Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “Space Nuclear”

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 NTRS2010

Non-Nuclear Testing of Space Nuclear Systems at NASA MSFC

Highly realistic non-nuclear testing can be used to investigate and resolve potential issues with space nuclear power and propulsion systems. Non-nuclear testing is particularly useful for systems designed with fuels and materials operating within their demonstrated nuclear performance envelope. Non-nuclear testing allows thermal hydraulic, heat transfer, structural, integration, safety, operational, performance, and other potential issues to be investigated and resolved with a greater degree of flexibility and at reduced cost and schedule compared to nuclear testing. The primary limit of non-nuclear testing is that nuclear characteristics and potential nuclear issues cannot be directly investigated. However, non-nuclear testing can be used to augment the potential benefit from any nuclear testing that may be required for space nuclear system design and development. This paper describes previous and ongoing non-nuclear testing related to space nuclear systems at NASA's Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC).

Houts, Michael G.↗
NASA NTRS1990

SP-100 nuclear space power systems with application to space commercialization

The technology of the SP-100 space nuclear power system program is compared to that of more familiar solar-power systems. The SP-100 program develops, validates, and demonstrates the technology for space nuclear power systems in the range of 10 to 1000 kilowatts electric for use in future military and civilian space missions. Mission applications, including earth orbiting platforms and lunar/Mars surface power, are enhanced or made possible by SP-100 technology. Attention is given to the SP-100 reference flight system design, the SP-100 nuclear reactor and nuclear-reactor shield, the platform-mounted, tethered, and free-flying reactors, and installation, operation, and disposal options, as well as lunar-Mars surface applications. The SP-100 is presented as one of the nuclear energy sources needed for long-life, compact, lightweight, continuous high power independent of solar orientation, specific orbits, or missions.

Smith, J. M.↗
NASA NTRS1988

SP-100 nuclear space power systems with application to space commercialization

The purpose of this paper is to familiarize the Space Commercialization Community with the status and characteristics of the SP-100 space nuclear power system. The program is a joint undertaking by the Department of Defense, the Department of Energy and NASA. The goal of the program is to develop, validate, and demonstrate the technology for space nuclear power systems in the range of 10 to 1000 kWe electric for use in the future civilian and military space missions. Also discussed are mission applications which are enhanced and/or enabled by SP-100 technology and how this technology compares to that of more familiar solar power systems. The mission applications include earth orbiting platforms and lunar/Mars surface power.

Smith, John M.↗
NASA NTRS2026

Space Nuclear Propulsion for Space Applications: Multi-Mission Nuclear Thermal Propulsion Vehicle Design

This NASA Technical Memorandum (TM) is intended to capture design work that the Advanced Concepts Office (ACO) at NASA’s Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) performed on behalf of the Space Nuclear Propulsion (SNP) Project during an SNP-driven design and mission analysis initiative in FY2025. Specifically, this TM focuses on several spacecraft design concepts intended to explore the feasibility of nuclear thermal propulsion (NTP) for use in a selection of notional, unmanned space missions. While references to the missions will be made in this TM, the primary focus will be on the spacecraft design concepts themselves, the ground rules and assumptions used for designing the spacecraft, a description of the various subsystems and their performance parameters, and the methodologies used to design them. The TM will also highlight areas of future work and additional considerations that may need to be taken into account when evaluating the feasibility of NTP space systems for other applications. The report will discuss the results from ACO’s analysis as they pertain to the different vehicle concepts that were evaluated. Each discipline section in this report will discuss the discipline-specific ground rules and assumptions, the methodology and design approaches employed, and present the results along with any relevant discussion, and highlight areas of future work where applicable.

Mitchell A Rodriguez↗
NASA NTRS1991

Ultrahigh temperature vapor core reactor-MHD system for space nuclear electric power

The conceptual design of a nuclear space power system based on the ultrahigh temperature vapor core reactor with MHD energy conversion is presented. This UF4 fueled gas core cavity reactor operates at 4000 K maximum core temperature and 40 atm. Materials experiments, conducted with UF4 up to 2200 K, demonstrate acceptable compatibility with tungsten-molybdenum-, and carbon-based materials. The supporting nuclear, heat transfer, fluid flow and MHD analysis, and fissioning plasma physics experiments are also discussed.

