Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “retirement”

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 NTRS1999

Aerospace Safety Advisory Panel

This report covers the activities of the Aerospace Safety Advisory Panel (ASAP) for calendar year 1998-a year of sharp contrasts and significant successes at NASA. The year opened with the announcement of large workforce cutbacks. The slip in the schedule for launching the International Space Station (ISS) created a five-month hiatus in Space Shuttle launches. This slack period ended with the successful and highly publicized launch of the STS-95 mission. As the year closed, ISS assembly began with the successful orbiting and joining of the Functional Cargo Block (FGB), Zarya, from Russia and the Unity Node from the United States. Throughout the year, the Panel maintained its scrutiny of NASA's safety processes. Of particular interest were the potential effects on safety of workforce reductions and the continued transition of functions to the Space Flight Operations Contractor. Attention was also given to the risk management plans of the Aero-Space Technology programs, including the X-33, X-34, and X-38. Overall, the Panel concluded that safety is well served for the present. The picture is not as clear for the future. Cutbacks have limited the depth of talent available. In many cases, technical specialties are 'one deep.' The extended hiring freeze has resulted in an older workforce that will inevitably suffer significant departures from retirements in the near future. The resulting 'brain drain' could represent a future safety risk unless appropriate succession planning is started expeditiously. This and other topics are covered in the section addressing workforce. The major NASA programs are also limited in their ability to plan property for the future. This is of particular concern for the Space Shuttle and ISS because these programs are scheduled to operate well into the next century. In the case of the Space Shuttle, beneficial and mandatory safety and operational upgrades are being delayed because of a lack of sufficient present funding. Likewise, the ISS has little flexibility to begin long lead-time items for upgrades or contingency planning. For example, the section on computer hardware and software contains specific findings related to required longer range safety-related actions. NASA can be proud of its accomplishments this past year, but must remain ever vigilant, particularly as ISS assembly begins to accelerate. The Panel will continue to focus on both the short- and long-term aspects of risk management and safety planning. This task continues to be made manageable and productive by the excellent cooperation the Panel receives from both NASA and its contractors. Particular emphasis will continue to be directed to longer term workforce and program planning issues as well as the immediate risks associated with ISS assembly and the initial flights of the X-33 and X-34. Section 2 of this report presents specific findings and recommendations generated by ASAP activities during 1998. Section 3 contains more detailed information in support of these findings and recommendations. Appendix A is a current roster of Panel members, consultants, and staff. Appendix B contains NASA's response to the findings and recommendations from the 1997 ASAP Annual Report. Appendix C details the fact-finding activities of the Panel in 1998. During the year, Mr. Richard D. Blomberg was elected chair of the Panel and Vice Admiral (VADM) Robert F Dunn was elected deputy chair. VADM Bernard M. Kauderer moved from consultant to member. Mr. Charles J. Donlan retired from the Panel after many years of meritorious service. Ms. Shirley C. McCarty and Mr. Robert L. ('Hoot') Gibson joined the Panel as consultants.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS2002

Knowledge Preservation for Design of Rocket Systems

An engineer at NASA Lewis RC presented a challenge to us at Southern University. Our response to that challenge, stated circa 1993, has evolved into the Knowledge Preservation Project which is here reported. The stated problem was to capture some of the knowledge of retiring NASA engineers and make it useful to younger engineers via computers. We evolved that initial challenge to this - design a system of tools such that, with this system, people might efficiently capture and make available via commonplace computers, deep knowledge of retiring NASA engineers. In the process of proving some of the concepts of this system, we would (and did) capture knowledge from some specific engineers and, so, meet the original challenge along the way to meeting the new. Some of the specific knowledge acquired, particularly that on the RL- 10 engine, was directly relevant to design of rocket engines. We considered and rejected some of the techniques popular in the days we began - specifically "expert systems" and "oral histories". We judged that these old methods had too high a cost per sentence preserved. That cost could be measured in hours of labor of a "knowledge professional". We did spend, particularly in the grant preceding this one, some time creating a couple of "concept maps", one of the latest ideas of the day, but judged this also to be costly in time of a specially trained knowledge-professional. We reasoned that the cost in specialized labor could be lowered if less time were spent being selective about sentences from the engineers and in crafting replacements for those sentences. The trade-off would seem to be that our set of sentences would be less dense in information, but we found a computer-based way around this seeming defect. Our plan, details of which we have been carrying out, was to find methods of extracting information from experts which would be capable of gaining cooperation, and interest, of senior engineers and using their time in a way they would find worthy (and, so, they would give more of their time and recruit time of other engineers as well). We studied these four ways of creating text: 1) the old way, via interviews and discussions - one of our team working with one expert, 2) a group-discussion led by one of the experts themselves and on a topic which inspires interaction of the experts, 3) a spoken dissertation by one expert practiced in giving talks, 4) expropriating, and modifying for our system, some existing reports (such as "oral histories" from the Smithsonian Institution).

