Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “Tipping Point”

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
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Survive the Dust: Dust Mitigation Technology to Enable Survive the Night Capabilities

Introduction: As we return to the Moon, the lunar regolith (i.e. lunar dust) covering the surface will be an obstacle to nominal operations. Accounts from Apollo astronauts and analysis of hardware returned from the surface illustrate just how deleterious the dust can be [1]. During Apollo missions, the lunar dust adhered to hardware mechanically and electrostatically [2]. Surviving the Night: Mitigating the lunar dust will be critical to surviving the night. Going hand-in-hand with other extreme environment considerations, dust mitigation is critical to mission success. Dust Impacts on Other Systems: The lunar dust can have negative implications for power, thermal, mechanisms, and several other systems or sub-systems. For example, Apollo encountered marked degradation of performance in heat rejection systems for the lunar roving vehicle, science packages, and other components because of the lunar dust [1]. For power alone, dust can cause internal clogging for power connectors, heat rejection issues, excessive dust on reflective surfaces, reduced power output for solar arrays, and so on. Dust Mitigation Strategy: In addition to considering technology solutions, it is important for hardware, systems, and or components to have a dust mitigation strategy. At a high level, hardware that will encounter the lunar dust should consider these things when defining a dust mitigation strategy: • Understand Natural Environment • Understand Induced Environment • Understand Tolerance to Dust • Write Dust Requirements • Select Dust Mitigation Solutions • Test Hardware in Dusty Environment More information on each of these can be provided to hardware owners. Dust Mitigation Technology Development: NASA has a series of technologies that may be available for hardware that needs to survive the lunar night. Many of these solutions are leveraging dust mitigation technology development efforts from NASA’s Space Technology Mission Directorate (STMD), as well as efforts from ESDMD programs, industry, and academia. Through a series of STMD programs (both internal to NASA and through partnerships), there are several technologies in development as considerations as dust mitigation solutions for hardware. Within STMD, the Game Changing Development Program (GCD) has funded several internal dust mitigation projects including low to mid TRL development, demonstrations on CLPS landers of high TRL solutions, and creating standards and best practices for dust mitigation. STMD dust mitigation efforts also include a series of partnerships for developing technologies and advancing the state of dust mitigation at NASA. This includes the Lunar Surface Innovation Consortium (LSIC), Small Business Innovation Research, Early Stage Innovations (ESI), Space Technology Research Grants (STRG), Announcement of Collaboration Opportunities (ACOs) and Tipping Points (TPs), and Challenges and Crowdsourcing, among others. There are also a series of dust mitigation solutions that have been widely used terrestrially, or during Apollo. In recent years, several studies have produced more data on the efficacy of these potential solutions in the lunar environment. Dust Mitigation Solutions: Dust mitigation solutions generally fall into four categories: • Dust Tolerant Mechanisms • Passive Dust Mitigation Capabilities • Active Dust Mitigation Capabilities • Dust Measurement Capabilities There are a series of solutions that may prove beneficial for hardware that needs to survive the lunar night, including new technology development as well as proven, terrestrial solutions. This presentation will discuss in more detail what some of these solutions are for payloads going to the surface. References: [1] J. R. Gaier, NASA/TM—2005-213610, The Effects of Lunar Dust on EVA Systems During the Apollo Missions [2] T. J. Stubbs, et al. Impact of Dust on Lunar Exploration, 2005

dust mitigation↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Modeling and Simulation of Tank Pressure Control using Zero-Boil Off Active Thermal Control for LOXSAT Technology Demonstration Mission

