Results for “Activity” — Page 75

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.

Cameron J. Hines↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

A Preliminary Assessment of Physical Demand during Simulated Lunar Surface Extravehicular Activities

Returning to the moon requires many advances in current space technology. One major aspect of this development is a new exploration spacesuit (xEMU). Taking lessons learned from Apollo era suitsand the Extravehicular Mobility Unit (EMU) used on the International Space Station (ISS), xEMU will have increased mobility, dust mitigation, headspace, glove fit, and life support capabilities. Artemis astronauts in xEMU will complete a far more rigorous Extravehicular Activity (EVA) schedule than Apolloand ISS. Notably, metabolic rates during Apollo lunar EVA tasks were observed to be up to 50% lower than similar tasks performed in a ground analog environment under simulated partial gravity with newer suits. Therefore, understanding the physical demands of lunar surface exploration operations is criticalto ensuring best outcomes operating within the constraints of xEMU and planning for exploration EVA activities. This study utilized the Active Response Gravity Offload System (ARGOS) to simulate the lunar environment and continuously offload subjects to lunar gravity. Two male subjects completed two days of EVAs wearing the pressurized Mark III spacesuit, completing suit fit and mobility checks, as well as simulated lander operations, cable routing, crew rescue, geology, payload relocation, and traverse tasks in an end-to-end EVA (E2E) task block and standalone (SA) task blocks. We recorded continuous values of metabolic rate (MR) and heart rate (HR) to assess physical demand. During the E2E task block, subjects did not rest between tasks to simulate continuous effort from task to task, as in real EVAs. In comparison, subjects had a 5-minute break after each SA task block to allow for the metabolic rate and heart rate to return to baseline.MR values were categorized as low (≤ 700 BTU/hr), medium (700-1000 BTU/HR), and high (≥ 1000 BTU/hr), while HR values were categorized as low (≤150) and high (>150). During the 16 tasks in the E2E block, subjects averaged low MR in 6% of tasks, medium MR in 47% of tasks, and high MR in 47% of tasks. While MR was consistent between subjects, Subject 1 averaged low HR for 100% of these tasks, while Subject 2 averaged low HR in 44% of tasks. During the 23 tasks in the SA task blocks, subjects averaged low MR in 26% of tasks, medium MR in 52% of tasks, and high MR in 22% of tasks. Again, HR was different between subjects, with subject 1 averaging low HR in 100% of these tasks while subject 2 averaged low HR in 70%. Across all tasks in this study, subjects reached maximum MR and HR values during a 500m traverse at 30% grade in the E2E block (subject 1: 1747 BTU/hr, 150 BPM; subject 2: 1656 BTU/hr, 177 BPM).Understanding the physical demand to complete exploration EVA tasks will be instrumental to the future success of exploration spacesuit designs and missions. Further work in this study will be needed to characterize MR during exploration EVA tasks, including expanding the subject pool and testing new suit designs.

Taylor E Schlotman↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Coolant Leak from ISS External Active Thermal Control System (EATCS) – An Examination of Most Probable

The Port (P1) and Starboard (S1) External Active Thermal Control Systems (EATCS) are single phase, mechanically pumped ammonia loops that operate independently to cool majority of the hardware and payloads onboard the International Space Station (ISS). A slow ammonia leak was detected using pressure and quantity telemetry five years after the P1 EATCS was activated. The leak gradually accelerated to a rate that locating and isolating the leak became imperative to maintain cooling capability. Partial pressure measurements from the Robotic External Leak Locator (RELL) scan surveys narrowed the search to the supply and return jumpers connecting one of three radiators to the system. Subsequently, the ISS crew performed high-definition video surveys during an Extravehicular Activity (EVA), or spacewalk, and ammonia flakes were observed projecting from the jumpers. Thus, the ground teams were confident that the culprit of the ammonia leak were the jumpers. The ammonia leak stopped after ground teams remotely isolated and vented those jumpers and associated radiator. Both jumpers were removed and returned to the ground, and a root cause investigation was conducted. A calibrated leak test determined the bulk of the ammonia leaked through a pair of seals in a Quick Disconnect (QD), or connector, on one end of the return jumper. The return jumper QD was dissected, visually inspected, chemically tested and evaluated. The results indicated the most probable cause of the accelerating ammonia leak was due to defective seals, plating delamination underneath the seals, and on-orbit thermal cycles exacerbating the delamination. Both jumpers were refurbished, relaunched to the ISS, and scheduled to be reinstalled during an EVA in 2022. It appeared the issue was unique, but recently the S1 EATCS is showing signs of an accelerating ammonia leak, and RELL scans narrowed the source to a similar pair of radiator jumpers.

