Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “ESM”

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 NTRS2018

The Second European Service Module (ESM-2) Evolutions, Production and Challenges

This paper presents an overview of the Second European Service Module (ESM-2), the second in a series of European Service Modules produced as part of the Barter agreement between NASA and ESA for the Orion Program. The European Industrial consortium is led by the ESA prime contractor Airbus Defence and Space in Bremen. ESA and Airbus signed the ESM-2 contract on 16 February 2017, for this key element of the Orion Exploration Mission 2 (EM-2). EM-2 is the first crewed mission for Orion and will take astronauts farther into the solar system than humanity has ever travelled. EM-2 will also be a historic mission for Europe, as the ESM-2 will be the first European spacecraft to be part of a human transportation system carrying humans beyond low Earth orbit. ESM-2 is mainly a recurring production following ESM-1. Nevertheless, there are a number of important changes being implemented, for example, to incorporate upgrades to further enhance safety and reliability. The challenging delivery schedule for ESM-2 has driven the need to commence manufacturing prior to completion of the qualification on ESM-1. In addition, some requirement deviations and non-compliances approved for ESM-1 have resulted in modifications for ESM-2. In order to manage the competing constraints effectively, the ESM-2 Team has put in place a number of novel approaches to manage schedule, risk, and technical changes. Airbus has set up multi-functional teams according to an approach known as "Major Spacecraft Deliveries" consisting of quality assurance, engineering and procurement. The risk of starting manufacturing prior to qualification is managed through a special risk share agreement. This agreement necessitates rigorous risk reviews across the board for all manufacturing, assembly, integration and test milestones. The ESM-2 changes are managed by Configuration Management, but Airbus has also introduced the Technical Baseline Matrix to provide a transparent top-level overview of the changes from ESM-1 to ESM-2. The tool provides the basis for ESM-2 design and development needs, decisions, as well as the input for the Orion EM-2 Critical Design Review (CDR). The main technical evolutions, status of the production and the novel management approaches for ESM-2 are presented and discussed in the paper.

Orion European Service Module Programme↗
NASA NTRS2003

Using System Mass (SM), Equivalent Mass (EM), Equivalent System Mass (ESM) or Life Cycle Mass (LCM) in Advanced Life Support (ALS) Reporting

The Advanced Life Support (ALS) has used a single number, Equivalent System Mass (ESM), for both reporting progress and technology selection. ESM is the launch mass required to provide a space system. ESM indicates launch cost. ESM alone is inadequate for technology selection, which should include other metrics such as Technology Readiness Level (TRL) and Life Cycle Cost (LCC) and also consider perfom.arxe 2nd risk. ESM has proven difficult to implement as a reporting metric, partly because it includes non-mass technology selection factors. Since it will not be used exclusively for technology selection, a new reporting metric can be made easier to compute and explain. Systems design trades-off performance, cost, and risk, but a risk weighted cost/benefit metric would be too complex to report. Since life support has fixed requirements, different systems usually have roughly equal performance. Risk is important since failure can harm the crew, but it is difficult to treat simply. Cost is not easy to estimate, but preliminary space system cost estimates are usually based on mass, which is better estimated than cost. Amass-based cost estimate, similar to ESM, would be a good single reporting metric. The paper defines and compares four mass-based cost estimates, Equivalent Mass (EM), Equivalent System Mass (ESM), Life Cycle Mass (LCM), and System Mass (SM). EM is traditional in life support and includes mass, volume, power, cooling and logistics. ESM is the specifically defined ALS metric, which adds crew time and possibly other cost factors to EM. LCM is a new metric, a mass-based estimate of LCC measured in mass units. SM includes only the factors of EM that are originally measured in mass, the hardware and logistics mass. All four mass-based metrics usually give similar comparisons. SM is by far the simplest to compute and easiest to explain.

Jones, Harry↗
NASA NTRS2014

An Overview of the Concept of Operations for Assembly, Integration, Testing and Ground Servicing Developed for the MPCV-ESM Propulsion System

A concept of operations for the Assembly, Integration and Testing (AIT) and the Ground Systems Development Operations (GSDO) of the European Service Module (ESM) propulsion system has been developed. The AIT concept of operations covers all fabrication, integration and testing activities in both Europe and in the United States. The GSDO Program develops the facilities, equipment, and procedures for the loading of hypergolic propellants, the filling of high-pressure gases, and contingency de-servicing operations for the ESM. NASA and ESA along with the Lockheed Martin and Airbus Space and Defense are currently working together for the EM-1 and EM-2 missions in which the ESM will be flown as part of the Orion Multi-Purpose Crew Vehicle (MPCV). The NASA/ESA SM propulsion team is collaborating with the AIT personnel from ESA/Airbus and NASA/Lockheed Martin to ensure successful integration of the European designed Service Module propulsion system, the Lockheed Martin designed Crew Module Adapter and the heritage Space Shuttle Orbital Maneuvering System Engines (OMS-E) being provided as Government Furnished Equipment (GFE). This paper will provide an overview of the current AIT and GSDO concept of operations for the ESM propulsion system.