To-date, research and modeling of cryogenic fluid management technologies (CFM) for spaceflight has been limited to ground tests, short-duration zero-g simulations (e.g. drop towers), and small-scale experiments on-orbit. There has not been a large-scale flight demonstration of a flight-like system. As future NASA missions to take humans further from Earth will require large, in-space cryogenic propulsion vehicles, it is imperative to begin collecting flight data for these systems to accurately model and design future vehicles. To meet this goal, NASA awarded tipping point technology demonstration awards to Eta Space, Lockheed Martin, Space Exploration Technologies (SpaceX), and United Launch Alliance (ULA) to demonstrate on-orbit storage and transfer of cryogenic propellant. For its award, Eta Space is developing LOXSAT-1. It is a small satellite that will be launched on a Rocket Lab Electron rocket. The spacecraft consists of a Rocket Lab Photon spacecraft bus with a primary payload of a spherical liquid oxygen (LOX) storage tank with thermodynamic control systems. The primary objective of the mission is to demonstrate zero-boil-off storage of liquid oxygen. To accomplish this objective, the payload is equipped with an active thermal control system fluid loop that consists of propellant management device (PMD), positive-displacement pump, heat exchanger connected to a cryocooler, and a spray bar mixing injector. When the fluid loop is operating, fluid is drawn from the tank by the PMD and pumped through the heat exchanger, lowering the fluid temperature below the fluid temperature in the tank. This subcooled liquid is then injected back into the tank through the spray bar. The subcooled injected liquid has two effects. If it is sprayed into the ullage space, the injected liquid will form into jets or droplets and exchange heat with the ullage gas. This will cool and condense the gas, reducing the pressure in the tank. Additionally, the liquid that is not sprayed through the ullage, as well as any remaining liquid spray from the ullage, will rejoin the liquid mass of the tank, lowering the bulk temperature of the liquid. These combines effects provide for zero-boil off pressure control by lowering the tank pressure and the liquid saturation pressure simultaneously, ensuring the liquid stays subcooled. To model these complex mechanics and predict the performance of the active thermal control system, NASA is providing Eta Space with 3 parallel models of the tank. The approach of providing 3 different models allows for cross-checking and comparisons between the three to better understand how different modeling assumptions and selection semi-empirical factors affects the modeling result. Additionally, developing 3 models provides three different schemes for numerical simulation, providing confidence that results depict real physical phenomenon and not numerical quirks of the program. Within the tank thermodynamics, there are two primary areas of heat transfer we concern ourselves with: the heat transfer between the ullage space and the droplet spray, and between the ullage space and bulk liquid. For the droplet heat transfer, there are multiple sets of assumptions that can be made and correlations that can be used. Currently, two working models - the TankSIM model and Easy5 model – provide for an overview of the different approaches available. The TankSIM model and Easy5 model use two different models for droplet heating and evaporation that illustrate how the models use different types of mechanisms to arrive at the same answer. For the TankSIM model, droplets are treated as spheres of constant radius. Heat is transferred from the ullage to the droplet and warms the droplet until it reaches saturation, then the droplet begins evaporating and reducing its radius and mass. To calculate the heat transfer coefficient between the droplet and ullage, the Ranz-Marshall correlation is used. To determine the number of droplets in the ullage, a resident mass approach is used. This approach averages the number of droplets such that residuals at the start-up and shut-off of the spray bar cancel out. This same approach is used in the Easy5 model. The GFSSP model implements a linked list to track individual droplet “nodes” within the model. For the Easy5 model, the droplet is assumed to have an interface at a temperature equal to the saturation temperature corresponding to the pressure of the gas phase. The heat transfer from the gas to the interface and the interface to the droplet bulk is then calculated, and the net mass transfer between the droplet and interface is determined by performing an energy balance across the interface. For the gas side of the interface, the Ranz-Marshall correlation is used. For the liquid side of the interface, a variety of correlations were tried, including Kronig and Brink (1950) and effective conductivity models. As a result of these assumptions, the Easy5 model currently predicts faster depressurization, as at saturated vapor conditions, the heat transfer coeffect on the liquid side for the Easy5 model is greater than the heat transfer coefficient predicted by Ranz-Marshall used in the TankSIM code. This greater heat flux translates into faster condensation of the saturated ullage gas. At the bulk liquid to ullage interface, the models are in much closer agreement. Both models model the ullage as a sphere centered within the bulk liquid in the tank, and both use the energy-jumping boundary condition to model heat and mass transfer across the interface. There are slight differences in how the interface temperature is calculated, however. The Easy5 model assumes the temperature of the interface is equal to the saturation temperature associated with the pressure of the gas phase. The TankSIM model calculates this temperature with Alabovskii’s equation, which provides a correction factor for interface temperatures. Analysis tasks are focused on determining rates of depressurization within the tank during active cooling operation. To maintain net positive suction head at the pump inlet, the tank pressure cannot fall faster than the saturation pressure associated with the temperature of the bulk liquid. Additionally, there is interest in analyzing the performance of the loop at different pump speeds and cryocooler input powers. Adjusting the flowrate affects both the performance of the heat exchanger between the cryocooler and pumped liquid, and the heat transfer between the droplet spray and the ullage. Ideally, a pump speed and cryocooler power can be selected that will allow the tank to operate in zero-boil-off mode with a very narrow range of storage pressure.

