SEARCH · Engineering Papers
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.
For presentation at, and publication in the proceedings of, the AMPP Annual Conference + Expo 2024, New Orleans, LA, March 3-7, 2024.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
The atomization of a liquid jet is a multi-scale and multi-physics problem of interest for many engineering applications. Particularly, it drives the fuel-oxidizer mixing and dictates the efficiency of combustion engines. High-fidelity multi-phase simulations remain challenging due to the excessive computational cost required to capture all the atomization scales. Thus, atomization models are necessary to represent sub-grid liquid structures. Here, in this work, a modified Σ-Y model in the context of Eulerian-Lagrangian Spray Atomization (ELSA) is used to transport the surface area density of the spray. The model's predictive performance is assessed under various operating conditions relevant to heavy-duty engines using the Engine Combustion Network (ECN) Spray C and Spray D research-grade injectors. The classic droplet collision formulation of the Σ-Y model alone does not replicate the response of the measured spray surface area to changes in injector, ambient pressure, and injection pressure, requiring individual tuning of the model's parameters. Instead, a transition between dense and dilute spray breakup mechanisms is proposed in terms of the average droplet spacing. The collision breakup mechanism represents the dilute spray, whereas the droplet size in the dense spray is driven by a competition between the integral scale of turbulence and the balance between the turbulent kinetic energy and the surface energy of the droplets. Such an approach minimizes the requirements for model tuning. Moreover, the role of the constants of a compressible standard k-ε RANS model is assessed in the injector's internal flow and external spray simulation framework, and an updated set is proposed. The results are validated against x-ray radiography and Ultra-Small Angle X-ray Scattering (USAXS) data and highlight the predictive capabilities of the proposed physics-driven Σ-Y model, which is compatible with engine simulation turnaround times.
Liquid fuel dispersion in practical systems is typically achieved by spraying the fuel into a polydisperse distribution of droplets evaporating and burning in a turbulent gaseous environment. In view of the nearly unsurmountable difficulties of this two-phase flow, it would be useful to use an experimental arrangement that allow a systematic study of spray evolution and burning in configurations of gradually increasing levels of complexity, starting from laminar sprays to fully turbulent ones. An Electrostatic Spray (ES) of charged droplets lends itself to this type of combustion experiments under well-defined conditions and can be used to synthesize gradually more complex spray environments. In its simplest configuration, a liquid is fed into a small metal tube maintained at several kilovolts relative to a ground electrode few centimeters away. Under the action of the electric field, the liquid meniscus at the outlet of the capillary takes a conical shape, with a thin jet emerging from the cone tip. This jet breaks up farther downstream into a fine spray of charged droplets. Several advantages distinguish the electrospray from alternative atomization techniques: the self-dispersion property of the spray due to coulombic repulsion; the absence of droplet coalescence; the potential control of the trajectories of charged droplets by suitable disposition of electrostatic fields; and the decoupling of atomization, which is strictly electrostatic, from gas flow processes. Furthermore, as recently shown in our laboratory, the electrospray can produce quasi-monodisperse droplets over a very broad size range (1-100 microns). The ultimate objective of this research project is to study the formation and burning of electrosprays of liquid fuels first in laminar regimes and then in turbulent ones. Combustion will eventually be investigated in conditions of three-dimensional droplet-droplet interaction, for which experimental studies have been limited to either qualitative observations in sprays or more quantitative observations on simplified systems consisting of a small number of droplets or droplet arrays. The compactness and potential controllability of this spray generaiton system makes it appealing for studies to be undertaken in the next two years on electrospray combustion in reduced-gravity environments such as those achievable at NASA microgravity test facilities.
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.
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.
Changes in land use over the past century have contributed to substantial losses of longleaf pine (Pinus palustris) woodlands in the southeastern USA and replacement with higher density, mixed pine and hardwood stands that suppress understory development and limit application of prescribed fire. To increase understanding of limiting factors and identify potential approaches for restoring longleaf pine woodlands, we studied in this work initial availability of light and soil water and 2-year (2018–2019) plant community responses after controlling overstory hardwoods in five remnant longleaf pine woodlands having no evidence of previous agriculture at the Savannah River Site near Aiken, SC, USA. Seven hardwood control treatments and a non-treated check were compared in a randomized compete block experiment: cutting, cutting + shredding of logging residues, stem injection with imazapyr herbicide, cutting + basal spray with imazapyr herbicide, cutting + basal spray with triclopyr herbicide, cutting + directed foliar spray with a mixture of glyphosate and imazapyr herbicides, and cutting + broadcast foliar spray with the same herbicide mixture. In the year prior to hardwood cutting (2016), understory light availability averaged 23% of full sun. Throughout the year of treatment installation (2017), average soil water content (SWC) was below permanent wilting point (5.5% SWC) where overstory hardwoods were retained; whereas, it was above wilting point (7.5%) where they had been cut. Thus, combined effects of shade and root competition from overstory hardwoods probably limited cover of herbaceous species in the non-treated check. In the 2 years following treatment, hardwood survival averaged > 99%, 62%, 42% and < 1% for the non-treated check, cutting, shredding, and herbicide treatments, respectively. Relative to the non-treated check, herbaceous species richness was increased by shredding, stem injection, basal spray, or directed foliar treatments; herbaceous cover was increased by basal spray or directed foliar treatments; and woody cover was decreased by directed or broadcast foliar treatments. The directed foliar spray was the most effective treatment for achieving many of the desired understory characteristics of a longleaf pine woodland, including a diverse understory dominated by herbaceous vegetation capable of supporting periodic prescribed fires. Although the imazapyr basal spray treatment increased cover of remnant woodland indicator species, none of the treatments increased richness of this species group, suggesting that restoration of native species composition will be expedited by enrichment seedings or plantings.
