Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “launch vehicle systems performance”

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 55 records · Page 3
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS1974

Earth Observatory Satellite system definition study. Report 1: Orbit/launch vehicle trade-off studies and recommendations

A summary of the constraints and requirements on the Earth Observatory Satellite (EOS-A) orbit and launch vehicle analysis is presented. The propulsion system (hydrazine) and the launch vehicle (Delta 2910) selected for EOS-A are examined. The rationale for the selection of the recommended orbital altitude of 418 nautical miles is explained. The original analysis was based on the EOS-A mission with the Thematic Mapper and the High Resolution Pointable Imager. The impact of the revised mission model is analyzed to show how the new mission model affects the previously defined propulsion system, launch vehicle, and orbit. A table is provided to show all aspects of the EOS multiple mission concepts. The subjects considered include the following: (1) mission orbit analysis, (2) spacecraft parametric performance analysis, (3) launch system performance analysis, and (4) orbits/launch vehicle selection.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS1994

A Segmented Ion Engine Design for Solar Elctric Propulsion Systems

Solar electric xenon ion propulsion can be used to deliver a substantial quantity of science instruments in rendezvous missions to small bodies such as comets and main belt asteroids with an Atlas IIAS launch vehicle. The performance of the ion propulsion system enables it to deliver typically more than twice the total mass to the destination in less than half the trip time relative to a chemical/ballistic approach using the same launch vehicle.

electron bombardment↗
NASA NTRS1999

Development of Response Surface Models for Rapid Analysis & Multidisciplinary Optimization of Launch Vehicle Design Concepts

Multdisciplinary design optimization (MDO) is an important step in the design and evaluation of launch vehicles, since it has a significant impact on performance and lifecycle cost. The objective in MDO is to search the design space to determine the values of design parameters that optimize the performance characteristics subject to system constraints. Vehicle Analysis Branch (VAB) at NASA Langley Research Center has computerized analysis tools in many of the disciplines required for the design and analysis of launch vehicles. Vehicle performance characteristics can be determined by the use of these computerized analysis tools. The next step is to optimize the system performance characteristics subject to multidisciplinary constraints. However, most of the complex sizing and performance evaluation codes used for launch vehicle design are stand-alone tools, operated by disciplinary experts. They are, in general, difficult to integrate and use directly for MDO. An alternative has been to utilize response surface methodology (RSM) to obtain polynomial models that approximate the functional relationships between performance characteristics and design variables. These approximation models, called response surface models, are then used to integrate the disciplines using mathematical programming methods for efficient system level design analysis, MDO and fast sensitivity simulations. A second-order response surface model of the form given has been commonly used in RSM since in many cases it can provide an adequate approximation especially if the region of interest is sufficiently limited.

Unal, Resit↗
NASA NTRS2005

STS-114: Discovery L-1 Countdown Status Briefing STS-114/Discovery L-2 Countdown Status Briefing

Bruce Buckingham from NASA Public Affairs introduces Jeff Spaulding, NASA Test Director and Kathy Winters, Shuttle Weather Officer in this L-2 countdown status briefing. Spaulding gives the Space Shuttle launch countdown status before lift-off on July 26th. He expresses that vehicle launch and ground systems are performing well and that there are no significant issues in preparation for the launch. The crew arrival time to the launching pad and the launch window for Discovery is also discussed. He ends his countdown status by expressing that the Discovery Orbiter is the safest Shuttle to date. Kathy Winters gives her weather forecast for the launch day. She presents a satellite picture of tropical storm Franklin and charts showing the STS-114 Tanking Forecast, Launch Forecast, Solid Rocket Booster (SRB) recovery, Continental United States (CONUS) launch, Transoceanic Abort Landing (TAL) launch, 24 and 48 Hour Delay, CONUS 24 and 48 hour delay, and TAL 24 and 48 hr delay. Questions from the news media about the mood of the test engineers as launch day is approached are answered. Jessica Rye from NASA Public Affairs introduces Pete Nikolento, NASA Test Director; Scott Higgenbotham, STS-114 Payload Mission Manager; and Kathy Winters, Space Shuttle Weather Officer in this L-1 Countdown Status Briefing. Nikolento expresses that the completion of the main engine system check-outs and servicing of on-board fuel-cell reactants have been completed. He also talks about pad closeouts and external cryogenic loads prior to launch. Scott Higgenbotham gives the payload status and Kathy Winters talks about her weather forecast for launch. Questions about the ecosensors, TAL sites, weather forecast and thoughts about return to flight are addressed.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS2018