zero boil-off↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Modeling and Simulation of Tank Pressure Control using Zero-Boil Off Active Thermal Control for LOXSAT Technology Demonstration Mission

To-date, research and modeling of cryogenic fluid management technologies (CFM) for spaceflight has been limited to ground tests, short-duration zero-g simulations (e.g. drop towers), and small-scale experiments on-orbit. There has not been a large-scale flight demonstration of a flight-like system. As future NASA missions to take humans further from Earth will require large, in-space cryogenic propulsion vehicles, it is imperative to begin collecting flight data for these systems to accurately model and design future vehicles. To meet this goal, NASA awarded tipping point technology demonstration awards to Eta Space, Lockheed Martin, Space Exploration Technologies (SpaceX), and United Launch Alliance (ULA) to demonstrate on-orbit storage and transfer of cryogenic propellant. For its award, Eta Space is developing LOXSAT-1. It is a small satellite that will be launched on a Rocket Lab Electron rocket. The spacecraft consists of a Rocket Lab Photon spacecraft bus with a primary payload of a spherical liquid oxygen (LOX) storage tank with thermodynamic control systems. The primary objective of the mission is to demonstrate zero-boil-off storage of liquid oxygen. To accomplish this objective, the payload is equipped with an active thermal control system fluid loop that consists of propellant management device (PMD), positive-displacement pump, heat exchanger connected to a cryocooler, and a spray bar mixing injector. When the fluid loop is operating, fluid is drawn from the tank by the PMD and pumped through the heat exchanger, lowering the fluid temperature below the fluid temperature in the tank. This subcooled liquid is then injected back into the tank through the spray bar. The subcooled injected liquid has two effects. If it is sprayed into the ullage space, the injected liquid will form into jets or droplets and exchange heat with the ullage gas. This will cool and condense the gas, reducing the pressure in the tank. Additionally, the liquid that is not sprayed through the ullage, as well as any remaining liquid spray from the ullage, will rejoin the liquid mass of the tank, lowering the bulk temperature of the liquid. These combines effects provide for zero-boil off pressure control by lowering the tank pressure and the liquid saturation pressure simultaneously, ensuring the liquid stays subcooled. To model these complex mechanics and predict the performance of the active thermal control system, NASA is providing Eta Space with 3 parallel models of the tank. The approach of providing 3 different models allows for cross-checking and comparisons between the three to better understand how different modeling assumptions and selection semi-empirical factors affects the modeling result. Additionally, developing 3 models provides three different schemes for numerical simulation, providing confidence that results depict real physical phenomenon and not numerical quirks of the program. Within the tank thermodynamics, there are two primary areas of heat transfer we concern ourselves with: the heat transfer between the ullage space and the droplet spray, and between the ullage space and bulk liquid. For the droplet heat transfer, there are multiple sets of assumptions that can be made and correlations that can be used. Currently, two working models - the TankSIM model and Easy5 model – provide for an overview of the different approaches available. The TankSIM model and Easy5 model use two different models for droplet heating and evaporation that illustrate how the models use different types of mechanisms to arrive at the same answer. For the TankSIM model, droplets are treated as spheres of constant radius. Heat is transferred from the ullage to the droplet and warms the droplet until it reaches saturation, then the droplet begins evaporating and reducing its radius and mass. To calculate the heat transfer coefficient between the droplet and ullage, the Ranz-Marshall correlation is used. To determine the number of droplets in the ullage, a resident mass approach is used. This approach averages the number of droplets such that residuals at the start-up and shut-off of the spray bar cancel out. This same approach is used in the Easy5 model. The GFSSP model implements a linked list to track individual droplet “nodes” within the model. For the Easy5 model, the droplet is assumed to have an interface at a temperature equal to the saturation temperature corresponding to the pressure of the gas phase. The heat transfer from the gas to the interface and the interface to the droplet bulk is then calculated, and the net mass transfer between the droplet and interface is determined by performing an energy balance across the interface. For the gas side of the interface, the Ranz-Marshall correlation is used. For the liquid side of the interface, a variety of correlations were tried, including Kronig and Brink (1950) and effective conductivity models. As a result of these assumptions, the Easy5 model currently predicts faster depressurization, as at saturated vapor conditions, the heat transfer coeffect on the liquid side for the Easy5 model is greater than the heat transfer coefficient predicted by Ranz-Marshall used in the TankSIM code. This greater heat flux translates into faster condensation of the saturated ullage gas. At the bulk liquid to ullage interface, the models are in much closer agreement. Both models model the ullage as a sphere centered within the bulk liquid in the tank, and both use the energy-jumping boundary condition to model heat and mass transfer across the interface. There are slight differences in how the interface temperature is calculated, however. The Easy5 model assumes the temperature of the interface is equal to the saturation temperature associated with the pressure of the gas phase. The TankSIM model calculates this temperature with Alabovskii’s equation, which provides a correction factor for interface temperatures. Analysis tasks are focused on determining rates of depressurization within the tank during active cooling operation. To maintain net positive suction head at the pump inlet, the tank pressure cannot fall faster than the saturation pressure associated with the temperature of the bulk liquid. Additionally, there is interest in analyzing the performance of the loop at different pump speeds and cryocooler input powers. Adjusting the flowrate affects both the performance of the heat exchanger between the cryocooler and pumped liquid, and the heat transfer between the droplet spray and the ullage. Ideally, a pump speed and cryocooler power can be selected that will allow the tank to operate in zero-boil-off mode with a very narrow range of storage pressure.