Moreman, Douglas↗
NASA NTRS1992

The Many Dimensions of Program Management

For the purposes of this paper, program refers to a collection of activities or projects which must be performed according to a plan or schedule. The Space Exploration Initiative within the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) is an example. Dimensionality refers to both the various perspectives of a program and to the components within that perspective. It is, thus, appropriate to think of dimensions of dimensionality. For example, one dimension or perspective of a program is the projects which perform the program. Within the project dimension, the individual projects are the components of that dimensionality. The number of projects defines the spatial dimensionality of the project dimension. Thus, each perspective or dimension has a dimensionality of its own. The structure and associated values of all the various perspectives of a program define the program. A project refers to the collection of activities required to conceive, sell, design, develop, evaluate, produce, operate, support, evolve, and retire a given system. A project thus effects the life cycle of given system. A project is, thus, the system to conceive, sell, design, develop, evaluate, produce, operate, support, evolve, and retire a system. A program, thus, effects the life cycle of the collection of projects required to effect the collection of systems required to implement the program.

Dean, Edwin B.↗
NASA NTRS2015

Grainex Mar-M 247 Turbine Disk Life Study for NASA's High Temperature High Speed Turbine Seal Test Facility

An experimental and analytical fatigue life study was performed on the Grainex Mar-M 247 disk used in NASA s Turbine Seal Test Facility. To preclude fatigue cracks from growing to critical size in the NASA disk bolt holes due to cyclic loading at severe test conditions, a retirement-for-cause methodology was adopted to detect and monitor cracks within the bolt holes using eddy-current inspection. For the NASA disk material that was tested, the fatigue strain-life to crack initiation at a total strain of 0.5 percent, a minimum to maximum strain ratio of 0, and a bolt hole temperature of 649 C was calculated to be 665 cycles using -99.95 percent prediction intervals. The fatigue crack propagation life was calculated to be 367 cycles after implementing a safety factor of 2 on life. Thus, the NASA disk bolt hole total life or retirement life was determined to be 1032 cycles at a crack depth of 0.501 mm. An initial NASA disk bolt hole inspection at 665 cycles is suggested with 50 cycle inspection intervals thereafter to monitor fatigue crack growth.

Delgado, Irebert R.↗
NASA NTRS2006

NASA Crew Launch Vehicle Overview

The US. Vision for Space Exploration, announced January 2004, outlines the National Aeronautics and Space Administration s (NASA) strategic goals and objectives. These include: 1) Flying the Shuttle as safely as possible until its retirement, not later than 2010. 2) Bringing a new Crew Exploration Vehicle (CEV) into service as soon as possible after Shuttle retirement. 3) Developing a balanced overall program of science, exploration, and aeronautics at NASA, consistent with the redirection of the human spaceflight program to focus on exploration. 4) Completing the International Space Station (ISS) in a manner consistent with international partner commitments and the needs of human exploration. 5) Encouraging the pursuit of appropriate partnerships with the emerging commercial space sector. 6) Establishing a lunar return program having the maximum possible utility for later missions to Mars and other destinations. Following the confirmation of the new NASA Administrator in April 2005, the Agency commissioned a team of aerospace subject matter experts from government and industry to perform the Exploration Systems Architecture Study (ESAS), which provided in-depth information for selecting the follow-on launch vehicle designs to enable these goals, The ESAS team analyzed a number of potential launch systems, with a focus on: (1) a human-rated launch vehicle for crew transport and (2) a heavy lift launch vehicle (HLLV) to carry cargo. After several months of intense study utilizing technical performance, budget, and schedule objectives, the results showed that the optimum architecture to meet the challenge of safe, reliable crew transport is a two-stage variant of the Space Shuttle propulsion system - utilizing the reusable Solid Rocket Booster (SRB) as the first stage, along with a new upper stage that uses a derivative of the RS-25 Space Shuttle Main Engine to deliver 25 metric tons to low-Earth orbit. The CEV that this new Crew Launch Vehicle (CLV) lofts into space early next decade will initially ferry astronauts to the Space Station and be capable of carrying crews back to lunar orbit and of supporting missions to Mars orbit. The HLLV system will utilize the Shuttle External Tank combined with SRBs. The focus of this paper is on the CLV system, giving an overview of plans and progress to date.