Darnell Cowan↗

NASA NTRS2022

The 2023 Meteor Shower Activity Forecast for Low Earth Orbit

The purpose of this document is to provide a forecast of major meteor shower activity in low Earth orbit (LEO). Most annual showers are expected to display typical activity, but the eta Aquariids (ETA) are expected to display more than double their typical activity level.

Althea Moorhead↗

NASA NTRS2023

Actively Controlled Louver for Human Spacecraft Radiator Ultraviolet (UV), Dust, and Freeze Protection

The paper examines the use of actively controlled louvers for human spacecraft radiators. State of the Art (SOA) radiators were design for Low Earth Orbit (LEO) operations where Ultraviolet (UV) radiation and dust have miniscule performance impacts. However, Artemis missions to the lunar orbit or surface will expose the radiators to high dose UV radiation and dust, which can degrade the radiator coating emissivity by up to 50% and consequently reduce performance early in missions. In addition, environmental nighttime temperatures at the lunar south pole are significantly colder and linger longer than LEO, and may require up to 4 kW of heater power to prevent coolant tubes from freezing, thawing, and rupturing. Analysis showed equipping the radiators with actively controlled louvers attenuated the UV radiation and dust effects, and limited degradation to less than 10% through End of Life (EOL) of missions. Furthermore, analysis demonstrated the ability to eliminate the heater power needed for freeze protection. Louver technology is a promising solution to maintain radiator performance and integrity for Artemis missions, but heritage louvers are passively controlled and only been used on small satellites. The technology requires maturing to active control, or motor actuated, to achieve faster thermal response times. Design considerations are discussed in this paper.

Louver↗

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

The Project “Analogs for Venus’ Geologically Recent Surfaces” (AVENGERS): A Comprehensive Database of Terrestrial Active Volcanoes for the Analysis of Ongoing Volcanism on Venus

The recently selected missions to Venus have opened a new era for the exploration of the Earth’s twin planet. As the Venus decade approaches, it is crucial to set the science goals for the future orbiting and in-situ investigations. One of the key science targets on Venus is certainly represented by the young topographic rises, which can be defined as the surface expression of underlying mantle plumes. These areas can be considered as the geologically youngest regions of Venus, being characterized by recent volcanic and tectonic activity. Studying areas of active volcanism and tectonism on Venus is crucial because it can reveal clues on the geologic past of the planet, as well as provide information about the volatile content of its interior and about the formation of its dense atmosphere. To this regard, the Project “Analogs for VENus’ GEologically Recent Surfaces” (AVENGERS) aims to build a database of Terrestrial analog sites for the analysis and identification of recent and possibly ongoing volcanic as well as tectonic activity on Venus to be investigated by the future missions. The Project AVENGERS will be a powerful tool for allowing a more efficient exploitation of the wealth of data to be provided by the future investigations of Venus during the upcoming decade.

