DOCSLIB.ORG

Reusable Stage Concepts Design Tool

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read 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 [email protected] 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. Of the total cost per launch, the manufac- turing cost of the rocket makes up 60% and 70%.10 To reduce the manufacturing costs, one can consider designing a reusable rocket stage. This will reduce the hardware costs but at the expense of higher development cost. Both SpaceX and United Launch Alliance have added reusability to their launcher’s first stage to decrease the cost per launch. Be- sides that, several other companies are investigating reusing the first stage. Most research focuses on the first stage and very little research is done on the upper stage. The upper stage of the Atlas V Centaur launcher is about 25% of the mass and 30% of the hardware cost of the entire launcher.23 This means that a significant portion of the cost is not considered for reuse at the moment. Upper stage reusability has been proposed for the Blue Origin New Glenn rocket3 and the Kistler K1 rocket.6 However, neither have proven this in flight. The USA Space Shuttle is the only example of an operational reusable upper stage. From literature, two classes of entry vehicles can be identified: ballistic or lift generating vehicles.31 Most research done on the upper stages focuses on the winged entry vehicles following a glide entry, such as the USA space shuttle, SpaceX BFR, and CNES/ESA Hermes.15 This means that the stage has to be developed from scratch. The development of an entirely new stage, however, is a time and cost-intensive process. Therefore the focus of this research is on making an existing upper stage reusable by applying commercially available entry descent and landing (EDL) hardware. For this research, it is assumed that the stage performs a ballistic entry and that no form of a winged entry vehicle is possible. It furthermore assumes that the initial condition for the stage is a stable orbit, this orbit is the target orbit for the satellite. When adding reusability to a stage, one adds hardware to bring it back the stage safely to the ground. This added hardware comes at a price in terms of payload reduction and hardware cost increase. Besides that, reliability might decrease when a stage is reused often. To determine whether the reusable upper stage is cheaper than an expendable upper stage, the Reuse Index as proposed by United Launch Alliance (ULA), is used.23 An overview of the investigated hardware and the Reuse Index can be found in section 2. As the Reuse Index requires the cost and mass for each Copyright © 2019 by L. Pepermans and B.T.C Zandbergen. Published by the EUCASS association with permission. DOI: 10.13009/EUCASS2019-421 REUSABLE STAGE CONCEPTS DESIGN TOOL recovery element of hardware required. These modifications to the stage are represented in an ID. Together with the various mass and cost models, this is shown in section 4. To determine whether a solution exists that can reduce an upper stage cost’s by adding reusability, an optimisation tool has been developed. The optimisation tool is based upon a genetic algorithm and is described in section 3. This method has been chosen due to the non-linear and non-continuous nature of the problem. When an optimum has been found, the tool performs a Monte Carlo analysis to determine the sensitivity of the found solution. The individual mass and cost models have all been verified using existing information. The trajectory verification, together with the verification of the optimisation algorithm, is done in section 5. Finally, in section 6, a case study is done using the Centaur upper stage. This case demonstrates the feasibility of upper stage reusability and shows the capabilities of the tool. The conclusions can be found in section 7. 2. Background From literature, it was found that the flight of an upper stage consists of five main phases, see Figure 1. Each phase requires the addition of hardware elements, these are presented in in Table 1. Figure 1 is preceded by the ascent flight of the upper stage and is followed by the retrieval and refurbishment of the upper stage. Figure 1: Flight phases of a reusable upper stage Table 1: Overview of identification phases in the reusable flight Phase Design options 1) De-orbit Two burn de-orbit 2) Atmospheric entry Conventional heat shield Inflatable heat shield 3) Descent Ballute Supersonic parachute Subsonic parachute Drag plate Engine burns Rotor landing 4) Landing None Airbag Retrorocket Water landing Mid air recovery 5) Retrieval and Refurbishment The de-orbit phase is done using a Hohmann transfer orbit with two engine burns, one at the apogee of the initial orbit, and one at the user-defined entry point (periapsis), see Figure 2. The entry point is defined by its altitude [m], velocity [m/s] and entry angle [deg] 1. The goal of the first burn is to attain the desired entry altitude while the second determines the entry angle and entry velocity. 