DOCSLIB.ORG

Heat-Shield for Extreme Entry Environment (HEEET) a Game

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Heat-Shield for Extreme Entry Environment (HEEET) a Game Heat-shield for Extreme Entry Environment (HEEET) ! A Game Changing Thermal Protection System ! for Saturn and Uranus Probe Missions ! Presented by: E. Venkatapathy, ! Advanced EDL Materials Project Manager / Game Changing Development Program! Chief Technologist, Entry System and Technologies Division ! NASA Ames Research Center! ! HEEET Project Manager: D. Ellerby! Leads: M. Stackpoole, K. Peterson and P. Gage! Team Members: A. Beerman, M. Blosser, R. Chinnapongse, R.Dillman, ! J. Feldman, M. Gasch, M. Munk, D. Prabhu and C. Poteet ! OPAG Meeting, January 13-14, Tuscon, AZ! OBJECTIVES! Ø" Enable! q" Discovery and New Frontier proposal teams to have a relatively mature TPS solution that will pass TMCO evaluation ! q" Development of heat-shield technology (HEEET) by 2016 for infusion into future robotic in situ-science missions. ! Ø" Engage! q" The OPAG and potential PIs/proposing organizations so that they are both stakeholders and partners in the technology maturation phase! Ø" Ensure! q" User requirements are balanced by developmental risk and cost! q" The user community understands infusion challenges beyond technology maturation! Ø" Inform! q" The community on current accomplishments and future plans of HEEET! 2! ENABLING OUTER PLANET MISSIONS IN THE COMING DECADES! Ø" Saturn (and Uranus) in situ science mission(s)! q" Missions studied prior to and in support of Decadal Survey ! u" Probes based on Galileo Design (rigid aeroshell with TPS)! q" Revive heritage carbon phenolic, or! q" Develop advanced TPS that is superior in performance to HCP and sustainable in the longer term! Current ablative TPS State of the Art ! 3! ENABLING OUTER PLANET MISSIONS IN THE COMING DECADES! Ø" Saturn (and Uranus) in situ science mission(s)! q" Missions studied prior to and in support of Decadal Survey ! u" Probes based on Galileo Design (rigid aeroshell with TPS)! q" Revive heritage carbon phenolic, or! q" Develop advanced TPS that is superior in performance to HCP and sustainable in the longer term! Ø" Under 3-D Woven TPS Effort! q" Combining the advance weaving techniques and resin infusion, we were able to create a family of ablative TPS! q" Heat-shield for extreme entry environment technology (HEEET)! 4! BACKGROUND: WOVEN TPS! Ø" HEEET - 3-D Woven TPS Family! q" Woven TPS: An approach to the design and manufacturing of abla;ve TPS by the combina;on of 3-D weaving that allows precise placement of fibers in an op;mized manner and resin infusion if needed Ø" In FY’12, established viability of the 3-D Woven TPS. q" Explored the “10,000” manufacturing ways of formulang a TPS q" Ablave TPS opKons, dry-woven as well as resin infused systems, ranged in density from (0.3 g/cc – 1.4 g/cc) in overall density q" Highlighted the Woven TPS potenKal for meeKng the mission needs of Venus, Saturn and High-speed Sample Return Missions (VEXAG 2012 & OPAG 2013) OPAG (& VEXAG) recommendaon to SMD-PSD & the resulKng advocacy and support by SMD-PSD were criKcal in securing 3-year project currently funded by STMD/Game Changing Development Program 5! FY"13 ACCOMPLISHMENTS! Ø" Manufactured and Tested a variety of Woven TPS! q" Density range from PICA to heritage CP! 1.6 Fully Dense 1.4 1.2 Carbon Fully Dense Phenolic (g/cc) 3-D Woven Dry Woven 1.0 (different resins) Carbon Phenolic 0.8 Dual Layer AVCOAT 3-D Woven CP Carbon 0.6 Density Phenolic 0.4 PICA (low phenolic infusion) 0.2 KEY Heritage TPS Woven TPS 6! A BRIEF HISTORY WOVEN TPS TECHNOLOGY: # WOVEN TPS TECHNOLOGY MATURATION AND MISSION INSERTION! 3-D Woven Multifunctional ! ! ! Ablative TPS (3D-MAT)! 2017 Enabling Orion with Lunar ! 2022+ Capable Compression Pad! ! Heat-shield for Extreme Entry ! Woven TPS 2020 - 2022 Environment Technology (HEEET) ! GCT BAA! Tech. Maturation to enable Venus, Saturn and outer planets missions ! ! ! ! ! ! ! Robust Heat-shield for Human Missions ! (Future Potential)! 