SEARCH · Engineering Papers
Results for “launch vehicle systems performance”
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.
The Business Case for Spiral Development in Heavy Lift Launch Vehicle Systems
Performance capabilities of a specific combination of the Space Shuttle external tank and various liquid engines in an in-line configuration, two-stage core vehicle with multiple redesigned solid rocket motor strap-ons are reexamined. This concept proposes using existing assets, hardware, and capabilities that are already crew-rated, flight certified, being manufactured under existing contracts, have a long history of component and system ground testing, and have been flown for over 20 yr. This paper goes beyond describing potential performance capabilities of specific components to discuss the overall system feasibility-from end to end, start to finish-describing the inherent cost advantages of the Spiral Development concept, which builds on existing capabilities and assets, as opposed to starting up a "fresh sheet" heavy-lift launch vehicle program from scratch.
Analysis of Near Simultaneous Jimsphere and AMPS High Resolution Wind Profiles
The high-resolution wind profile of the Automated Meteorological Profiling System (HRAMPS) is the proposed replacement for the Jimsphere measurement system used to support NASA Shuttle launches from the Eastern Test Range (ETR). Samples of twenty-six ETR near simultaneous Jimsphere and HRAMPS wind profiles were obtained for Shuttle program HRAMPS certification studies. Shuttle systems engineering certification is to ensure that spacecraft and launch vehicle systems performance and safety evaluations for each launch (derived from flight simulations with Jimsphere wind profile data bases) retain their validity when HRAMPS profiles are used on day-of-launch (DOL) in trajectory and loads simulations to support the commit-to-launch decision. This paper describes a statistical analysis of the near simultaneous profiles. In principle the differences between a Jimsphere profile and an HRAMPS profile should be attributed to tracking technology (radar versus GPS tracking of a Jimsphere flight element) and the method for derivation of wind vectors from the raw tracking data. In reality, it is not technically feasible to track the same Jimsphere balloon with the two systems. The aluminized Mylar surface of the standard Jimsphere flight element facilitates radar tracking, but it interferes with HRAMPS during simultaneous tracking. Suspending a radar reflector from an HRAMPS flight element (Jimsphere without aluminized coating) does not produce satisfactory Jimsphere profiles because of intermittent radar returns. Thus, differences between the Jimsphere and HRAMPS profiles are also attributed to differences in the trajectories of separate flight elements. Because of small sample size and a test period limited to one winter season, test measurements during extreme high winds aloft could not have been expected and did not occur. It is during the highest winds that the largest differences between Jimsphere and HRAMPS would occur because the distance between flight elements would be larger. Jimsphere radar tracking noise increases as a function of balloon displacement downrange. The Jimsphere data processing compensates for tracking signal/noise degradation by increasing the smoothing interval. The Jimsphere wind profile effective resolution is a function of downrange distance and altitude, whereas the effective resolution of the HRAMPS should be independent of those variables. The procedure used for editing Jimsphere spikes in Shuttle DOL profiles was not implemented for the Jimsphere profile measurements during the AMPS field tests. For this analysis a code was developed that essentially mimics DOL Jimsphere spike editing. Jimsphere profiles have somewhat more noise in the wavelength range less than 200m defined as the noise floor. No differences between Jimsphere and HRAMPS wind profile pairs have been found that would support denial of HRAMPS certification for application in Shuttle DOL applications. The reliability of the HRAMPS system, which is an important certification issue, is not addressed in this study.
Atlas-Centaur AC-18 performance evaluation for Applications Technology Satellite ATS-5 mission
The Atlas-Centaur with the ATS-5 spacecraft was successfully launched from Eastern Test Range on August 12, 1969, and the ATS-5 was placed in the required highly elliptical transfer orbit with apogee near synchronous altitude. From this orbit the ATS-5, using its apogee motor, achieved the desired near-synchronous circular equatorial orbit. All launch vehicle systems performed satisfactorily.