Maya, Isaac↗
NASA NTRS2023

Information and Best Practices Related to NASA Nuclear Flight Safety for Space Flights Involving Space Nuclear Systems

The purpose of this handbook is to facilitate a repeatable and robust process that promotes clear and effective interfaces between activities and stakeholders focused on meeting nuclear flight safety requirements for missions utilizing space nuclear systems (SNS), within the context of NASA’s broader nuclear-related activities and interfaces. NPR 8715.26, Nuclear Flight Safety, requires that the NASA project manager “incorporate nuclear flight safety considerations starting with program or project formulation through the point at which the SNS or other radioactive material no longer has the potential to affect Earth’s biosphere.” NASA’s use of SNS inherently involves partnering with other stakeholders to conduct a range of related activities that interface with nuclear flight safety. From a categorical perspective these include: (i) meeting the authorities and licensing requirements for possession and use of nuclear material, as governed by other Federal authorities; (ii) conducting National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) activities for nuclear-enabled missions; (iii) meeting Federal nuclear launch authorization requirements; (iv) conducting radiological contingency planning activities, including those associated with international commitments; (v) performing risk communication and public outreach activities; and (vi) ensuring decommissioning and disposal strategies reflect National policies and interests. It is the intent of this handbook to promote an effective interface between nuclear flight safety and these interrelated categorical activities. In addition to activities undertaken with partnering agencies, there are individual nuclear-related activities and programs that have a nexus to nuclear flight safety, and these include: (i) applicable NASA Standing Review Boards; (ii) the US Department of Energy nuclear safety activities conducted in partnership with NASA under Memoranda of Understanding; (iii) the Department of Defense’s Range Safety activities; (iv) NASA’s general involvement in interagency and international dialogues regarding nuclear safety; (v) the NASA-administered Interagency Nuclear Safety Review Board; (vi) NASA’s program and project governance activities and nuclear-specific Technical Discipline Team activities under the Office of the Chief Engineer; and others. It is the intent of this handbook to promote effective leveraging of these additional interrelated organizational activities, as appropriate.

Donald Helton↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Space Nuclear Propulsion for Deep Space Science Missions

The use of nuclear thermal propulsion (NTP) 1 and nuclear electric propulsion (NEP) 2 systems on deep space science missions to the outer planets and into the interstellar medium 3 can yield significant spacecraft system and mission performance benefits and improvements relative to the use of conventional chemical propulsion systems. Several recent and ongoing programs are developing the technologies and systems required to realize a near-term deep space nuclear propulsion capability. NTP provides improved propulsion efficiencies compared to chemical propulsion, while also providing substantial thrust. This combination of high thrust and increased specific impulse (I_sp) provides high acceleration and extended thrusting periods, enabling greatly reduced trip-times on certain types of missions compared to various propulsive alternatives. For examples, compared to a baseline mission using chemical propulsion, NTP-powered missions to Jupiter or Uranus could deliver approximately 2.4-3.6 times more payload (in the case of Jupiter, the payload delivery is significantly larger than the Juno spacecraft). In this comparison, the higher end of the payload advantage is obtained when the trip time is held equal for the NTP-powered vehicle and a vehicle using a chemical propulsion departure stage. NTP systems are presently under development by multiple government agencies. NASA’s Space Nuclear Propulsion (SNP) project aims to demonstrate a hydrogen-fed NTP engine at 900 s specific impulse (I_sp) and approximately 10-15 klb_f of thrust. DARPA’s Demonstration Rocket for Agile Cislunar Operations (DRACO) program is targeting a demonstration of an NTP system in the cislunar space between the Earth and the Moon. An appropriately phased development plan that applies the development of the reactor technology for an NTP engine in this performance class and leverages mature, existing liquid rocket component hardware provides a path to a lower cost propulsion system that can be realized on a shorter development schedule. NEP, with high Isp in the 2,000-8,000 s range, can also provide advantages over chemical propulsion, including a much greater payload delivery mass and the flexibility for planners to trade between delivered mass and a wider window of mission trajectory options. Electric propulsion (EP) systems have demonstrated great utility, performing notably on the Dawn mission to enable rendezvous and orbital insertion at two separate bodies, Vesta and Ceres. An NEP-powered vehicle would have a similar capability to visit multiple bodies, loitering at each before moving to the next. A 10 kW_e NEP system provides a power- rich environment on the spacecraft that is simply not possible using present radioisotope power systems, giving mission planners more scientific instrument and communication hardware options. Several programs and projects are presently developing NEP systems and subsystems in the 10 kW_e power range, leveraging past reactor work and recent nuclear power generation risk-reduction demonstration activities such as the Demonstration Using Flattop Fission (DUFF) and the Kilopower Reactor Using Stirling TechnologY (KRUSTY). The goal of the Air Force Research Laboratory’s Joint Energy Technology Supplying On-Orbit Nuclear Power (JETSON) program is an in-space demonstration vehicle that has a 10 kW_e -class fission power source. These past and present efforts can be combined with the ongoing development of 10 kW_e -class electric propulsion systems (notably the NEXT-C ion thruster or the Hall-effect thrusters for Power and Propulsion Element of the Lunar Gateway) to provide a pathway to a low-cost, reliable NEP system for deep space science application.

