Lessons Learned From Performing Quality Control of KSC LC-39B Lightning Protection Tower Meteorological Data
No abstract available
Orcutt, John M.↗
SEARCH · Engineering Papers
Results for “LC 39B”
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.
Overview of the LC-39B Lightning Detection System and After Strike Process
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Christopher Lowe↗
Numerical Modeling of Propellant Boil-Off in a Cryogenic Storage Tank
A numerical model to predict boil-off of stored propellant in large spherical cryogenic tanks has been developed. Accurate prediction of tank boil-off rates for different thermal insulation systems was the goal of this collaboration effort. The Generalized Fluid System Simulation Program, integrating flow analysis and conjugate heat transfer for solving complex fluid system problems, was used to create the model. Calculation of tank boil-off rate requires simultaneous simulation of heat transfer processes among liquid propellant, vapor ullage space, and tank structure. The reference tank for the boil-off model was the 850,000 gallon liquid hydrogen tank at Launch Complex 39B (LC- 39B) at Kennedy Space Center, which is under study for future infrastructure improvements to support the Constellation program. The methodology employed in the numerical model was validated using a sub-scale model and tank. Experimental test data from a 1/15th scale version of the LC-39B tank using both liquid hydrogen and liquid nitrogen were used to anchor the analytical predictions of the sub-scale model. Favorable correlations between sub-scale model and experimental test data have provided confidence in full-scale tank boil-off predictions. These methods are now being used in the preliminary design for other cases including future launch vehicles
Majumdar, A. K.↗
Lightning Protection System
A new Lightning Protection System (LPS) was designed and built at Launch Complex 39B (LC-39B), at the Kennedy Space Center (KSC), Florida, in 2009, for NASA’s Space Launch System (SLS) program. A comprehensive lightning monitoring system was additionally designed and the LC-39B lightning instrumentation started incremental deployment early 2011. By March 2011, the LC-39B lightning monitoring system was activated with short outages during construction and renovations of the LC-39B. Since 2011, the LC-39B LPS has been directly struck at least once per year. The earliest and latest in a year that the LPS has been directly struck by lightning has been January 7th and October 1st (both 2017), respectively. During the summer of 2018, the Mobile Launcher 1 (ML-1) lightning monitoring system was deployed and partially active during ML-1 construction/testing. Since 2018, the ML-1 has been parked at the LC-39B for different durations of time for integrated testing. Early August 2019 (6th and 9th ) multiple lightning strikes terminated directly on the LPS at three different locations in addition to a nearby strike within the Pad perimeter and multiple nearby strikes outside the Pad Perimeter, triggering both, the LC-39B and the ML-1 lightning monitoring systems. This has been the first time direct lightning strikes have terminated on the LPS or within the LC-39B perimeter while the ML-1 has been at the LC-39B. This paper summarizes direct and close nearby lightning strikes to LC-39B from 2011 until the summer of 2019.
Angel G Mata↗
Survivability Versus Time
Develop Survivability vs Time Model as a decision-evaluation tool to assess various emergency egress methods used at Launch Complex 39B (LC 39B) and in the Vehicle Assembly Building (VAB) on NASAs Kennedy Space Center. For each hazard scenario, develop probability distributions to address statistical uncertainty resulting in survivability plots over time and composite survivability plots encompassing multiple hazard scenarios.
Probability Distribution Function↗
Probabilistic Survivability Versus Time Modeling
This technical paper documents Kennedy Space Centers Independent Assessment team work completed on three assessments for the Ground Systems Development and Operations (GSDO) Program to assist the Chief Safety and Mission Assurance Officer (CSO) and GSDO management during key programmatic reviews. The assessments provided the GSDO Program with an analysis of how egress time affects the likelihood of astronaut and worker survival during an emergency. For each assessment, the team developed probability distributions for hazard scenarios to address statistical uncertainty, resulting in survivability plots over time. The first assessment developed a mathematical model of probabilistic survivability versus time to reach a safe location using an ideal Emergency Egress System at Launch Complex 39B (LC-39B); the second used the first model to evaluate and compare various egress systems under consideration at LC-39B. The third used a modified LC-39B model to determine if a specific hazard decreased survivability more rapidly than other events during flight hardware processing in Kennedys Vehicle Assembly Building (VAB).Based on the composite survivability versus time graphs from the first two assessments, there was a soft knee in the Figure of Merit graphs at eight minutes (ten minutes after egress ordered). Thus, the graphs illustrated to the decision makers that the final emergency egress design selected should have the capability of transporting the flight crew from the top of LC 39B to a safe location in eight minutes or less. Results for the third assessment were dominated by hazards that were classified as instantaneous in nature (e.g. stacking mishaps) and therefore had no effect on survivability vs time to egress the VAB. VAB emergency scenarios that degraded over time (e.g. fire) produced survivability vs time graphs that were line with aerospace industry norms.
