Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “Hybrid Flight Architectures”

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.

129 records · Page 8

Strategy for Developing Technologies for Megawatt-class Nuclear Electric Propulsion Systems

In late fiscal year 2020, the Space Nuclear Propulsion (SNP) project began the process of formulating an investment strategy to support development of the technologies required for a high-power (megawatt-class) nuclear electric propulsion (NEP) system capable of performing human-scale missions. This activity was initiated concurrent with several high-level studies and assessments were either under way or had just concluded. Studies of human-scale Mars missions have been performed several times over the past two decades. One of the most recent studies examined opposition-class human Mars missions to occur in the late 2030s timeframe [1,2]. The mission architecture assumed a hybrid NEP/chem-propelled vehicle that used a high specific impulse (Isp) NEP-system and a liquid oxygen (LOx)-liquid methane high thrust chemical stage (two 110 kN (25 klbf) thrust, 365 s Isp engines) for maneuvers performed to enter and exit gravity wells. Trajectory analyses performed in this study showed that such a mission could be performed with 2-4 MWe directed into the electric propulsion system (operating for 20,000+ hours), with the large range representing different opposition-class Mars mission opportunities and permutations on the trajectory design, concept of operations, and technology choices. In 2020, the NASA Engineering and Safety Center (NESC) performed a study to evaluate the maturity of the different technologies required for nuclear propulsion systems [3]. The executive summary of this report provided the following top-level conclusions: • “The majority of critical technologies for… NEP/Chem… systems are relatively immature” • “TRLs [technology readiness levels] in the literature are often overestimated” • “The majority of critical technologies… for NEP/Chem… systems are at a relatively high level of advancement degree of difficulty (AD2 > 4) for maturation, requiring a dual development approach” • “The proper assessment of baseline TRL and AD2 values and the estimation of requirements and resources required for advancement have been consistent issues for NEP,” • “Non-advocate reviews should occur at the start of a technology program and at all key milestones.” In 2021, the National Academies of Science, Engineering, and Medicine (NASEM) issued a separate report [4] identifying the “primary technical and programmatic challenges, merits, and risks for maturing space nuclear propulsion technologies of interest to a future human Mars exploration mission.” That work contained several important findings, including: • “Developing a MWe-class NEP system for the baseline mission would require increasing power by orders of magnitude relative to NEP system flight- or ground-based technology demonstrations completed to date.” • “Subscale in-space flight testing of NEP systems cannot address many of the risks and potential failure modes associated with the baseline mission NEP system. With sufficient M&S [modeling & simulation] and ground testing, including modular subsystem tests at full scale and power, flight qualification requirements can be met by the cargo missions that will precede the first crewed mission to Mars. Fully integrated ground testing may not be required.” • “As a result of low and intermittent investment over the past several decades, it is unclear if even an aggressive program would be able to develop an NEP system capable of executing the baseline mission in 2039.” These efforts motivated the SNP project to investigate the technologies available for a megawatt-class high power nuclear electric propulsion system. That system is illustrated schematically in Figure 1 and is comprised of five separate top-level critical technology elements (CTEs). 1. Nuclear Reactor – Thermal power source for the system, utilizing high-assay low enriched uranium (HALEU) as the nuclear fuel. Reactor radiation shielding is also included in this CTE. 2. Power Conversion – Operates as a thermodynamic cycle, accepting nuclear reactor thermal power as an input and converting it to mechanical power. 3. Power Management and Distribution (PMAD) – Accepts as an input mechanical power from the power conversion system, which is used to generate electrical power. The PMAD system also distributes the generated electrical power to all other parts of the spacecraft, including the high-power EP system. The PMAD system may also perform duties such as isolation, fault detection, and power transformation/rectification for different spacecraft systems, including the thrusters. 4. Electric Propulsion (EP) – Accepts as an input electrical power, which is used to accelerate a propellant to high speeds to produce thrust. This system includes the power processing unit (PPU), which converts the power it receives to the correct current and voltage required by the thrusters, and the propellant storage and feed systems, which contain and meter the flow of propellant to the thrusters. 5. Thermal Management (Radiators/Heat Rejection) – The cold side of the thermodynamic power conversion cycle, accepts thermal power from the power conversion system and radiatively rejects that heat to space. In this paper, we describe the SNP project formulation and investment strategy that aims to accomplish the research and development required to advance the technology readiness for each CTE. The strategy relies heavily upon experimental testing supported by modeling and simulation to yield realistic assessments of the technologies, which in turn will be used to inform future NEP system-level design decisions and any potential technology downselects.