zero boil-off↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Modeling and Simulation of Tank Pressure Control using Zero-Boiloff Active Thermal Control for LOXSAT Technology Demonstration Mission

To-date, research and modeling of cryogenic fluid management technologies (CFM) for spaceflight has been limited to ground tests, short-duration zero-g simulations (e.g. drop towers), and small-scale experiments on-orbit. There has not been a large-scale flight demonstration of a flight-like system. As future NASA missions to take humans further from Earth will require large, in-space cryogenic propulsion vehicles, it is imperative to begin collecting flight data for these systems to accurately model and design future vehicles. To meet this goal, NASA awarded tipping point technology demonstration awards to Eta Space, Lockheed Martin, Space Exploration Technologies (SpaceX), and United Launch Alliance (ULA) to demonstrate on-orbit storage and transfer of cryogenic propellant. For its award, Eta Space is developing LOXSAT-1. It is a small satellite that will be launched on a Rocket Lab Electron rocket. The spacecraft consists of a Rocket Lab Photon spacecraft bus with a primary payload of a spherical liquid oxygen (LOX) storage tank with thermodynamic control systems. The primary objective of the mission is to demonstrate zero-boil-off storage of liquid oxygen. To accomplish this objective, the payload is equipped with an active thermal control system fluid loop that consists of propellant management device (PMD), positive-displacement pump, heat exchanger connected to a cryocooler, and a spray bar mixing injector. When the fluid loop is operating, fluid is drawn from the tank by the PMD and pumped through the heat exchanger, lowering the fluid temperature below the fluid temperature in the tank. This subcooled liquid is then injected back into the tank through the spray bar. The subcooled injected liquid has two effects. If it is sprayed into the ullage space, the injected liquid will form into jets or droplets and exchange heat with the ullage gas. This will cool and condense the gas, reducing the pressure in the tank. Additionally, the liquid that is not sprayed through the ullage, as well as any remaining liquid spray from the ullage, will rejoin the liquid mass of the tank, lowering the bulk temperature of the liquid. These combines effects provide for zero-boil off pressure control by lowering the tank pressure and the liquid saturation pressure simultaneously, ensuring the liquid stays subcooled. To model these complex mechanics and predict the performance of the active thermal control system, NASA is providing Eta Space with 3 parallel models of the tank. The approach of providing 3 different models allows for cross-checking and comparisons between the three to better understand how different modeling assumptions and selection semi-empirical factors affects the modeling result. Additionally, developing 3 models provides three different schemes for numerical simulation, providing confidence that results depict real physical phenomenon and not numerical quirks of the program. Within the tank thermodynamics, there are two primary areas of heat transfer we concern ourselves with: the heat transfer between the ullage space and the droplet spray, and between the ullage space and bulk liquid. For the droplet heat transfer, there are multiple sets of assumptions that can be made and correlations that can be used. Currently, two working models - the TankSIM model and Easy5 model – provide for an overview of the different approaches available. The TankSIM model and Easy5 model use two different models for droplet heating and evaporation that illustrate how the models use different types of mechanisms to arrive at the same answer. For the TankSIM model, droplets are treated as spheres of constant radius. Heat is transferred from the ullage to the droplet and warms the droplet until it reaches saturation, then the droplet begins evaporating and reducing its radius and mass. To calculate the heat transfer coefficient between the droplet and ullage, the Ranz-Marshall correlation is used. To determine the number of droplets in the ullage, a resident mass approach is used. This approach averages the number of droplets such that residuals at the start-up and shut-off of the spray bar cancel out. This same approach is used in the Easy5 model. The GFSSP model implements a linked list to track individual droplet “nodes” within the model. For the Easy5 model, the droplet is assumed to have an interface at a temperature equal to the saturation temperature corresponding to the pressure of the gas phase. The heat transfer from the gas to the interface and the interface to the droplet bulk is then calculated, and the net mass transfer between the droplet and interface is determined by performing an energy balance across the interface. For the gas side of the interface, the Ranz-Marshall correlation is used. For the liquid side of the interface, a variety of correlations were tried, including Kronig and Brink (1950) and effective conductivity models. As a result of these assumptions, the Easy5 model currently predicts faster depressurization, as at saturated vapor conditions, the heat transfer coeffect on the liquid side for the Easy5 model is greater than the heat transfer coefficient predicted by Ranz-Marshall used in the TankSIM code. This greater heat flux translates into faster condensation of the saturated ullage gas. At the bulk liquid to ullage interface, the models are in much closer agreement. Both models model the ullage as a sphere centered within the bulk liquid in the tank, and both use the energy-jumping boundary condition to model heat and mass transfer across the interface. There are slight differences in how the interface temperature is calculated, however. The Easy5 model assumes the temperature of the interface is equal to the saturation temperature associated with the pressure of the gas phase. The TankSIM model calculates this temperature with Alabovskii’s equation, which provides a correction factor for interface temperatures. Analysis tasks are focused on determining rates of depressurization within the tank during active cooling operation. To maintain net positive suction head at the pump inlet, the tank pressure cannot fall faster than the saturation pressure associated with the temperature of the bulk liquid. Additionally, there is interest in analyzing the performance of the loop at different pump speeds and cryocooler input powers. Adjusting the flowrate affects both the performance of the heat exchanger between the cryocooler and pumped liquid, and the heat transfer between the droplet spray and the ullage. Ideally, a pump speed and cryocooler power can be selected that will allow the tank to operate in zero-boil-off mode with a very narrow range of storage pressure.