Propulsion↗
NASA NTRS2014

An Overview of the Concept of Operations for Assembly, Integration, Testing and Ground Servicing Developed for the MPCV-ESM Propulsion System

A concept of operations for the Assembly, Integration and Testing (AIT) and the Ground Systems Development Operations (GSDO) of the European Service Module (ESM) propulsion system has been developed. The AIT concept of operations covers all fabrication, integration and testing activities in both Europe and in the United States. The GSDO Program develops the facilities, equipment, and procedures for the loading of hypergolic propellants, the filling of high-pressure gases, and contingency de-servicing operations for the ESM. NASA and ESA along with the Lockheed Martin and Airbus Space and Defense are currently working together for the EM-1 and EM-2 missions in which the ESM will be flown as part of the Orion Multi-Purpose Crew Vehicle (MPCV). The NASA/ESA SM propulsion team is collaborating with the AIT personnel from ESA/Airbus and NASA/Lockheed Martin to ensure successful integration of the European designed Service Module propulsion system, the Lockheed Martin designed Crew Module Adapter and the heritage Space Shuttle Orbital Maneuvering System Engines (OMS-E) being provided as Government Furnished Equipment (GFE). This paper will provide an overview of the current AIT and GSDO concept of operations for the ESM propulsion system.

Ground Servicing↗
NASA NTRS2019

Challenges and Opportunities of International Cooperation for Safety & Mission Assurance (SMA) on the European Service Module (ESM) of the Orion Program

ESA is providing the ESM to NASA for the Orion Program in accordance with the Implementing Arrangement (IA) established between the two Agencies in 2012. This IA is a barter agreement, in which ESA provides Service Module vehicles for the first two flights of Orion in exchange for two servicing missions to the ISS. This arrangement has provided opportunities and challenges to both communities. It represents an important opportunity for ESA to build on its experience in the development and operations of ATV and play an active role in the development and flight of a manned space vehicle. This paper will explore some of the unique aspects of this arrangement as it affects Safety & Mission Assurance (SMA).The assessment of ESM compliance with applicable safety requirements is the responsibility of the Joint Safety and Engineering Review Panel (JSERP). The JSERP has two features that are relatively unique amongst NASA safety panels. First, NASA Engineering and SMA organizations co-chair this Panel. Previously, Safety has chaired, with Engineering as a member of the Panel. Inclusion of Engineering as a co-chair has offered greater leverage within the technical community. Second, the JSERP includes a second set of co-chairs from ESA Engineering and ESA Product Assurance and Safety (PA/S) organizations. This recognizes the international arrangement as one of partnership.Another source of both opportunity and challenge is the differing experience base of ESA and NASA. NASA has decades of experience in manned spaceflight, dating back to the Mercury program and following through Gemini, Apollo, Apollo-Soyuz, Skylab, Shuttle and the International Space Station. The risk posture for manned missions is much more rigorous than for unmanned missions. ESA brings a wealth of knowledge as well, with their flights of Ariane and Automated Transfer Vehicle (ATV), development and operation of the Columbus module on ISS, and satellite programs. The result is that both parties have developed paradigms related to risk and failure that contribute to ESM discussions.Orion represents humanity's first venture beyond Low-Earth Orbit (LEO) in over fifty years. Much of that experience is captured in program documents, but first-hand knowledge is limited to a few spaceflight veterans. Missions to LEO have offered the opportunity of direct, near-instantaneous communications and assistance, and the ability to return to Earth within a matter of hours in case of emergency. Outward-bound missions do not have these features and will require a more autonomous spacecraft with attendant safety-related issues.This paper will explore these and other challenges as we approach the flight of the first Orion vehicle.