2016+ Oct, 2013Oct, Jan. 2012 April 2011 Sept. 2016Sept. June, 2012 7! FY"13 ACCOMPLISHMENTS! Ø" Manufactured and Tested a variety of Woven TPS! Ø" Down-selected a single architecture.! q" Based on testing, analysis, performance characteristics, developmental risk and cost! Recession Resistant Layer! Insulating, Lower ! Density Layer! Bonded Structure! 8! FY"13 ACCOMPLISHMENTS! Ø" Manufactured and Tested a variety of Woven TPS! Ø" Down-selected a single architecture.! Ø" Defining TRL 5/6 with community/ user input and buy-in! q" Held a workshop ( 95+ Ground Test ! participants)! Woven TPS ! Capability! Technology! q" Common capability to meet Human ! Saturn! Venus, Saturn and other Missions! destinations defined with the help of and understanding of the High-speed ! participants! Sample Return! Venus! q" Capability requirements verification defines the TRL maturity! ! 9! FY"13 ACCOMPLISHMENTS! Ø" Manufactured and Tested a variety of Woven TPS! Ø" Down-selected a single architecture.! Ø" Defining TRL 5/6 with community/ user input! Ø" Developed 3-year technology maturation project plan! Ø" Secured funding and approval from STMD for the technology maturation efforts ( FY#14 – FY#16)! Ø" User Agreement under development! Goal: Deliver a TRL 5/6 ! Heat-shield Technology in 3 years! 10! SATURN Probe Design Space! Entry Corridor : Equatorial and a 600 N/S ! Entry Flight Path Angles: -80 and -190! Mass = 250 kg; Probe Dia. = 1 m! 600 N/S Equat.! Steeper Entry (-19°) ! Shallower Entry ( -8°)! ! 2 600 N/S! Stag. Heat kW/cm Stag. Flux, Equatorial! Pressure, atm.! SATURN Probe Design Space & Ground Test Facility Conditions ! Entry Corridor : Equatorial and a 600 N/S ! Entry Flight Path Angles: -80 and -190! Mass = 250 kg; Probe Dia. = 1 m! 600 N/S Equat.! Pressure,IHF – 3” Nozzle ! ! Steeper Entry (-19°) ! 1”atm. Iso-Q! Test Article! Shallower Entry ( -8°)! FY"13 Arc Jet Testing ! ! 2 IHF - 6 inch Nozzle! IHF 3” Nozzle! 1” Flat Face Article! Stag. Heat kW/cm Stag. Flux, AEDC (Wedge)! Pressure, atm.! ARC JET TEST RESULTS – TWO LAYER SYSTEM! •" Both acreage and preliminary seam concepts tested at three relevant conditions.! •" No failure observed in these or other relevant arc jet tests to-date. ! •" HEEET appears to be very robust compared to carbon phenolic. ! 13! SATURN PROBE AREAL MASS COMPARISONS ! Equatorial @ -90! Equatorial @ -190! Lat. 600 @ -90! Lat. 600 @ -190! •" Areal mass of the 2-layer system has the potenital for ~ 40% mass savings compared to that of heritage Carbon Phenolic! •" Un-margined; preliminary estimate with very limited property data! •" Carbon Phenolic heat-shield mass estimates ~ 50% of the entry mass! •" Performance combined with anticipated robustness makes HEEET an exceptional TPS! 14! SATURN PROBE THICKNESS COMPARISONS ! 1.60! 1.40! Recession Layer! Insulative Layer! 1.20! ! 1.00! 0.80! Thickness, in 0.60! 0.40! 0.20! 0.00! Weave Weave Carbon Weave Weave Carbon Weave Weave Carbon Weave Weave Carbon #1! #3! Phenolic! #1! #3! Phenolic! #1! #3! Phenolic! #1! #3! Phenolic! EquatorialG8H90 @! -90! EquatorialG19H90 @! -190! 600 G8H30Lat. @! -90! 600 G19H30Lat. @ !-190! •" Un-margined HEEET thickness ( 0.80” – 1.4”)! •" ~20% thicker compared to heritage carbon phenolic! •" Thickness impacts cost, schedule and is a risk drivers for technology maturation. ! •" Question to the Saturn Community: ! •" Equatorial and steeper entry will result in lowest thickness and areal mass! •" Are there scientific rationale for high latitude? How high? ! •" Are there Con Ops requirements that dictate entry angle? Steeper or shallower? ! 