1Downward from local horizon is negative 2 DOI: 10.13009/EUCASS2019-421 REUSABLE STAGE CONCEPTS DESIGN TOOL Figure 2: De-orbit manoeuvres When re-entering the atmosphere, the stage experiences heat transfer due to aerothermal heating. This resulting heat flow can require the use of thermal protection system is. Literature suggests two options for thermal protection: solid heat shields and inflatable heat shields. The solid heat shield is however a more conventional solution the inflatable heat shield has the advantage that it can combine the functions of thermal protection, parachute, and airbag landing system.8, 14 It has however a lower technology readiness level compared to the conventional heat shields. To ensure a safe landing, one or more decelerators are required. Four main decelerator options have been identified from literature: parachutes, drag plates, engine burns, and rotor landing. Even though the rotor landing nicely combines the decelerator and landing options, the technology readiness level is not sufficient for current applications and thus not considered.22 The parachutes identified to be of use for this research are ballistic, non-steerable parachutes. The parachutes con- sidered for this research come in three categories: ballute, ribbon parachutes, and Ringsails parachutes. The ballute’s primary function is stabilisation of the stage and is used when the upper stage is unstable during the flight. The rib- bon parachutes are assumed to be supersonic, drogue parachutes where the Ringsail parachutes are mainly used for subsonic, main parachutes.12 The choice of parachutes is based upon the deployment altitude: • 100000 m - 60000 m - Ballute • 60000 m - 7500 m - Ribbon parachute • 7500 m - 0 m - Ringsail The drag plates are deployable, solid drag enhancement surfaces. These surfaces increase the drag of the body to decrease the terminal velocity. Drag plates can also provide aerodynamic control, although this is not considered in this research. Engine burns are an air-independent method of deceleration. This means it can decrease the maximum dynamic pressure and heat flux on the stage during the atmospheric entry flight. When a concept separates the engines and propellant tanks, engine burns are not a feasible decelerator. The landing hardware assumes that the stage always performs a safe landing as long as the terminal velocity of the stage is within the allowable range. Four landing options have been identified from literature: retrorockets, airbags, water landing and mid-air retrieval.12 Both the retrorockets and airbags are used for a dry landing; this can either be on land or a ship. The retrorocket solution equips the stage with small solid rocket engines that are fired just before the stage hits the ground. The advantage of this system is that the maximum allowable terminal velocity is assumed to be 100 m/s. The airbag system has a lower maximum acceptable landing velocity of 10 m/s.12 However, it has a lower cost than the retrorocket system for landing velocities below 12 m/s. During a land landing, the stage is retrieved by a truck with a crane. This is comparable to the Soyuz landings. When the stage lands in the water, it is assumed that any landing is safe when the landing velocity is below 20 m/s.
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 / [email protected] 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 [email protected] (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]
  • Industry at the Edge of Space Other Springer-Praxis Books of Related Interest by Erik Seedhouse
    IndustryIndustry atat thethe EdgeEdge ofof SpaceSpace ERIK SEEDHOUSE S u b o r b i t a l Industry at the Edge of Space Other Springer-Praxis books of related interest by Erik Seedhouse Tourists in Space: A Practical Guide 2008 ISBN: 978-0-387-74643-2 Lunar Outpost: The Challenges of Establishing a Human Settlement on the Moon 2008 ISBN: 978-0-387-09746-6 Martian Outpost: The Challenges of Establishing a Human Settlement on Mars 2009 ISBN: 978-0-387-98190-1 The New Space Race: China vs. the United States 2009 ISBN: 978-1-4419-0879-7 Prepare for Launch: The Astronaut Training Process 2010 ISBN: 978-1-4419-1349-4 Ocean Outpost: The Future of Humans Living Underwater 2010 ISBN: 978-1-4419-6356-7 Trailblazing Medicine: Sustaining Explorers During Interplanetary Missions 2011 ISBN: 978-1-4419-7828-8 Interplanetary Outpost: The Human and Technological Challenges of Exploring the Outer Planets 2012 ISBN: 978-1-4419-9747-0 Astronauts for Hire: The Emergence of a Commercial Astronaut Corps 2012 ISBN: 978-1-4614-0519-1 Pulling G: Human Responses to High and Low Gravity 2013 ISBN: 978-1-4614-3029-2 SpaceX: Making Commercial Spacefl ight a Reality 2013 ISBN: 978-1-4614-5513-4 E r i k S e e d h o u s e Suborbital Industry at the Edge of Space Dr Erik Seedhouse, M.Med.Sc., Ph.D., FBIS Milton Ontario Canada SPRINGER-PRAXIS BOOKS IN SPACE EXPLORATION ISBN 978-3-319-03484-3 ISBN 978-3-319-03485-0 (eBook) DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-03485-0 Springer Cham Heidelberg New York Dordrecht London Library of Congress Control Number: 2013956603 © Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014 This work is subject to copyright.
