Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “Artemis 1”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 19 records
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Artemis 1 Radiation Modeling and Analysis Using Operational Methods

The successful completion of the Artemis 1 mission has provided NASA with a significant volume of space radiation dosimetry data that can be used to verify the accuracy of current operational SRAG dose computation models and methods for Beyond LEO missions. High-Fidelity CAD models of the Artemis 1 MPCV Orion were raytraced in 10,000 directions per sensor location, including the location of Artemis HERA sensors, Artemis RAMs (TLDs), and the crew active dosimetry (CADs). The full Artemis 1 mission was modelled using the as-flown trajectory, Ap9-Ae9 IRENE providing the VAB trapped proton and electron environment, and the Badhwar-O’Neill 2020 model providing the freespace GCR environment. IGRF 12 was used to compute cutoff rigidities for the GCR environment in LEO. 1DHZETRN was used to estimate point doses at each sensor position. Computed RAM doses were within 5% of measured values. The computed VAB transit and freespace GCR dose rates showed good qualitative agreement with measured HERA values. An estimate of normalized mean effective dose for a hypothetical male crew member on Artemis 1 using current standard operational methods was computed to be 22.3 mSv.

Artemis 1↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Tomography Analysis of Orion Artemis 1 Heatshield Sample

The Orion spacecraft, under NASA's Artemis program, is an integral step in humanity's ambitions of deep space exploration, including our return to the Moon and subsequent mission to Mars. The performance of Orion's heatshield is central to ensuring the safety and success of such missions. This presentation offers a comprehensive overview of the process used in and findings derived from tomography scans of an Artemis 1 heatshield sample executed at the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory's Advanced Light Source. These tomography scans captured high-resolution X-Ray images of the heatshield's microstructure, allowing advanced imaging to be employed for 3D image segmentation and visualization of the sample. The Porous Media Analysis (PuMA) software stands central to our analysis, offering robust computational algorithms and methodologies to digitally compute properties of the heatshield material. The presentation discusses the following derived metrics: - Volume fractions, representing the spatial distribution and amounts of various components throughout the heatshield’s depth. - Porosity and crack distributions, offering insights into the void space within the material, critical for understanding the heatshield's structural integrity. - Fiber orientation, detailing the alignment and arrangement of fibers, significant for material orthotropy. - Permeability estimates, quantifying the passage of gas through the material, relevant for re-entry conditions and pyrolysis gasses. One distinctive feature of this study is the comparative evaluation against data obtained from tomography scans of the Exploration Flight Test-1 (EFT-1) heatshield. Such a comparison offers multiple insights, including evaluation of the consistency and repeatability of manufacturing processes as well as understanding of any evolutionary changes in heatshield design or material properties.

Micro-tomography↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Augmenting the Space Environment Complex's Thermal Vacuum Capabilities for Artemis 1 Orion Spacecraft Testing

The Space Environments Complex at Glenn Research Center’s Neil A Armstrong Test Facility (formerly Plum Brook Station) recently successfully completed Artemis 1 thermal vacuum testing. The Space Environments Complex boasts the world’s largest thermal vacuum chamber with a 122-foot tall, 100-foot diameter aluminum assembly vacuum chamber. The fifty-year old chamber has been adapted over its history to conduct several unique test campaigns in a variety of test environments. Artemis 1 Orion spacecraft testing is the most complex test campaign the Space Environments Complex has undergone to date, with temperature limits between -250 F to +300F in a high vacuum with significant requirements for quality data and contamination control of a flight vehicle. This presentation covers the improvements and innovations in the cryoshroud and thermal systems, data acquisition, as well as contamination and cleanliness to accommodate the rigors of a flight vehicle during a six-week thermal vacuum test. Additionally, the presentation covers successes and lessons learned from the testing.

