Future Space Transportation Technology: Prospects and Priorities
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Future Space Transportation Technology: Prospects and Priorities David Harris Projects Integration Manager Matt Bille and Lisa Reed In-Space Propulsion Technology Projects Office Booz Allen Hamilton Marshall Space Flight Center 12 1 S. Tejon, Suite 900 MSFC, AL 35812 Colorado Springs, CO 80903 [email protected] [email protected] / [email protected] ABSTRACT. The Transportation Working Group (TWG) was chartered by the NASA Exploration Team (NEXT) to conceptualize, define, and advocate within NASA the space transportation architectures and technologies required to enable the human and robotic exploration and development of‘ space envisioned by the NEXT. In 2002, the NEXT tasked the TWG to assess exploration space transportation requirements versus current and prospective Earth-to-Orbit (ETO) and in-space transportation systems, technologies, and rcsearch, in order to identify investment gaps and recommend priorities. The result was a study nom’ being incorporatcd into future planning by the NASA Space Architect and supporting organizations. This papcr documents the process used to identify exploration space transportation investment gaps ;IS well as tlie group’s recommendations for closing these gaps and prioritizing areas of future investment for NASA work on advanced propulsion systems. Introduction investments needed to close gaps before the point of flight demonstration or test. The NASA Exploration Team (NEXT) was chartered to: Achieving robotic, and eventually, human presence beyond low Earth orbit (LEO) will Create and maintain a long-term require an agency-wide commitment of NASA strategic vision lor science-driven centers working together as “one NASA.” humanhobotic exploration Propulsion technology advancements are vital if NASA is to extend a human presence beyond the Conduct advanced concepts analym Earth’s neighhorhood. and develop new approaches for e xp I orat i on vi a b re a kt 11 roug I1 While numerous advanced propulsion technology icchnologies are presently bcing researched and developed, it is not feasible to invest in all of Generate scientific, technical unci [hciii. Instead. NASA must ensure that its future programmatic requircmenls to drivc mission goals are clearly defined, then identify technology investments which will those advanced technologies which, if funded, enable each new phase 01‘ offer the most potential for successfully meeting human/robotic exploration. those require men ts . The basis of the NASA exploration vision is In 2002, the NASA Exploration Team (NEXT) sustained development of “stepping stone” tasked the Transportation Working Group to capabilities that enable affordable, sale and assess future technology investments. The I reliable space exploration. That vision remains resulting report is summarized in this paper. in place in the NASA Space Architect support activity, which subsumed the NASA Exploration The major ~OCLIS of tlie Exploration Space Team. A stepping stone is not a set of missions, Transportation Gap Analysis was to analyze but a level of capability. The stepping stones numerous advanced propulsion concepts, are displayed visually in Figure I. iclcntily their technological readiness levels, compare their capabilities to future mission req u i rc me n t s , and recommend tech no logy 1 Ainerican Instittile of Aeronautics and Astronautics Technology for HuniadRobotic Aiialysis Tasks: Exploration and Development of Space (THREADS) architecture into Earth to The primary tasks in this analysis were: Orbit (ETO), In-Space Propulsion, and . Research performance capabilities of Target-Body segments. A Design existing and prospective propulsion Reference Mission (DRM) set of‘ 17 technologies. missions, covering all five Steppins . Research I‘uture mission requirements stones identified in the NEXT vision, as dcl‘incd by the NASA Exploration was derived I’rom NEXT and other Team and other enterprises within N A s A in i ss i o n p I an n i n p J ( )cunlc 111s. NASA. Compare l‘uture mission requirements to Missions we re mapped t () tcc li n o I o g i c 5. prospective propulsion technologies, The DRMs usccl ranged l’rom support to identifying the most suitable the International Space Station all tlic techno I ogi c s . way to Human Outer Planet Exploration Map transportation requirements to and an interstellar probe. For each technologies and capabilities, DRM, the prospective were identified. identifying technology investment gaps Then a scoring exercise was performed and making recommendations for their in which each technology was scored closure. against 1 1 criteria by independent experts. The weighting of criteria was then applied to [lie raw scores. Go anywhere, anytime Sustainable Planetary Surfaces