zero boil-off↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

NASA Small Spacecraft Technology Program

This presentation provides an overview of the technology demonstration missions, Tipping Point, and Announcement of Collaboration Opportunity projects managed by the Small Spacecraft Technology program. It also provides brief mentions of major NASA missions and programs.

Roger C. Hunter↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Carbothermal Reduction Demonstration: Laser Driven Reaction in a Thermal-Vacuum Environment and Project Status

Introduction: Lunar regolith is approximately 45% oxygen by mass. The majority of the oxygen is bound in silicate minerals. The carbothermal reduction process has been proven to be effective at removing oxygen from lunar regolith simulants [1]. The Carbothermal Reduction Demonstration (CaRD) project aims to increase the Technology Readiness Level (TRL) of a combined solar concentrator and carbothermal reduction systemin order to demonstrate this technology on the lunar surface. The CaRD project is divided into two design cycles, a brass board and prototype. The status of both design cycles will be discussed, as well as concepts for how this technology can be applied to the Artemis program in the future. Brassboard Vacuum Test: For the brassboard demonstration, a 2 kW Nd-YAG laser was used to heat lunar regolith simulant within a carbothermal reactor developed by Sierra Space. The reactor was placed inside of a 15 ft thermal vacuum chamber at the Johnson Space Center. The resulting reaction products were analyzed using both a gas chromotograph and mass spectrometer provided by Kennedy Space Center. Thermal data was also collected. Prototype Design: For the prototype, the CaRD team will perform another thermal vacuum test at JSC using the same interfaces and assets developed for the brassboard but will test a new carbothermal reactor design that Sierra Space is developing through the Carbothermal Oxygen Production Reactor (COPR) Tipping Point project that will include a means to autonomously move regolith in and out of the reactor. In addition, a deployable solar concentrator is being developed by Glenn Research Center using mirrors produced by Carbon Mirror Applications. The solar concentrator will be used to deliver solar energy into a carbothermal reactor to melt regolith and extract oxygen. Avionics and software for the concentrator are being developed by Kennedy Space Center. Future Concepts: An ongoing task within the CaRD project is to update models that can be used to determine the mass, power, and size of In-Situ Resource Utilization concepts at various scales. These models can now be used to analyze alternatives for future applications based on the latest available data.