15! URANUS MISSION DESIGN COMPARISONS# AREAL DENSITY COMPARISONS! •" 2-layer system can result in potential ~ 50% mass savings compared to Carbon Phenolic for the range of entry configurations considered for Uranus small probe(s)! •" Un-margined and based on very limited property data! •" Simulation on a flank location comparison is very similar in that the zero-margin areal density is ~ 50% as that of Carbon Phenolic 16! URANUS MISSION DESIGN COMPARISONS THICKNESS COMPARISONS – STAGNATION POINT! 1.2 Recession Layer 1 Insulative Layer 0.8 0.6 0.4 Thickness, in 0.2 0 HEEET #1 HEEET #3 Carbon HEEET #1 HEEET #3 Carbon HEEET #1 HEEET #3 Carbon Phenolic Phenolic Phenolic Entry Angle: 68 deg Entry Angle: 42 deg Entry Angle: 24 deg •" HEEET thickness is comparable to that of Carbon Phenolic for the range of entry configurations considered for Uranus small probe(s) •" Simulation on a flank location comparison is very similar in that the zero-margin thickness is comparable to that of Carbon Phenolic •" Comparing Saturn and Uranus Probes, Saturn is the driver for thickness •" Are there Uranus specific drivers for a technology maturation effort – TBD ? •" We need to engage with the Science and mission design communities as the opportunity is here and now for the TPS technology TECHNOLOGY MATURATION CHALLENGES! Ø" System/Manufacturing q" Molding flat panels q" Seams q" Resin Infusion at scale Ø" Integraon q" Aeroshell sub-structure and with backshell Ø" Flight System design tools development and verificaon q" Thermal response model is an example of design tool needed q" Engineering Test Unit –" ~(1.0m – 1.5m) base Diameter, 45° Sphere Cone –" Design will be proven at a smaller scale that is applicable for larger scale –" Smaller likely compared to Venus lander missions such as VITaL –" Integrated “Kled” design Successful ETU design, build and testing = TRL 5/6 (for full scale Venus, Saturn and higher speed sample return missions) 18! CONCLUDING REMARKS! Ø" FY#13 has been a great year! q" Successful testing, analysis and planning along with community advocacy resulted in HEEET project becoming a funded, 3-year tech. mat. effort! Ø" Current project plan is aggressive! q" Numerous tech maturation challenges need to be overcome! q" Dialogue between STMD and SMD-PSD! q" NASA (STMD) developed technology infusion in a SMD competed mission ! Ø" HEEET is a game changer and applicable to a wide range of missions ! q" Critical for near, mid and longer term Science missions as well as longer term Human missions ! u" Saturn and Venus for the next New Frontier! u" Uranus – we need to work with the Uranus community! Ø" Continued community engagement is a must: ! q" Through OPAG-VEXAG-other Ags.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Ceramic Matrix Composites with Nano Technology–An Overview
    International Review of Applied Engineering Research. ISSN 2248-9967 Volume 4, Number 2 (2014), pp. 99-102 © Research India Publications http://www.ripublication.com/iraer.htm Ceramic Matrix Composites with Nano Technology–An Overview Saubhagya Sharma, Samresh Kumar Shashi and Vikram Tomar Department of Material Science & Nano Technology, University of Petroleum & Energy Studies, Dehradun, Uttrakhand. Abstract Ceramic matrix composites (CMCs) are promising materials for use in high temperature structural applications. This class of materials offers high strength to density ratios. Also, their higher temperature capability over conventional super alloys may allow for components that require little or no cooling. This benefit can lead to simpler component designs and weight savings. These materials can also contribute in increasing the operating efficiency due to higher operating temperatures being achieved. Using carbon/carbon composites with the help of Nanotechnology is more beneficial in structural engineering and can decrease the production cost. They can withstand high stresses and temperatures than the traditional alumina, silicon carbide which fracture easily under mechanical loads Fundamental work in processing, characterization and analysis is important before the structural properties of this new class of Nano composites can be optimized. The fields of the Nano composite materials have received a lot of attention to scientists and engineers in recent years. The fabrication of such composites using Nano technology can make a revolution in the field of material science engineering and can make the composites able to be used in long lasting applications. 1. Introduction As we know that Composite materials are the type of materials that are formed by combining two or more materials of different physical and chemical properties.
