DOCSLIB.ORG

Orpheus AIAA Pluto Orbiter Design Competition

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Orpheus AIAA Pluto Orbiter Design Competition Orpheus AIAA Pluto Orbiter Design Competition AOE 4166: Senior Design Instructor: Dr. Kevin Shinpaugh Pluto Orbiter Group 1 Submitted by: Rob Engebretson, Timothy Hughes, Daniel McGrath, Jon-Paul Query, Clifton Reese May 10, 2018 Daniel McGrath Rob Engebretson Team Lead Propulsion/Structures and Launch Vehicles Communications, Command and Data AIAA Member Number: 594706 Handling/Attitude, Trajectory, and Orbits AIAA Member Number: 921354 Timothy Hughes Jon-Paul Query Attitude, Trajectory, and Orbits/Power, Power, Thermal, and Environment/Structures Thermal, and Environment and Launch Vehicles AIAA Member Number: 919746 AIAA Member Number: 919779 Clifton Reese Attitude, Trajectory, and Orbits/Propulsion AIAA Member Number: 921655 Kevin Shinpaugh Faculty Advisor Copyright © 2018 by Rob Engebretson, Timothy Hughes, Daniel McGrath, Jon-Paul Query, and Clifton Reese. Published by the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Inc., with permission. Executive Summary New Horizons, launched by NASA in 2006, performed a flyby of Pluto nine years later and gathered large amounts of data from the system. Orpheus, the successor to New Horizons, is designed to enter orbit around the Pluto system and send back larger amounts of data back to scientists on Earth. The name Orpheus was chosen for its mythological resonance with Pluto. Orpheus traveled to the underworld in order to bring back his wife, Eurydice, however at the end of the journey Orpheus left the underworld leaving behind his wife. The primary goal of this project is to gather scientific data from the Pluto system while orbiting the system for at least one year. Orpheus will need to topographically and optically map Pluto's surface while inside the system. Instruments onboard the spacecraft will also thermally map and retrieve high resolution images of Pluto, Charon and its smaller moons. Since the spacecraft will spend at least one year on orbit, the spacecraft can study the dynamic evolution of Pluto's atmosphere before ejection from the system. Geological features that New Horizons missed during its flyby can be studied due to the prolonged presence around Pluto and close orbit. The project requires the mission to conclude after 25 years from launch with a minimum of one year in the Pluto system. Due to the current position of Pluto and the outer planets, as well as booster availability, a Jupiter flyby trajectory has been chosen that requires a launch date of December 2028. This trajectory requires approximately 9.18 km/s of ∆V of onboard propulsion to achieve Pluto orbit, and will take roughly 17.5 years to arrive at Pluto. With this trajectory a total of 7.5 years can be spent inside the system exploring Pluto and its moons. The high ∆V required to successfully capture the spacecraft implies that a high specific- impulse propulsion system is needed. After comparing several thrusters, the NEXT thruster system was selected because of its efficiency and long life expectancy. A set of two NEXT iii thrusters will be used so that the risk of engine failure can be minimized. To power the electric thrusters, Orpheus will employ an 8 kW reactor and a MMRTG to produce a total of 8.1 kW for the spacecraft. Only nuclear power systems were deemed viable because of the distance from the sun which makes solar power useless. Fuel cells were briefly discussed but became unnecessary once the reactor became viable. Thermal control is accomplished by passive and active system which keep the spacecraft within its operational ranges. MLI will be used to thermally insulate the spacecraft and falls under the passive thermal system. Four sets of louvers are used to radiate excess heat near the inner solar system and a set of heaters will be used in the outer solar system. Orpheus is designed to maximize performance for