Launch Vehicle Performance with Solid Particle Feed Systems for Atomic Propellants
An analysis of launch vehicle Gross Liftoff Weight (GLOW) using high energy density atomic propellants with solid particle feed systems was conducted. The analyses covered several propellant combinations, including atoms of aluminum (Al), boron (B). carbon (C), and hydrogen (H) stored in a solid cryogenic particle, with a cryogenic liquid as the carrier fluid. Several different weight percents (wt%) for the liquid carrier were investigated and the gross lift off weight (GLOW) of the vehicles using the solid particle feed systems were compared with a conventional 02/H2 propellant vehicle. The potential benefits and effects of feed systems using solid particles in a liquid cryogenic fluid are discussed.
Exploring in aerospace rocketry. 11 - Launch vehicles
Summary of configurations, major systems, and performance equations for launch vehicles
Launch vehicle performance using metallized propellants
Metallized propellant propulsion systems are considered as replacements for the solid rocket boosters and liquid sustainer stages on the current launch vehicles: both the Space Transportation System (STS) and the Titan 4. Liquid rocket boosters for the STS were analyzed as replacements for current solid rocket boosters. These boosters can provide a liquid propulsion system within the volume constraints of a solid rocket booster. A replacement for the Space Shuttle Main Engines using metallized O2/H2/Al was studied. The liquid stages of the Titan 4 were also investigated; the Aerozine-50 (A-50) fuel was replaced with metallized storable A-50/Al. A metallized propellant is similar to a traditional liquid propellant. However, it has metal particles, such as aluminum, that are suspended in a gelled fuel, such as hydrogen, RP-1, A-50 or monomethyl hydrazine (MMH). The fuels then undergo combustion with liquid oxygen or nitrogen tetroxide (NTO). These propellants provide options for increasing the performance of existing launch vehicle chemical propulsion systems by increasing fuel density or specific impulse or both. These increases in density and specific impulse can significantly reduce the propulsion system liftoff weight and allow a liquid rocket booster to fit into the same volume as an existing solid rocket booster. Also, because gelled fuels are akin to liquid propellants, metallized systems can provide enhanced controllability over solid propulsion systems. Gelling of the propellant also reduces the sensitivity to impacts and consequently reduces the propellant explosion hazard.
Launch vehicle performance using metallized propellants
Metallized propellant propulsion systems are considered as replacements for the solid rocket boosters and liquid sustainer stages on the current launch vehicles: both the Space Transportation System (STS) and the Titan 4. Liquid rocket boosters for the STS were analyzed as replacements for current solid rocket boosters. These boosters can provide a liquid propulsion system within the volume constraints of a solid rocket booster. A replacement for the Space Shuttle Main Engines using metallized 02/H2/A1 was studied. The liquid stages of the Titan 4 were also investigated; the Aerozine-50 (A-50) fuel was replaced with metallized storable A-50/A1. A metallized propellant is similar to a traditional liquid propellant. However, it has metal particles, such as aluminum, that are suspended in a gelled fuel, such as hydrogen, RP-1, A-50 or monomethyl hydrazine (MMH). The fuels then undergo combustion with liquid oxygen or nitrogen tetroxide (NTO). These propellants provide options for increasing the performance of existing launch vehicle chemical propulsion systems by increasing fuel density or specific impulse or both. These increases in density and specific impulse can significantly reduce the propulsion system liftoff weight and allow a liquid rocket booster to fit into the same volume as an existing solid rocket booster. Also, because gelled fuels are akin to liquid propellants, metallized systems can provide enhanced controllability over solid propulsion systems. Gelling of the propellant also reduces the sensitivity to impacts and consequently reduces the propellant explosion hazard.
Manned space flight network performance analysis for the gt-2 mission
Gemini launch vehicle, spacecraft systems, and performance data on reentry heating under maximum heating conditions
Advanced post-saturn earth launch vehicle study executive summary report
Advanced post-Saturn earth launch vehicle design and chemonuclear propulsion system performance
Ground control and monitoring of rendezvous
This paper discusses the ground control and monitoring function performed in support of the Gemini rendezvous missions. Included are discussions of the support philosophy adopted for Gemini; the resulting influence upon mission design; and comparisons between predicted and actual flight results.