6DOF Testing of the SLS Inertial Navigation Unit

The Navigation System on the NASA Space Launch System (SLS) Block 1 vehicle performs initial alignment of the Inertial Navigation System (INS) navigation frame through gyrocompass alignment (GCA). Because the navigation architecture for the SLS Block 1 vehicle is a purely inertial system, the accuracy of the achieved orbit relative to mission requirements is very sensitive to initial alignment accuracy. The assessment of this sensitivity and many others via simulation is a part of the SLS Model-Based Design and Model-Based Requirements approach. As a part of the aforementioned, 6DOF Monte Carlo simulation is used in large part to develop and demonstrate verification of program requirements. To facilitate this and the GN&C flight software design process, an SLS-Program-controlled Design Math Model (DMM) of the SLS INS was developed by the SLS Navigation Team. The SLS INS model implements all of the key functions of the hardware-namely, GCA, inertial navigation, and FDIR (Fault Detection, Isolation, and Recovery)-in support of SLS GN&C design requirements verification. Despite the strong sensitivity to initial alignment, GCA accuracy requirements were not verified by test due to program cost and schedule constraints. Instead, the system relies upon assessments performed using the SLS INS model. In order to verify SLS program requirements by analysis, the SLS INS model is verified and validated against flight hardware. In lieu of direct testing of GCA accuracy in support of requirement verification, the SLS Navigation Team proposed and conducted an engineering test to, among other things, validate the GCA performance and overall behavior of the SLS INS model through comparison with test data. This paper will detail dynamic hardware testing of the SLS INS, conducted by the SLS Navigation Team at Marshall Space Flight Center's 6DOF Table Facility, in support of GCA performance characterization and INS model validation. A 6-DOF motion platform was used to produce 6DOF pad twist and sway dynamics while a simulated SLS flight computer communicated with the INS. Tests conducted include an evaluation of GCA algorithm robustness to increasingly dynamic pad environments, an examination of GCA algorithm stability and accuracy over long durations, and a long-duration static test to gather enough data for Allan Variance analysis. Test setup, execution, and data analysis will be discussed, including analysis performed in support of SLS INS model validation.

Geohagan, Kevin↗
NASA NTRS2018

6DOF Testing of the SLS Inertial Navigation Unit

The Navigation System on the NASA Space Launch System (SLS) Block 1 vehicle performs initial alignment of the Inertial Navigation System (INS) navigation frame through gyrocompass alignment (GCA). In lieu of direct testing of GCA accuracy in support of requirement verification, the SLS Navigation Team proposed and conducted an engineering test to, among other things, validate the GCA performance and overall behavior of the SLS INS model through comparison with test data. This paper will detail dynamic hardware testing of the SLS INS, conducted by the SLS Navigation Team at Marshall Space Flight Center's 6DOF Table Facility, in support of GCA performance characterization and INS model validation. A 6-DOF motion platform was used to produce 6DOF pad twist and sway dynamics while a simulated SLS flight computer communicated with the INS. Tests conducted include an evaluation of GCA algorithm robustness to increasingly dynamic pad environments, an examination of GCA algorithm stability and accuracy over long durations, and a long-duration static test to gather enough data for Allan Variance analysis. Test setup, execution, and data analysis will be discussed, including analysis performed in support of SLS INS model validation.

Geohagan, Kevin W.↗
NASA NTRS2011

Mars Ascent Vehicle Gross Lift-off Mass Sensitivities for Robotic Mars Sample Return

The Mars ascent vehicle is a critical element of the robotic Mars Sample Return (MSR) mission. The Mars ascent vehicle must be developed to survive a variety of conditions including the trans-Mars journey, descent through the Martian atmosphere and the harsh Martian surface environments while maintaining the ability to deliver its payload to a low Mars orbit. The primary technology challenge of developing the Mars ascent vehicle system is designing for all conditions while ensuring the mass limitations of the entry descent and landing system are not exceeded. The NASA In-Space Propulsion technology project has initiated the development of Mars ascent vehicle technologies with propulsion system performance and launch environments yet to be defined. To support the project s evaluation and development of various technology options the sensitivity of the Mars ascent vehicle gross lift-off mass to engine performance, inert mass, target orbits, and launch conditions has been completed with the results presented herein.