Kurt A Polzin↗

NASA Tech Briefs, September 2013

Topics include: ISS Ammonia Leak Detection Through X-Ray Fluorescence; A System for Measuring the Sway of the Vehicle Assembly Building; Fast, High-Precision Readout Circuit for Detector Arrays; Victim Simulator for Victim Detection Radar; Hydrometeor Size Distribution Measurements by Imaging the Attenuation of a Laser Spot; Quasi-Linear Circuit; High-Speed, High-Resolution Time-to-Digital Conversion; Li-Ion Battery and Supercapacitor Hybrid Design for Long Extravehicular Activities; Ultrasonic Low-Friction Containment Plate for Thermal and Ultrasonic Stir Weld Processes; High-Powered, Ultrasonically Assisted Thermal Stir Welding; Next-Generation MKIII Lightweight HUT/Hatch Assembly; Centrifugal Sieve for Gravity-Level-Independent Size; Segregation of Granular Materials; Ion Exchange Technology Development in Support of the Urine Processor Assembly; Nickel-Graphite Composite Compliant Interface and/or Hot Shoe Material; UltraSail CubeSat Solar Sail Flight Experiment; Mechanism for Deploying a Long, Thin-Film Antenna From a Rover; Counterflow Regolith Heat Exchanger; Acquisition and Retaining Granular Samples via a Rotating Coring Bit; Very-Low-Cost, Rugged Vacuum System; Medicine Delivery Device With Integrated Sterilization and Detection; FRET-Aptamer Assays for Bone Marker Assessment, C-Telopeptide, Creatinine, and Vitamin D; Multimode Directional Coupler for Utilization of Harmonic Frequencies from TWTAs; Dual-Polarization, Multi-Frequency Antenna Array for use with Hurricane Imaging Radiometer; Complementary Barrier Infrared Detector (CBIRD) Contact Methods; Autonomous Control of Space Nuclear Reactors; High-Power, High-Speed Electro-Optic Pockels Cell Modulator; Covariance Analysis Tool (G-CAT) for Computing Ascent, Descent, and Landing Errors; Enigma Version 12; Micrometeoroid and Orbital Debris (MMOD) Shield Ballistic Limit Analysis Program; Spitzer Telemetry Processing System; Planetary Protection Bioburden Analysis Program; Wing Leading Edge RCC Rapid Response Damage Prediction Tool (IMPACT2); ISSM: Ice Sheet System Model; Automated Loads Analysis System (ATLAS); Integrated Main Propulsion System Performance Reconstruction Process/Models. Phoenix Telemetry Processor; Contact Graph Routing Enhancements Developed in ION for DTN; GFEChutes Lo-Fi; Advanced Strategic and Tactical Relay Request Management for the Mars Relay Operations Service; Software for Generating Troposphere Corrections for InSAR Using GPS and Weather Model Data; Ionospheric Specifications for SAR Interferometry (ISSI); Implementation of a Wavefront-Sensing Algorithm; Sally Ride EarthKAM - Automated Image Geo-Referencing Using Google Earth Web Plug-In; Trade Space Specification Tool (TSST) for Rapid Mission Architecture (Version 1.2); Acoustic Emission Analysis Applet (AEAA) Software; Memory-Efficient Onboard Rock Segmentation; Advanced Multimission Operations System (ATMO); Robot Sequencing and Visualization Program (RSVP); Automating Hyperspectral Data for Rapid Response in Volcanic Emergencies; Raster-Based Approach to Solar Pressure Modeling; Space Images for NASA JPL Android Version; Kinect Engineering with Learning (KEWL); Spacecraft 3D Augmented Reality Mobile App; MPST Software: grl_pef_check; Real-Time Multimission Event Notification System for Mars Relay; SIM_EXPLORE: Software for Directed Exploration of Complex Systems; Mobile Timekeeping Application Built on Reverse-Engineered JPL Infrastructure; Advanced Query and Data Mining Capabilities for MaROS; Jettison Engineering Trajectory Tool; MPST Software: grl_suppdoc; PredGuid+A: Orion Entry Guidance Modified for Aerocapture; Planning Coverage Campaigns for Mission Design and Analysis: CLASP for DESDynl; and Space Place Prime.