Gemini Summary Conference
The Gemini Summary Conference was held on February 1 and 2, 1967, at the NASA Manned Spacecraft Center, Houston, Tex. The conference emphasized the highlights of the Gemini Program and especially the flight results of the last five missions. This report contains the 21 technical papers presented at the conference as well as an introduction by George E. Mueller and concluding remarks by George M. Low. The technical papers are divided into five sections: the first describes the rendezvous, docking, and tethered-vehicle operations involving the spacecraft and a target vehicle; the second presents various aspects of extravehicular activity; the third concerns the operational support of the missions ; the fourth cover the experiments conducted during the missions; and the fifth compares the astronaut flight and simulation experiences and relates the Gemini results to the Apollo Program.
Summary of rendezvous operations
One of the major objectives of the Gemini Program was to develop and to demonstrate techniques for the rendezvous and docking of space vehicles. This objective is of vital importance since rendezvous and docking is mandatory for success in many future manned space-flight programs. For example, lunar orbital rendezvous has been selected as the primary mode for the Apollo lunar-landing mission which requires one rendezvous and two dockings. Other programs requiring rendezvous are planetary missions, manned space stations, and unmanned satellite inspection and repair missions.
Onboard operations for rendezvous
An overall plan for onboard rendezvous operations for the Gemini missions was developed in parallel with the mission plan. The purpose of this plan was to make optimum use of crew time in orbit to maximize the probability of a successful rendezvous. The evolution of the plan began with a preliminary time line of events based upon the known guidance-equipment requirements and upon the estimated crew timing. A preliminary set of flight charts was developed to aid the crew with primary and backup procedures and to establish a backup guidance capability. These charts, which consisted of a few simple graphs and tabulation sheets, enabled the crew to calculate accurate solutions for the terminal maneuvers even with an inoperative guidance-equipment component. As such, the charts significantly contributed to the probability of mission success. Following the development of the charts, an engineering evaluation was conducted on a realistic man-in-the-loop simulation. During this evaluation, the procedures and charts were subjected to the expected equipment errors and trajectory dispersions, and revisions were made as necessary to improve effectiveness. The resulting plan was presented to the flight crew; the charts were evaluated during a period of training on the simulator. The crew spent several weeks training on both the primary procedures and on the various failure modes.
Gemini results as related to the Apollo program
The Gemini Program was conceived to provide a space system that could furnish answers to many of the problems in operating manned vehicles in space. It was designed to build upon the experience gained from Project Mercury, and to extend and expand this fund of experience in support of the manned lunar landing program and other future manned space-flight programs. The purpose of this paper is to relate some of the results of the Gemini Program to the Apollo Program, and to discuss some of the contributions which have been made. The objectives of the Gemini Program applicable to Apollo are : (1) long-duration flight, (2) rendezvous and docking, (3) post-docking maneuver capability, (4) controlled reentry and landing, (5) flight- and groundcrew proficiency, and (6) extra vehicular capability. The achievement of these objectives has provided operational experience and confirmed much of the technology which will be utilized in future manned programs. These contributions will be discussed in three major areas : launch and flight operations, flight-crew operations and training, and technological development of subsystems and components. While there is obvious interrelation among the three elements, the grouping affords emphasis and order to the discussion.
Saturn V derivatives.
Family concept of Saturn 5 derivative launch vehicle systems noting performance capabilities in orbital and high energy missions at miminum cost
Integral launch and reentry vehicle system. Volume 2 - Vehicle performance and operations
Aerodynamic and thermodynamic performance of reusable two stage system
Round-Trip Solar Electric Propulsion Missions for Mars Sample Return
Mars Sample Return (MSR) missions could benefit from the high specific impulse of Solar Electric Propulsion (SEP) to achieve lower launch masses than with chemical propulsion. SEP presents formulation challenges due to the coupled nature of launch vehicle performance, propulsion system, power system, and mission timeline. This paper describes a SEP orbiter-sizing tool, which models spacecraft mass & timeline in conjunction with low thrust round-trip Earth-Mars trajectories, and presents selected concept designs. A variety of system designs are possible for SEP MSR orbiters, with large dry mass allocations, similar round-trip durations to chemical orbiters, and reduced design variability between opportunities.