Joyner, James J., Sr.↗
Predicting SLS Launch Environment using a Novel Multiphase Formulation
Powerful acoustic waves generated during ignition of launch vehicles may be dangerous to the vehicle, its payload, or the surrounding structures. The water-based Ignition Overpressure and Sound Suppression (IOP/SS) system at Kennedy Space Center’s (KSC) Launch Complex 39B (LC-39B) will be used to protect the Space Launch System (SLS) from the acoustic vibrations generated during launch. The IOP/SS system uses enormous amounts of water to dampen and attenuate these sound waves. To better understand the launch environment risks and to study the effectiveness of the IOP/SS system it is desirable to have time-accurate unsteady simulations of the vehicle ignition with water-based sound suppression. This paper presents results obtained with a novel, high-order accurate, and robust numerical method designed for simulating compressible multiphase flows. A positivity-preserving finite difference scheme is utilized which is formally high-order accurate and also provably robust. Robustness is critical due to the extreme nature of the flow which exhibits highly nonlinear shock and rarefaction waves interacting with liquid-gas interfaces with density ratios of the order of 1000:1. Furthermore, the high-order accuracy (and the high resolution property) is desirable for predicting wave phenomena like IOP waves since the signal can be resolved accurately and propagated long distances with fewer grid points. This finite-difference method was developed using NASA’s Launch, Ascent, and Vehicle Aerodynamics (LAVA) Cartesian immersed boundary framework. We present a validation case by applying our solver to the SLS Scale Model Acoustic Test (SMAT). The SLS SMAT is a well-instrumented 5% scale model test meant to represent the SLS at NASA KSC’s LC-39B pad. Scale IOP tests were performed with and without the sound suppression water and included many sensors which recorded the pressure waves produced during ignition. For this validation case we conduct two simulations, likewise with and without sound suppression water, and compare the SLS SMAT pressure sensor signals with our numerical signals at identical locations. Following this validation case we present a study of the SLS launch environment to examine engineering safety concerns about the mobile launch pad. Engineers at KSC redesigned the main flame deflector at LC-39B anticipating the increased loads from the SLS and to repair damage from prior Shuttle missions. This deflector redesign made use of surface pressure and temperature data from LAVA full-scale SLS simulations without the sound suppression system. The engineers were questioning the possibility of increased pressure loads on the underside of the mobile launcher due to the water in the flame trench. Based on the results established in our simulations of the SLS SMAT, we performed updated calculations for SLS at LC-39B with and without water systems active to assess the readiness of the launch pad for Artemis I launch. Our results show that the IOP/SS system is effective at reducing the overpressure signal and overall sound pressure levels felt by the vehicle and additionally that the pressure loads experienced by the mobile launcher (ML) during engine startup is not increased by the presence of water.
EGS↗
Probabilistic Survivability Versus Time Modeling
This presentation documents Kennedy Space Center's Independent Assessment work completed on three assessments for the Ground Systems Development and Operations (GSDO) Program to assist the Chief Safety and Mission Assurance Officer during key programmatic reviews and provided the GSDO Program with analyses of how egress time affects the likelihood of astronaut and ground worker survival during an emergency. For each assessment, a team developed probability distributions for hazard scenarios to address statistical uncertainty, resulting in survivability plots over time. The first assessment developed a mathematical model of probabilistic survivability versus time to reach a safe location using an ideal Emergency Egress System at Launch Complex 39B (LC-39B); the second used the first model to evaluate and compare various egress systems under consideration at LC-39B. The third used a modified LC-39B model to determine if a specific hazard decreased survivability more rapidly than other events during flight hardware processing in Kennedy's Vehicle Assembly Building.