Dux, Ian J.↗
NASA NTRS1999

Development of Response Surface Models for Rapid Analysis and Multidisciplinary Optimization of Launch Vehicle Design Concepts

Multidisciplinary design optimization (MDO) is an important step in the design and evaluation of launch vehicles, since it has a significant impact on performance and lifecycle cost. The objective in MDO is to search the design space to determine the values of design parameters that optimize the performance characteristics subject to system constraints. Vehicle Analysis Branch (VAB) at NASA Langley Research Center has computerized analysis tools in many of the disciplines required for the design and analysis of launch vehicles. Vehicle performance characteristics can be determined by the use of these computerized analysis tools. The next step is to optimize the system performance characteristics subject to multidisciplinary constraints. However, most of the complex sizing and performance evaluation codes used for launch vehicle design are stand-alone tools, operated by disciplinary experts. They are, in general, difficult to integrate and use directly for MDO.

Unal, Resit↗
NASA NTRS2008

Cryogenic Moisture Uptake in Foam Insulation for Space Launch Vehicles

Rigid polyurethane foams and rigid polyisocyanurate foams (spray-on foam insulation), like those flown on Shuttle, Delta IV, and will be flown on Ares-I and Ares-V, can gain an extraordinary amount of water when under cryogenic conditions for several hours. These foams, when exposed for eight hours to launch pad environments on one side and cryogenic temperature on the other, increase their weight from 35 to 80 percent depending on the duration of weathering or aging. This effect translates into several thousand pounds of additional weight for space vehicles at lift-off. A new cryogenic moisture uptake apparatus was designed to determine the amount of water/ice taken into the specimen under actual-use propellant loading conditions. This experimental study included the measurement of the amount of moisture uptake within different foam materials. Results of testing using both aged specimens and weathered specimens are presented. To better understand cryogenic foam insulation performance, cryogenic moisture testing is shown to be essential. The implications for future launch vehicle thermal protection system design and flight performance are discussed.

Fesmire, James E.↗
NASA NTRS2016

CASIS Fact Sheet: Hardware and Facilities

Vencore is a proven information solutions, engineering, and analytics company that helps our customers solve their most complex challenges. For more than 40 years, we have designed, developed and delivered mission-critical solutions as our customers' trusted partner. The Engineering Services Contract, or ESC, provides engineering and design services to the NASA organizations engaged in development of new technologies at the Kennedy Space Center. Vencore is the ESC prime contractor, with teammates that include Stinger Ghaffarian Technologies, Sierra Lobo, Nelson Engineering, EASi, and Craig Technologies. The Vencore team designs and develops systems and equipment to be used for the processing of space launch vehicles, spacecraft, and payloads. We perform flight systems engineering for spaceflight hardware and software; develop technologies that serve NASA's mission requirements and operations needs for the future. Our Flight Payload Support (FPS) team at Kennedy Space Center (KSC) provides engineering, development, and certification services as well as payload integration and management services to NASA and commercial customers. Our main objective is to assist principal investigators (PIs) integrate their science experiments into payload hardware for research aboard the International Space Station (ISS), commercial spacecraft, suborbital vehicles, parabolic flight aircrafts, and ground-based studies. Vencore's FPS team is AS9100 certified and a recognized implementation partner for the Center for Advancement of Science in Space (CASIS

Solomon, Michael R.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Effect of Engine Thrust and Isp Tradeoffs and Alternate Propellants on ΔV Budget and Architecture Mass for 1st Generation Nuclear Thermal Propulsion Flight Test Systems