a reasonable cost, estimated to be be- tween $1,570 and $2,027 million, while mitigating risk for the mission. Redundant systems have been used where necessary to ensure that Orpheus is able to complete its mission, in- cluding completely redundant computers and control hardware and a spare NEXT thruster. We believe that Orpheus will meet overall mission objectives and reveal valuable new infor- mation on both Pluto and dwarf planets in general. iv Contents Executive Summary iii Contents v List of Symbols and Abbreviations vii List of Figures ix List of Tables x 1 Introduction 1 1.1 Background . 1 1.2 Requirements . 2 2 Scientific Objectives 4 2.1 Close And Long Range Optical Imager (CALORI) . 6 2.2 Thermal Imaging Spectrometer . 7 2.3 Laser Altimeter . 8 3 Concept of Operations 9 4 Trajectory and Orbits 10 4.1 Trajectory . 10 4.2 Science Orbit . 12 5 Propulsion 14 5.1 Engine Types . 14 5.2 Engine Comparison . 15 5.3 Final Propulsion Configuration . 18 5.4 Summary . 19 6 Launch Vehicle 21 6.1 Summary . 22 7 Power 23 8 Thermal Management 28 9 Structure 33 10 Communications 38 v 11 Attitude Determination and Control 41 12 Data Handling 43 13 Risk Analysis 44 14 Compliance 47 A Mass Budget 49 B Cost Budget 50 C Requirements Flowdown 51 References 55 vi List of Symbols and Abbreviations ◦ degrees µm Micrometers AU Astronomical Unit dB Decibel Bps Bits per second BPSK Binary Phase Shift Keying C3 Characteristic Energy CALORI Close And Long range Optical Reconnaissance Imager DEAP Deep Space Network Aperture Enhancement Project ∆V Change in velocity DNE Do Not Exceed DSN Deep Space Network Eb/No ratio of received energy-per-bit to noise-density GPHS-RTG General-Purpose heat source RTG Gs Gravitaion force HIRISE High Resolution Imaging Science Experiment IMU Inertial Measurement Unit Isp Specific Impulse keV kiloelectronvolt Kg kilogram Km kilometer Km2 s2 Kilometers squared per second squared kW KiloWatts LA Laser Altimeter LH2 Liquid Hydrogen LOX Liquid Oxygen m meter m2 square meters mN millinewton m s meters per second MLI Multi-layer Insulation MMRTG Multi-Mission RTG NASA National Aeronautics and Space Administration NEXT NASA Evolutionary Xenon Thruster NSTAR NASA Solar Technology Application Readiness PEPPSI Pluto Energetic Particle Spectrometer Science Investigation PPU Power Processing Unit RCS Reaction Control System REX Radio Science Experiment RS Reed-Solomon decoding RTG radioisotope thermoelectric generator vii SLS Space Launch System SPICE Spacecraft Planet Instrument C-matrix Events SWAP Solar Wind at Pluto SDC Student Dust Counter THEMIS Thermal Emission Imaging System TIS Thermal Imaging System US United States W Watts W m2 Watts per meter squared viii List of Figures 1 Ojective Hierarchy . 3 2 Concept of operations for Orpheus. 9 3 View of Orpheus trajectory from edge of ecliptic plane. 11 4 View of Orpheus trajectory from above ecliptic plane. 11 5 Late-stage mapping orbit . 13 6 Comparison of the braking time required for each engine with its required initial mass. 16 7 Comparison of time required to achieve sufficient ∆V to complete the Pluto insertion burn . 20 8 Multi-Mission Radioisotope Thermoelectric Generator . 24 9 Kilopower nuclear fission reactor . 27 10 Solar Irradiance Throughout the Solar System . 29 11 Heat needed for Spacecraft for Survivable Temperature Ranges . 30 12 Spacecraft layout . 34 13 Cutaway of the launch configuration of the spacecraft. 35 14 Orpheus stowed in Falcon Heavy payload fairing. 36 15 Base of the reactor truss . 37 16 Antenna array . 39 17 Pointing error and data rate . 40 18 Risk Matrix . 45 ix List of Tables 1 Needs, Alterables, Constraints . 2 2 Comparison of engines. 16 3 Engine trade study. 17 4 Launch vehicle comparison . 21 5 Power systems trade study . 25 6 Power budget . 26 7 The Operating and Survival Temperatures of Significant Systems . 29 8 Solar Irradiance at Earth, Jupiter, and Pluto. 30 9 Link budget for cruise, propulsive, and science modes. 