P D Incecco↗

NASA NTRS2022

Universal Scaling Laws for Solar and Stellar Atmospheric Heating: Catalog of Power-law Index between Solar Activity Proxies and Various Spectral Irradiances

The formation of extremely hot outer atmospheres is one of the most prominent manifestations of magnetic activity common to late-type dwarf stars, including the Sun. It is widely believed that these atmospheric layers, the corona, transition region, and chromosphere, are heated by the dissipation of energy transported upwards from the stellar surface by the magnetic field. This is signified by the spectral line fluxes at various wavelengths, scaled with power-law relationships against the surface magnetic flux over a wide range of formation temperatures, which are universal to the Sun and Sunlike stars of different ages and activity levels. This study describes a catalog of power-law indices between solar activity proxies and various spectral line fluxes. Compared to previous studies, we expanded the number of proxies, which now includes the total magnetic flux, total sunspot number, total sunspot area, and the F10.7 cm radio flux, and further enhanced the number of spectral lines by a factor of 2. This provides the data to study in detail the flux–flux scaling laws from the regions specified by the temperatures of the corona (log(T/K) = 6–7) to those of the chromosphere (log(T/K) ∼ 4), as well as the reconstruction of various spectral line fluxes of the Sun in the past, F-, G-, and K-type dwarfs, and the modeled stars.

Stellar coronae↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Coding Structures for Seated Row Simulation of an Active Controlled Vibration Isolation and Stabilization System for Astronaut’s Exercise Platform

Simulation for seated aerobic row exercise was a continued task to assist NASA in analyzing a one-dimensional vibration isolation and stabilization system for astronaut’s exercise platform. Feedback delay and signal noise were added to the simulation model. Simulation runs for this study were conducted in two software simulation tools, Trick and MBDyn, software simulation environments developed at the NASA Johnson Space Center. The exciter force in the simulation was calculated from motion capture of an exerciser during a seated aerobic row exercise. The simulation runs include passive control, active control using a Proportional, Integral, Derivative (PID) controller, and active control using a Piecewise Linear Integral Derivative (PWLID) controller. Output parameters include displacements of the exercise platform, the exerciser, and the counterweight; transmitted force to the wall of spacecraft; and actuator force to the platform. The simulation results showed excellent force reduction in the active controlled system compared to the passive controlled system, which resulted in less force reduction.

Simulation↗

NASA NTRS2023

Time Series of Magnetic Field Parameters Extracted from Merged Space-Weather MDI/HMI Active Region Patches as Potential Tool for Solar Flare Forecasting

Space-Weather MDI Active Region Patches (SMARPs) and Space-Weather HMI Active Region Patches (SHARPs) are two recently developed data products, which have been used for solar flare prediction studies. The present work is an effort to expand the application of SMARP and SHARP summary heliomagnetic parameters to the forecasting of solar flares. A new data product was derived by filtering, rescaling, and merging the SMARP and SHARP summary parameter data series, which were further converted into two-dimensional arrays by selecting time slices corresponding to R-value maxima, where R-value is a measure of the unsigned magnetic flux near polarity inversion lines. The resulting combined MDI-HMI time series currently span the period between April 4, 1996 and December 13, 2022, and can be extended to a more recent date, providing an opportunity to correlate and compare them with other solar activity parameters, such as the daily solar flare index, which is computed as a sum of the product of GOES X-ray flare magnitude and flare duration, for all M- and X-class flares during a day. Preliminary results demonstrate a significant overall correlation, with Pearson coefficients between 0.339 and 0.627. In addition, an oscillating pattern is seen in the daily-averaged sliding-window correlation coefficient. Time-lagged cross-correlation indicates that a leader-follower dynamic exists in some parameters, especially R-value, where they lead the flare index by at least several days, which may have potential for further application in space weather forecasting.

