Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “PROPULSION”

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 127 records · Page 7

Propulsion integration for a hybrid propulsive-lift system

In a discussion of STOL vehicles with conventional high-lift devices, the need for efficient power-augmented lift systems is presented, and the implications of quiet operation are noted. The underlying philosophy of a promising hybrid lift system with major interactions between aerodynamic, thermodynamic, acoustic, and configuration design technologies is derived. The technique by which engine and airframe-related characteristics for this application may be matched in an optimum manner is described and illustrated by describing the features of a particular short-haul commercial STOL vehicle.

Bowden, M. K.↗

Study of laser heated propulsion devices. Part 2: Assessment of laser propulsion modeling and simulation requirements

Theoretical models for the laser heated thruster are reviewed. The requirements for an improved laser heated thruster theoretical model are discussed. The application of a time dependent finite difference Navier-Stokes equation solution to the laser heated thruster problem is described, along with a simple closed form solution which was developed in order to gain insight into the difficulties encountered in the pursuit of the numerical solution.

Thoenes, J.↗

Solar electric propulsion system /SEPS/: Tomorrow's propulsion system - Today

Mission and system concepts relating to the SEPS project will be discussed as well as an overview of current project planning. SEPS system concept descriptions will be limited to in-house NASA concepts. The capabilities of the in-house concepts to meet a wide range of mission requirements will be described to give an indication of potential capabilities SEPS can provide to the space mission planners.

Austin, R. E.↗

Superconducting applications in propulsion systems. Magnetic insulation for plasma propulsion devices

The purpose of this paper is to review the status of knowledge of the basic concepts needed to establish design parameters for effective magnetic insulation. The objective is to estimate the effectiveness of the magnetic field in insulating the plasma, to calculate the magnitude of the magnetic field necessary to reduce the heat transfer to the walls sufficiently enough to demonstrate the potential of magnetically driven plasma rockets.

Gonzalez, Dora E.↗

Separating Propulsive Mass and Energy for Space Applications

Initially and traditionally, space access and in-space propulsion utilized combustion and expulsion of chemical “fuels” carried on board, with performance governed by the rocket equation. These chemicals produced energy, and after combustion, constituted the propulsive mass/momentum. The best such chemicals in terms of Isp that are deemed safe engineering/mission wise are hydrogen and oxygen, producing some 450 seconds of Isp. There are more reactive chemicals, such as fluorine, which have higher Isp, but also have serious safety issues. Propulsion in atmospheres can ingest atmospheric constituents (aka “airbreathing propulsion”) which provide additional propulsive mass when heated and a component of the combustion/energy generation process. This utilization of non-stored/carried propulsive mass provides partial separation of propulsive mass and energy and produces higher Isp. The other approach to separating propulsive mass and energy is to, either on board or added from offboard, supply additional energy, such as from nuclear or solar sources. This is the approach for fission nuclear thermal and electric propulsion, which can provide an Isp in excess of 800 seconds of Isp. Other processes or in addition to thermal expansion, such as electro-magnetics, can be employed to increase exit velocity and Isp. Separating propulsive mass and energy for space faring is commonly referred to as a means to circumvent the rocket equation and is capable of producing major benefits for the development of commercial deep space and space faring in general including affordable fast transits to mitigate the human health impacts of galactic cosmic radiation (GCR) and microG. The key to higher than chemical Isp, beyond H2-O2, and beyond the radiated energy and systems limitations of solar for space faring, is a light weight, high energy density source, either on board or via utilization of energy beaming to the vehicle. Traditional energy sources include chemical, heat, electrics, mechanical, photons, and nuclear. Propulsive mass can be carried on board, sourced beyond the surface of Earth via in-situ resource utilization (ISRU), and includes harvesting from atmospheres. High Isp via electromagnetic related propulsive mass acceleration requires sufficient ionization and conductivity. The major metrics for space propulsion are costs, safety, Isp, weight, and thrust level, the latter dependent upon mission requirements. High thrust for human missions is needed to reduce time exposed to radiation and microG and high thrust is required for space access. Costs of space access are reducing via reusability, printing manufacture, and robotization of manufacturing and operation. Chemical rockets provide high thrust from the expansion of the heated mass constituents at high mass flow. The other high thrust propulsion approach is magnetohydrodynamics (MHD), which, in addition to high thrust, has a high Isp of over 2,000 seconds of Isp. The VASIMIR engine offers some 5,000 seconds of Isp at high thrust [ref. 3]. Electric propulsion cycles are capable of Isp much higher than that but at low thrust levels using available energy sources. With cost as a major metric, reusable rockets and improved manufacturing and operations are rapidly greatly lowering the costs of space access, which could provide/supply in space fuel depots and affordable chemical propulsion for the desired human fast transits (e.g., some 200-day round trips to Mars). The other option for fast transits is VASIMIR, given a nuclear on-board energy source that has the requisite many megawatts of power and an alpha, kgs of weight/kW of energy produced, on the order of one (i.e., a light weight, high energy density energy source). The purpose of this report is to examine the options beyond traditional rocket engines, where propulsive mass and energy are combined, specifically the separation of propulsive mass and energy. This report considers the spectrum of advanced energetics, sources of propulsive mass, conductivity enhancement approaches, energy beaming possibilities, and candidate propulsion cycles. Suggestions are made for various combinatorial, system level, beyond traditional combustion rocket, space propulsion approaches for human deep space missions given the changing conditions of increased knowledge of deep space resources for ISRU, revolutionary energetics, and technology advancements writ large.