Source record↗

Future Homes in Space: Development of Concepts for Exploration Space Habitats

NASA’s Artemis campaign seeks to return humans to the moon and establish a sustained presence on the lunar surface. This session will emphasize how habitation capabilities on the moon and in cislunar space can potentially contribute to the sustainability objectives of Artemis. Habitable elements represent opportunities to enable longer duration stays, increase the number of crew members present, enhance science and utilization activities, drive technology development for future Mars exploration, perform analog missions, and fuel economic opportunities for US industry. Panelists include Paul Kessler (NASA Marshall Space Flight Center, deputy lead for lunar surface habitation); Andrew Choate (NASA Marshall Space Flight Center, Mars habitation lead); Krystofer Dudzinski (NASA Marshall Space Flight Center, a space architect within the MSFC Advanced Concepts Office); and Larry Toups (retired from NASA Johnson Space Center, currently an adjunct professor at University of Houston in space architecture). The panel is moderated by Tracie Prater (NASA Marshall Space Flight Center, Habitation Systems Development Office). The panel will begin with an overview of the history of habitation concepts and an academic perspective on general considerations in space habitat design (Larry Toups). Paul Kessler and Andrew Choate will introduce NASA’s principle of “architecting from the right” to help define objectives for Artemis missions, needs/characteristics, use cases, and functions (as published in the agency’s Architecture Definition Document) and provide perspective on how this principle informs habitation concept development work. NASA panelists will discuss key engineering challenges identified for developing, deploying, and operating habitable assets on the lunar surface and/or in deep space. These may include dust mitigation, outfitting of inflatable softgoods (for concepts which may use softgoods as a primary structural material), survival in lunar darkness, human health and performance considerations, maintenance/repair/sparing, and autonomy. These identified challenges represent risks for habitation systems development and relate closely to capability gaps identified by the agency. While the work of NASA Marshall Space Flight Center’s habitation development office is primarily focused on habitats which are launched from earth pre-integrated (referred to as Class I in the framework previously developed by NASA space architects Kennedy/Cohen) or launched from earth and deployed at the point of use (Class II), there is also extensive work in NASA, academia, and companies on constructed habitats, which would be built on a planetary surface using indigenous resources (Class III habitats). Panelist Krystopher Dudzinski will discuss potential evolutionary pathways from Class I and Class II habitats to Class III habitats, unique and common architectural challenges within each habitat class, and key gaps in implementing Class III habitats from an architectural perspective. NASA panelists and the moderator will also provide an overview of partnership opportunities and avenues for further engagement to advance habitation systems for the SpaceCom audience. NASA is currently developing notional concepts for a lunar surface habitat and Mars transit habitat, which will be discussed during this panel session and used as examples. These concepts represent options for habitation system design and are a point of departure. They do not represent a final plan or formal recommendation on the part of the agency. Based on the most recent analysis cycle, NASA’s lunar surface habitat (SH) concept nominally supports two crew members for 30 days, with the capacity to support four crew during a surge period where crew will swap between the SH and another surface asset, such as a pressurized rover. This example design has a metallic airlock for ingress/egress and the upper portion is an inflatable material system which serves as the habitation module. The notional interior of the habitat is a three-deck layout/configuration which supports all crew mission functions, including exercise, stowage, extravehicular activity (EVA), sleep, hygiene waste collection, maintenance and repair, and meal preparation. Under analysis assumptions for habitation, the Mars Transit Habitat (TH) concept would support four crew on an up to 1,200 day Mars mission. One option for the concept is to initially dock Transit Habitat at Gateway, where it can be used to increase the duration of crew stays in cislunar space and perform shakedown and analog missions prior to a Mars departure. One challenge in longer duration missions which involve both surface exploration and transit is understanding crew adaptation when transitioning between partial gravity and microgravity environments. TH at Gateway offers an opportunity to study this transition and in doing so reduce risks associated with future Mars exploration. Like lunar SH, the most recent analysis cycle concept of a Mars TH is a hybrid structure design, with a metallic section supporting EVAs, axial/radial docking, and Safe Haven capabilities, and an inflatable softgoods structure for the primary habitation function. Interior layouts to optimize crew usability and livability are currently under trade. The panel will include presentation material, but also seeks to engage the audience in a highly interactive conversation regarding the potential role for habitation in future exploration initiatives. Potential topics for discussion include the influence of the crew experience on habitation systems design and livability/usability considerations, the benefits of space habitation development in terrestrial applications, and challenges and opportunities in “feeding forward” lunar surface habitation systems development to Mars exploration.

space habitats↗