Heliophysics↗

NASA NTRS2022

COCPIT: Collaborative Activity Planning Software for Mars Perseverance Rover

Since landing on the Martian surface, the Perseverance rover has relied on a distributed team to generate commands for exploring its new environment each sol (Martian day). The team uses a complex suite of software tools to accomplish this challenging task in time for the next window of opportunity to send commands to the rover. A key piece of this software ecosystem is COCPIT (Component-based Campaign Planning, Implementation, and Tactical). COCPIT is part of the next generation of planning and scheduling software tools developed by NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory in partnership with NASA's Ames Research Center. COCPIT is a web-based application that allows users to collaboratively view and update the Perseverance rover's activity plans, continuously verify that the plan satisfies constraints, assign targets for directing scientific instruments, document science intent, and model power and data resources. Mars Surface Operations requires diverse expertise from team members within the Engineering, Science, Robotic, and Instrument Operations groups, distributed across North America and Europe. In order to improve efficiency and reduce risk, all teams are able to review and edit their activities simultaneously and see the effects on the plan in its entirety. As part of the Ground Data System (GDS) tool suite, COCPIT is responsible for the activity plan. It provides specialized views that allow operators to understand where there may be room for additional observations, see whether any planning constraints are being violated, and confirm that energy usage and data generation are within the defined limits. It contains details such as which filters a camera will use for a given observation, what the resolution of the images should be, where to store the data onboard, and how long the observation is expected to take. It predicts when specific data will be downlinked from the rover to a passing orbiter, so that the team knows when to expect that data on Earth for evaluation in future planning. Ultimately the information from the COCPIT plan is translated to sequences that will be bundled and radiated to Perseverance for execution. The COCPIT tool is used throughout all planning phases.

Kanefsky, Bob↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Reanalysis Activities at the NASA Global Modeling and Assimilation Office

This talk presents an overview of recent reanalysis activities at the NASA Global Modeling and Assimilation Office (GMAO) as part of a multi-faceted strategy towards an Integrated Earth System retrospective analysis, coupling components of the atmosphere, ocean, chemistry, land, and ice. While elements of the atmosphere-ocean coupled Goddard Earth Observing System (GEOS) model and data assimilation are being actively developed, a suite of reanalysis products is designed to provide further understanding of key aspects of Earth system coupling in a reanalysis context: The baseline atmospheric reanalysis, the GEOS Retrospective analysis for the early 21st Century (GEOS-R21C), features recent advances in the GEOS model and data assimilation, and targets the NASA’s Earth Observing System EOS and post-EOS satellite observations; GEOS-IT, a user-tailored low-resolution atmospheric reanalysis, serves as a second baseline to the NASA Instrument Teams for validation and calibration and drives a one-way coupled ocean reanalysis, GEOSIT-Ocean; PolarMERRA, a high-resolution downscaled product for the polar regions, focuses on improving the representation of polar atmospheric processes with an assessment of current cryospheric biases, and targeted improvements to surface sea ice and glacier conditions; Finally, R21C-Chem, an off-line atmospheric chemistry and composition reanalysis, includes both tropospheric and stratospheric trace gases. The diversity of these reanalysis activities presents unique opportunities for collaborations cross-teams/institutions, with new commercial data partners, and with end-user groups. This talk will discuss these opportunities and explore leveraging the lessons learned along the way on key drivers in Earth system interactions as we converge towards the next generation of the Modern-Era Retrospective analysis for Research and Applications (MERRA) suite.

Amal El Akkraoui↗

NASA NTRS2023

The 2024 Meteor Shower Activity Forecast for Low Earth Orbit

The purpose of this document is to provide a forecast of major meteor shower activity in low Earth orbit (LEO). Most annual showers are expected to display typical activity, but the eta Aquariids (ETA) are once again expected to exhibit more than double their typical activity level.

Althea Moorhead↗

NASA NTRS2024

Crew State and Risk Model Development to Predict Hydration Status During Extravehicular Activity Training Events