A J Paz↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Carbothermal Reduction Demonstration (CaRD)

Introduction: Lunar regolith is approximately 45% oxygen by mass. The majority of the oxygen is bound in silicate minerals. The carbothermal reduction process has been proven to be effective at removing oxygen from lunar regolith simulants. The Carbothermal Reduction Demonstration (CaRD) project aims to increase the Technology Readiness Level (TRL) of a combined solar concentrator and carbothermal reduction systemin order to demonstrate this technology on the lunar surface. The CaRD project is divided into two design cycles, a brass board and prototype. The status of both design cycles will be discussed, as well as concepts for how this technology can be applied to the Artemis program in the future. Brassboard Vacuum Test: For the brassboard demonstration, a 2 kW Nd-YAG laser was used to heat lunar regolith simulant within a carbothermal reactor developed by Sierra Space. The reactor was placed inside of a 15 ft thermal vacuum chamber at the Johnson Space Center. The resulting reaction products were analyzed using both a gas chromotograph and mass spectrometer provided by Kennedy Space Center. Thermal data was also collected. Prototype Design: For the prototype, the CaRD team will perform another thermal vacuum test at JSC using the same interfaces and assets developed for the brassboard but will test a new carbothermal reactor design that Sierra Space is developing through the Carbothermal Oxygen Production Reactor (COPR) Tipping Point project that will include a means to autonomously move regolith in and out of the reactor. In addition, a deployable solar concentrator is being developed by Glenn Research Center using mirrors produced by Carbon Mirror Applications. The solar concentrator will be used to deliver solar energy into a carbothermal reactor to melt regolith and extract oxygen. Avionics and software for the concentrator are being developed by Kennedy Space Center. Future Concepts: An ongoing task within the CaRD project is to update models that can be used to determine the mass, power, and size of In-Situ Resource Utilization concepts at various scales. These models can now be used to analyze alternatives for future applications based on the latest available data.

Aaron Paz↗
NASA NTRS2022

Performance Analysis of Terrain Relative Navigation Using Blue Origin New Shepard Suborbital Flight Telemetry

As part of a NASA Tipping Point Partnership with Blue Origin to mature precision lunar landing technologies, two test flights of the Blue Origin New Shepard vehicle carrying a NASA-developed sensor suite were conducted on 10/13/2020 and 08/26/2021 at the West Texas Launch Site (LS-1). Part of the acquired datasets, comprising data from an inertial measurement unit and a downward facing camera, was postprocessed through a JPL-developed prototype Visual Odometry and Map Relative Localization software (TRNVOSIM), and compared against ground truth acquired by the host vehicle navigation system. In this paper, we provide a description of the algorithms, the test setup, and the processed results.

Pedrotty, Samuel M.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

AMOC Stability in GISS-E2-1-G: A Case of Stochastic Bifurcation

A 10-member ensemble simulation using the NASA GISS-E2-1-G climate model shows a clear bifurcation in the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation (AMOC) strength under the SSP2-4.5 future scenario, leading to 8 stable AMOC-on and 2 stable AMOC-off climate states after 400 years of integration, despite identical forcing of each ensemble member. Ocean models have previously shown a tipping point where sufficient forcing (e.g. by freshwater inputs) can shut down the AMOC. A variety of fully coupled models have demonstrated this, either through hosing experiments or increased precipitation and warming at high latitudes due to increased concentrations of greenhouse gases. In the GISS simulations, there are no external freshwater perturbations. The bifurcation arises freely in the coupled system and is the result of stochastic variability associated with sea-ice transport and melting in the Irminger Sea following a slowing of the GHG concentration increase at the end of the twenty-first century. We believe this is the first time that a CMIP-class model has shown such a bifurcation across an initial condition ensemble.