Following the first Nuclear Thermal Propulsion (NTP) system test, also known as DRACO, the next NTP system to be developed would be the 1st Generation NTP system. An analysis was conducted to determine the performance of different vehicle configurations utilizing hydrogen (H-NTP), ammonia (A-NTP), and methane (M-NTP) as propellants launched onboard commercial launch vehicles. This was enabled by a quasi-steady-state power balance engine model and vehicle component physics that sized the vehicle system using Master Equipment List (MEL) parameters. The analysis considered configuration cases outlined by a matrix of different mission classes and vehicle configurations that covered the design space of the 1st Generation NTP system to explore various propellant options, engine architectures, and mission scopes. Four mission classes were evaluated which included single burn missions performing maneuvers having a ΔV of 1 km/s and 2.5 km/s followed by 2-burn and 4-burn missions that aimed to exhaust the launch vehicles volume or mass limitations. In all cases, the NTP systems with the lowest thrust class had the longest burn time of which A-NTP and M-NTP systems provided the longest and shortest burn times depending on the launch vehicle used while H-NTP systems tended to cluster together in the middle. Longer burn times could be useful as a testing platform to increase the time for data accumulation. Across the multi-burn cases, H-NTP systems were found to be volume limited while A-NTP and M-NTP systems were mass limited. Both single burn missions showed that A-NTP configurations provided the lowest dry mass given that ammonia had the highest density with comparable performance to M-NTP systems and no requirement for cryocoolers. The results showed that beyond the propellant selection type, the launch vehicle selection, which included Starship, New Glenn, Vulcan, Falcon 9 (recoverable), and Falcon Heavy (recoverable), was a primary driving factor in the test vehicle’s capabilities. Trends were determined based on a set of dimensionless parameters that included the mass ratio of inert mass to initial wetted mass, ratio of specific impulse to burn time, and a dimensionless engine parameter (ratio of impulse to engine momentum). These relationships found the “knees-in-the-curves” that could be a significant point of reference for the designer as they indicate a change in the trend which is located at a specific impulse to burn time ratio of 1, a mass ratio of 0.6, and an engine performance parameter of 4. This study did not attempt to make a recommendation rather provide the tools for the reader to select their own configuration based on their needs.

Propellant↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Effect of Engine Thrust and Isp Tradeoffs and Alternate Propellants on ΔV Budget and Architecture Mass for 1st Generation Nuclear Thermal Propulsion Flight Test Systems

Following the first Nuclear Thermal Propulsion (NTP) system test, also known as DRACO, the next NTP system to be developed would be the 1st Generation NTP system. An analysis was conducted to determine the performance of different vehicle configurations utilizing hydrogen (H-NTP), ammonia (A-NTP), and methane (M-NTP) as propellants launched onboard commercial launch vehicles. This was enabled by a quasi-steady-state power balance engine model and vehicle component physics that sized the vehicle system using Master Equipment List (MEL) parameters. The analysis considered configuration cases outlined by a matrix of different mission classes and vehicle configurations that covered the design space of the 1st Generation NTP system to explore various propellant options, engine architectures, and mission scopes. Four mission classes were evaluated which included single burn missions performing maneuvers having a ΔV of 1 km/s and 2.5 km/s followed by 2-burn and 4-burn missions that aimed to exhaust the launch vehicles volume or mass limitations. In all cases, the NTP systems with the lowest thrust class had the longest burn time of which A-NTP and M-NTP systems provided the longest and shortest burn times depending on the launch vehicle used while H-NTP systems tended to cluster together in the middle. Longer burn times could be useful as a testing platform to increase the time for data accumulation. Across the multi-burn cases, H-NTP systems were found to be volume limited while A-NTP and M-NTP systems were mass limited. Both single burn missions showed that A-NTP configurations provided the lowest dry mass given that ammonia had the highest density with comparable performance to M-NTP systems and no requirement for cryocoolers. The results showed that beyond the propellant selection type, the launch vehicle selection, which included Starship, New Glenn, Vulcan, Falcon 9 (recoverable), and Falcon Heavy (recoverable), was a primary driving factor in the test vehicle’s capabilities. Trends were determined based on a set of dimensionless parameters that included the mass ratio of inert mass to initial wetted mass, ratio of specific impulse to burn time, and a dimensionless engine parameter (ratio of impulse to engine momentum). These relationships found the “knees-in-the-curves” that could be a significant point of reference for the designer as they indicate a change in the trend which is located at a specific impulse to burn time ratio of 1, a mass ratio of 0.6, and an engine performance parameter of 4. This study did not attempt to make a recommendation rather provide the tools for the reader to select their own configuration based on their needs.