Operational Hazards↗
Lightning Instrumentation System
A new comprehensive lightning instrumentation system has been designed for the Mobile Launcher 1 (ML-1) at the Kennedy Space Center, Florida. This new instrumentation system includes the synchronized recording of three B-dot, 3-axis measurement stations, one D-dot sensor and eighteen vehicle measurement channels. Each vehicle measurement channel is comprised of two currents and one voltage measurements. The instrumentation system is composed of centralized transient recorders and digitizers, connected to the transient recorders via fiber optic cables. The transient recorders are triggered by the B-dot or D-dot sensors. When the Space Launch System (SLS) vehicle is present at the ML-1, the transient recorders record data on a dual sampling rate mode, continuous slow 5 kilo-samples per second (per channel) and event driven fast 100 mega-samples per second (per channel). Without the presence of the vehicle at the ML-1, the instrumentation system operates only as an event driven fast 100 mega-samples per second (per channel). In the absence of the vehicle, the only measurements recorded are the B-dot and D-dot stations. Additionally, a portable Lightning Monitoring System (LMS) is temporarily installed inside the Orion Crew Capsule module monitoring one portable B-dot, 3-axis measurement station, and 2 Crew Capsule BUS voltages. The portable LMS has a transient recorder independent of the ML-1 transient recorders, that is triggered by the portable B-dot sensor or transients on the vehicle BUS voltages. This portable instrumentation is removed while performing close out operations before the vehicle launch. For the ML-1 lightning instrumentation system, new custom B-dot and D-dot sensors were designed and prototypes were tested at the International Center for Lightning Research and Testing (ICLRT) at Camp Blanding, Florida. The Ground Special Power (GSP) vehicle measurement channels monitoring on the ML-1 is done via 1) Commercial off-the-shelf (COTS) current shunts and 2) custom Voltage Dividers. The new ML-1 lightning instrumentation system was designed, fabricated, deployed, and tested prior to the summer of 2019, in preparation for the first NASA's SLS mission to be launched from the Launch Complex 39B (LC-39B). The ML-1 lightning instrumentation was designed to complement the LC-39B lightning instrumentation system providing electromagnetic measurements closer to the vehicle, at different heights and inside the Crew capsule module.
Angel G Mata↗
The Quality Control Algorithms Used in the Process of Creating the NASA Kennedy Space Center Lightning Protection System Towers Meteorological Database
The methodology and the results of the quality control (QC) process of the meteorological data from the Lightning Protection System (LPS) towers located at Kennedy Space Center (KSC) launch complex 39B (LC-39B) are documented in this paper. Meteorological data are used to design a launch vehicle, determine operational constraints, and to apply defined constraints on day-of-launch (DOL). In order to properly accomplish these tasks, a representative climatological database of meteorological records is needed because the database needs to represent the climate the vehicle will encounter. Numerous meteorological measurement towers exist at KSC; however, the engineering tasks need measurements at specific heights, some of which can only be provided by a few towers. Other than the LPS towers, Tower 313 is the only tower that provides observations up to 150 m. This tower is located approximately 3.5 km from LC-39B. In addition, data need to be QC'ed to remove erroneous reports that could pollute the results of an engineering analysis, mislead the development of operational constraints, or provide a false image of the atmosphere at the tower's location.
Orcutt, John M.↗
The Quality Control Algorithms Used in the Creation of NASA Kennedy Space Center Lightning Protection System Towers Meteorological Database
An accurate database of meteorological data is essential for designing any aerospace vehicle and for preparing launch commit criteria. Meteorological instrumentation were recently placed on the three Lightning Protection System (LPS) towers at Kennedy Space Center (KSC) launch complex 39B (LC-39B), which provide a unique meteorological dataset existing at the launch complex over an extensive altitude range. Data records of temperature, dew point, relative humidity, wind speed, and wind direction are produced at 40, 78, 116, and 139 m at each tower. The Marshall Space Flight Center Natural Environments Branch (EV44) received an archive that consists of one-minute averaged measurements for the period of record of January 2011 - April 2015. However, before the received database could be used EV44 needed to remove any erroneous data from within the database through a comprehensive quality control (QC) process. The QC process applied to the LPS towers' meteorological data is similar to other QC processes developed by EV44, which were used in the creation of meteorological databases for other towers at KSC. The QC process utilized in this study has been modified specifically for use with the LPS tower database. The QC process first includes a check of each individual sensor. This check includes removing any unrealistic data and checking the temporal consistency of each variable. Next, data from all three sensors at each height are checked against each other, checked against climatology, and checked for sensors that erroneously report a constant value. Then, a vertical consistency check of each variable at each tower is completed. Last, the upwind sensor at each level is selected to minimize the influence of the towers and other structures at LC-39B on the measurements. The selection process for the upwind sensor implemented a study of tower-induced turbulence. This paper describes in detail the QC process, QC results, and the attributes of the LPS towers meteorological database.