Introduction: Hydration is critical for optimal human health and performance and dehydration can lead to impaired cardiovascular function, thermal dysregulation, decreased blood plasma volume, and cognitive impacts, particularly during physical activity. Prolonged and repeated extravehicular activities (EVA) without sufficiently available drinking water may increase risk for dehydration, which could impair crew health and impact mission success. Understanding hydration needs and potential effects on health and performance are necessary to optimize crew well-being and enable successful EVA objectives. This study aims to develop a model of hydration status during EVA using water balance techniques. Methods: Water balance measures were collected on 15 healthy astronauts who performed ≈6-hour simulated microgravity extravehicular activity (EVA) training in the NASA Neutral Buoyancy Laboratory (NBL). Data collected included pre-and post-EVA nude body weight (BW), maximum absorption garment (MAG) weight, Disposable In-suit Drink Bag (DIDB) weight, urine specific gravity (USG), and extra pre-EVA intake (W). Variables were combined to create the water balance model as pre-EVA (Hn)= BWn+ MAGn+ DIDBn+ Wnand post EVA (Hn+1) = BWn+1+ MAGn+1+ DIDBn+1. Urine specific gravity values were used to refine water balance measures into hydration categories: Hydrated, Marginally Hydrated, and Dehydrated. Results: Pre-EVA modeling indicated53% of crew were hydrated, 20% were marginally hydrated, and 27% were dehydrated. Alternately, Hn+1 showed 13% of crew remained hydrated, 47% were marginally hydrated, and 40% were dehydrated at the end of the EVA. Furthermore, 75% of the crewmembers who started sufficiently hydrated finished the run marginally hydrated or dehydrated. According to USG indices presented by Casa and Lawrence, et al. (2000), only 25% of the crew started and remained hydrated throughout the EVA, and those who were dehydrated at the outset stayed dehydrated. Conclusion: Model outcomes assessing hydration status during 6-hour simulated microgravity EVAs demonstrate the necessity to further address hydration requirements for optimal human performance during spaceflight and EVA. This study enables additional baseline development of the Crew State and Risk Model Hydration, Nutrition, and Waste Management component that aims to provide individualized crew state and risk predictions during EVAs. Reference: Casa, D. J., Armstrong, L. E., et al. (2000). National Athletic Trainers’ Association Position Statement: Fluid Replacement for Athletes. Journal of Athletic Training, 35:212-224.

L Cooper↗

NASA NTRS2023

ENSO and MJO Modulation of U.S. Cloud-to-Ground Lightning Activity

Cloud-to-ground (CG) lightning substantially impacts human health and property. However, the relations between U.S. lightning activity and the Madden-Julian Oscillation (MJO) and El Niño-Southern Oscillation (ENSO), two predictable drivers of global climate variability, remain uncertain, in part because most lightning datasets have short records that cannot robustly reveal MJO- and ENSO-related patterns. To overcome this limitation, we developed an empirical model of 6-hourly lightning flash count over the contiguous U.S. (CONUS) using environmental variables (convective available potential energy and precipitation) andNational Lightning Detection Network data for 2003–2016. This model is shown to reproduce the observed daily and seasonal variability of lightning over most of CONUS. Then, the empirical model was applied to construct a proxy lightning dataset for the period 1979–2021, which was used to investigate the summer MJO-lightning relationship at daily resolution and the winter-spring ENSO-lightning relationship at seasonal resolution. Overall, no robust relationship between MJO phase and lightning patterns was found when seasonality was taken into consideration. El Niño is associated with increased lightning activity over the Coastal Southeast U.S. during early winter, the Southwest during winter through spring, and the Northwest during late spring, whereas La Niña is associated with increased lightning activity over the Tennessee River Valley during winter.

Lightning↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

The Trash Compaction Processing System (TCPS) Technology Demonstrations and Risk Reduction Activities 2023-2024

The Trash Compactor Processing System (TCPS) employs heat and pressure to safely compress spacecraft trash. The Next STEP Phase B Appendix 2 contract was awarded to Sierra Space for the development of ground and flight demonstration hardware, slated for testing on the International Space Station in 2026. Meanwhile, Ames Research Center is actively engaged in risk reduction activities related to in-house hardware, fine-tuning science objectives and test procedures.This paper will discuss the updated TCPS requirements and present the results of the risk reduction activities, which include moisture analysis, component offgas, and aerosol analysis.

Justine Tra-my Richardson↗