Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “station”

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 577 records · Page 32
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS1988

Selection of combined water electrolysis and resistojet propulsion for Space Station Freedom

An analytical rationale is presented for the configuration of the NASA Space Station's two-element propulsion system, and attention is given to the cost benefits accruing to this system over the Space Station's service life. The principal system element uses gaseous oxygen and hydrogen obtained through water electrolysis to furnish attitude control, backup attitude control, and contingency maneuvering. The secondary element uses resistojets to augment Space Station reboost through the acceleration of waste gases in the direction opposite the Station's flight path.

Schmidt, George R.↗
NASA NTRS1988

Space Station Freedom - A resource for aerospace education

The role of the International Space Station in future U.S. aerospace education efforts is discussed from a NASA perspective. The overall design concept and scientific and technological goals of the Space Station are reviewed, and particular attention is given to education projects such as the Davis Planetarium Student Space Station, the Starship McCullough, the Space Habitat, the working Space Station model in Austin, TX, the Challenger Center for Space Life Education, Space M+A+X, and the Space Science Student Involvement Program. Also examined are learning-theory aspects of aerospace education: child vs adult learners, educational objectives, teaching methods, and instructional materials.

Brown, Robert W.↗
NASA NTRS1988

Reducing the risks of using Ada onboard the Space Station

In 1986, the Ada programming language was chosen by NASA as the primary computer programming language for the development of new software for the Space Station. Ada was selected based on the results of investigations coordinated through Johnson Space Center (JSC). These investigations resulted in the identification of a set of problems and risks associated with using software developed in Ada onboard the Space Station. But the risks associated with these problems were found to be of insufficient severity to outweigh the significant benefits and suitability of Ada for the project. However, since the selection of Ada for the Space Station Project, detailed investigations have continued at Johnson Space Center into the most important problems identified in using Ada. This paper discusses some of the specific solutions to problems which have been identified through these investigations and which are reducing the risks of using Ada onboard the Space Station.

Humphrey, Terry D.↗
NASA NTRS1989

Opportunities for space station assembly operations during crew absence

Prior to Permanently Manned Capability (to be achieved approximately 21 months after the First Element Launch), the Space Station will be manned for less than 10 percent of its total staytime on orbit. The most intensive and critical Station assembly operations will occur during these early flights. Some robotic resources may be available to perform assembly operations while the Station crew is absent; however, the use of robotic devices for assembly operations during unmanned phases has not yet been adopted by the Space Station program. This paper studies the relevant aspects of teleoperated and autonomous assembly activities, and presents candidate assembly operations that could be performed during crew absence. From this analysis, the potential benefits of remote control of robotic resources can be weighed against any associated increase in cost and complexity that would accompany implementation of this capability.

Parrish, Joseph C.↗
NASA NTRS1989

Preliminary control/structure interaction study of coupled Space Station Freedom/Assembly Work Platform/orbiter

Results are presented from a preliminary control/structure interaction study of the Space Station, the Assembly Work Platform, and the STS orbiter dynamics coupled with the orbiter and station control systems. The first three Space Station assembly flight configurations and their finite element representations are illustrated. These configurations are compared in terms of control authority in each axis and propellant usage. The control systems design parameters during assembly are computed. Although the rigid body response was acceptable with the orbiter Primary Reaction Control System, the flexible body response showed large structural deflections and loads. It was found that severe control/structure interaction occurred if the stiffness of the Assembly Work Platform was equal to that of the station truss. Also, the response of the orbiter Vernier Reaction Control System to small changes in inertia properties is examined.

Singh, Sudeep K.↗
NASA NTRS1989

An automated, integrated approach to Space Station structural modeling

NASA and its contractors have developed an integrated, interdisciplinary CAD/analysis system designated IDEAS(double asterisk)2 in order to conduct evaluations of alternative Space Station concepts' performance over the projected course of the Station's evolution in orbit. Attention is presently given to the requirements associated with automated FEM-building methods applicable to Space Station system-level structural dynamic analysis, and the ways in which IDEAS(double asterisk)2 addresses these requirements. Advantage is taken of the interactive capabilities of the SUPERTAB FEM preprocessor system for Space Station model manipulation and modification.

Lindenmoyer, Alan J.↗
NASA NTRS1988

Liquid helium servicing from the Space Station

The current concept of liquid helium resupply from the Space Station is discussed with regard to user and Space Station requirements, as well as requirements of the liquid helium servicing facility itself. A number of trade-offs which will affect both the hardware and the operation of the facility are presented. A total of 12 potential users have been identified. The users are divided into two groups: large volume users which are serviced every one to two years and small volume users which are serviced every few months. Both groups have a very strong impact on the definition of the liquid helium servicing facility. The facility components will be based on results of the Superfluid Helium On Orbit Transfer flight demonstration being conducted by NASA. Currently, the Space Station design includes a customer servicing bay which provides electrical power, thermal and contamination control, and connections for control and data handling systems. Restrictions on venting and vibrational disturbances on the Space Station may preclude servicing during quiescent periods when accelerations are minimal.