Kurt A. Polzin↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Space Nuclear Propulsion for Deep Space Science Missions

The use of nuclear thermal propulsion (NTP) 1 and nuclear electric propulsion (NEP) 2 systems on deep space science missions to the outer planets and into the interstellar medium 3 can yield significant spacecraft system and mission performance benefits and improvements relative to the use of conventional chemical propulsion systems. Several recent and ongoing programs are developing the technologies and systems required to realize a near-term deep space nuclear propulsion capability. NTP provides improved propulsion efficiencies compared to chemical propulsion, while also providing substantial thrust. This combination of high thrust and increased specific impulse (I_sp) provides high acceleration and extended thrusting periods, enabling greatly reduced trip-times on certain types of missions compared to various propulsive alternatives. For examples, compared to a baseline mission using chemical propulsion, NTP-powered missions to Jupiter or Uranus could deliver approximately 2.4-3.6 times more payload (in the case of Jupiter, the payload delivery is significantly larger than the Juno spacecraft). In this comparison, the higher end of the payload advantage is obtained when the trip time is held equal for the NTP-powered vehicle and a vehicle using a chemical propulsion departure stage. NTP systems are presently under development by multiple government agencies. NASA’s Space Nuclear Propulsion (SNP) project aims to demonstrate a hydrogen-fed NTP engine at 900 s specific impulse (I_sp) and approximately 10-15 klb_f of thrust. DARPA’s Demonstration Rocket for Agile Cislunar Operations (DRACO) program is targeting a demonstration of an NTP system in the cislunar space between the Earth and the Moon. An appropriately phased development plan that applies the development of the reactor technology for an NTP engine in this performance class and leverages mature, existing liquid rocket component hardware provides a path to a lower cost propulsion system that can be realized on a shorter development schedule. NEP, with high Isp in the 2,000-8,000 s range, can also provide advantages over chemical propulsion, including a much greater payload delivery mass and the flexibility for planners to trade between delivered mass and a wider window of mission trajectory options. Electric propulsion (EP) systems have demonstrated great utility, performing notably on the Dawn mission to enable rendezvous and orbital insertion at two separate bodies, Vesta and Ceres. An NEP-powered vehicle would have a similar capability to visit multiple bodies, loitering at each before moving to the next. A 10 kW_e NEP system provides a power- rich environment on the spacecraft that is simply not possible using present radioisotope power systems, giving mission planners more scientific instrument and communication hardware options. Several programs and projects are presently developing NEP systems and subsystems in the 10 kW_e power range, leveraging past reactor work and recent nuclear power generation risk-reduction demonstration activities such as the Demonstration Using Flattop Fission (DUFF) and the Kilopower Reactor Using Stirling TechnologY (KRUSTY). The goal of the Air Force Research Laboratory’s Joint Energy Technology Supplying On-Orbit Nuclear Power (JETSON) program is an in-space demonstration vehicle that has a 10 kW_e -class fission power source. These past and present efforts can be combined with the ongoing development of 10 kW_e -class electric propulsion systems (notably the NEXT-C ion thruster or the Hall-effect thrusters for Power and Propulsion Element of the Lunar Gateway) to provide a pathway to a low-cost, reliable NEP system for deep space science application.