    [Show full text]
  • A Perspective on the Design and Development of the Spacex Dragon Spacecraft Heatshield
    A Perspective on the Design and Development of the SpaceX Dragon Spacecraft Heatshield by Daniel J. Rasky, PhD Senior Scientist, NASA Ames Research Center Director, Space Portal, NASA Research Park Moffett Field, CA 94035 (650) 604-1098 / Daniel.J.Rasky@nasa.gov February 28, 2012 2 How Did SpaceX Do This? Recovered Dragon Spacecraft! After a “picture perfect” first flight, December 8, 2010 ! 3 Beginning Here? SpaceX Thermal Protection Systems Laboratory, Hawthorne, CA! “Empty Floor Space” December, 2007! 4 Some Necessary Background: Re-entry Physics • Entry Physics Elements – Ballistic Coefficient – Blunt vs sharp nose tip – Entry angle/heating profile – Precision landing reqr. – Ablation effects – Entry G’loads » Blunt vs Lifting shapes – Lifting Shapes » Volumetric Constraints » Structure » Roll Control » Landing Precision – Vehicle flight and turn-around requirements Re-entry requires specialized design and expertise for the Thermal Protection Systems (TPS), and is critical for a successful space vehicle 5 Reusable vs. Ablative Materials 6 Historical Perspective on TPS: The Beginnings • Discipline of TPS began during World War II (1940’s) – German scientists discovered V2 rocket was detonating early due to re-entry heating – Plywood heatshields improvised on the vehicle to EDL solve the heating problem • X-15 Era (1950’s, 60’s) – Vehicle Inconel and Titanium metallic structure protected from hypersonic heating AVCOAT » Spray-on silicone based ablator for acreage » Asbestos/silicone moldable TPS for leading edges – Spray-on silicone ablator
    [Show full text]
  • Xii Multifunctional Composites 11 Thermal Protection Systems
    xii Multifunctional Composites 11 Thermal protection systems, Maurizio Natali, Luigi Torre, and Jos´e Maria Kenny 337 11.1 The hyperthermal environment . 337 11.2 Non-ablative TPS materials . 339 11.2.1 NA-TPS on the Space Shuttle . 339 11.2.2 SSO reusable surface insulation . 341 11.2.3 Conclusion remarks on non-ablative TPS materials . 342 11.3 High temperature composites as polymeric ablatives . 342 11.4 Testing facilities . 348 11.4.1 The oxy-acetylene torch testbed - OATT . 349 11.4.2 The simulated solid rocket motor - SSRM . 349 11.4.3 Plasma jet torches . 351 11.4.4 Recession rate sensing techniques for TPSs . 352 11.5 PAs as thermal insulating materials . 356 11.5.1 Rigid HSMs . 356 11.5.2 Flexible HSMs for TPSs . 356 11.5.3 Elastomeric HSMs for SRMs . 357 11.6 Phenolic impregnated carbon ablators . 359 11.7 Differences between FRPAs and LCAs . 360 11.8 Nanostructured ablative materials . 360 11.8.1 Nanosilica as filler for traditional and nanostructured ablatives 363 Table of Contents xiii 11.8.2 Carbon nanofilaments based NRAMs . 366 11.9 Conclusions . 368 Bibliography . 369 Chapter 11 Thermal protection systems Maurizio Natali, Luigi Torre, and Jos´eMaria Kenny University of Perugia, Perugia, Italy Abstract Ablative materials play a vital role for the entire aerospace industry. Although some non-polymeric materials have been successfully used as ablatives, polymer ablatives (PA) represent the most versatile class of thermal protection system (TPS) materials. Compared with oxide, inorganic polymer, and metal based TPS materials, PAs have some intrinsic advantages, such as high heat shock resistance and low density.