GISS ModelE2.1↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Global Climate Impacts of Greenland and Antarctic Glacial Melt: A Comparative Study

A 10-member ensemble simulation using the NASA GISS-E2-1-G climate model shows a clear bifurcation in the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation (AMOC) strength under the SSP2-4.5 future scenario, leading to 8 stable AMOC-on and 2 stable AMOC-off climate states after 400 years of integration, despite identical forcing of each ensemble member. Ocean models have previously shown a tipping point where sufficient forcing (e.g. by freshwater inputs) can shut down the AMOC. A variety of fully coupled models have demonstrated this, either through hosing experiments or increased precipitation and warming at high latitudes due to increased concentrations of greenhouse gases. In the GISS simulations, there are no external freshwater perturbations. The bifurcation arises freely in the coupled system and is the result of stochastic variability associated with sea-ice transport and melting in the Irminger Sea following a slowing of the GHG concentration increase at the end of the twenty-first century. We believe this is the first time that a CMIP-class model has shown such a bifurcation across an initial condition ensemble.

GISS ModelE2.1↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Update on NASA’s ISRU Development and Mission Plans for the Artemis Program

In 2017, NASA initiated the Artemis program to send astronauts back to the lunar surface, create a sustainable human lunar exploration program, and lead the first human exploration mission to the Mars surface. While much of NASA’s plans for the Artemis program currently focus on the Human Lunar Return and the ability for astronauts to explore the lunar surface for limited durations each year, the longer-term vision for the Artemis program is to enable sustained human exploration and commercial operations in cis-lunar space and the lunar surface. An important aspect of achieving this long-term vision, is to better understand and characterize the resources on the Moon and Mars and learn how to extract and use these resources. Known as In Situ Resource Utilization (ISRU), the identification, mapping, extraction, and processing of space resources has the potential to greatly reduce the cost and risk of human exploration. These are achieved by reducing what needs to be delivered from Earth and the dependency on these supplies, lowering costs through commercial operations, and expanding infrastructure for safer and more capable exploration and surface operations. To guide development of ISRU technologies and systems on the ground and demonstrate these capabilities on the Moon and Mars, the NASA Space Technology Mission Directorate (STMD) created and released the ISRU Envisioned Future Priorities (EFP) strategic plan in 2022 and updated it in 2023. While lunar ISRU technology development had already started, these publicly released strategic plans have been used to guide and prioritize technology development, and assess the progress in achieving the vision. Since the release of the ISRU EFP, there have been several significant activities/events that have occurred with respect to human lunar exploration, surface infrastructure, and ISRU. One was the release of the Artemis Architecture Definition Document Revision 1 that included ISRU as a sub-architecture. The second was the release of several STMD solicitations including the Announcement of Collaborative Opportunities (ACO) and Tipping Point (TP). The third was the release of a Request for Information for the Lunar Infrastructure Foundational Technology-1 (LIFT-1) mission with the primary objective of extracting oxygen from lunar regolith. The fourth was the release of STMD technology and capability Shortfalls, and the review, ranking by numerous stakeholders and individuals, and subsequent prioritization of the Shortfalls that will be utilized in future solicitation and development plans. This paper will provide an overview and status of on-going technology and system development activities, an update of ISRU into the Artemis campaign, an update on ISRU-related mission, and the impacts of the Shortfall prioritization.

NASA↗
NASA NTRS2026

Swamp Works Regolith Compaction Technologies

While the level of compaction below the lunar surface increases quickly after only a few cm of depth, in many cases during a construction mission there will be a need to excavate and transport regolith to a new location for cut-and-fill or horizontal construction of structures such as berms. In these cases to achieve high levels of bulk density, compaction must be per-formed. Additionally, in some cases surface technolo-gies such as systems that sinter/melt the surface may desire the maximum possible compaction at the sur-face to improve melting/heating performance and the final material strength properties. Kennedy Space Center’s (KSC) Swamp Works has developed two means of compaction, lunar and mar-tian compaction. Planetary Autonomous Compaction Technology (PACT) which is part of the Multifunction End Effector for Regolith Compaction Acquisition and Transfer (MEERCAT [1]) robotic arm end effector system’s capabilities and the Site Preparation Tooling for Operations on Mobility Platforms (STOMP [2]) vibratory roller compactor. PACT on MEERCAT has been demonstrated to a TRL 5 and STOMP to a TRL 4 in ambient testing. The results of PACT on MEERCAT and STOMP testing will be shared with results for various simulants including BP-1, ICN-LHT-1G (aka CSM-LHT-1G), RDW-LHT-1GH (a simulant developed for the Mason Tipping Point to match characteristics of ICN-LHT-1G), and Exolith LHS-1E. This will also include discus-sions on methods used to verify relative density before and after compaction and means to verify density effects below depth. To calculate relative density, maximum and minimum densities for simulants were taken from literature [3] [4] [5] and additional lab test-ing (publication in work).