Kurt A. Polzin↗
NASA NTRS2022

NASA Utilization of Space Nuclear Systems for Robotic and Human Exploration Missions: Response to EO 13972: Promoting Small Nuclear Reactors for National Defense and Space Exploration

Space Nuclear Systems (SNS) technology development offers a wide range of capabilities to support NASA’s current and future missions. Executive Order (EO) 13972, “Promoting Small Modular Reactors for National Defense and Space Exploration” [1], issued 5 January 2021, directs NASA to define requirements for NASA utilization of nuclear energy systems for human and robotic exploration missions through 2040 and analyze the costs and benefits of such requirements.” Although it is premature to define requirements and cost for future exploration missions that have not yet been formulated, this report describes planned objectives and missions by 2040 that are enabled or enhanced by nuclear systems while taking into account a number of unique considerations for nuclear energy in the space environment. Nuclear energy systems are enabling for space missions and critical capabilities where conventional forms of energy production are impractical or impossible due to mass constraints, mission duration, or distance from the Sun. Space nuclear technologies available or in development for use by 2040 utilize radioisotope decay or nuclear fission and fall into three categories: heat, power, and propulsion. Current applications utilize radioisotope power systems that provide consistent and reliable performance in the sub-kilowatt power range. More advanced SNS can enable new mission objectives where high energy density solutions are critical, or where access to solar solutions is prohibitive. Higher power radioisotope and fission systems are under development within NASA for a wide variety of human exploration and science mission applications. Planned missions designed to use radioisotope systems include Dragonfly, a rotorcraft that will explore the surface of Titan, and Persephone, a mission concept for a Pluto orbiter. Nuclear fission systems have the key advantage of providing significantly higher power, lower mass solutions from tens to even thousands of kilowatts. Fission power is enabling to a sustained human presence on the Moon and developing a robust lunar economy. Fission propulsion is enabling for missions within and beyond cis-lunar space. This report examines NASA-envisioned mission applications and associated performance needs for SNS over the next twenty years leading to 2040 along with the unique technical considerations posed by space nuclear technology development. This includes engineering and operational logistics for ground handling, thermal management, survival of the space environment, operational safety, power requirements, and service longevity. Safety to the public, the NASA work force, and agency assets remains a top priority for NASA and particular attention is given to this aspect in the design, hardware assembly, ground operation, launch, and mission operation of an SNS. NASA relies on the Department of Energy as nuclear authority and its legacy of rigorous safety procedures as standards for ground development, test, transportation, and launch site operation. The principal concern is preventing unintended radiological release to the public or environment. Radioisotope system experience has established processes, including ground operation, transportation, and launch, that are considered directly applicable to emerging fission systems; however, fission systems have unique design needs that impact the safety and performance requirements. High efficiency power conversion from both fission and radioisotope systems requires high operating temperatures necessitating both passive and active thermal management to maintain safe and nominal operating conditions. Effective cooling and waste heat rejection have special considerations for space applications, whether in zero-g or reduced gravity. Fluid and heat transfer within the reactor system is not anticipated to be impacted by reduced or zero-g environments. Cryogenic working fluids and propellant supplies utilized in some space nuclear applications will need low mass, high capacity cryocoolers to meet the long-term storage and near zero-boiloff needs. Integrated, high power density SNS capable of being packaged in a single vehicle is a key consideration for NASA. Due to concerns for complexity and reliability, in space reactor assembly and reactor refueling are not current design considerations. Expanding into a new era for space exploration depends on mass-efficient, high-energy solutions to power deep-space vehicles, operate in harsh environments, and increase mission flexibility. NASA nuclear technology investments are targeting power for surface operations and propulsion for fast-transit, deep-space missions, all with the ability to reliably operate without the need for repair or refueling. NASA’s goals, enabled by nuclear technologies, provide for exciting advances in scientific objectives and human exploration, ushering in a new space age that enables a human presence on bodies beyond our Earth.

nuclear↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Overview of High Temperature Material Needs for Space Nuclear Propulsion Reactors

