across trials was 5.0+/-1.6 min (range: 2.8-8.0 min); all subjects were able to successfully complete all trials. Average maximum HR at activity start, at the hatch opening, in the water, and in the raft, was 108, 137, 147, and 153 bpm, respectively; these values corresponded to 59+/-10%, 73+/-8%, 82+/-3%, and 84+/-6% of HRpeak, respectively. The highest HRs were seen after raft ingress and ranged from 72-99% HRpeak. Across all trials, cumulative averages of 5.4, 3.0, 1.1, and 0.2 min were spent at HRs >60%, >70%, >80%, and >90% HRpeak, respectively. CONCLUSION: Unaided Orion side hatch egress in the NBL is a relatively short-duration activity that elicits a high HR response for several min. Although all crewmembers successfully completed this activity, additional factors such as high seas, poor visibility, an incapacitated crewmember, neurovestibular perturbation, and neuromuscular deconditioning characteristic of a true operational environment may increase the physiologic demand (or decrease crewmembers' physiologic capacity) of unaided Orion side hatch egress. Additionally, landing conditions may require the crewmembers to egress from the top hatch, which is expected to be even more physiologically demanding; this condition will be evaluated in subsequent collaborative testing with the NASA Crew Survival Engineering Team.

English, Kirk L.↗
NASA NTRS2015

Asteroid Redirect Crewed Mission Space Suit and EVA System Maturation

The Asteroid Redirect Crewed Mission (ARCM) requires a Launch/Entry/Abort (LEA) suit capability and short duration Extra Vehicular Activity (EVA) capability from the Orion spacecraft. For this mission, the pressure garment that was selected, for both functions, is the Modified Advanced Crew Escape Suit (MACES) with EVA enhancements and the life support option that was selected is the Exploration Portable Life Support System (PLSS). The proposed architecture was found to meet the mission constraints, but much more work is required to determine the details of the required suit upgrades, the integration with the PLSS, and the rest of the tools and equipment required to accomplish the mission. This work has continued over the last year to better define the operations and hardware maturation of these systems. EVA simulations have been completed in the NBL and interfacing options have been prototyped and analyzed with testing planned for late 2014. For NBL EVA simulations, in 2013, components were procured to allow in-house build up for four new suits with mobility enhancements built into the arms. Boots outfitted with clips that fit into foot restraints have also been added to the suit and analyzed for possible loads. Major suit objectives accomplished this year in testing include: evaluation of mobility enhancements, ingress/egress of foot restraint, use of foot restraint for worksite stability, ingress/egress of Orion hatch with PLSS mockup, and testing with two crew members in the water at one time to evaluate the crew's ability to help one another. Major tool objectives accomplished this year include using various other methods for worksite stability, testing new methods for asteroid geologic sampling and improving the fidelity of the mockups and crew equipment. These tests were completed on a medium fidelity capsule mockup, asteroid vehicle mockup, and asteroid mockups that were more accurate for an asteroid type EVA than previous tests. Another focus was the design and fabrication of the interface between the MACES and the PLSS. The MACES was not designed to interface with a PLSS, hence an interface kit must accommodate the unique design qualities of the MACES and provide the necessary life support function connections to the PLSS. A prototype interface kit for MACES to PLSS has been designed and fabricated. Unmanned and manned testing of the interface will show the usability of the kit while wearing a MACES. The testing shows viability of the kit approach as well as the operations concept. The design will be vetted through suit and PLSS experts and, with the findings from the testing, the best path forward will be determined. As the Asteroid Redirect Mission matures, the suit/life support portion of the mission will mature along with it and EVA Tools & Equipment can be iterated to accommodate the overall mission objectives and compromises inherent in EVA Suit optimization. The goal of the EVA architecture for ARCM is to continue to build on the previously developed technologies and lessons learned, and accomplish the ARCM EVAs while providing a stepping stone to future missions and destinations.

Bowie, Jonathan T.↗