40 10 Risk Mitigation . 46 11 Compliance Matrix . 47 12 Data Compliance Matrix . 47 13 Mass Budget . 49 14 Cost Budget . 50 x 1 Introduction The goal of Orpheus is to follow New Horizons and gather more scientific data about Pluto and its moons by entering an orbit within the system. Questions about Pluto remain unanswered by the flyby performed by New Horizons and this project sets out to answer them. Using an instrument payload similar to that of New Horizons, Orpheus will gather topographical and thermal data about Pluto's dark side. Using a modified camera, Orpheus will also take higher resolution images of Pluto's smaller moons - Styx, Nix, Kerberos, and Hydra. While within a close orbit of Pluto, smaller features, such as potential cryovolcanoes, will be resolved. 1.1 Background In February of 1930, Clyde Tombaugh discovered a ninth planet in the solar system by observing movement of an object in various photographs. [1] Later named Pluto, after the mythological god of the underworld, it was known as the ninth planet in our solar system for more than 70 years. In 2006, Pluto was reclassified as a dwarf planet. [2] In the same year, NASA launched its New Horizons probe to study the dwarf planet Pluto in a flyby maneuver. Its goal was to study the surface of Pluto and its relatively large moon, Charon. After completing a gravity assist around Jupiter in 2007, New Horizons arrived in the Pluto system in July of 2015. The flyby was successful in obtaining far more detailed images of Pluto and Charon's surfaces and low-resolution images of Pluto's other, much smaller, moons. It is now exploring the Kuiper Belt and will eventually study other bodies in this system. [3] 1 Table 1: Needs, alterables, and constraints for Orpheus. Category Element Launch a probe from Earth to Pluto orbit Needs Send scientific data back to Earth Trajectory Propulsion Method(s) Launch Vehicle Alterables Launch Date Structure All Subsystems Orbit Maximum mission time of 25 years Constraints Orbit around Pluto system for at least one year One launch vehicle 1.2 Requirements The primary mission requirements come from the AIAA RFP.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Machine Learning Regression for Estimating Characteristics of Low-Thrust Transfers
    MACHINE LEARNING REGRESSION FOR ESTIMATING CHARACTERISTICS OF LOW-THRUST TRANSFERS A Thesis Presented to The Academic Faculty By Gene L. Chen In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Master of Science in the School of Aerospace Engineering Georgia Institute of Technology May 2019 Copyright c Gene L. Chen 2019 MACHINE LEARNING REGRESSION FOR ESTIMATING CHARACTERISTICS OF LOW-THRUST TRANSFERS Approved by: Dr. Dimitri Mavris, Advisor Guggenheim School of Aerospace Engineering Georgia Institute of Technology Dr. Alicia Sudol Guggenheim School of Aerospace Engineering Georgia Institute of Technology Dr. Michael Steffens Guggenheim School of Aerospace Engineering Georgia Institute of Technology Date Approved: April 15, 2019 To my parents, thanks for the support. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Firstly, I would like to thank Dr. Dimitri Mavris for giving me the opportunity to pursue a Master’s degree at the Aerospace Systems Design Laboratory. It has been quite the experience. Also, many thanks to my committee members — Dr. Alicia Sudol and Dr. Michael Steffens — for taking the time to review my work and give suggestions on how to improve - it means a lot to me. Additionally, thanks to Dr. Patel and Dr. Antony for helping me understand their work in trajectory optimization. iv TABLE OF CONTENTS Acknowledgments . iv List of Tables . vii List of Figures . viii Chapter 1: Introduction and Motivation . 1 1.1 Thesis Overview . 4 Chapter 2: Background . 5 Chapter 3: Approach . 17 3.1 Scenario Definition . 17 3.2 Spacecraft Dynamics . 18 3.3 Choice Between Direct and Indirect Method . 19 3.3.1 Chebyshev polynomial method . 20 3.3.2 Sims-Flanagan method .