Gotng- Beyond and Sraying Trawling out to - 1.5 AU, and SUylng for kndeflnlrc pews brth’s Neighborhood *haying for 1.3 9 Enabling NNlnnble Getting Set by Doing scientlfc research i EnabUng ocrlul Lblnp and worlrhg Inverc&akun ’ on anothcr pbnet advancements Figure 1- NEXT Stepping stones Gap Analysis Process: . Technology gaps were identiI’ied. For each technology, puhlications and Thc gap analysis was accomplished in four major experts in the relevant field were steps descrihecl below and shown in Figure 2. surveyed to identify the gaps between the current state of‘ the technology and . Data was gathered on mission Technology Readiness Level (TRL) 6 - req u i re men ts and tech no1 ogi es. A total the prototype demonstration stage. of 22 technologies, inany of which have (The NASA TRL scale runs from I several variants, were analyzed. These (“basic principles observed”) to 9 were categorized according to NASA’s (“flight proven”).) 2 Ainericnn Institute of Aeronautics and Astron:rutics Alternatives were recommended to Advanced VehiclelEnrrine Desiuns close the gaps and prioritize areas of investment for future NASA projects. There are several innovative designs io Finally, priorities were recommended improve the efficiency of a rocket-powcrcd for future investment. craft for the Earth-to-Orbit journey. An Recommendations for follow-on studies example is the Rocket-Based Combined focusing on specific technologies Cycle (RBCC) propulsion system. By needing further discrimination were injecting fuel at various locations, the RBCC also developed. engine can operate as an air-augmented rocket, ramjet, scramjet, or pure rocket. Earth-to-Orbit (ETO) transport includes those This provides a high I,,, while operating in systems or technologies that enable missions the most propellant-economical mode lor from the Earth to low earth orbit (LEO). In- any given point in the tr;i.jcciory while Spiice transport includes those systems or delivering highly variable thrust levels. technologies that enable transport to and from Other options include pulse-detonation \wious points in space. Target-Body transport engines, the Turbine-Based Combined Cycle technologies are used when arriving and (TBCC) engine. and the Air Collcction and departing other celcstial bodies. Enrichment System (ACES). Ion Prouulsion (Gridded Ion thruster) Technologies Ion propulsion systems are in liniitctl use I'or in-space applications. Producing high I,,, but State of the Art (SOA) Chemical Rockets low thrust over long periods, an ion system. with xenon ions accelerated through Current rockets use mainly chemical electrostatically-charged grids, was used on propulsion, burning solid or liquid fuel with NASA's 1998 - 2001 Deep Space I (DSI) an oxidizer. Variations of this include mission. DSI used a system developed ai hybrid propellant systems, in which solid NASA Glenn Research Center (GRC). This fuel is burned with liquid oxygen, and a thruster, 30 cm in diameter, accelerated the variety of exotic fuels. Theoretically, spacecraft to a velocity of 3.5 kilometers per current chemical rocket technology could second (km/scc) over a 20-month period. perform most 01' the DRMs examined in this GRC is developing the NASA Evolutionary analysis. Such propulsion is not, however, Xenon Thruster (NEXT) system. Such a sustainable and affordable for long duration thruster can be powered by eiher ;I soIii~-- missions. While research in chemical electric source or a nuclear-electric source. propulsion promises cl'l'iciency gains, it will not enable new classcs 01' missions. Solar Thermal Propulsion (STP) Advanced Chemical Rockets STP uses a concentrator (onc or more parabolic mirrors, which in some designs are Some currently-researched chemical fuel inflatable structures) to locus and dircct improvements (which often also require solar radiation, a store of propellant (usually changes in engine design) include advanced hydrogen), and an absorher/thruster which hydrocarbon fuels and high energy density uses the solar energy to heat, expand, and matter (HEDM) propellant (which includes expel the propellant to produce thrust. STP exotic propellants as well as energetic produces an I,, of 800 - 1000 seconds. molecules added to currently-used Compared to ion propulsion, STP offers a propellants). A class of propellants called higher thrust-to-weight ratio. Raising a recombination energy fuels or atomic fuels payload from LEO to geosynchronous orbit might increase specil'ic impulse (I,,, to 550- (GEO) using STP would take an estimated 700 scc. Thesc improvements are currently 30 days. This may not be suitable lor nt widely varying TRLs, trom 2 to 7. humans, but is attraclivc for curgo missions. 3 Ainerican Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics Ion Propulsion - Hall Effect Thruster system could come flom any of five types