Breon, S. R.↗
NASA NTRS1988

Solar water heater for NASA's Space Station

The feasibility of using a solar water heater for NASA's Space Station is investigated using computer codes developed to model the Space Station configuration, orbit, and heating systems. Numerous orbit variations, system options, and geometries for the collector were analyzed. Results show that a solar water heater, which would provide 100 percent of the design heating load and would not impose a significant impact on the Space Station overall design is feasible. A heat pipe or pumped fluid radial plate collector of about 10-sq m, placed on top of the habitat module was found to be well suited for satisfying water demand of the Space Station. Due to the relatively small area required by a radial plate, a concentrator is unnecessary. The system would use only 7 to 10 percent as much electricity as an electric water-heating system.

Somers, Richard E.↗
NASA NTRS1989

Space Station Freedom - Accommodation for technology R&D

The paper examines the features of the accommodation equipment designed for the candidate technology payloads of the Space Station, which include magnetic plasma thruster systems and a hypothetical advanced electromagnetic propulsion system utilizing high-temperature superconductivity materials. The review of the accommodation-equipment concepts supports the assumption that some propulsion technologies can be tested on the Space Station while being attached externally to the station's truss structure. For testing technologies with inherent operation or performance hazards, space platforms and smaller free-flyers coordinated with the Space Station can be used. Diagrams illustrating typical accommodation equipment configurations are included.

Holt, Alan C.↗
NASA NTRS1989

Evolutionary space station fluids management strategies

Results are summarized for an 11-month study to define fluid storage and handling strategies and requirements for various specific mission case studies and their associated design impacts on the Space Station. There are a variety of fluid users which require a variety of fluids and use rates. Also, the cryogenic propellants required for NASA's STV, Planetary, and Code Z missions are enormous. The storage methods must accommodate fluids ranging from a high pressure gas or supercritical state fluid to a sub-cooled liquid (and superfluid helium). These requirements begin in the year 1994, reach a maximum of nearly 1800 metric tons in the year 2004, and trail off to the year 2018, as currently planned. It is conceivable that the cryogenic propellant needs for the STV and/or Lunar mission models will be met by LTCSF LH2/LO2 tanksets attached to the SS truss structure. Concepts and corresponding transfer and delivery operations have been presented for STV propellant provisioning from the SS. A growth orbit maneuvering vehicle (OMV) and associated servicing capability will be required to move tanksets from delivery launch vehicles to the SS or co-orbiting platforms. Also, appropriate changes to the software used for OMV operation are necessary to allow for the combined operation of the growth OMV. To support fluid management activities at the Space Station for the experimental payloads and propellant provisioning, there must be truss structure space allocated for fluid carriers and propellant tanksets, and substantial beam strengthening may be required. The Station must have two Mobile Remote Manipulator Systems (MRMS) and the growth OMV propellant handling operations for the STV at the SS. Propellant needs for the Planetary Initiatives and Code Z mission models will most likely be provided by co-orbiting propellant platform(s). Space Station impacts for Code Z mission fluid management activities will be minimal.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS1988

Advancing automation and robotics technology for the Space Station Freedom and for the US economy

In April 1985, as required by Public Law 98-371, the NASA Advanced Technology Advisory Committee (ATAC) reported to Congress the results of its studies on advanced automation and robotics technology for use on the Freedom space station. This material was documented in the initial report (NASA Technical Memorandum 87566). A further requirement of the law was that ATAC follow NASA's progress in this area and report to Congress semiannually. This report is the seventh in a series of progress updates and covers the period between April 1, 1988 and September 30, 1988. NASA has accepted the basic recommendations of ATAC for its Space Station Freedom efforts. ATAC and NASA agree that the thrust of Congress is to build an advanced automation and robotics technology base that will support an evolutionary Space Station Freedom program and serve as a highly visible stimulator, affecting the U.S. long-term economy. The progress report identifies the work of NASA and the Freedom study contractors. It also describes research in progress, and it makes assessments of the advancement of automation and robotics technology on the Freedom space station.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS1990

Advancing automation and robotics technology for the Space Station Freedom and for the US economy: Submitted to the United States Congress

In April 1985, as required by Public Law 98-371, the NASA Advanced Technology Advisory Committee (ATAC) reported to Congress the results of its studies on advanced automation and robotics technology for use on the Space Station Freedom. This material was documented in the initial report (NASA Technical Memorandum 87566). A further requirement of the law was that ATAC follow NASA's progress in this area and report to Congress semiannually. This report is the ninth in a series of progress updates and covers the period between February 24, 1989, and July 12, 1989. NASA has accepted the basic recommendation of ATAC for its Space Station Freedom efforts. ATAC and NASA agree that the thrust of Congress is to build an advanced automation and robotics technology base that will support an evolutionary Space Station program and serve as a highly visible stimulator, affecting the U.S. long-term economy. The work of NASA and the Freedom contractors, e.g., Work Packages, as well as the Flight Telerobotic Servicer is identified. Research in progress is also described and assessments of the advancement of automation and robotics technology on the Space Station Freedom are given.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS1989