Ciancone, Michael L.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Artemis I Orion ESM Propulsion System Engine Performance

NASA's Orion spacecraft transports humans and cargo into cislunar space for the Artemis program. The European Service Module (ESM), supplied by ESA and its European industry partners, provides Orion with power and in-space propulsion. The Orion-ESM propulsion system is a bipropellant hypergolic propulsion system using monomethyl hydrazine (MMH) and nitrogen tetroxide (MON-3). Primary translational propulsion is provided by the Orbital Maneuvering System Engine(OMS-E), with backup translational propulsion provided by eight Auxiliary thrusters (AUX). Attitude control and small translational maneuvers are provided by twenty four Reaction Control System (RCS) engines. The 2022 Artemis I mission was the first integrated flight test of the Orion-ESM spacecraft and its propulsion system. The OMS-E used on Artemis I was a refurbished Space Shuttle OMS-E that previously flew on nineteen missions ranging f rom STS-41G in 1984 to STS-112 in 2002. The Auxiliary engines are modified Aerojet Rocketdyne R4D-11 engines produced specifically for the Orion program. The RCS engines are Ariane Group engines originally used for the Automated Transfer Vehicle (ATV) program. This paper will discuss the unique operational requirements for each engine on Orion and the development and qualification effort sat both the engine and system-level that were completed to enable a successful Artemis I mission. Next the paper will evaluate the in-f light performance of the engines during the Artemis I mission showing nominal performance as expected. Additionally, comparisons to models will be presented showing very good correlation. Finally, the paper will address the plan for the engines on future Orion missions and the evolution of the system operation.

liquid propulsion systems↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Artemis I Orion ESM Propulsion System Engine Performance

NASA's Orion spacecraft transports humans and cargo into cislunar space for the Artemis program. The European Service Module (ESM), supplied by ESA and its European industry partners, provides Orion with power and in-space propulsion. The Orion-ESM propulsion system is a bipropellant hypergolic propulsion system using monomethyl hydrazine (MMH) and nitrogen tetroxide (MON-3). Primary translational propulsion is provided by the Orbital Maneuvering System Engine (OMS-E), with backup translational propulsion provided by eight Auxiliary thrusters (AUX). Attitude control and small translational maneuvers are provided by twenty-four Reaction Control System (RCS) engines. The 2022 Artemis I mission was the first integrated flight test of the Orion-ESM spacecraft and its propulsion system. The OMS-E used on Artemis I was a refurbished Space Shuttle OMS-E that previously flew on nineteen missions ranging from STS-41G in 1984 to STS-112 in 2002. The Auxiliary engines are modified Aerojet Rocketdyne R4D-11 engines produced specifically for the Orion program. The RCS engines are Ariane Group engines originally used for the Automated Transfer Vehicle (ATV) program. This paper will discuss the unique operational requirements for each engine on Orion and the development and qualification effort sat both the engine and system-level that were completed to enable a successful Artemis I mission. Next the paper will evaluate the in-f light performance of the engines during the Artemis I mission showing nominal performance as expected. Additionally, comparisons to models will be presented showing very good correlation. Finally, the paper will address the plan for the engines on future Orion missions and the evolution of the system operation.

liquid propulsion systems↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Comparison of Exploration Oxygen Recovery Technology Options Using ESM and LSMAC

In preparation for long duration manned space flight, numerous technology development efforts are ongoing in the area of environmental control and life support (ECLS). In cooperation with international, industry, and academic partners, NASA seeks to leverage the International Space Station as a testbed for technologies targeted for Exploration-class missions. In recent years, Equivalent Systems Mass (ESM) analyses have been conducted to evaluate the relative breakeven points and to compare technologies as part of ECLS architectural trades. While these studies have provided important data pertaining to key engineering metrics, additional considerations are important to more fully understand the potential impacts and costs associated with selecting a specific architecture. A tool, called the Life Support Multi-Dimensional Assessment Criteria (LSMAC), was recently proposed by Sierra Nevada Corporation in an attempt to incorporate influences of these additional considerations including Maintainability, Risk Analysis, Technology Readiness Level, Radiation Impacts, Manufacturing Costs, Reliability, Human Factors, and Un-Crewed Operations. As a first step toward evaluating and implementing this tool, LSMAC was used to revisit the ISS oxygen recovery trade from the 1990’s wherein Sabatier was selected over Bosch technology. Second, the tool was used to compare oxygen recovery developmental technologies currently in work. The results of these studies as well as a comparison with standalone ESM analyses are reported. Further, a discussion of the potential application of the tool across the ECLS portfolio and its potential use in future technology selection for ISS flight demonstrations is provided.