    [Show full text]
  • 액체로켓 메탄엔진 개발동향 및 시사점 Development Trends of Liquid
    Journal of the Korean Society of Propulsion Engineers Vol. 25, No. 2, pp. 119-143, 2021 119 Technical Paper DOI: https://doi.org/10.6108/KSPE.2021.25.2.119 액체로켓 메탄엔진 개발동향 및 시사점 임병직 a, * ㆍ 김철웅 a⋅ 이금오 a ㆍ 이기주 a ㆍ 박재성 a ㆍ 안규복 b ㆍ 남궁혁준 c ㆍ 윤영빈 d Development Trends of Liquid Methane Rocket Engine and Implications Byoungjik Lim a, * ㆍ Cheulwoong Kim a⋅ Keum-Oh Lee a ㆍ Keejoo Lee a ㆍ Jaesung Park a ㆍ Kyubok Ahn b ㆍ Hyuck-Joon Namkoung c ㆍ Youngbin Yoon d a Future Launcher R&D Program Office, Korea Aerospace Research Institute, Korea b School of Mechanical Engineering, Chungbuk National University, Korea c Guided Munitions Team, Hyundai Rotem, Korea d Department of Aerospace Engineering, Seoul National University, Korea * Corresponding author. E-mail: [email protected] ABSTRACT Selecting liquid methane as fuel is a prevailing trend for recent rocket engine developments around the world, triggered by its affordability, reusability, storability for deep space exploration, and prospect for in-situ resource utilization. Given years of time required for acquiring a new rocket engine, a national-level R&D program to develop a methane engine is highly desirable at the earliest opportunity in order to catch up with this worldwide trend towards reusing launch vehicles for competitiveness and mission flexibility. In light of the monumental cost associated with development, fabrication, and testing of a booster stage engine, it is strategically a prudent choice to start with a low-thrust engine and build up space application cases.
    [Show full text]
  • Atlas Launch System Mission Planner's Guide, Atlas V Addendum
    ATLAS Atlas Launch System Mission Planner’s Guide, Atlas V Addendum FOREWORD This Atlas V Addendum supplements the current version of the Atlas Launch System Mission Plan- ner’s Guide (AMPG) and presents the initial vehicle capabilities for the newly available Atlas V launch system. Atlas V’s multiple vehicle configurations and performance levels can provide the optimum match for a range of customer requirements at the lowest cost. The performance data are presented in sufficient detail for preliminary assessment of the Atlas V vehicle family for your missions. This guide, in combination with the AMPG, includes essential technical and programmatic data for preliminary mission planning and spacecraft design. Interface data are in sufficient detail to assess a first-order compatibility. This guide contains current information on Lockheed Martin’s plans for Atlas V launch services. It is subject to change as Atlas V development progresses, and will be revised peri- odically. Potential users of Atlas V launch service are encouraged to contact the offices listed below to obtain the latest technical and program status information for the Atlas V development. For technical and business development inquiries, contact: COMMERCIAL BUSINESS U.S. GOVERNMENT INQUIRIES BUSINESS INQUIRIES Telephone: (691) 645-6400 Telephone: (303) 977-5250 Fax: (619) 645-6500 Fax: (303) 971-2472 Postal Address: Postal Address: International Launch Services, Inc. Commercial Launch Services, Inc. P.O. Box 124670 P.O. Box 179 San Diego, CA 92112-4670 Denver, CO 80201 Street Address: Street Address: International Launch Services, Inc. Commercial Launch Services, Inc. 101 West Broadway P.O. Box 179 Suite 2000 MS DC1400 San Diego, CA 92101 12999 Deer Creek Canyon Road Littleton, CO 80127-5146 A current version of this document can be found, in electronic form, on the Internet at: http://www.ilslaunch.com ii ATLAS LAUNCH SYSTEM MISSION PLANNER’S GUIDE ATLAS V ADDENDUM (AVMPG) REVISIONS Revision Date Rev No.