Dumbacher, Daniel L.↗
NASA NTRS2006

NASA Exploration Launch Projects Overview: The Crew Launch Vehicle and the Cargo Launch Vehicle Systems

The U.S. Vision for Space Exploration (January 2004) serves as the foundation for the National Aeronautics and Space Administration's (NASA) strategic goals and objectives. As the NASA Administrator outlined during his confirmation hearing in April 2005, these include: 1) Flying the Space Shuttle as safely as possible until its retirement, not later than 2010. 2) Bringing a new Crew Exploration Vehicle (CEV) into service as soon as possible after Shuttle retirement. 3) Developing a balanced overall program of science, exploration, and aeronautics at NASA, consistent with the redirection of the human space flight program to focus on exploration. 4) Completing the International Space Station (ISS) in a manner consistent with international partner commitments and the needs of human exploration. 5) Encouraging the pursuit of appropriate partnerships with the emerging commercial space sector. 6) Establishing a lunar return program having the maximum possible utility for later missions to Mars and other destinations. In spring 2005, the Agency commissioned a team of aerospace subject matter experts to perform the Exploration Systems Architecture Study (ESAS). The ESAS team performed in-depth evaluations of a number of space transportation architectures and provided recommendations based on their findings? The ESAS analysis focused on a human-rated Crew Launch Vehicle (CLV) for astronaut transport and a heavy lift Cargo Launch Vehicle (CaLV) to carry equipment, materials, and supplies for lunar missions and, later, the first human journeys to Mars. After several months of intense study utilizing safety and reliability, technical performance, budget, and schedule figures of merit in relation to design reference missions, the ESAS design options were unveiled in summer 2005. As part of NASA's systems engineering approach, these point of departure architectures have been refined through trade studies during the ongoing design phase leading to the development phase that begins in 2008. Comprehensive reviews of engineering data and business assessments by both internal and independent reviewers serve as decision gates to ensure that systems can fully meet customer and stakeholder requirements. This paper provides the current CLV and CaLV configuration designs and gives examples of the progress being made during the first year of this significant effort. Safe, reliable, cost-effective space transportation systems are a foundational piece of America s future in space and the next step in realizing the plan for revitalizing lunar capabilities on the passageway to the human exploration of Mars. While building on legacy knowledge and heritage hardware for risk reduction, NASA will apply lessons learned from developing these new launch vehicles to the growth path for future missions. The elements for mission success and continued U.S. leadership in space have been assembled over the past year. As NASA designs and develops these two new systems over the next dozen years, visible progress, such as that reported in this paper, may sustain the national will to stay the course across political administrations and weather the inevitable trials that will be experienced during this challenging endeavor.