vibration↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Swamp Works Regolith Compaction Technologies

While the level of compaction below the lunar surface increases quickly after only a few cm of depth, in many cases during a construction mission there will be a need to excavate and transport regolith to a new location for cut-and-fill or horizontal construction of structures such as berms. In these cases to achieve high levels of bulk density, compaction must be per-formed. Additionally, in some cases surface technologies such as systems that sinter/melt the surface may desire the maximum possible compaction at the sur-face to improve melting/heating performance and the final material strength properties. Kennedy Space Center’s (KSC) Swamp Works has developed two means of compaction, lunar and mar-tian compaction. Planetary Autonomous Compaction Technology (PACT) which is part of the Multifunction End Effector for Regolith Compaction Acquisition and Transfer (MEERCAT) robotic arm end effector system’s capabilities and the Site Preparation Tooling for Operations on Mobility Platforms (STOMP) vibratory roller compactor. PACT on MEERCAT has been demonstrated to a TRL 5 and STOMP to a TRL 4 in ambient testing. The results of PACT on MEERCAT and STOMP testing will be shared with results for various simulants including BP-1, ICN-LHT-1G (aka CSM-LHT-1G), RDW-LHT-1GH (a simulant developed for the Mason Tipping Point to match characteristics of ICN-LHT-1G), and Exolith LHS-1E. This will also include discussions on methods used to verify relative density before and after compaction and means to verify density effects below depth. To calculate relative density, maximum and minimum densities for simulants were taken from literature and additional lab testing (publication in work).

redwire↗
DOE OSTI2023

Multiscale spatial analysis of fracture nodes in two dimensions

Spatial arrangement of fractures as a function of scale is an important component of fracture quantification for inferential and predictive modeling. Available methods that analyze fracture spatial arrangement are based on one-dimensional spacing data; therefore, they are limited to semi-parallel fractures. Such methods cannot be applied to fracture networks in higher dimensions, particularly when fractures have different orientations. Here to characterize fracture arrangements in two dimensions, we propose using Ripley’s K-function, as a method of point pattern analysis, to quantify spatial arrangement of fracture nodes. Fracture nodes, such as barycenters, intersection points, and tips, are point-based representations of fracture locations and connectivity within the fracture network. We introduce formulations for isotropic as well as directional analyses of spatial arrangement. In addition, we derive formulations for edge correction in circular and rectangular study domains. Finally, we demonstrate applications of Ripley’s K-function on two natural fracture datasets. Our proposed method supports quantification and characterization of fracture spatial arrangements that allow practitioners to build representative models of fractures in the subsurface.

02 PETROLEUM↗
NASA NTRS1987

Analysis of induced velocities in the wake of a hovering helicopter rotor

A simple analytical method has been developed to predict the induced velocities at the tip vortex in the wake of a hovering helicopter rotor. The wake model in the analysis includes the blade bound vortex as well as a tip vortex and vortex sheet trailed from each blade. Standard, prescribed wake models were used to describe the geometry of the tip vortex and the vortex sheet. Curved vortex elements were used to model the tip vortices and the vortex sheets. The analysis was used to study the contribution from each wake component to the axial-induced velocity of the tip vortex. Results show a highly variable induced velocity at the tip vortex both before and after the first blade passage. However, the prescribed tip vortex models require a constant axial velocity of the tip vortex. This inconsistency between the prescribed axial velocity of the tip vortex and the velocity that the wake geometry induces on the tip vortex points to a limitation of the current prescribed tip vortex geometry models.

Light, Jeffrey S.↗
NASA NTRS1986

Propeller noise caused by blade tip radial forces

New experimental evidence which indicates the presence of leading edge and tip edge vortex flow on Prop-Fans is examined, and performance and noise consequences are addressed. It was shown that the tip edge vortex is a significant noise source, particularly for unswept Prop-Fan blades. Preliminary calculations revealed that the addition of the tip side edge source to single rotation Prop-Fans during take off conditions improved the agreement between experiment and theory at blade passing frequency. At high-speed conditions such as the Prop-Fan cruise point, the tip loading effect tends to cancel thickness noise.

Hanson, D. B.↗