Space nuclear propulsion systems are capable of enabling future crewed missions to Mars. Two primary options of these systems exist: nuclear thermal propulsion (NTP) and nuclear electric propulsion (NEP). NTP systems use a reactor as a heat exchanger to heat a hydrogen propellant to produce high specific impulse (≥ 900 s) and thrust (10 - 100 klbf). A NTP materials challenge is development of nuclear fuel capable of operating for short durations (hours) under high power densities (≥ 5 MW/L) and temperatures (> 2700 K) in a corrosive hydrogen environment. In NEP systems, the reactor heats a working fluid which transfers heat to a power conversion system to power electric thrusters. NEP is capable of higher specific impulse (≥ 2000 s) but limited to low thrust (10s lbf). Light weight vessel and in-core structural materials that are radiation-resistant, creep-resistant, and dimensionally stable while operating at ~1500 K over mission times up to several years are needed for NEP. Both systems can benefit from high temperature neutron moderators. Through the Space Nuclear Propulsion project, NASA, supported by the DOE, is developing NTP and NEP systems. Technology maturation planning and risk reduction activities related to fabrication and testing of reactor material candidates is ongoing. This presentation overviews NTP and NEP materials needs and current ceramic and composite development activities.

nuclear thermal propulsion↗
NASA NTRS1972

Space nuclear power systems

Space nuclear power systems are considered for use in those particular spacecraft applications for which nuclear power systems offer unique advantages over solar and/or chemical space power systems. Both isotopic and reactor heated space electrical power units are described in an attempt to illustrate their operating characteristics, spacecraft integration aspects, and factory-to-end of mission operational considerations. The status of technology developments in nuclear power systems is presented. Some projections of those technologies are made to form a basis for the applications of space nuclear power systems to be expected over the next 10-15 years.

Carpenter, R. T.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Nuclear Space System Analysis and Modelling (NSSAM): A Software Tool to Efficiently Analyze the Design Space of Space Reactor Systems

Space reactors have the potential to play a key role in future NASA exploration activities due to their capability to enable sustainable power and advanced propulsion systems. To enable assessment of the space reactor design space, the nuclear space system analysis and modelling (NSSAM) software was developed by Analytical Mechanics Associates. NSSAM leverages a scalable and extensible software architecture which automates reactor analysis to perform coupled engine-reactor and reactor physics-thermal hydraulics calculations. This allows space reactor systems to be evaluated by a wider number of users with a consistent analysis approach to compare designs. NSSAM has been developed with multiple use cases to tailor the analysis to the level of detail desired by the user and computing resources. This summary overviews the NSSAM architecture and development approach, current capabilities (including design variants and use cases) and analysis approach for reactor and system component models.

nuclear thermal propulsion↗
NASA NTRS1990

A radiological assessment of space nuclear power operations near Space Station Freedom

In order to accomplish NASA's more ambitious exploration goals, nuclear reactors may be used in the vicinity of Space Station Freedom (SSF) either as power sources for coorbiting platforms or as part of the propulsion system for departing and returning personnel or cargo vehicles. This study identifies ranges of operational parameters, such as parking distances and reactor cooldown times, which would reasonably guarantee that doses to the SSF crew from all radiation sources would be below guidelines recently recommended by the National Council of Radiation Protection and Measurements. The specific scenarios considered include: (1) the launch and return of a nuclear electric propulsion vehicle, (2) the launch and return of a nuclear thermal rocket vehicle, (3) the operation of an SP-100 class reactor on a coorbiting platform, (4) the activation of materials near operating reactors, (5) the storage and handling of radioisotope thermal generator units, and (6) the storage and handling of fresh and previously operated reactors. Portable reactor shield concepts were examined for relaxing the operational constraints imposed by unshielded (for human proximity operations) reactors and that might also be used to provide additional SSF crew protection from natural background radiation.

Stevenson, Steve↗
NASA NTRS2005

Making space nuclear power a reality

Our current space exploration missions are power limited. Space nuclear reactors could provide the power for both onboard electrical power and propulsion to enable a new generation of space science and exploration. Implementing a mission using a space nuclear reactor presents many technical challenges. However, nuclear technologies are safely and reliably used throughout U.S. industries and the Government. Well-defined processes and regulations currently exist for the use of nuclear technologies in space or any other application. These processes and regulations assure safe, reliable use of nuclear technology in a manner that protects the public and the environment. The question is not one of choosing between safety and space science, but of investing in a technology that includes rigorous processes and procedures to assure safe.

nuclear↗