Morgan B Abney↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

A Systematic Framework for Investigating Climate Impact-Drivers in NASA GISS ModelE Configurations: Towards Improving ESM Development for Impact Applications

Earth System Model (ESM) development benefits from attention to the downstream applications for nature and society. The evaluation of ESMs often focuses on a limited set of climatic impact-drivers (CIDs)1 and numerous large-scale parameters that are not directly relevant for impact analysis. To address this limitation, we propose a comprehensive framework for impact-relevant model version comparison. This framework explores both the intended and unintended consequences of shifts in model components, parameters, and resolutions, emphasizing the perspectives of the climate impacts community. We have selected a core set of CIDs as a basis for comparing model versions.

earth system models↗
NASA NTRS2017

Orion European Service Module (ESM) Development, Integration and Qualification Status

ESA and the European Industry are supplying the European Service Module for Orion. An overview of the system and subsystem configuration of the Orion European Service Module (ESM) as designed and built for the EM-1 mission is provided as well as an outline of its development, assembly, integration and verification process performed by ESA and NASA in coordination with their respective Industrial prime contractors, Airbus Defence and Space and Lockheed Martin.

Berthe, Philippe↗
NASA NTRS2018

Orion European Service Module (ESM) Development, Integration and Qualification Status

Following the very successful series of five Automated Transfer Vehicle (ATV) missions to the International Space Station (ISS) which were completed in 2015, ESA and NASA jointly decided to partially offset the European obligations deriving from the extension of the ISS Programme until the end of 2020 with different means. The selected barter option was a new development : the provision by ESA of the European Service Module (ESM) for NASA's new Orion human exploration spacecraft as part of the Exploration Mission 1 (EM-1). This development and production was entrusted to the prime contractor of the ATV, Airbus Defence and Space in Bremen, Germany.

Berthe, Philippe↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Comparison of Equivalent System Mass (ESM) and Modeling Results from Improved Heat Loss Approaches for the Carbon Dioxide Deposition (CDep) System

Proper insulation on any type of cryogenic system is essential for its performance to be optimal, as a poorly insulated system will allow for significant heat loss. Different insulation arrangements for CDep were considered, and performance was simulated and measured in Modelica. Heat loss was correlated to cycle time and CO2 deposition efficiency, which led to overall system power usage. Mass, volume, and power consumption were weighted accordingly in the ESM calculations to guide selection of the CDep insulation scheme.

Marian Alcid↗
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 NTRSDate not supplied

Serial Propellant Tank Pressure Behavior in Artemis I 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 percent.

Propellant Tank↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

ESM Roughness Datasets (ARC)

This work focused on the effects on turbulent heat transfer due to surface roughness of types relevant to NASA entry missions, and was supported by NASA’s Entry Systems Modeling (ESM) Project. The emphasis was on new classes of woven materials, which are enabling for many missions.

heat transfer↗
NASA NTRS2003

Using Technology Readiness Level (TRL), Life Cycle Cost (LCC), and Other Metrics to Supplement Equivalent System Mass (ESM) in Advanced Life Support (ALS)

The ALS project plan goals are reducing cost, improving performance, and achieving flight readiness. ALS selects projects to advance the mission readiness of low cost, high performance technologies. The role of metrics is to help select good projects and report progress. The Equivalent Mass (EM) of a system is the sum of the estimated mass of the hardware, of its required materials and spares, and of the pressurized volume, power supply, and cooling system needed to support the hardware in space. EM is the total payload launch mass needed to provide and support a system. EM is directly proportional to the launch cost.

Jones, Harry↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Overview and Assessment of the ESM Pressure Control Performance on Artemis I

The European Service Module propulsion system is a bipropellant hypergolic serial system used to provide translational thrust and attitude control for Orion. To control propellant tank pressure, a bang-bang pressure control system is employed. Each propellant commodity is regulated by a pressure control assembly consisting of two pressurization branches (a primary and redundant pressurization path) where each branch includes 3 valves in series. Regulation is accomplished via flight software control of two downstream solenoid valves triggered off propellant tank ullage pressure. This paper presents an overview of system level challenges which have been overcome to enable a successful Artemis I flight. Principle among the challenges was valve-to-valve pneumatic interactions which drove changes to the control scheme. During the Artemis I mission, the pressure control assembly was able to control tank pressure within allowable tolerances. Comparison between flight data and mathematical models are presented showing excellent agreement. Finally, during flight, a pressure surge was observed during the first regulation cycle when there was propellant in the upstream propellant tank. This was attributed to a gas hammer effect within the pressurization system and was not observable in a 1g environment. This paper also discusses the conclusion that this gas hammer effect is a nominal feature of the system during operations. Assessment of the in-flight performance of the electronic pressure regulation scheme on the European Service Module propulsion system shows the system behaved nominally during the Artemis I mission.

propulsion system↗