Orcutt, John M.↗
Operational Lessons Learned from the Ares I-X Flight Test
The Ares I-X flight test, launched in 2009, is the first test of the Ares I crew launch vehicle. This development flight test evaluated the flight dynamics, roll control, and separation events, but also provided early insights into logistical, stacking, launch, and recovery operations for Ares I. Operational lessons will be especially important for NASA as the agency makes the transition from the Space Shuttle to the Constellation Program, which is designed to be less labor-intensive. The mission team itself comprised only 700 individuals over the life of the project compared to the thousands involved in Shuttle and Apollo missions; while missions to and beyond low-Earth orbit obviously will require additional personnel, this lean approach will serve as a model for future Constellation missions. To prepare for Ares I-X, vehicle stacking and launch infrastructure had to be modified at Kennedy Space Center's Vehicle Assembly Building (VAB) as well as Launch Complex (LC) 39B. In the VAB, several platforms and other structures designed for the Shuttle s configuration had to be removed to accommodate the in-line, much taller Ares I-X. Vehicle preparation activities resulted in delays, but also in lessons learned for ground operations personnel, including hardware deliveries, cable routing, transferred work and custodial paperwork. Ares I-X also proved to be a resource challenge, as individuals and ground service equipment (GSE) supporting the mission also were required for Shuttle or Atlas V operations at LC 40/41 at Cape Canaveral Air Force Station. At LC 39B, several Shuttle-specific access arms were removed and others were added to accommodate the in-line Ares vehicle. Ground command, control, and communication (GC3) hardware was incorporated into the Mobile Launcher Platform (MLP). The lightning protection system at LC 39B was replaced by a trio of 600-foot-tall towers connected by a catenary wire to account for the much greater height of the vehicle. Like Shuttle, Ares I-X will be stacked on a MLP and rolled out to the pad on a Saturn-era crawler-transporter. While Ares I-X was only held in place by the four hold-down posts on its aft skirt during rollout, a new vehicle stabilization system (VSS) attached to the vertical service structure kept the vehicle from undue swaying prior to launch at the pad, LC 39B. Following the launch, the flight test vehicle first stage was recovered with the aid of new parachutes resized to accommodate the five-segment-long first stage, which had a much greater length and mass than the Shuttle s reusable solid rocket boosters. After splashdown, recovery divers exercised extra care when handling the first stage to ensure that the flight data recorders in the fifth segment simulator were not damaged by exposure to sea water. The data recovered from the Ares I-X flight test will be very valuable in verifying the predicted environments and models used to design the vehicle. Lessons learned from Ares I-X will be shared with the Ares Projects through written and verbal reports and through integration of mission team members into the Project workforce.
Davis, Stephan R.↗
Ares I-X Malfunction Turn Range Safety Analysis
Ares I-X was the designation given to the flight test version of the Ares I rocket which was developed by NASA (also known as the Crew Launch Vehicle (CLV) component of the Constellation Program). The Ares I-X flight test vehicle achieved a successful flight test on October 28, 2009, from Pad LC-39B at Kennedy Space Center, Florida (KSC). As part of the flight plan approval for the test vehicle, a range safety malfunction turn analysis was performed to support the risk assessment and vehicle destruct criteria development processes. Several vehicle failure scenarios were identified which could have caused the vehicle trajectory to deviate from its normal flight path. The effects of these failures were evaluated with an Ares I-X 6 degrees-of-freedom (6-DOF) digital simulation, using the Program to Optimize Simulated Trajectories Version II (POST2) simulation tool. The Ares I-X simulation analysis provided output files containing vehicle trajectory state information. These were used by other risk assessment and vehicle debris trajectory simulation tools to determine the risk to personnel and facilities in the vicinity of the launch area at KSC, and to develop the vehicle destruct criteria used by the flight test range safety officer in the event of a flight test anomaly of the vehicle. The simulation analysis approach used for this study is described, including descriptions of the failure modes which were considered and the underlying assumptions and ground rules of the study.