    [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]
  • Orion Capsule Launch Abort System Analysis
    Orion Capsule Launch Abort System Analysis Assignment 2 AE 4802 Spring 2016 – Digital Design and Manufacturing Georgia Institute of Technology Authors: Tyler Scogin Michel Lacerda Jordan Marshall Table of Contents 1. Introduction ......................................................................................................................................... 4 1.1 Mission Profile ............................................................................................................................. 7 1.2 Literature Review ........................................................................................................................ 8 2. Conceptual Design ............................................................................................................................. 13 2.1 Design Process ........................................................................................................................... 13 2.2 Vehicle Performance Characteristics ......................................................................................... 15 2.3 Vehicle/Sub-Component Sizing ................................................................................................. 15 3. Vehicle 3D Model in CATIA ................................................................................................................ 22 3.1 3D Modeling Roles and Responsibilities: .................................................................................. 22 3.2 Design Parameters and Relations:............................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • 19700031865.Pdf
    1. Report No. 2. Government Accession No. 3. Recipient's Catalog No. NASA TM X-2075 4. Title and Subtitle 5. Report Date EFFECTOFRETROROCKETCANTANGLEON October 1970 6. Performing Organization Code GROUND EROSION - A SCALED VIKING STUDY 7. Author(s) 8. Performing Organization Report No. Leonard V. Clark L-7376 IO. Work Unit No. 9. Performing Organization Name and Address 124-08-29-01 NASA Langley Research Center 11. Contract or Grant No. Hampton, Va. 23365 13. Type of Report and Period Covered 12. Sponsoring Agency Name and Address Technical Memorandum National Aeronautics and Space Administration 14. Sponsoring Agency Code Washington, D.C. 20546 ~ 16. Abstract An experimental study was conducted at the Langley Research Center to evaluate the relative merits of canting the Viking lander retrorockets toward the spacecraft center line as a means of reducing rocket-exhaust disturbance of the surface of Mars. This paper describes the experimental study, outlines the scaling scheme of the tests, and briefly dis- cusses significant data trends. The results of this exploratory study indicate that canting of the retrorockets toward the center of the spacecraft does reduce ground erosion of the landing site from that produced by a lander configuration with downward-directed retro- rockets. Obviously, before canting the Viking lander retrorockets, it would be necessary to weigh this reduction in surface disturbance against the attendant loss of thrust due to canting. 17. Key Words (Suggested by Author(s) ) 18. Distribution Statement Jet impingement Unclassified - Unlimited Rocket-exhaust effects 19. Security Classif. (of this report) 20. Security Classif. (of this page) 21. No.
    [Show full text]
  • ESPA Ring Datasheet
    PAYLOAD ADAPTERS | ESPA ESPA THE EVOLVED SECONDARY PAYLOAD ADAPTER ESPA mounts to the standard NSSL (formerly EELV) interface bolt pattern (Atlas V, Falcon 9, Delta IV, OmegA, Vulcan, Courtesy of Lockheed Martin New Glenn) and is a drop-in component in the launch stack. Small payloads mount to ESPA ports featuring either a Ø15-inch bolt circle with 24 fasteners or a 4-point mount with pads at each corner of a 15-inch square; both of these interfaces have become small satellite standards. ESPA is qualified to carry 567 lbs (257 kg), and a Heavy interface Courtesy of NASA (with Ø5/16” fastener hardware) has been introduced with a capacity of 991 lbs (450 kg). All small satellite mass capabilities require the center of gravity (CG) to be within 20 inches (50.8 cm) of the ESPA port surface. Alternative configurations can be accommodated. ESPA GRANDE ESPA Grande is a more capable version of ESPA with Ø24-inch ports; the ring height is typically 42 inches. The Ø24-inch port has been qualified by test to Courtesy of ORBCOMM & Sierra Nevada Corp. carry small satellites up to 1543 lb (700 kg). ESPA ESPA IS ADAPTABLE TO UNIQUE MISSION REQUIREMENTS • The Air Force’s STP-1 mission delivered multiple small satellites on an Atlas V. • NASA’s Lunar Crater Observation and Sensing Satellite (LCROSS): ESPA was the spacecraft hub for the LCROSS shepherding satellite in 2009. • ORBCOMM Generation 2 (OG2) launched stacks of two and three ESPA Grandes on two different Falcon 9 missions and in total deployed 17 satellites.
    [Show full text]