Erin Reed↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

The SCIFLI Airborne Observation of Artemis 1 Ascent

SCIFLI, The Scientifically Calibrated In-Flight Imagery (https://scifli.larc.nasa.gov/), team at NASA Langley Research Center specializes in the collection of multispectral data for space vehicles during Ascent and Entry, Descent, and Landing (EDL) observations. Multispectral datasets are invaluable across the NASA Agency and to commercial stakeholders for evaluating the performance of launch and re-entry space vehicles and ensuring the safety of the scientific research community. The launch of Artemis 1 marked the initiation of NASA returning to lunar exploration. SCIFLI’s Airborne Multispectral Imager (SAMI) was deployed by the SCIFLI team to scientifically document the historic event and provide the NASA research community with aerial footage of the event in wavelength channels ranging from the ultraviolet (UV) to the visible (VIS) to mid-wave infrared (MWIR). SAMI was designed to spectrally image unique aerothermal phenomena during the Artemis 1 launch. The use of these datasets captured in-flight during the launch will provide insight to research organizations across the Agency; aiding in validation efforts for simulations and modeling that contributed to the kickoff of the Agency’s resurgence to lunar exploration. This presentation will focus on the imagery captured on SAMI by the WB-57 team on November 16th, 2022, during the observation. Imaging objectives were identified and considered beforehand to determine the configuration of the SAMI instrument for the imaging mission. SCIFLI and Opto-Knowledge Systems, Inc. (OKSI) performed a thorough review of the datasets collected to identify and characterize aerothermal phenomena occurring during the observation. Additional post-processing was completed to provide quantitatively calibrated temperature images of the rocket during the observation. Some of the candidates were not optimal for quantitative temperature extraction due to common degradation factors, but after various image enhancements they proved useful for qualitatively characterizing different phenomena during the observation.

Artemis1↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Flame Deflector Ablation Analysis based on Artemis 1 Launch Environment

This paper presents the updated ablative analysis methods used to determine Artemis 1 launch load environment on the flame deflector for the design based on Artemis I Assessments. The flame trench under Pad 39B at Kennedy Space Center contains a flame deflector to safely divert the exhaust plume from the SLS rocket during launch. During launch of Artemis I the refurbished flame trench and the new flame deflector experienced peak temperatures of over 2,000 degrees Fahrenheit (over 1,000 degrees Celsius) for several seconds. These extreme conditions caused ablation (material removal) from the steel plates. This paper contains flame deflector heat flux values for design based on Artemis I assessment. Post flight images of the flame deflector are shown along with “Pre vs Post” Flame Deflector scan image to measure the post flight deviations. Using COMSOL, a method to calculate a heat flux value due to measured deviations in the deflector plates caused by ablation is shown.

Artemis I↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

A CFD Validation Study Using Artemis 1 Orbital Slosh Test Data

Advancements in liquid propellant management science and technologies are key to increasing safety, decreasing cost, and increasing payload mass of NASA space missions. Liquid propellant usually comprises a large portion of the total mass of launch vehicles and spacecraft, so predicting and controlling the motion of it are important. Computational fluid dynamics (CFD) programs are critical to predicting slosh dynamics, but CFD programs require experimental validation with physically relevant test data before the results can be trusted. Low-gravity slosh test data is lacking, and most of what exists is inadequate for CFD validation. A potential slosh risk for Orion, and the lack of validated low-gravity slosh models, led to performing on-orbit slosh tests during the Artemis 1 mission to assess the impacts of slosh on the guidance, navigation, and control of Orion. This work details the validation of a coupled slosh-motion CFD model using the Orion orbital slosh test data set.

CFD↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

A CFD Validation Study using Artemis 1 Orbital Slosh Test Data

Advancements in liquid propellant management science and technologies are key to increasing safety, decreasing cost, and increasing payload mass of NASA space missions. Liquid propellant usually comprises a large portion of the total mass of launch vehicles and spacecraft, so predicting and controlling the motion of it are important. Computational fluid dynamics (CFD) programs are critical to predicting slosh dynamics, but CFD programs require experimental validation with physically relevant test data before the results can be trusted. Low-gravity slosh test data is lacking, and most of what exists is inadequate for CFD validation. A potential slosh risk for Orion, and the lack of validated low-gravity slosh models, led to performing on-orbit slosh tests during the Artemis 1 mission to assess the impacts of slosh on the guidance, navigation, and control of Orion. This work details the validation of a coupled slosh-motion CFD model using the Orion orbital slosh test data set.

CFD↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Artemis 1 Recovery and Post-Flight Evaluations

The Artemis I launch window opens Aug. 29, with a scheduled splashdown off the coast of San Diego in early October. Jeremy will describe the at-sea recovery method and the immediate inspections that will take place to evaluate the performance of Orion’s heat shield or thermal protection system.