    [Show full text]
  • Astrodynamics
    Politecnico di Torino SEEDS SpacE Exploration and Development Systems Astrodynamics II Edition 2006 - 07 - Ver. 2.0.1 Author: Guido Colasurdo Dipartimento di Energetica Teacher: Giulio Avanzini Dipartimento di Ingegneria Aeronautica e Spaziale e-mail: [email protected] Contents 1 Two–Body Orbital Mechanics 1 1.1 BirthofAstrodynamics: Kepler’sLaws. ......... 1 1.2 Newton’sLawsofMotion ............................ ... 2 1.3 Newton’s Law of Universal Gravitation . ......... 3 1.4 The n–BodyProblem ................................. 4 1.5 Equation of Motion in the Two-Body Problem . ....... 5 1.6 PotentialEnergy ................................. ... 6 1.7 ConstantsoftheMotion . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .... 7 1.8 TrajectoryEquation .............................. .... 8 1.9 ConicSections ................................... 8 1.10 Relating Energy and Semi-major Axis . ........ 9 2 Two-Dimensional Analysis of Motion 11 2.1 ReferenceFrames................................. 11 2.2 Velocity and acceleration components . ......... 12 2.3 First-Order Scalar Equations of Motion . ......... 12 2.4 PerifocalReferenceFrame . ...... 13 2.5 FlightPathAngle ................................. 14 2.6 EllipticalOrbits................................ ..... 15 2.6.1 Geometry of an Elliptical Orbit . ..... 15 2.6.2 Period of an Elliptical Orbit . ..... 16 2.7 Time–of–Flight on the Elliptical Orbit . .......... 16 2.8 Extensiontohyperbolaandparabola. ........ 18 2.9 Circular and Escape Velocity, Hyperbolic Excess Speed . .............. 18 2.10 CosmicVelocities
    [Show full text]
  • Reduction of Saturn Orbit Insertion Impulse Using Deep-Space Low Thrust
    Reduction of Saturn Orbit Insertion Impulse using Deep-Space Low Thrust Elena Fantino ∗† Khalifa University of Science and Technology, Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates. Roberto Flores‡ International Center for Numerical Methods in Engineering, 08034 Barcelona, Spain. Jesús Peláez§ and Virginia Raposo-Pulido¶ Technical University of Madrid, 28040 Madrid, Spain. Orbit insertion at Saturn requires a large impulsive manoeuver due to the velocity difference between the spacecraft and the planet. This paper presents a strategy to reduce dramatically the hyperbolic excess speed at Saturn by means of deep-space electric propulsion. The inter- planetary trajectory includes a gravity assist at Jupiter, combined with low-thrust maneuvers. The thrust arc from Earth to Jupiter lowers the launch energy requirement, while an ad hoc steering law applied after the Jupiter flyby reduces the hyperbolic excess speed upon arrival at Saturn. This lowers the orbit insertion impulse to the point where capture is possible even with a gravity assist with Titan. The control-law algorithm, the benefits to the mass budget and the main technological aspects are presented and discussed. The simple steering law is compared with a trajectory optimizer to evaluate the quality of the results and possibilities for improvement. I. Introduction he giant planets have a special place in our quest for learning about the origins of our planetary system and Tour search for life, and robotic missions are essential tools for this scientific goal. Missions to the outer planets arXiv:2001.04357v1 [astro-ph.EP] 8 Jan 2020 have been prioritized by NASA and ESA, and this has resulted in important space projects for the exploration of the Jupiter system (NASA’s Europa Clipper [1] and ESA’s Jupiter Icy Moons Explorer [2]), and studies are underway to launch a follow-up of Cassini/Huygens called Titan Saturn System Mission (TSSM) [3], a joint ESA-NASA project.
    [Show full text]
  • Electric Propulsion System Scaling for Asteroid Capture-And-Return Missions
    Electric propulsion system scaling for asteroid capture-and-return missions Justin M. Little⇤ and Edgar Y. Choueiri† Electric Propulsion and Plasma Dynamics Laboratory, Princeton University, Princeton, NJ, 08544 The requirements for an electric propulsion system needed to maximize the return mass of asteroid capture-and-return (ACR) missions are investigated in detail. An analytical model is presented for the mission time and mass balance of an ACR mission based on the propellant requirements of each mission phase. Edelbaum’s approximation is used for the Earth-escape phase. The asteroid rendezvous and return phases of the mission are modeled as a low-thrust optimal control problem with a lunar assist. The numerical solution to this problem is used to derive scaling laws for the propellant requirements based on the maneuver time, asteroid orbit, and propulsion system parameters. Constraining the rendezvous and return phases by the synodic period of the target asteroid, a semi- empirical equation is obtained for the optimum specific impulse and power supply. It was found analytically that the optimum power supply is one such that the mass of the propulsion system and power supply are approximately equal to the total mass of propellant used during the entire mission. Finally, it is shown that ACR missions, in general, are optimized using propulsion systems capable of processing 100 kW – 1 MW of power with specific impulses in the range 5,000 – 10,000 s, and have the potential to return asteroids on the order of 103 104 tons. − Nomenclature