Since 2015, the automotive industry has regularly observed sharp increases in customer complaints of poor driveability and increased warranty claims during the months of September and October. These persistent seasonal complaint increases have been tracked to occur from increased abnormal combustion events that coincide with the seasonal transition from summer to winter fuel volatility, beginning on September 15th annually. The Reid Vapor Pressure (RVP) of gasoline during this seasonal transition has been found to be the primary property attributed to this annual issue. It’s hypothesized that an increase in volatile butanes and pentanes from advanced petroleum recovery techniques and hydrofracking production has hastened the transition from summer to winter fuel volatility in the marketplace, rather than the gradual increase of the RVP over time as historically intended. At worst, mid-winter fuel, with an RVP ranging from 12 to 16 psi, depending on location in the U.S., enters the market while ambient temperatures can still be above average for the winter season. This combination of high volatility fuel with unseasonably warm weather will increase fuel system flash boiling, injector spray cavitation, and spray collapse inside the engine’s combustion chamber, ultimately linking fuel property variations to abnormal engine combustion processes. This CRADA program will investigate these known knowledge gaps by coupling with two national laboratories, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, and the National Renewable Energy Laboratory to employ both unique tools and expertise throughout the industry to provide the insight, knowledge, and data critical to understand the observed interactions. Overall findings of this work are that fuel wall retention increased SPI proportionally, and fuels with an increased distillation (i.e. energy fraction) above the wall temperature increased fuel retention. Likewise fuels with increased enthalpy of vaporization (HoV) increased fuel retention proportional to the temperature reduction from the HoV (~13K reduction in this work). Thus, fuel with increased HoV and increased fuel distillation above the linear temperature also exhibited increased SPI rates. Fuel with high RVP did exhibit increased fuel spray collapse form spray imaging measurements, but in SPI testing the high volatility of these fuels at the tested conditions did not necessarily increase SPI rates despite exhibiting increased spray collapse in injector imaging and increased spray-wall impingement measured in fired engine testing. It was also found that spray imaging showed collapse was possible at throttled conditions, but this was not relevant to high boost pressures relevant to SPI conditions, however, under transient load and or speed encountered in real-world operation fuel spray collapse could affect fuel retention and real-world SPI that were not probed in the automated high load test sequence of this work.
An apparatus to catch paint overspray has been proposed. Overspray is an unavoidable parasitic component of spray that occurs because the flow of air or other gas in the spray must turn at the sprayed surface. Very small droplets are carried away in this turning flow, and some land on adjacent surfaces not meant to be painted. The basic principle of the paint-spray catcher is to divert the overspray into a suction system at the boundary of the area to be painted. The paint-spray catcher (see figure) would include a toroidal plenum connected through narrow throat to a nozzle that would face toward the center of the torus, which would be positioned over the center of the area to be spray-painted. The plenum would be supported by four tubes that would also serve as suction exhaust ducts. The downstream ends of the tubes (not shown in the figure) would be connected to a filter on a suction pump. The pump would be rated to provide a suction mass flow somewhat greater than that of the directed spray gas stream, so that the nozzle would take in a small excess of surrounding gas and catch nearly all of the overspray. A small raised lip at the bottom edge of the nozzle would catch paint that landed inside the nozzle. Even if the paint is directly piston pumped, the droplets entrain an air flow by time they approach the wall, so there is always a gas stream to carry the excess droplets to the side. For long-duration spraying operations, it could be desirable to include a suction-drain apparatus to prevent overflowing and dripping of paint from inside the lip. A version without an external contraction and with the throat angled downward would be a more compact version of catcher, although it might be slightly less efficient.
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.
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.
Micro-cold spray, also commonly referred to as the aerosol deposition method or vacuum kinetic spraying, is a process for depositing nanostructured films of metals and ceramics by impacting solid nanoparticles at high velocity onto a substrate at room temperature and at low pressures. Tantalum films deposited by micro-cold spray are desirable because tantalum is non-reactive to certain molten metals and can therefore serve as a non-reactive barrier coating. However, unlike most other metals deposited by micro-cold spray, tantalum quickly forms an oxide layer when exposed to air. In the deposition of films using traditional cold spray with much larger particles, native oxides must fracture for particle–substrate bonding to occur. Furthermore, the fraction of the particle that is oxidized in micro-cold spray and the strain rates experienced by the particles upon impact are both much larger than in cold spray, suggesting that the role of the oxide on film deposition may be distinct. The effect of this oxide layer on particle deformation and adherence to a substrate under high strain rates is studied using molecular dynamics simulations. The effect of oxide layer thickness, particle diameter, and impact velocity are examined.