Jeremy Vander Kam↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Serial Propellant Tank Pressure Behavior in Artemis 1 Orion-ESM Propulsion System

An oscillatory pressure behavior was observed throughout the Orion-ESM propulsion system during the Artemis I mission. This behavior was attributed to propellant oscillations within the serial line connecting the two propellant tanks for each commodity. A linearized dynamic model of the serial propellant tank system was derived to explain this behavior. The model showed excellent agreement with the flight data, with the predicted system natural frequencies matching the flight data within 1%.

Liquid propulsion systems↗
NASA NTRS2022

NESC Peer Review of Exploration Systems Development (ESD) Integrated Vehicle Modal Test, Model Correlation, Development Flight Instrumentation (DFI) and Flight Loads Readiness; Uncertainty Propagation for Model Validation Sub-task

This report details a sub-task (regarding Uncertainty Propagation for Model Validation) from a NASA Engineering and Safety Center assessment that is a multi-year activity spanning the complete development of the Space Launch System integrated vehicle structural dynamic models, and the development of the certification of flight readiness for the Artemis 1 and Artemis 2 vehicles and their variants.

Exploration Systems Development; Development Fligh↗
NASA NTRS2020

Space Launch System Mobile Launcher Modal Pretest Analysis

NASA is developing an expendable heavy lift launch vehicle capability, the Space Launch System, to support lunar and deep space exploration. To support this capability, an updated ground infrastructure is required including modifying an existing Mobile Launcher system. The Mobile Launcher is a very large heavy beam/truss steel structure designed to support the Space Launch System during its buildup and integration in the Vehicle Assembly Building, transportation from the Vehicle Assembly Building out to the launch pad, and provides the launch platform at the launch pad. The previous Saturn/Apollo and Space Shuttle programs had integrated vehicle ground vibration tests of their integrated launch vehicles performed with simulated free-free boundary conditions to experimentally anchor and validate structural and flight controls analysis models. For the Space Launch System program, the Mobile Launcher will be used as the modal test fixture for the ground vibration test of the first Space Launch System flight vehicle, Artemis 1, programmatically referred to as the integrated vehicle modal test. The integrated vehicle modal test of the Artemis 1 integrated launch vehicle will have its core and second stages unfueled while mounted to the Mobile Launcher while inside the Vehicle Assembly Building, which is currently scheduled for the summer of 2020. The Space Launch System program has implemented a building block approach for dynamic model validation. The modal test of the Mobile Launcher is an important part of this building block approach in supporting the integrated vehicle modal test since the Mobile Launcher will serve as a structurally dynamic test fixture whose modes will couple with the modes of the Artemis 1 integrated vehicle. The Mobile Launcher modal test will further support understanding the structural dynamics of the Mobile Launcher and Space Launch System during rollout to the launch pad, which will play a key role in better understanding and prediction of the rollout forces acting on the launch vehicle. The Mobile Launcher modal test is currently scheduled for the summer of 2019. Due to a very tight modal testing schedule, this independent Mobile Launcher modal pretest analysis has been performed to ensure there is a high likelihood of successfully completing the modal test (i.e. identify the primary target modes) using the planned instrumentation, shakers, and excitation types. This paper will discuss this Mobile Launcher modal pretest analysis for its three test configurations and the unique challenges faced due to the Mobile Launcher’s size and weight, which are typically not faced when modal testing aerospace structures.

Akers, James C.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Optimization of the Lunar Icecube Trajectory Using Stochastic Global Search and Multi-Point Shooting

Lunar IceCube is a 6U cubesat that will launch on NASA’s Artemis 1 mission in 2021. Lunar IceCube will separate from Artemis 1 shortly after trans-lunar injection (TLI) and travel to its science orbit about the moon using its Busek Ion Thruster 3 (BIT-3) propulsion system. This paper describes a technique to rapidly design Lunar IceCube trajectories using the monotonic basin hopping (MBH) stochastic global search algorithm, along with low- and high-fidelity multi-point shooting transcriptions. This technique allows the Lunar IceCube team to rapidly adapt to changing initial conditions, spacecraft properties, and operational constraints.

optimization↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

CFD 2030 Grand Challenge: CFD-in-the-Loop Monte Carlo Flight Simulation for Space Vehicle Design