    [Show full text]
  • Orbital Fueling Architectures Leveraging Commercial Launch Vehicles for More Affordable Human Exploration
    ORBITAL FUELING ARCHITECTURES LEVERAGING COMMERCIAL LAUNCH VEHICLES FOR MORE AFFORDABLE HUMAN EXPLORATION by DANIEL J TIFFIN Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of: Master of Science Department of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering CASE WESTERN RESERVE UNIVERSITY January, 2020 CASE WESTERN RESERVE UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF GRADUATE STUDIES We hereby approve the thesis of DANIEL JOSEPH TIFFIN Candidate for the degree of Master of Science*. Committee Chair Paul Barnhart, PhD Committee Member Sunniva Collins, PhD Committee Member Yasuhiro Kamotani, PhD Date of Defense 21 November, 2019 *We also certify that written approval has been obtained for any proprietary material contained therein. 2 Table of Contents List of Tables................................................................................................................... 5 List of Figures ................................................................................................................. 6 List of Abbreviations ....................................................................................................... 8 1. Introduction and Background.................................................................................. 14 1.1 Human Exploration Campaigns ....................................................................... 21 1.1.1. Previous Mars Architectures ..................................................................... 21 1.1.2. Latest Mars Architecture .........................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Solar Orbiter Assessment Study and Model Payload
    Solar Orbiter assessment study and model payload N.Rando(1), L.Gerlach(2), G.Janin(4), B.Johlander(1), A.Jeanes(1), A.Lyngvi(1), R.Marsden(3), A.Owens(1), U.Telljohann(1), D.Lumb(1) and T.Peacock(1). (1) Science Payload & Advanced Concepts Office, (2) Electrical Engineering Department, (3) Research and Scientific Support Department, European Space Agency, ESTEC, Postbus 299, NL-2200AG, Noordwijk, The Netherlands (4) Mission Analysis Office, European Space Agency, ESOC, Darmstadt, Germany ABSTRACT The Solar Orbiter mission is presently in assessment phase by the Science Payload and Advanced Concepts Office of the European Space Agency. The mission is confirmed in the Cosmic Vision programme, with the objective of a launch in October 2013 and no later than May 2015. The Solar Orbiter mission incorporates both a near-Sun (~0.22 AU) and a high-latitude (~ 35 deg) phase, posing new challenges in terms of protection from the intense solar radiation and related spacecraft thermal control, to remain compatible with the programmatic constraints of a medium class mission. This paper provides an overview of the assessment study activities, with specific emphasis on the definition of the model payload and its accommodation in the spacecraft. The main results of the industrial activities conducted with Alcatel Space and EADS-Astrium are summarized. Keywords: Solar physics, space weather, instrumentation, mission assessment, Solar Orbiter 1. INTRODUCTION The Solar Orbiter mission was first discussed at the Tenerife “Crossroads” workshop in 1998, in the framework of the ESA Solar Physics Planning Group. The mission was submitted to ESA in 2000 and then selected by ESA’s Science Programme Committee in October 2000 to be implemented as a flexi-mission, with a launch envisaged in the 2008- 2013 timeframe (after the BepiColombo mission to Mercury) [1].
    [Show full text]
  • A Free Spacecraft Simulation Tool