Snoddy, Jimmy R.↗
NASA NTRS2007

Reducing the Risk of Human Missions to Mars Through Testing

During the summer of 2002 the NASA Deputy Administrator charted an internal NASA planning group to develop the rationale for exploration beyond low-Earth orbit. This team, termed the Exploration Blueprint, performed architecture analyses to develop roadmaps for how to accomplish the first steps beyond Low-Earth Orbit through the human exploration of Mars. The previous NASA Exploration Team (NEXT) activities laid the foundation and framework for development of NASA s Integrated Space Plan. The reference missions resulting from the analysis performed by the Exploration Blueprint team formed the basis for requirement definition, systems development, technology roadmapping, and risk assessments for future human exploration beyond low-Earth orbit. Emphasis was placed on developing recommendations on what could be done now to effect future exploration activities. The Exploration Blueprint team embraced the Stepping Stone approach to exploration where human and robotic activities are conducted through progressive expansion outward beyond low- Earth orbit. Results from this study produced a long-term strategy for exploration with near-term implementation plans, program recommendations, and technology investments. Specific results included the development of a common exploration crew vehicle concept, a unified space nuclear strategy, focused bioastronautics research objectives, and an integrated human and robotic exploration strategy. Recommendations from the Exploration Blueprint included the endorsement of the Nuclear Systems Initiative, augmentation of the bioastronautics research, a focused space transportation program including heavy-lift launch and a common exploration vehicle design for ISS and exploration missions, as well as an integrated human and robotic exploration strategy for Mars. Following the results of the Exploration Blueprint study, the NASA Administrator has asked for a recommendation by June, 2003 on the next steps in human and robotic exploration in order to put into context an updated Integrated Space Transportation Plan (post- Columbia) and guide Agency planning. NASA was on the verge of committing significant funding in programs that would be better served if longer term goals were better known including the Orbital Space Plane, research on the ISS, National Aerospace Initiative, Shuttle Life Extension Program, Project Prometheus, as well as a wide range of technology development throughout the Agency. Much of the focus during this period was on integrating the results from the previous studies into more concrete implementation strategies in order to understand the relationship between NASA programs, timing, and resulting budgetary implications. This resulted in an integrated approach including lunar surface operations to retire risk of human Mars missions, maximum use of common and modular systems including what was termed the exploration transfer vehicle, Earth orbit and lunar surface demonstrations of long-life systems, collaboration of human and robotic missions to vastly increase mission return, and high-efficiency transportation systems (nuclear) for deep-space transportation and power. The data provided in this summary viewgraph presentation was developed to begin to address one of the key elements of the emerging implementation strategy, namely how lunar missions help retire risk of human missions to Mars. During this process the scope of the activity broadened into the issue of how testing in general, in various venues including the Moon, can help reduce the risk for Mars missions.

Drake, Bret G.↗
NASA NTRS2006

Johnson Space Center Flight Medicine Clinic Experience

Being a member of the Flight Medicine Clinic (FMC) Staff is a great experience. I joined the FMC staff 2 years ago when I became part of the Kelsey-Seybold team. The FMC staff consists of Flight Surgeons, Family Clinic Physician, Nursing staff, Wellness Coordinator and Support staff. We serve as the Primary Care Physicians for the astronauts and their families and provide annual physicals for the retired astronauts. We have approximately 800 patients in the FMC. As the Family Clinic Physician, I care for the astronaut spouses and children and provide annual physicals for the retired astronauts. Since we have a small patient population, we have the opportunity to spend increased personal time with our patients, which I enjoy. We have a pretty healthy patient population, who are very interested in their overall health and preventive care. In preparation for a shuttle launch, our nursing staff assists the flight surgeons with the astronaut physical exams, which occur 10 days prior to launch and again 3 days after their return. We also provide Primary Contact physicals for the families and guests, who will be in close contact with shuttle crew members. During these physicals, we provide education, emphasizing the importance of preventing the spread of communicable diseases to shuttle crew members. Being a part of the Space Medicine Program is an honor. To know that you contribute in some way to our nation s Space Program is very special. (This article was prepared by Dr. Trela Landry, M.D. for inclusion in a Kelsey-Seybold newsletter on 25 OCT 2006.)

Landry, Trela↗
NASA NTRS2006

Safety and Mission Assurance Knowledge Management Retention: Managing Knowledge for Successful Mission Operations

Knowledge Management is a proactive pursuit for the future success of any large organization faced with the imminent possibility that their senior managers/engineers with gained experiences and lessons learned plan to retire in the near term. Safety and Mission Assurance (S&MA) is proactively pursuing unique mechanism to ensure knowledge learned is retained and lessons learned captured and documented. Knowledge Capture Event/Activities/Management helps to provide a gateway between future retirees and our next generation of managers/engineers. S&MA hosted two Knowledge Capture Events during 2005 featuring three of its retiring fellows (Axel Larsen, Dave Whittle and Gary Johnson). The first Knowledge Capture Event February 24, 2005 focused on two Safety and Mission Assurance Safety Panels (Space Shuttle System Safety Review Panel (SSRP); Payload Safety Review Panel (PSRP) and the latter event December 15, 2005 featured lessons learned during Apollo, Skylab, and Space Shuttle which could be applicable in the newly created Crew Exploration Vehicle (CEV)/Constellation development program. Gemini, Apollo, Skylab and the Space Shuttle promised and delivered exciting human advances in space and benefits of space in people s everyday lives on earth. Johnson Space Center's Safety & Mission Assurance team work over the last 20 years has been mostly focused on operations we are now beginning the Exploration development program. S&MA will promote an atmosphere of knowledge sharing in its formal and informal cultures and work processes, and reward the open dissemination and sharing of information; we are asking "Why embrace relearning the "lessons learned" in the past?" On the Exploration program the focus will be on Design, Development, Test, & Evaluation (DDT&E); therefore, it is critical to understand the lessons from these past programs during the DDT&E phase.