Flight qualification of space vehicles is markedly different from those typically employed for aircraft. The concept of an extensive flight test campaign for a space vehicle does not exist, and vehicle designers must look to alternative techniques for demonstrating robust and reliable performance of their vehicles prior to operational flight. A space vehicle may undergo only a handful of flight tests in its development cycle, with each flight representing a drastically different flight phase or flight configuration. For instance, NASA’s Space Launch System (SLS) launch vehicle and Orion spacecraft will only see a total of four flight demonstrations before flying a crew on its first operational mission, and each flight demonstrates a unique vehicle configuration and/or set of flight conditions. The SLS will be flown only one time before it becomes operational (Artemis 1). The Orion spacecraft Crew Module (CM) will have been tested twice, once on a Delta IV launch vehicle (Exploration Flight Test 1) and once as a fully integrated system with the SLS launch vehicle (Artemis 1). The Orion Launch abort system will have been tested twice, once in a pad abort scenario (Pad Abort 1) and once in an inflight abort scenario (Ascent Abort 2) on a modified Peacekeeper booster. Both of these latter tests involve only a boiler plate CM, not a functional Orion spacecraft. Thus, unlike aircraft, there is very little opportunity for engineers to assess and evaluate their preflight predictions. Instead, space vehicle designers rely on Monte Carlo flight simulations with detailed dispersions of predicted nominal flight behavior to determine how robust their design is to errors and uncertainties in the flight conditions their vehicle may encounter. These Monte Carlo analyses entail thousands of trajectory simulations to demonstrate that the vehicle can meet design requirements at a specified level of reliability. From an aerodynamics and aerothermodynamics perspective, these trajectory simulations are fueled by an extensive aerodynamic database that covers the complete range of expected flight conditions, vehicle configurations, and flight attitudes expected in a given mission. Today, these databases amount to a table of engineering parameters that can be quickly interrogated by the trajectory simulator. The aerodynamic and aerothermodynamic databases are assembled via a series of ground tests, empirical and analytical analysis, physics-based computational analysis, applicable past flight performance data, and in some cases, engineering judgment. These databases generally take years to assemble for a new space vehicle system and in the case of SLS/Orion, over a decade of test and analysis have been expended to develop the extensive databases required to cover the myriad of configurations and potential flight conditions required for the system. Recently, it has been proposed that Computational Fluid Dynamic (CFD) and computing capability may be reaching a point where it is foreseeable that CFD could be integrated directly into the production trajectory simulation tools used to design NASA’s space vehicles. To demonstrate this, NASA has embarked on two demonstrations of this type of capability, one where six degree of freedom flight trajectory simulation equations are embedded in an existing CFD solver and another where a production CFD solver is loosely coupled with a production trajectory simulation tool. These efforts represent an initial demonstration of a future approach to flight trajectory simulation, but they are a far cry from the capability required to perform a full-up CFD-in-the-loop Monte Carlo trajectory simulation. Therefore, this represents a viable grand challenge for computational methods addressing space vehicle design and development. The final paper/presentation will discuss the many hurdles, beyond simply raw computational power, to realizing this grand challenge and how they map directly to the CFD Vision 2030 ojectives. Among these are the wide range of flight conditions, including accelerating/decelerating flight, encountered by a space vehicle during launch and/or entry. The vehicle can also encounter numerous configuration changes, some of which can be quite drastic, during the course of its flight, so robust, automated geometry modeling, grid generation, and adaptation will play a huge role in reaching this goal. Multiply this by 1000’s of trajectory simulations occurring simultaneously in a given Monte Carlo analysis, and the problem readily scales to absorb virtually any size of supercomputer envisioned today. The concept of CFD-in-the-loop Monte Carlo trajectory simulation poses a formidable challenge for emerging and future computing systems, and it has the potential to shave years off the development cycle for aerodynamic and aerothermodynamic performance predictions as compared to today’s space vehicle design approach.