    [Show full text]
  • Highly Reliable 3-Dimensional Woven Thermal Protection System for Mars Sample Return
    Highly Reliable 3-Dimensional Woven Thermal Protection System for Mars Sample Return Don Ellerby Presenting for Keith Peterson Keith.h.Peterson@nasa.gov (512) 650-0885 Co-Authors (alphabetical by last name), E. Christiansen, D. Ellerby, P. Gage, M. Gasch, D. Prabhu, J. Vander Kam , E. Venkatapathy, T. W hite This work is funded by NASA Ames IRAD PI: E. Venkatapathy ; Technical Lead: K. Peterson; 1 3D Woven for MSR - Overview • The MSR Challenge: – Reliability requirements for a Mars Sample Return (MSR) Earth Entry Vehicle (EEV) are expected to be more stringent than any mission flown to date. • This flows down to all EEV subsystems, including heat-shield TPS • Likely to be the key driver for design decisions in many subsystem trades. • The MSR formulation is holding an option to on-ramp a 3D-woven system. The goal of this effort is to: –Provide a recommended 3D woven TPS architecture for MSR using Risk Informed Decision Making (RIDM). • Risk Informed DeCision Making (RIDM): – MSR formulation will institute RIDM processes to select configurations it pursues in future design cycles. • RIDM is a deliberative process that uses a diverse set of performance measures, together with other considerations, to inform decision making. – RIDM acknowledges the inevitable gaps in technical information, and the need for incorporating the cumulative wisdom of experienced personnel to integrate technical and nontechnical factors in order to produce sound decisions. 2 Why 3D Woven on MSR? • All TPS systems under consideration have their own set of challenges: – Carbon-Carbon (Hot Structure): • Certification of thermal-structural performance during re-entry and at temperature under the high strain landing impact environment will be challenging.
    [Show full text]
  • Aerothermodynamic Design of the Mars Science Laboratory Heatshield
    Aerothermodynamic Design of the Mars Science Laboratory Heatshield Karl T. Edquist∗ and Artem A. Dyakonovy NASA Langley Research Center, Hampton, Virginia, 23681 Michael J. Wrightz and Chun Y. Tangx NASA Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, California, 94035 Aerothermodynamic design environments are presented for the Mars Science Labora- tory entry capsule heatshield. The design conditions are based on Navier-Stokes flowfield simulations on shallow (maximum total heat load) and steep (maximum heat flux, shear stress, and pressure) entry trajectories from a 2009 launch. Boundary layer transition is expected prior to peak heat flux, a first for Mars entry, and the heatshield environments were defined for a fully-turbulent heat pulse. The effects of distributed surface roughness on turbulent heat flux and shear stress peaks are included using empirical correlations. Additional biases and uncertainties are based on computational model comparisons with experimental data and sensitivity studies. The peak design conditions are 197 W=cm2 for heat flux, 471 P a for shear stress, 0.371 Earth atm for pressure, and 5477 J=cm2 for total heat load. Time-varying conditions at fixed heatshield locations were generated for thermal protection system analysis and flight instrumentation development. Finally, the aerother- modynamic effects of delaying launch until 2011 are previewed. Nomenclature 1 2 2 A reference area, 4 πD (m ) CD drag coefficient, D=q1A D aeroshell diameter (m) 2 Dim multi-component diffusion coefficient (m =s) ci species mass fraction H total enthalpy
    [Show full text]
  • Venus Entry Challenges and Solutions for Aerial Platform Deployment