Johnson, Teresa A.↗
NASA NTRS2009

Development of a Portable Oxygen Monitoring System for Operations in the International Space Station Airlock

NASA is currently engaged in an activity to facilitate effective operations on the International Space Station (ISS) after the Space Shuttle retires. Currently, the Space Shuttle delivers crew and cargo to and from ISS. The Space Shuttle provides the only large scale method of hardware return from ISS to the ground. Hardware that needs to be periodically repaired, refurbished, or recalibrated must come back from ISS on the Shuttle. One example of NASA flight hardware that is used on ISS and refurbished on the ground is the Compound Specific Analyzer for Oxygen (CSA-O2). The CSA-O2 is an electrochemical sensor that is used on orbit for about 12 months (depending on Shuttle launch schedules), then returned to the ground for sensor replacement. The shuttle is scheduled to retire in 2010, and the ISS is scheduled to operate until 2016. NASA needs a hand held sensor that measures oxygen in the ISS environment and has a 5-10 year service life. After conducting a survey of oxygen sensor systems, NASA selected a Tunable Diode Laser Absorption Spectrometer (TDLAS) as the method of measurement that best addresses the needs for ISS. These systems are compact, meet ISS accuracy requirements, and because they use spectroscopic techniques, the sensors are not consumed or altered after making a measurement. TDLAS systems have service life ratings of 5-10 years, based on the lifetime of the laser. NASA is engaged in modifying a commercially available sensor, the Vaisala OMT 355, for the ISS application. The Vaisala OMT 355 requires three significant modifications to meet ISS needs. The commercial sensor uses a wall mount power supply, and the ISS sensor needs to use a rechargeable battery as its source of power. The commercial sensor has a pressure correction setpoint: the sensor can be adjusted to operate at reduced pressure conditions, but the sensor does not self correct dynamically and automatically. The ISS sensor needs to operate in the airlock, and make accurate measurements in an environment that can change from 14.7 psia to 10.2 psia in 15 minutes. The commercial sensor needs to be repackaged into a configuration that is more compact, and better suited for ISS airlock operations. NASA has recently completed a prototype of the reconfigured system. The unit has been repackaged in a way that the optical path of the spectrometer is unchanged, but the electronics has been integrated into a case measuring 10.7 X 7.2 X 3.0 inches. Two flight qualified rechargeable batteries have been integrated into system. The batteries can power the sensor for 10 hours on a single charge. A pressure sensor has been added to the system. The modified unit automatically compensates for changes in pressure, and meets 0.2% accuracy requirements for oxygen measurements in an environment with 18 to 32% oxygen across a pressure range of 10.0 to 15.0 psia.