Dennis M. Bushnell↗

Advanced Space Propulsion

This presentation describes a number of advanced space propulsion technologies with the potential for meeting the need for dramatic reductions in the cost of access to space, and the need for new propulsion capabilities to enable bold new space exploration (and, ultimately, space exploitation) missions of the 21st century. For example, current Earth-to-orbit (e.g., low Earth orbit, LEO) launch costs are extremely high (ca. $10,000/kg); a factor 25 reduction (to ca. $400/kg) will be needed to produce the dramatic increases in space activities in both the civilian and government sectors identified in the Commercial Space Transportation Study (CSTS). Similarly, in the area of space exploration, all of the relatively 'easy' missions (e.g., robotic flybys, inner solar system orbiters and landers; and piloted short-duration Lunar missions) have been done. Ambitious missions of the next century (e.g., robotic outer-planet orbiters/probes, landers, rovers, sample returns; and piloted long-duration Lunar and Mars missions) will require major improvements in propulsion capability. In some cases, advanced propulsion can enable a mission by making it faster or more affordable, and in some cases, by directly enabling the mission (e.g., interstellar missions). As a general rule, advanced propulsion systems are attractive because of their low operating costs (e.g., higher specific impulse, ISD) and typically show the most benefit for relatively 'big' missions (i.e., missions with large payloads or AV, or a large overall mission model). In part, this is due to the intrinsic size of the advanced systems as compared to state-of-the-art (SOTA) chemical propulsion systems. Also, advanced systems often have a large 'infrastructure' cost, either in the form of initial R&D costs or in facilities hardware costs (e.g., laser or microwave transmission ground stations for beamed energy propulsion). These costs must then be amortized over a large mission to be cost-competitive with a SOTA system with a low initial development and infrastructure cost and a high operating cost. Note however that this has resulted in a 'Catch 22' standoff between the need for large initial investment that is amortized over many launches to reduce costs, and the limited number of launches possible at today's launch costs. Some examples of missions enabled (either in cost or capability) by advanced propulsion include long-life station-keeping or micro-spacecraft applications using electric propulsion or BMDO-derived micro-thrusters, low-cost orbit raising (LEO to GEO or Lunar orbit) using electric propulsion, robotic planetary missions using aerobraking or electric propulsion, piloted Mars missions using aerobraking and/or propellant production from Martian resources, very fast (100-day round-trip) piloted Mars missions using fission or fusion propulsion, and, finally, interstellar missions using fusion, antimatter, or beamed energy. The NASA Advanced Propulsion Technology program at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) is aimed at assessing the feasibility of a range of near-term to far term advanced propulsion technologies that have the potential to reduce costs and/or enable future space activities. The program includes cooperative modeling and research activities between JPL and various universities and industry; and directly supported independent research at universities and industry. The cooperative program consists of mission studies, research and development of ion engine technology using C60 (Buckminsterfullerene) propellant, and research and development of lithium-propellant Lorentz-force accelerator (LFA) engine technology. The university/industry-supported research includes modeling and proof-of-concept experiments in advanced, high-lsp, long-life electric propulsion, and in fusion propulsion.