    Venus Entry Challenges and Solutions for Aerial Platform Deployment Ethiraj Venkatapathy, Don Ellerby, Paul Wercinski Entry Systems and Technology Division NASA Ames Research Center Peter Gage, Neerim Corp. Venus Aerial Platform Workshop #2, December 6, 2017 Pasadena, CA 1 Summary . Entry, Descent and Deployment (EDD) of aerial platforms at Venus with rigid aero-shell is no more challenging than at other destinations. • Limited only by the availability of efficient heat-shield/TPS technology. • NASA is investing in the maturation of “Heat-shield for Extreme Entry Environment Technology (HEEET)” to TRL 6 and is incentivizing its use for New Frontiers - 4 missions • Future Venus Aerial Platform missions can use HEEET in place of Carbon Phenolic, which is not currently available HEEET is more mass efficient and permits lower-deceleration entry profile . Lower ballistic coefficient concepts, ADEPT and HIAD, may offer additional opportunities • even lower-deceleration entry profiles • Release of multiple probes from open back of EV . Lowest ballistic coefficient lifting concepts (VAMP) may provide other science benefits but concept and technical maturity are low 12/06/17 2 NASA has Demonstrated Entry System Capability Missions have successfully survived entry environments ranging from the very mild (Mars Viking ~25 W/cm2 and 0.05 atm.) to the extreme (Galileo ~30,000W/cm2 and 7 atm.) P-V and Galileo used Carbon-Phenolic (CP) (but heritage CP TPS is no longer viable). HEEET is a mass efficient system that will be available for future Venus missions 6/11/16 3 Entry System: Protects the Scientific Payload and Deploys at the Right Location and Orientation Entry begins when atmospheric Typical Rigid Aeroshell: effects start to impact the system Function of Entry System: .
    [Show full text]
  • APOLLO EXPERIENCE REPORT - THERMAL PROTECTION SUBSYSTEM by Jumes E
    NASA TECHNICAL NOTE NASA TN D-7564 w= ro VI h d z c Q rn 4 z t APOLLO EXPERIENCE REPORT - THERMAL PROTECTION SUBSYSTEM by Jumes E. Puulosky und Leslie G, St. Leger Ly12d012 B. Johlzson Space Center Honst0~2, Texus 77058 NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION WASHINGTON, 0. C. JANUARY 1974 ~--_. - .. 1. Report No. 2. Government Accession No. 3. Recipient's Catalog No. D-7564 4. Title and Subtitle 5. Report Date January 1974 APOLLOEXPERIENCEREPORT THERMAL PROTECTION SUBSYSTEM 6. Performing Organization Code I 7. Author(s) I 8. Performing Organization Report No. JSC S-383 James E. Pavlosky and Leslie G. St. Leger, JSC 10. Work Unit No. I 9. Performing Organization Name and Address 11. Contract or Grant No. Lyndon B. Johnson Space Center Houston, Texas 77058 13. Type of Report and Period Covered 12. Sponsoring Agency Name and Address 14. Sponsoring Agency Code National Aeronautics and SDace Administration Washington, D. C. 20546 1 15. Supplementary Notes The JSC Director waived the use of the International System of Units (SI) for this Apollo Experienc Report because, in his judgment, the use of SI units would impair the usefulness of th'e report or result in excessive cost. 16. Abstract The Apollo command module was the first manned spacecraft to be designed to enter the atmos- phere of the earth at lunar-return velocity, and the design of the thermal protection subsystem for the resulting entry environment presented a major technological challenge. Brief descrip- tions of the Apollo command module thermal design requirements and thermal protection con- figuration, and some highlights of the ground and flight testing used for design verification of the system are presented.