Space station Simulation Computer System (SCS) study for NASA/MSFC. Volume 1: Overview and summary

NASA's Space Station Freedom Program (SSFP) planning efforts have identified a need for a payload training simulator system to serve as both a training facility and as a demonstrator to validate operational concepts. The envisioned Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) Payload Training Complex (PTC) required to meet this need will train the space station payload scientists, station scientists, and ground controllers to operate the wide variety of experiments that will be onboard the Space Station Freedom. The Simulation Computer System (SCS) is the computer hardware, software, and workstations that will support the Payload Training Complex at MSFC. The purpose of this SCS study is to investigate issues related to the SCS, alternative requirements, simulator approaches, and state-of-the-art technologies to develop candidate concepts and designs. This study was performed August 1988 to October 1989. Thus, the results are based on the SSFP August 1989 baseline, i.e., pre-Langley configuration/budget review (C/BR) baseline. Some terms, e.g., combined trainer, are being redefined. An overview of the study activities and a summary of study results are given here.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS1990

Advancing automation and robotics technology for the Space Station Freedom and for the US economy

In April 1985, the NASA Advanced Technology Advisory Committee (ATAC) reported to Congress the results of its studies on advanced automation and robotics technology for use on Space Station Freedom. This material was documented in the initial report (NASA Technical Memorandum 87566). The progress made by Levels 1, 2, and 3 of the Office of Space Station in developing and applying advanced automation and robotics technology are described. Emphasis was placed upon the Space Station Freedom Program responses to specific recommendations made in ATAC Progress Report 9, the Flight Telerobotic Servicer, the Advanced Development Program, and the Data Management System. Assessments are presented for these and other areas as they apply to the advancement of automation and robotics technology for the Space Station Freedom.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS1990

Space Station Based Microacceleration Experiment Platform

Normal Space Station Freedom activities, such as docking, astronauts' movement, equipment vibrations, and space station reboosts, exert forces on the structure, resulting in static or transient accelerations greater than many microgravity experiments can tolerate. A solution to this problem is to isolate experiments on a separate platform free from such disturbances. The Space Station Based Microacceleration Experiment Platform, a proposed solution to the Space Station microgravity experiment problem is described. It is modular in design and can be telerobotically assembled and operated. The Microacceleration Experiment Platform (MEP) consists of a minimum configuration platform to which power, propulsion, propellant, and experiment modules are added. The platform's layout is designed to take maximum advantage of the microgravity field structure in orbit.

Barber, Katy↗
NASA NTRS1990

Telepresence and Space Station Freedom workstation operations

The Space Station Freedom workstation system is a distributed network of computer based workstations that provides the man-machine interfaces for controlling space station systems. This includes control of external manipulator, robotic and free flyer devices by crewmembers in the space station's pressurized shirt-sleeve environment. These remotely controlled devices help minimize the requirement for costly crew extravehicular activity (EVA) time for such tasks as station assembly and payload support. Direct window views may be used for controlling some of the systems, but many activities will be remote or require levels of detail not possible by direct observation. Since controlling remote devices becomes more difficult when direct views are inadequate or unavailable, many performance enhancing techniques have been considered for representing information about remote activities to the operator. Described here are the telepresence techniques under consideration to support operations and training. This includes video enhancements (e.g., graphic and text overlays and stereo viewing), machine vision systems, remote activity animation, and force reflection representation.

Jensen, Dean G.↗
NASA NTRS1989

Designing Space Station Freedom for evolution

The requirements for using the Space Station for research and development and to support human missions to the Moon and Mars are examined. Space Station configurations are presented for these two cases. It is suggested that, by the year 2010, the Space Station requirements for research and development should include 275 kW of average power, a crew of 24, 5 full laboratory modules, and 3 pocket labs. For supporting the Lunar/Mars program as a transportation node facility, the Space Station should require 175 kw of average power, 16 crew members, 3 full laboratory modules, and 1 pocket lab.

Huckins, Earle K., III↗
NASA NTRS1989

Using space for technology development - Planning for the Space Station era

Experience with the Shuttle and free-flying satellites as technology test-beds has shown the feasibility and desirability of using space assets as a facility for technology development. Thus, by the time the Space Station era will have arrived, the technologist will be ready for an accessible engineering facility in space. As the 21st century is approached, it is expected that virtually every flight to the Space Station Freedom will be required to carry one or more research, technology, and engineering experiments. The experiments planned will utilize both the pressurized volume, and the external payload attachment facilities. A unique, but extremely important, class of experiments will use the Space Station itself as an experimental vehicle. Based upon recent examination of possible Space Station Freedom assembly sequences, technology payloads may well utilize 20-30 percent of available resources.

Ambrus, Judith H.↗