Frisbee, Robert H.↗

Transit Habitat Government-Reference Conceptual Design Reaction Control System Propulsion Concept Design Data Book

The function of Transit Habitat (TH) Reaction Control System (RCS) propulsion is to provide free-flying spacecraft capabilities and to augment Gateway stack control when docked on Gateway. The requirements of multiple propellant replenishments and extensive life operation have significant impacts on selection of the propulsion system concept and components for the RCS. The intent of this document is to provide insight into the government-reference conceptual design of a propulsion system for TH element. A pressure-fed hypergolic bi-propellant system is the assumed propulsion approach for the RCS. Its architectural concept is being traded within the NASA Moon to Mars architecture. A pressure-regulated system is examined. The propellants under consideration are Monomethyl Hydrazine (MMH) and Mixed Oxides of Nitrogen with 3% Nitric Oxide (MON3). A peer review was conducted to assess the flow schematic design and propulsion component selection, compliant with a set of assumed requirements. Redundant components to satisfy one-fault tolerance for function and two-fault tolerance against catastrophic events are incorporated in the propulsion concept design. Instrumentation laid out on the schematic would be used to gather data to monitor the health of the propulsion system and to support quantity gauging of the propulsion system fluids. Venting propellant ullage gas overboard during the refilling operations poses a significant concern to the external surfaces of the TH. A liquid/gas separator would be required to eliminate, or at least reduce, the amount of liquid propellant expelled in the vent gas mixture. The technology readiness level of the phase separator for the TH must be advanced. Metal diaphragm and non-positive-expulsion PMD propellant tank systems were traded against each other, with the PMD architecture being selected. A blowdown concept is also considered for the TH RCS propulsion. Its fluid schematic is derived from the pressure-regulated schematic with removal of assemblies involving the helium pressurization and ullage venting. Its system wet mass is 10% heavier than the pressure-regulated due to thruster performance loss and larger propellant tanks. There is no firm constraint on the propulsion system mass at this phase of the design. The blowdown concept can offer reduction in component count and operation, that would lead to a more reliable propulsion system. The blowdown concept would also benefit avionics, thermal, power, and structures on the TH. Assessing these benefits will be carried as a future work. Drawbacks of thrust and minimum impulse bit (MIB) variations due to the blowdown operation would be acceptable to Guidance, Navigation, and Control (GNC). Although the blowdown concept has been selected as a current baseline, further evaluation of the concept will be the subject of future work to ensure that the blowdown propulsion operation is appropriate for the HT RCS propulsion. This document also highlights key trade studies and design decisions, including pros and cons of the selected concept. Other appropriate options for components are pointed out for future assessments. Additional background information and documents for further review are referenced in this report.

spacecraft propulsion↗

Space Nuclear Propulsion for Deep Space Science Missions

The use of nuclear thermal propulsion (NTP) 1 and nuclear electric propulsion (NEP) 2 systems on deep space science missions to the outer planets and into the interstellar medium 3 can yield significant spacecraft system and mission performance benefits and improvements relative to the use of conventional chemical propulsion systems. Several recent and ongoing programs are developing the technologies and systems required to realize a near-term deep space nuclear propulsion capability. NTP provides improved propulsion efficiencies compared to chemical propulsion, while also providing substantial thrust. This combination of high thrust and increased specific impulse (I_sp) provides high acceleration and extended thrusting periods, enabling greatly reduced trip-times on certain types of missions compared to various propulsive alternatives. For examples, compared to a baseline mission using chemical propulsion, NTP-powered missions to Jupiter or Uranus could deliver approximately 2.4-3.6 times more payload (in the case of Jupiter, the payload delivery is significantly larger than the Juno spacecraft). In this comparison, the higher end of the payload advantage is obtained when the trip time is held equal for the NTP-powered vehicle and a vehicle using a chemical propulsion departure stage. NTP systems are presently under development by multiple government agencies. NASA’s Space Nuclear Propulsion (SNP) project aims to demonstrate a hydrogen-fed NTP engine at 900 s specific impulse (I_sp) and approximately 10-15 klb_f of thrust. DARPA’s Demonstration Rocket for Agile Cislunar Operations (DRACO) program is targeting a demonstration of an NTP system in the cislunar space between the Earth and the Moon. An appropriately phased development plan that applies the development of the reactor technology for an NTP engine in this performance class and leverages mature, existing liquid rocket component hardware provides a path to a lower cost propulsion system that can be realized on a shorter development schedule. NEP, with high Isp in the 2,000-8,000 s range, can also provide advantages over chemical propulsion, including a much greater payload delivery mass and the flexibility for planners to trade between delivered mass and a wider window of mission trajectory options. Electric propulsion (EP) systems have demonstrated great utility, performing notably on the Dawn mission to enable rendezvous and orbital insertion at two separate bodies, Vesta and Ceres. An NEP-powered vehicle would have a similar capability to visit multiple bodies, loitering at each before moving to the next. A 10 kW_e NEP system provides a power- rich environment on the spacecraft that is simply not possible using present radioisotope power systems, giving mission planners more scientific instrument and communication hardware options. Several programs and projects are presently developing NEP systems and subsystems in the 10 kW_e power range, leveraging past reactor work and recent nuclear power generation risk-reduction demonstration activities such as the Demonstration Using Flattop Fission (DUFF) and the Kilopower Reactor Using Stirling TechnologY (KRUSTY). The goal of the Air Force Research Laboratory’s Joint Energy Technology Supplying On-Orbit Nuclear Power (JETSON) program is an in-space demonstration vehicle that has a 10 kW_e -class fission power source. These past and present efforts can be combined with the ongoing development of 10 kW_e -class electric propulsion systems (notably the NEXT-C ion thruster or the Hall-effect thrusters for Power and Propulsion Element of the Lunar Gateway) to provide a pathway to a low-cost, reliable NEP system for deep space science application.