    [Show full text]
  • Applying the Ablative Heat Shield to the Apollo Spacecraft
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University The Space Congress® Proceedings 1967 (4th) Space Congress Proceedings Apr 3rd, 12:00 AM Applying the Ablative Heat Shield to the Apollo Spacecraft B. V. Coplan Materials Technology Directorate, Space Systems Division, Avco Corporation Wilmington, Massachusetts R. W. King Materials Technology Directorate, Space Systems Division, Avco Corporation Wilmington, Massachusetts Follow this and additional works at: https://commons.erau.edu/space-congress-proceedings Scholarly Commons Citation Coplan, B. V. and King, R. W., "Applying the Ablative Heat Shield to the Apollo Spacecraft" (1967). The Space Congress® Proceedings. 4. https://commons.erau.edu/space-congress-proceedings/proceedings-1967-4th/session-15/4 This Event is brought to you for free and open access by the Conferences at Scholarly Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in The Space Congress® Proceedings by an authorized administrator of Scholarly Commons. For more information, please contact commons@erau.edu. APPLYING THE ABLATIVE HEAT SHIELD TO THE APOLLO SPACECRAFT B. V. Coplan R. W. King Materials Technology Directorate Space Systems Division Avco Corporation Wilmington, Massachusetts INTRODUCTION I. DESCRIPTION OF HEAT SHIELD The Apollo program to land men on the moon The ablative heat shield structure is com­ is administered by the National Aeronautics and posed of a fiberglass honeycomb, impregnated with Space Administration. Production of the space­ a phenolic resin and bonded with an epoxy-based craft command module has been assigned 'to the adhesive to the cleaned, stainless steel shell. North American Aviation Company. As a subcon­ The honeyc.omb structure is composed of a number of tractor to N.A.A., the Avco Corporation is pieces formed on molds to the proper curvatures .
    [Show full text]
  • Reusable Stage Concepts Design Tool
    DOI: 10.13009/EUCASS2019-421 8TH EUROPEAN CONFERENCE FOR AERONAUTICS AND AEROSPACE SCIENCES (EUCASS) DOI: ADD DOINUMBER HERE Reusable stage concepts design tool Lars Pepermans?, Barry Zandbergeny ?Delft University of Technology Kluyverweg 1, 2629 HS Delft lpepermans@outlook.com yDelft University of Technology Kluyverweg 1, 2629 HS Delft Abstract Reusable launch vehicles hold the promise of substantially reducing the cost of access to space. Many different approaches towards realising a reusable rocket exist or are being proposed. This work focuses on the use of an optimisation method for conceptual design of non-winged reusable upper stages, thereby allowing it to take into account landing on land, sea or mid-air retrieval as well as landing the full stage or the engine only. As the optimisation criterion, the ratio of the specific launch cost of the reusable to the expendable version is used. The tool also provides for a Monte Carlo analysis, which allows for investigating the ruggedness of the design solution(s) found. The article will describe the methods implemented in the Conceptual Reusability Design Tool (CRDT) together with the modifications made to ParSim v3, a simulation tool by Delft Aerospace Rocket Engi- neering. Furthermore, it will present the steps taken to verify and validate CRDT. Finally, several example cases are presented based on the Atlas V-Centaur launch vehicle. The cases demonstrate the tools capa- bility of finding optimum and the sensitivity of the found optimum. However, it also shows the optimum when the user disables some Entry Descent and Landing (EDL) options. 1. Introduction To make space more accessible, one can reduce the cost of an orbital launch.