Graf, John↗
NASA NTRS2010

Ares V: Enabling Unprecedented Payloads for Space in the 21st Century

Numerous technical and programmatic studies since the U.S. space program began in the 1960s has emphasized the need for a heavy lift capability for exploration beyond low Earth orbit (LEO). The Saturn V once embodied that capability until it was retired. Now the Ares V cargo launch vehicle (CaLV) promises to restore and improve on that capability, providing unprecedented opportunities for human and robotic exploration, science, national security and commercial uses. This paper provides an overview of the capabilities of Ares V, both as an opportunity for payloads of increased mass and/or volume, and as a means of reducing risk in the payload design process. The Ares V is part of NASA s Constellation Program, which also includes the Ares I crew launch vehicle (CLV), Orion crew exploration vehicle (CEV), and Altair lunar lander. This architecture is designed to carry out the national space policy goals of completing the International Space Station (ISS), retiring the Space Shuttle fleet, and expanding human exploration beyond LEO. The Ares V is designed to loft upper stages and/or cargo, such as the Altair lander, into LEO. The Ares I is designed to put Orion into LEO with a crew of up to four for rendezvous with the ISS or with the Ares V Earth departure stage for journeys to the Moon. While retaining the goals of heritage hardware and commonality, the Ares V configuration continues to be refined through a series of internal trades. The current reference configuration was recommended by the Ares Projects and approved by the Constellation Program during the Lunar Capabilities Concept Review (LCCR) June 2008. The reference configuration defines the Ares V as 381 feet (116m) tall with a gross lift-off mass (GLOM) of 8.1 million pounds (3,704.5 mT). Its first stage will generate 11 million pounds of sea-level liftoff thrust. It will be capable of launching 413,800 pounds (187.7 mT) to LEO, 138,500 pounds (63 mT) direct to the Moon or 156,700 pounds (71.1 mT) in its dual-launch architecture role with Ares I. It could also launch 123,100 pounds (55.8 mT) to Sun-Earth L2. Assessment of astronomy payload requirements since Spring 2008 has indicated that Ares V has the potential to support a range of payloads and missions. Some of these missions were impossible in the absence of Ares V s capabilities. Collaborative design/architecture inputs, exchanges, and analyses have already begun between scientists and payload developers. A 2008 study by a National Research Council (NRC) panel, as well as analyses presented by astronomers and planetary scientists at two weekend conferences in 2008, support the position that Ares V has benefit to a broad range of planetary and astronomy missions. This early dialogue with Ares V engineers is permitting the greatest opportunity for payload/transportation/mission synergy and with the least financial impact to Ares V development. In addition, independent analyses suggest that Ares V has the opportunity to enable more cost-effective mission design. 1

Creech, Steve↗
NASA NTRS2010

Propulsion Risk Reduction Activities for Non-Toxic Cryogenic Propulsion

The Propulsion and Cryogenics Advanced Development (PCAD) Project s primary objective is to develop propulsion system technologies for non-toxic or "green" propellants. The PCAD project focuses on the development of non-toxic propulsion technologies needed to provide necessary data and relevant experience to support informed decisions on implementation of non-toxic propellants for space missions. Implementation of non-toxic propellants in high performance propulsion systems offers NASA an opportunity to consider other options than current hypergolic propellants. The PCAD Project is emphasizing technology efforts in reaction control system (RCS) thruster designs, ascent main engines (AME), and descent main engines (DME). PCAD has a series of tasks and contracts to conduct risk reduction and/or retirement activities to demonstrate that non-toxic cryogenic propellants can be a feasible option for space missions. Work has focused on 1) reducing the risk of liquid oxygen/liquid methane ignition, demonstrating the key enabling technologies, and validating performance levels for reaction control engines for use on descent and ascent stages; 2) demonstrating the key enabling technologies and validating performance levels for liquid oxygen/liquid methane ascent engines; and 3) demonstrating the key enabling technologies and validating performance levels for deep throttling liquid oxygen/liquid hydrogen descent engines. The progress of these risk reduction and/or retirement activities will be presented.

Smith, Timothy D.↗
NASA NTRS2010

Propulsion Risk Reduction Activities for Nontoxic Cryogenic Propulsion

The Propulsion and Cryogenics Advanced Development (PCAD) Project s primary objective is to develop propulsion system technologies for nontoxic or "green" propellants. The PCAD project focuses on the development of nontoxic propulsion technologies needed to provide necessary data and relevant experience to support informed decisions on implementation of nontoxic propellants for space missions. Implementation of nontoxic propellants in high performance propulsion systems offers NASA an opportunity to consider other options than current hypergolic propellants. The PCAD Project is emphasizing technology efforts in reaction control system (RCS) thruster designs, ascent main engines (AME), and descent main engines (DME). PCAD has a series of tasks and contracts to conduct risk reduction and/or retirement activities to demonstrate that nontoxic cryogenic propellants can be a feasible option for space missions. Work has focused on 1) reducing the risk of liquid oxygen/liquid methane ignition, demonstrating the key enabling technologies, and validating performance levels for reaction control engines for use on descent and ascent stages; 2) demonstrating the key enabling technologies and validating performance levels for liquid oxygen/liquid methane ascent engines; and 3) demonstrating the key enabling technologies and validating performance levels for deep throttling liquid oxygen/liquid hydrogen descent engines. The progress of these risk reduction and/or retirement activities will be presented.