CFD 2030↗
NASA NTRS2023

Understanding Workforce Agility at NASA Kennedy Space Center

NASA leads the world in space research and provides other government agencies, educational institutions, and companies opportunities to explore, launch, and conduct research in and around space. NASA has 11 formal locations based around the United States, and each has different goals and objectives to help NASA meet its overall mission. 2004, President George Bush announced a new vision for the Space Exploration program. During his grand announcement, he discussed that the Space Shuttles would retire due to the 2003 Space Shuttle Columbia accident, where the crew and the space vehicle were lost. The Kennedy Space Center (KSC) would no longer manage the day-to-day operations of maintaining the US Space Shuttle fleet. Our NASA teams would continue working to finish the Space Shuttle program's mission to build the International Space Station. Afterward, NASA would transition to develop and test a new spacecraft, the Crew Exploration Vehicle. The third goal was to return to the moon by 2020 as the launching point for missions beyond, to get humans from lower Earth orbit to the moon and Mars. (Secretary, 2004) The KSC engineering workforce had to prepare to transition from Operational support of the Space Shuttle program to the design and development of over 50 subsystems for the future SLS and Orion Launch Systems at the Kennedy Space Center. These subsystems developed at the Kennedy Space Center Engineering Directorate followed a comprehensive design process that required several different product deliverables during various phases for each subsystem. (Schafer et al., 2013) What allowed these systems to be successful? What enabled NASA KSC to complete over 130 Artemis 1 Design Certification and System Acceptance Reviews, closing over 21,656 Requirements to deem the Artemis 1 rocket ready for launch? Little is known about the NASA engineering workforce agility characteristics that enabled the organization to transition from the Space Shuttle program that ended in 2011 and launch the Artemis Program's SLS rocket on November 16, 2022.

Workforce Agility↗
NASA NTRS2023

Lunanet Position, Navigation, and Timing Services and Signals, Enabling the Future of Lunar Exploration

The International Space Exploration Coordination Group established in 2018 the 3rd edition of the Global Exploration Roadmap (ISECG, 2018) that aims to achieve Mars human surface activities and identifies the exploration of the Moon as a critical intermediate step. A supplement covering updates on surface exploration scenarios was released in 2020 (ISECG, 2020). The Artemis Accords (NASA Artemis, 2020), first signed in October 2020, now includes over two dozen nations, in an agreement on the principles for best practices, including interoperability. In September 2022 the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) introduced the Moon to Mars Objectives highlighting recurring tenets of collaboration with international and industry partners and interoperability, along with infrastructure objectives for Position, Navigation, and Timing (PNT). The successful Artemis 1 mission paved the way to the ambitious plans to establish a sustainable human presence on the Moon. Just a few months after Artemis 1 launch (NASA, 2022), iSpace HAKUTO-R Mission1 (iSpace, 2022) launched, being the first-ever mission launched by a commercial launch service provider aiming to land on the lunar surface. The NASA Artemis program plans initial crewed landings and surface traverses in 2025, supported by the Lunar Gateway. Regular launches will follow to build the lunar systems for a sustained presence as presented in the Artemis Plan (NASA Artemis Plan, 2020), (NASA, 2022). NASA’s contracts with commercial providers through the Commercial Lunar Payload Services program (CLPS, (NASA, n.d.)) will deliver science and technology demonstration missions to the Moon starting in November 2023. The European Space Agency (ESA) Argonaut (ESA Argonaut, 2022) program plans to have recurrent missions to bring payloads to the lunar surface, supporting lunar exploration. These are just a few examples of planned missions that will target Earth’s natural satellite in the next decade, with forecasts of tens of missions per year (NSR, 2022), (Euroconsult, 2020). The large number of missions and the complexity of landing and operating are expected to demand a change of paradigm from the current Earth-based communication and navigation services, that may be combined with onboard sensors. In recent years, several agencies have proposed to deploy cislunar communication and navigation services to support lunar missions (NASA LCRNS, 2022), (ESA Moonlight, 2022), (JAXA, 2022)). All these proposals seek to deploy service-providing satellites in lunar orbit to ease the user missions’ operations. The PNT services objective is to support all types of lunar users (e.g.: orbiters, landers, ascent vehicles, surface crew, rovers, and deployed science payloads). At the same time, NASA and ESA initiated an effort to define a common framework to ensure interoperability among different service providers: the LunaNet framework. The LunaNet Interoperability Specification (NASA and ESA, 2023) covers communication, PNT, and auxiliary services, by establishing a common set of requirements to ensure interoperability. This conference contribution will present the LunaNet PNT services, focusing on the Lunar Augmented Navigation Service (LANS) that would be provided by a system that resembles the Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS) concept on Earth: constellations of satellites broadcasting a radio navigation signal synchronized to a common reference clock, with augmentations to accommodate users’ needs in an environment away from Earth. This paper includes a description of the high-level LANS concept, and the basic principles defined to ensure interoperability. In addition, it will describe the common S-band PNT Augmented Forward Signal (AFS) and common messages to be adopted for compliance with the LunaNet framework, and the justification of the selected approach.

LunaNet↗