    [Show full text]
  • INTRODUCTION This Study of Reentry Vehicle (RV)
    INTRODUCTION This study of Reentry Vehicle (RV) systems and their associated operations was conducted for the Department of Transportation/Office of Commercial Space Transportation. The purpose of the study was to investigate and present an overview of reentry vehicle systems and to identify differences in mission requirements and operations. This includes reentry vehicle system background, system design considerations, description of past/present/future reentry systems, and hazards associated with reentry vehicles that attain orbit, reenter, and are recovered. A general literature search that included the OCST data base, NASA, Air Force, and other technical libraries and personal contact with various government or private industry organizations knowledgeable in reentry system vehicles was performed. A reference page is provided at the end of this report. A history of early manned reentry vehicle launches is shown in Appendix I. A listing of some of the agencies and companies found to be most knowledgeable in the reentry vehicle area is provided in Appendix II. The following sections provide more detailed information on reentry system vehicles. A. Background - The development of reentry vehicles began in the late 1950's due to the need for Department of Defense and Central Intelligence Agency photo reconnaissance of Soviet ICBM sites. NASA has also been involved in the use of reentry vehicles since the early 1960's, including manned space programs Mercury, Gemini and Apollo. The following sections describe the evolution of reentry system development in the United States and foreign countries: 1. Discoverer1 - The Discoverer program was of major importance because it provided a vehicle for testing orbital maneuvering capability and reentry techniques and it played a large role in enabling the first United States manned space flights to be conducted in Project Mercury.
    [Show full text]
  • Facing the Heat Barrier: a History of Hypersonics
    Thomas A. Heppenheimer has been a freelance Facing the Heat Barrier: writer since 1978. He has written extensively on aerospace, business and government, and the A History of Hypersonics history of technology. He has been a frequent of Hypersonics A History Facing the Heat Barrier: T. A. Heppenheimer contributor to American Heritage and its affiliated publications, and to Air & Space Smithsonian. He has also written for the National Academy of Hypersonics is the study of flight at speeds where Sciences, and contributed regularly to Mosaic of the aerodynamic heating dominates the physics of National Science Foundation. He has written some the problem. Typically this is Mach 5 and higher. 300 published articles for more than two dozen Hypersonics is an engineering science with close publications. links to supersonics and engine design. He has also written twelve hardcover books. Within this field, many of the most important results Three of them–Colonies in Space (1977), Toward Facing the Heat Barrier: have been experimental. The principal facilities Distant Suns (1979) and The Man-Made Sun have been wind tunnels and related devices, which (1984)-have been alternate selections of the A History of Hypersonics have produced flows with speeds up to orbital Book-of-the-Month Club. His Turbulent Skies velocity. (1995), a history of commercial aviation, is part of the Technology Book Series of the Alfred P. T. A. Heppenheimer Why is it important? Hypersonics has had Sloan Foundation. It also has been produced as two major applications. The first has been to a four-part, four-hour Public Broadcasting System provide thermal protection during atmospheric television series Chasing the Sun.
    [Show full text]
  • Skylab: the Human Side of a Scientific Mission
    SKYLAB: THE HUMAN SIDE OF A SCIENTIFIC MISSION Michael P. Johnson, B.A. Thesis Prepared for the Degree of MASTER OF ARTS UNIVERSITY OF NORTH TEXAS May 2007 APPROVED: J. Todd Moye, Major Professor Alfred F. Hurley, Committee Member Adrian Lewis, Committee Member and Chair of the Department of History Sandra L. Terrell, Dean of the Robert B. Toulouse School of Graduate Studies Johnson, Michael P. Skylab: The Human Side of a Scientific Mission. Master of Arts (History), May 2007, 115pp., 3 tables, references, 104 titles. This work attempts to focus on the human side of Skylab, America’s first space station, from 1973 to 1974. The thesis begins by showing some context for Skylab, especially in light of the Cold War and the “space race” between the United States and the Soviet Union. The development of the station, as well as the astronaut selection process, are traced from the beginnings of NASA. The focus then shifts to changes in NASA from the Apollo missions to Skylab, as well as training, before highlighting the three missions to the station. The work then attempts to show the significance of Skylab by focusing on the myriad of lessons that can be learned from it and applied to future programs. Copyright 2007 by Michael P. Johnson ii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This thesis would not be possible without the help of numerous people. I would like to begin, as always, by thanking my parents. You are a continuous source of help and guidance, and you have never doubted me. Of course I have to thank my brothers and sisters.
    [Show full text]