Smith, Timothy D.↗
NASA NTRS2010

H-II Transfer Vehicle (HTV) and the Operations Concept for Extravehicular Activity (EVA) Hardware

With the retirement of the Space Shuttle fleet imminent in 2011, a new concept of operations will become reality to meet the transportation challenges of the International Space Station (ISS). The planning associated with the retirement of the Space Shuttle has been underway since the announcement in 2004. Since then, several companies and government entities have had to look for innovative low-cost commercial orbital transportation systems to continue to achieve the objectives of ISS delivery requirements. Several options have been assessed and appear ready to meet the large and demanding delivery requirements of the ISS. Options that have been identified that can facilitate the challenge include the Russian Federal Space Agency's Soyuz and Progress spacecraft, European Space Agency's Automated Transfer Vehicle (ATV), the Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency's (JAXA's) H-II Transfer Vehicle (HTV) and the Boeing Delta IV Heavy (DIV-H). The newest of these options is the JAXA's HTV. This paper focuses on the HTV, mission architecture and operations concept for Extra-Vehicular Activities (EVA) hardware, the associated launch system, and details of the launch operations approach.

Chullen, Cinda↗
NASA NTRS2011

H-II Transfer Vehicle (HTV) and the Operations Concept for Extravehicular Activity (EVA) Hardware

With the retirement of the Space Shuttle fleet imminent in 2011, a new operations concept will become reality to meet the transportation challenges of the International Space Station (ISS). The planning associated with the retirement of the Space Shuttle has been underway since the announcement in 2004. Since then, several companies and government entities have had to look for innovative low-cost commercial orbital transportation systems to continue to achieve the objectives of ISS delivery requirements. Several options have been assessed and appear ready to meet the large and demanding delivery requirements of the ISS. Options that have been identified that can facilitate the challenge include the Russian Federal Space Agency's Soyuz and Progress spacecraft, European Space Agency's Automated Transfer Vehicle (ATV), and the Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency's (JAXA s) H-II Transfer Vehicle (HTV). The newest of these options is the JAXA's HTV. This paper focuses on the HTV, mission architecture and operations concept for Extra-Vehicular Activities (EVA) hardware, the associated launch system, and details of the launch operations approach.

Chullen, Cinda↗
NASA NTRS2011

Current Status of the Nitrogen Oxygen Recharge System

This paper presents an overview of the Nitrogen Oxygen Recharge System (NORS) to date and the current development status of the system. NORS is an element of the International Space Station (ISS) Environmental Control and Life Support Systems (ECLSS) used to resupply the ISS with Nitrogen and Oxygen following the impending retirement of the Space Shuttle. The paper will discuss why NASA is developing NORS, including a summary of other concepts considered, and other related concepts currently being developed by NASA. The current system architecture will be described, along with a summary of the current design of the NORS. The overall programmatic schedule of the NORS in the context of the upcoming shuttle retirement and future launch vehicle development will also be presented. Finally, the paper will examine the significant technical challenges encountered during the requirements and preliminary design phase of NORS development. A key challenge to the development of NORS is the international shipment - and associated regulations - of pressurized Oxygen, which is necessary due to the use of launch vehicles based in Japan and French Guiana to send NORS gasses to the ISS. The storage and use of relatively large quantities of high pressure (41,000 kPa) Oxygen and Nitrogen within the ISS, which is unprecedented both on the ISS and other space vehicles, has had a significant impact on the design and architecture of the system. The high pressure of the system also poses unique thermal considerations, which has led to the development of a heater system for thermal conditioning of high pressure gas to avoid thermal impacts on downstream hardware. The on-orbit envelope allocated to the NORS has changed (gotten smaller) and has impacted both the design and architecture of the system. Finally, the balance of safety considerations associated with these high pressure gasses, particularly high pressure Oxygen, with the functionality of the system has profoundly impacted the form of the system and will be discussed.