Kurt A. Polzin↗

Space Nuclear Propulsion for Deep Space Science Missions

The use of nuclear thermal propulsion (NTP) 1 and nuclear electric propulsion (NEP) 2 systems on deep space science missions to the outer planets and into the interstellar medium 3 can yield significant spacecraft system and mission performance benefits and improvements relative to the use of conventional chemical propulsion systems. Several recent and ongoing programs are developing the technologies and systems required to realize a near-term deep space nuclear propulsion capability. NTP provides improved propulsion efficiencies compared to chemical propulsion, while also providing substantial thrust. This combination of high thrust and increased specific impulse (I_sp) provides high acceleration and extended thrusting periods, enabling greatly reduced trip-times on certain types of missions compared to various propulsive alternatives. For examples, compared to a baseline mission using chemical propulsion, NTP-powered missions to Jupiter or Uranus could deliver approximately 2.4-3.6 times more payload (in the case of Jupiter, the payload delivery is significantly larger than the Juno spacecraft). In this comparison, the higher end of the payload advantage is obtained when the trip time is held equal for the NTP-powered vehicle and a vehicle using a chemical propulsion departure stage. NTP systems are presently under development by multiple government agencies. NASA’s Space Nuclear Propulsion (SNP) project aims to demonstrate a hydrogen-fed NTP engine at 900 s specific impulse (I_sp) and approximately 10-15 klb_f of thrust. DARPA’s Demonstration Rocket for Agile Cislunar Operations (DRACO) program is targeting a demonstration of an NTP system in the cislunar space between the Earth and the Moon. An appropriately phased development plan that applies the development of the reactor technology for an NTP engine in this performance class and leverages mature, existing liquid rocket component hardware provides a path to a lower cost propulsion system that can be realized on a shorter development schedule. NEP, with high Isp in the 2,000-8,000 s range, can also provide advantages over chemical propulsion, including a much greater payload delivery mass and the flexibility for planners to trade between delivered mass and a wider window of mission trajectory options. Electric propulsion (EP) systems have demonstrated great utility, performing notably on the Dawn mission to enable rendezvous and orbital insertion at two separate bodies, Vesta and Ceres. An NEP-powered vehicle would have a similar capability to visit multiple bodies, loitering at each before moving to the next. A 10 kW_e NEP system provides a power- rich environment on the spacecraft that is simply not possible using present radioisotope power systems, giving mission planners more scientific instrument and communication hardware options. Several programs and projects are presently developing NEP systems and subsystems in the 10 kW_e power range, leveraging past reactor work and recent nuclear power generation risk-reduction demonstration activities such as the Demonstration Using Flattop Fission (DUFF) and the Kilopower Reactor Using Stirling TechnologY (KRUSTY). The goal of the Air Force Research Laboratory’s Joint Energy Technology Supplying On-Orbit Nuclear Power (JETSON) program is an in-space demonstration vehicle that has a 10 kW_e -class fission power source. These past and present efforts can be combined with the ongoing development of 10 kW_e -class electric propulsion systems (notably the NEXT-C ion thruster or the Hall-effect thrusters for Power and Propulsion Element of the Lunar Gateway) to provide a pathway to a low-cost, reliable NEP system for deep space science application.

Kurt A. Polzin↗