    Orbiter: AFreeSpacecraftSimulationTool MartinSchweiger DepartmentofComputerScience UniversityCollegeLondon www.orbitersim.com 2nd ESAWorkshoponAstrodynamics ToolsandTechniques ESTEC,Noordwijk 13-15September2004 Contents • Overview • Scope • Limitations • SomeOrbiterfeatures: • Timepropagation • Gravitycalculation • Rigid-bodymodelandsuperstructures • OrbiterApplicationProgrammingInterface: • Concept • Orbiterinstrumentation • TheVESSELinterfaceclass • Newfeatures: • Air-breatingengines:scramjetdesign • Virtualcockpits • Newvisualeffects • Orbiterasateachingtool • Summaryandfutureplans • Demonstration Overview · Orbiterisareal-timespaceflightsimulationforWindowsPC platforms. · Modellingofatmosphericflight(launchandreentry), suborbital,orbitalandinterplanetarymissions(rendezvous, docking,transfer,swing-byetc.) · Newtonianmechanics,rigidbodymodelofrotation,basic atmosphericflightmodel. · Planetpositionsfrompublicperturbationsolutions.Time integrationofstatevectorsorosculatingelements. · Developedsince2000asaneducationalandrecreational applicationfororbitalmechanicssimulation. · WritteninC++,usingDirectXfor3-Drendering.Public programminginterfacefordevelopmentofexternalmodule plugins. · WithanincreasinglyversatileAPI,developmentfocusis beginningtoshiftfromtheOrbitercoreto3rd partyaddons. Scope · Launchsequencefromsurfacetoorbitalinsertion(including atmosphericeffects:drag,pressure-dependentengineISP...) · Orbitalmanoeuvres(alignmentoforbitalplane,orbit-to-orbit transfers,rendezvous) · Vessel-to-vesselapproachanddocking.Buildingof superstructuresfromvesselmodules(includingsimplerules
    [Show full text]
  • Method for Rapid Interplanetary Trajectory Analysis Using Δv Maps with Flyby Options
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by DSpace@MIT METHOD FOR RAPID INTERPLANETARY TRAJECTORY ANALYSIS USING ΔV MAPS WITH FLYBY OPTIONS TAKUTO ISHIMATSU*, JEFFREY HOFFMAN†, AND OLIVIER DE WECK‡ Department of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 77 Massachusetts Avenue, Cambridge, MA 02139, USA. Email: [email protected]*, [email protected]†, [email protected]‡ This paper develops a convenient tool which is capable of calculating ballistic interplanetary trajectories with planetary flyby options to create exhaustive ΔV contour plots for both direct trajectories without flybys and flyby trajectories in a single chart. The contours of ΔV for a range of departure dates (x-axis) and times of flight (y-axis) serve as a “visual calendar” of launch windows, which are useful for the creation of a long-term transportation schedule for mission planning purposes. For planetary flybys, a simple powered flyby maneuver with a reasonably small velocity impulse at periapsis is allowed to expand the flyby mission windows. The procedure of creating a ΔV contour plot for direct trajectories is a straightforward full-factorial computation with two input variables of departure and arrival dates solving Lambert’s problem for each combination. For flyby trajectories, a “pseudo full-factorial” computation is conducted by decomposing the problem into two separate full-factorial computations. Mars missions including Venus flyby opportunities are used to illustrate the application of this model for the 2020-2040 time frame. The “competitiveness” of launch windows is defined and determined for each launch opportunity. Keywords: Interplanetary trajectory, C3, delta-V, pork-chop plot, launch window, Mars, Venus flyby 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Determination of Optimal Earth-Mars Trajectories to Target the Moons Of
    The Pennsylvania State University The Graduate School Department of Aerospace Engineering DETERMINATION OF OPTIMAL EARTH-MARS TRAJECTORIES TO TARGET THE MOONS OF MARS A Thesis in Aerospace Engineering by Davide Conte 2014 Davide Conte Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Science May 2014 ii The thesis of Davide Conte was reviewed and approved* by the following: David B. Spencer Professor of Aerospace Engineering Thesis Advisor Robert G. Melton Professor of Aerospace Engineering Director of Undergraduate Studies George A. Lesieutre Professor of Aerospace Engineering Head of the Department of Aerospace Engineering *Signatures are on file in the Graduate School iii ABSTRACT The focus of this thesis is to analyze interplanetary transfer maneuvers from Earth to Mars in order to target the Martian moons, Phobos and Deimos. Such analysis is done by solving Lambert’s Problem and investigating the necessary targeting upon Mars arrival. Additionally, the orbital parameters of the arrival trajectory as well as the relative required ΔVs and times of flights were determined in order to define the optimal departure and arrival windows for a given range of date. The first step in solving Lambert’s Problem consists in finding the positions and velocities of the departure (Earth) and arrival (Mars) planets for a given range of dates. Then, by solving Lambert’s problem for various combinations of departure and arrival dates, porkchop plots can be created and examined. Some of the key parameters that are plotted on porkchop plots and used to investigate possible transfer orbits are the departure characteristic energy, C3, and the arrival v∞.