Propellant↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Effect of Engine Thrust and Isp Tradeoffs and Alternate Propellants on ΔV Budget and Architecture Mass for 1st Generation Nuclear Thermal Propulsion Flight Test Systems

Following the first Nuclear Thermal Propulsion (NTP) system test, also known as DRACO, the next NTP system to be developed would be the 1st Generation NTP system. An analysis was conducted to determine the performance of different vehicle configurations utilizing hydrogen (H-NTP), ammonia (A-NTP), and methane (M-NTP) as propellants launched onboard commercial launch vehicles. This was enabled by a quasi-steady-state power balance engine model and vehicle component physics that sized the vehicle system using Master Equipment List (MEL) parameters. The analysis considered configuration cases outlined by a matrix of different mission classes and vehicle configurations that covered the design space of the 1st Generation NTP system to explore various propellant options, engine architectures, and mission scopes. Four mission classes were evaluated which included single burn missions performing maneuvers having a ΔV of 1 km/s and 2.5 km/s followed by 2-burn and 4-burn missions that aimed to exhaust the launch vehicles volume or mass limitations. In all cases, the NTP systems with the lowest thrust class had the longest burn time of which A-NTP and M-NTP systems provided the longest and shortest burn times depending on the launch vehicle used while H-NTP systems tended to cluster together in the middle. Longer burn times could be useful as a testing platform to increase the time for data accumulation. Across the multi-burn cases, H-NTP systems were found to be volume limited while A-NTP and M-NTP systems were mass limited. Both single burn missions showed that A-NTP configurations provided the lowest dry mass given that ammonia had the highest density with comparable performance to M-NTP systems and no requirement for cryocoolers. The results showed that beyond the propellant selection type, the launch vehicle selection, which included Starship, New Glenn, Vulcan, Falcon 9 (recoverable), and Falcon Heavy (recoverable), was a primary driving factor in the test vehicle’s capabilities. Trends were determined based on a set of dimensionless parameters that included the mass ratio of inert mass to initial wetted mass, ratio of specific impulse to burn time, and a dimensionless engine parameter (ratio of impulse to engine momentum). These relationships found the “knees-in-the-curves” that could be a significant point of reference for the designer as they indicate a change in the trend which is located at a specific impulse to burn time ratio of 1, a mass ratio of 0.6, and an engine performance parameter of 4. This study did not attempt to make a recommendation rather provide the tools for the reader to select their own configuration based on their needs.

Propellant↗
NASA NTRS2010

Modular Approach to Launch Vehicle Design Based on a Common Core Element

With a heavy lift launch vehicle as the centerpiece of our nation's next exploration architecture's infrastructure, the Advanced Concepts Office at NASA's Marshall Space Flight Center initiated a study to examine the utilization of elements derived from a heavy lift launch vehicle for other potential launch vehicle applications. The premise of this study is to take a vehicle concept, which has been optimized for Lunar Exploration, and utilize the core stage with other existing or near existing stages and boosters to determine lift capabilities for alternative missions. This approach not only yields a vehicle matrix with a wide array of capabilities, but also produces an evolutionary pathway to a vehicle family based on a minimum development and production cost approach to a launch vehicle system architecture, instead of a purely performance driven approach. The upper stages and solid rocket booster selected for this study were chosen to reflect a cross-section of: modified existing assets in the form of a modified Delta IV upper stage and Castor-type boosters; potential near term launch vehicle component designs including an Ares I upper stage and 5-segment boosters; and longer lead vehicle components such as a Shuttle External Tank diameter upper stage. The results of this approach to a modular launch system are given in this paper.

Creech, Dennis M.↗
NASA NTRS1987

Orbital Spacecraft Consumables Resupply System (OSCRS): Monopropellant application to space station and OMV automatic refueling impacts of an ELV launch, volume 4

The use of orbital spacecraft consumables resupply system (OSCRS) at the Space Station is investigated, its use with the orbital maneuvering vehicle, and launch of the OSCRS on an expendable launch vehicles. A system requirements evaluation was performed initially to identify any unique requirements that would impact the design of OSCRS when used at the Space Station. Space Station documents were reviewed to establish requirements and to identify interfaces between the OSCRS, Shuttle, and Space Station, especially the Servicing Facility. The interfaces between OSCRS and the Shuttle consists of an avionics interface for command and control and a structural interface for launch support and for grappling with the Shuttle Remote Manipulator System. For use of the OSCRS at the Space Station, three configurations were evaluated using the results of the interface definition to increase the efficiency of OSCRS and to decrease the launch weight by Station-basing specific OSCRS subsystems. A modular OSCRS was developed in which the major subsystems were Station-based where possible. The configuration of an OSCRS was defined for transport of water to the Space Station.

Source record↗