Beaty, J. R.↗
Center Planning and Development: Multi-User Spaceport Initiatives
The Vehicle Assembly building at NASAs Kennedy Space Center has been used since 1966 to vertically assemble every launch vehicle, since the Apollo Program, launched from Launch Complex 39 (LC-39). After the cancellation of the Constellation Program in 2010 and the retirement of the Space Shuttle Program in 2011, the VAB faced an uncertain future. As the Space Launch System (SLS) gained a foothold as the future of American spaceflight to deep space, NASA was only using a portion of the VABs initial potential. With three high bays connected to the Crawler Way transportation system, the potential exists for up to three rockets to be simultaneously processed for launch. The Kennedy Space Center (KSC) Master plan, supported by the Center Planning and Development (CPD) Directorate, is guiding Kennedy toward a 21st century multi-user spaceport. This concept will maintain Kennedy as the United States premier gateway to space and provide multi-user operations through partnerships with the commercial aerospace industry. Commercial aerospace companies, now tasked with transporting cargo and, in the future, astronauts to the International Space Station (ISS) via the Commercial Resupply Service (CRS) and Commercial Crew Program (CCP), are a rapidly growing industry with increasing capabilities to make launch operations more economical for both private companies and the government. Commercial operations to Low Earth Orbit allow the government to focus on travel to farther destinations through the SLS Program. With LC-39B designated as a multi-use launch pad, companies seeking to use it will require an integration facility to assemble, integrate, and test their launch vehicle. An Announcement for Proposals (AFP) was released in June, beginning the process of finding a non-NASA user for High Bay 2 (HB2) and the Mobile Launcher Platforms (MLPs). An Industry Day, a business meeting and tour for interested companies and organizations, was also arranged to identify and answer any additional questions posed by potential proposers. After amending the AFP and posting additional material for potential users to consider, proposals are being accepted until July 31, at which point they will be evaluated to determine the proposer which best meets the objectives of the government. By identifying VAB HB2 as available and seeking proposals from the commercial sector for VAB HB2 and MLP use, Center Planning and Development is ensuring Kennedy Space Centers relevance in the evolving launch industry of the 21st century.
AFP↗
Energy Efficient Large-Scale Storage of Liquid Hydrogen
World’s largest LH2storage tanks constructed in mid-1960s at NASA/KSC. These vacuum-perlite insulated tanks, still in service today, are 3,200 m3capacity (ea.). In 2018, construction began on an additional 4,700 m3LH2storage tank at LC-39B•NASA’s new Space Launch System (SLS) heavy lift rocket for Artemis program holds 2,033 m3of LH2in its 8.4-m diameter by 40-m height. Two new energy-efficient technologies are included: glass bubbles insulation system and an Integrated Refrigeration and Storage (IRAS) heat exchanger for passive + active thermal control:•Evacuated glass bubbles insulation system has been shown to reduce LH2boiloff by 46% versus perlite in field demonstrations. Controlled storage via IRAS, when fully implemented, will provide full control of ullage pressure, zero boiloff, and even production of densified LH22CEC-2021
cryogenics↗
Environmental Control Systems for Exploration Missions One and Two
In preparing for Exploration Missions One and Two (EM-1 & EM-2), the Ground Systems Development and Operations Program has significant updates to be made to nearly all facilities. This is all being done to accommodate the Space Launch System, which will be the world’s largest rocket in history upon fruition. Facilitating the launch of such a rocket requires an updated Vehicle Assembly Building, an upgraded Launchpad, Payload Processing Facility, and more. In this project, Environmental Control Systems across several facilities were involved, though there is a focus around the Mobile Launcher and Launchpad. Parts were ordered, analysis models were updated, design drawings were updated, and more.
EM-2↗
Comparison of Daily, Monthly (Lunar), Yearly, Decadal, Quarter-Century, Half-Century, and Centurial Shoreline Change Rates at the Kennedy Space Center, Cape Canaveral, Florida, USA
The Kennedy Space Center (KSC) is North America’s premier spaceport and provides crucial access to space for both government and private entities. The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) facilities are clustered along a 12 km active shoreline at Cape Canaveral, Florida, USA, with the entire NASA and US Space Force station (SF) shoreline stretching over 32 km (Figure 1). Several Launch Complexes (LC’s) including the modern heavy lift facilities are only a few tens of meters from the active shoreline and are imminently threatened by continued sea level rise and ongoing coastal erosion. The space center was built on the northern part of Cape Canaveral. Images collected in 1943 show that Apollo Heavy Lift Launch Complexes were built in swales on ground that was at or below sea level with Launch Complex 39B constructed on a paleo inlet (Figures 2 and 3). Today the Heavy Lift Launch Complexes are ~220 meters from the shoreline with the area between the complexes retreating at the highest rates along the cape (Figure 4). To better understand the intersection of environmental concerns, limited budgets for shoreline protection, and sheltering critical infrastructure; NASA, The University of Florida, United States Geological Survey (USGS), National Park Service (NPS) and contractors have and continue to conduct numerous studies to characterize and understand the shoreline evolution and rates of change at KSC. This project aims to better understand and visualize the temporal and spatial variability of change along the NASA shoreline beyond a simple point to point solution.
Richard MacKenzie III↗