    [Show full text]
  • Building and Maintaining the International Space Station (ISS)
    / Building and maintaining the International Space Station (ISS) is a very complex task. An international fleet of space vehicles launches ISS components; rotates crews; provides logistical support; and replenishes propellant, items for science experi- ments, and other necessary supplies and equipment. The Space Shuttle must be used to deliver most ISS modules and major components. All of these important deliveries sustain a constant supply line that is crucial to the development and maintenance of the International Space Station. The fleet is also responsible for returning experiment results to Earth and for removing trash and waste from the ISS. Currently, transport vehicles are launched from two sites on transportation logistics Earth. In the future, the number of launch sites will increase to four or more. Future plans also include new commercial trans- ports that will take over the role of U.S. ISS logistical support. INTERNATIONAL SPACE STATION GUIDE TRANSPORTATION/LOGISTICS 39 LAUNCH VEHICLES Soyuz Proton H-II Ariane Shuttle Roscosmos JAXA ESA NASA Russia Japan Europe United States Russia Japan EuRopE u.s. soyuz sL-4 proton sL-12 H-ii ariane 5 space shuttle First launch 1957 1965 1996 1996 1981 1963 (Soyuz variant) Launch site(s) Baikonur Baikonur Tanegashima Guiana Kennedy Space Center Cosmodrome Cosmodrome Space Center Space Center Launch performance 7,150 kg 20,000 kg 16,500 kg 18,000 kg 18,600 kg payload capacity (15,750 lb) (44,000 lb) (36,400 lb) (39,700 lb) (41,000 lb) 105,000 kg (230,000 lb), orbiter only Return performance
    [Show full text]
  • Orbiter Processing Facility
    National Aeronautics and Space Administration Space Shuttle: Orbiter Processing From Landing To Launch he work of preparing a space shuttle for the same facilities. Inside is a description of an flight takes place primarily at the Launch orbiter processing flow; in this case, Discovery. Complex 39 Area. TThe process actually begins at the end of each acts Shuttle Landing Facility flight, with a landing at the center or, after landing At the end of its mission, the Space Shuttle f at an alternate site, the return of the orbiter atop a Discovery lands at the Shuttle Landing Facility on shuttle carrier aircraft. Kennedy’s Shuttle Landing one of two runway headings – Runway 15 extends Facility is the primary landing site. from the northwest to the southeast, and Runway There are now three orbiters in the shuttle 33 extends from the southeast to the northwest fleet: Discovery, Atlantis and Endeavour. Chal- – based on wind currents. lenger was destroyed in an accident in January After touchdown and wheelstop, the orbiter 1986. Columbia was lost during approach to land- convoy is deployed to the runway. The convoy ing in February 2003. consists of about 25 specially designed vehicles or Each orbiter is processed independently using units and a team of about 150 trained personnel, NASA some of whom assist the crew in disembarking from the orbiter. the orbiter and a “white room” is mated to the orbiter hatch. The The others quickly begin the processes necessary to “safe” the hatch is opened and a physician performs a brief preliminary orbiter and prepare it for towing to the Orbiter Processing Fa- medical examination of the crew members before they leave the cility.
    [Show full text]
  • Astrodynamics (AERO0024)
    Astrodynamics (AERO0024) The two­body problem Lamberto Dell'Elce Space Structures & Systems Lab (S3L)0 Outline The two­body problem µ rÜ = – r Equations of motion r 3 Resulting orbits 1 Outline The two­body problem µ rÜ = – r Equations of motion r 3 Resulting orbits 2 What is the two­body problem (or Kepler problem)? F 21 F m1 12 m2 Motion of two point masses due to their gravitational interaction 3 Two­body problem vs real world 4 What is the interest in the two­body problem? 5 Gravitational force of a point mass F 21 F m1 12 m2 r Norm: m1 m2 kF 12k = kF 21k = G r 2 Direction: • Along the line joining m1 and m2 • Directed toward the attractor 6 Gravitational constant 7 Gravitational parameter of a Celestial body 8 Satellite laser ranging 9 Satellites as bodies in free fall 10 Is point­mass a good approximation for Earth gravity? 11 Gravitational potential of a uniform sphere 12 Gravitational potential of a spherically­symmetric body 13 Outline The two­body problem µ rÜ = – r Equations of motion r 3 Resulting orbits 14 Dynamics of the two bodies 15 Motion of the center of mass 16 Equations of relative motion Assume m2 m1 17 Equations of relative motion 18 Integrals of motion: The angular momentum 19 Implication: Motion lies in a plane 20 Azimuth component of the velocity 21 Integrals of motion: The eccentricity vector 22 Relative trajectory 23 In summary 24 Outline The two­body problem µ rÜ = – r Equations of motion r 3 Resulting orbits 25 Conic sections in polar coordinates 26 Conic sections 27 Possible trajectories of the two­body
    [Show full text]