Dick, Brandon↗
NASA NTRS2011

Attitude Control and Orbital Dynamics Challenges of Removing the First 3-Axis Stabilized Tracking and Data Relay Satellite from the Geosynchronous ARC

Launched on April 4, 1983 onboard STS 6 (Space Shuttle Challenger), the First Tracking and Data Relay Satellite (TDRS 1) was retired above the Geosynchronous Orbit (GEO) on June 27, 2010 after having provided real-time communications with a variety of low-orbiting spacecraft over a 26-year period. To meet NASA requirements limiting orbital debris 1, a team of experts was assembled to conduct an End-Of-Mission (EOM) procedure to raise the satellite 350 km above the GEO orbit. Following the orbit raising via conventional station change maneuvers, the team was confronted with having to deplete the remaining propellant and passivate all energy storage or generation sources. To accomplish these tasks within the time window, communications (telemetry and control links), electrical power, propulsion, and thermal constraints, a spacecraft originally designed as a three-axis stabilized satellite was turned into a spinner. This paper (a companion paper to Innovative Approach Enabled the Retirement of TDRS 1, paper # 1699, IEEE 2011 Aerospace Conference, March 5-12, 2011 sup 2) focuses on the challenges of maintaining an acceptable spinning dynamics, while repetitively firing thrusters. Also addressed are the effects of thruster firings on the orbit characteristics and how they were mitigated by a careful scheduling of the fuel depletion operations. Periodic thruster firings for spin rate adjustment, nutation damping, and precession of the momentum vector were also required in order to maintain effective communications with the satellite. All operations were thoroughly rehearsed and supported by simulations thus lending a high level of confidence in meeting the NASA EOM goals.

Benet, Charles A.↗
NASA NTRS2011

Ground Processing Affordability for Space Vehicles

Launch vehicles and most of their payloads spend the majority of their time on the ground. The cost of ground operations is very high. So, why so often is so little attention given to ground processing during development? The current global space industry and economic environment are driving more need for efficiencies to save time and money. Affordability and sustainability are more important now than ever. We can not continue to treat space vehicles as mere science projects. More RLV's (Reusable Launch Vehicles) are being developed for the gains of reusability which are not available for ELV's (Expendable Launch Vehicles). More human-rated vehicles are being developed, with the retirement of the Space Shuttles, and for a new global space race, yet these cost more than the many unmanned vehicles of today. We can learn many lessons on affordability from RLV's. DFO (Design for Operations) considers ground operations during design, development, and manufacturing-before the first flight. This is often minimized for space vehicles, but is very important. Vehicles are designed for launch and mission operations. You will not be able to do it again if it is too slow or costly to get there. Many times, technology changes faster than space products such that what is launched includes outdated features, thus reducing competitiveness. Ground operations must be considered for the full product Lifecycle, from concept to retirement. Once manufactured, launch vehicles along with their payloads and launch systems require a long path of processing before launch. Initial assembly and testing always discover problems to address. A solid integration program is essential to minimize these impacts, as was seen in the Constellation Ares I-X test rocket. For RLV's, landing/recovery and post-flight turnaround activities are performed. Multi-use vehicles require reconfiguration. MRO (Maintenance, Repair, and Overhaul) must be well-planned--- even for the unplanned problems. Defect limits and standard repairs need to be in-place as well as easily added. Many routine inspections and maintenance can be like an aircraft overhaul. Modifications and technology upgrades should be expected. Another factor affecting ground operations efficiency is trending. It is essential for RLV's, and also useful for ELV's which fly the same or similar models again. Good data analysis of technical and processing performance will determine fixes and improvements needed for safety, design, and future processing. Collecting such data on new or low-frequency vehicles is a challenge. Lessons can be learned from the Space Shuttle, or even the Concorde aircraft. For all of the above topics, efficient business systems must be established for comprehensive program management and good throughput. Drawings, specifications, and manuals for an entire launch vehicle are often in different formats from multiple vendors, plus they have proprietary constraints. Nonetheless, the integration team must ensure that all data needed is compatible and visible to each appropriate team member. Ground processing systems for scheduling, tracking, problem resolution, etc. must be well laid-out. The balance between COTS (commercial off the shelf) and custom software is difficult. Multiple customers, vendors, launch sites, and landing sites add to the complexity of efficient IT (Information Technology) tools.

Ingalls, John↗