National Aeronautics and Space Administration AArreess VV OOvveerrvviieeww EESSMMDD TTeecchhnnoollooggyy EExxcchhaannggee CCoonnffeerreennccee November 2007 www.nasa.gov Ares Projects Office Phil Sumrall Contents ! Vehicle & Requirements Overview ! Value Streaming Process ! Technology Challenges ! Apollo Technology Development ! Conclusions National Aeronautics and Space Administration 7368.2 National Aeronautics and Space Administration VVeehhiiccllee && RReeqquuiirreemmeennttss OOvveerrvviieeww www.nasa.gov Reference Ares V Overview Ares V (CaLV) Payload Fairing Earth Departure Stage (EDS) Core Stage (CS) Reusable Solid Rocket Booster (RSRB) National Aeronautics and Space Administration 7368.4 Ares V Ascent Profile EDS Engine Cutoff Core Stage Time = 767.2 sec 5 x RS-68 Sub-Orbital Burn Duration = 441.9 sec Injected Weight = 359,287 lbm 414.2 sec. Isp, 106.0% Power Lead Shroud Separation Orbital Altitude = 120 nmi circ @ 28.5° 33.0 ft (10.0 m) Diameter Time = 335.5 sec Altitude = 422.7 kft EDS Heating Rate = 0.1 BTU/ft!-sec 1 x J2X EDS TLI Burn 448.0 sec. Isp,294 lbf Thrust EDS Ignition Orbital Altitude = 100 nmi circ @ 28.5 Time = 325.3 sec Burn Duration = 309.0 sec 27.5 ft (10.0 m) Diameter Altitude = 400.0 kft Mach = 12.49 Main Engine Cutoff Lunar Time = 325.3 sec Maximum Dynamic Pressure Lander/CEV Altitude = 400.0 kft Time = 79.5 sec Separation Altitude = 45.8 kft Mach = 12.49 Mach = 1.69 Dynamic Pressure = 637 psf SRB Separation Time = 126.6 sec Altitude = 125.0 kft Mach = 3.87 Dynamic Pressure = 85 psf EDS Disposal Core Separation Time = 325.3 sec CEV Rendez. & Dock w/EDS Liftoff Time - Assumed Up to 14 Days Time = +1 sec Orbital Altitude Assumed to Degrade to 100 nmi Thrust-to-Weight = 1.36 Launch SRB GLOW = 7,326,376 lbm Splashdown National Aeronautics and Space Administration 7368.5 Ares V Driving Requirements from CARD CARD Req’t Requirement Rationale The CaLV shall utilize twin shuttle-derived 5-segment !Draws Performance Constraints around Booster SRBs along with a core stage that employs 5 modified Selection and Core Stage Design CA0391-HQ RS-68 engines for first stage propulsion. !Boosters and Core Stage Provide ~70% of Detla V for LEO Insertion The CaLV EDS shall deliver at least 66,939 (TBR-001- !Defines TLI Payload most strenuous performance 076) kg (147,266 lbm) from Earth Rendezvous Orbit parameter CA0847-PO (ERO) to the start of the Trans-Lunar Coast (TLC) for !TLI Payload Sizes EDS crewed lunar missions. The LSAM shall have a Control Mass of 45,000 (TBR- !Defines LEO Payload for Crew Mission CA0836-PO 001-075) kg (99,180 lbm) at the time of launch for Lunar !Contribute ~2/3 Mass for TLI Payload Sortie and Lunar Outpost crew missions !TLI Payload Sizes EDS The CEV shall have a Control Mass of 20,185 (TBR-001- !Contribute ~1/3 Mass for TLI Payload CA4139-PO 159) kg (44,500 lbm) at the time of CaLV rendezvous. !TLI Payload Sizes EDS The CaLV EDS shall provide a minimum translational !Defines Delta V thus propellant Needed for Delta V CA0051-PO delta-V of 3,150 (TBR-001-258) m/s (10,335 f/s) for the !TLI Delta V Sizes EDS TLI for crewed lunar missions. The CaLV EDS shall meet its requirements after !Defines Propellant Reserves for EDS Stage CA0850-PO loitering in low Earth orbit (LEO) at least (TBD-001-975) !Major Factor in subsystem Selection and Design for days after orbit insertion for crewed lunar missions. EDS The CaLV shall deliver at least 125,000 (TBR-001-220) !Defines Mars Mission Max Payload per launch CA0282-PO kg (275,578 lbm) to a (TBD-001-072) Earth orbit for Mars !Orbit and Payload size the Ares V exploration missions. The CaLV shall launch cargo into a (TBD-001-565) Earth Further defines performance capability of Ares V CA3215-PO ! orbit for Mars missions. All Missions Lunar Requirements Mars Requirements National Aeronautics and Space Administration 7368.6 Performance Comparison ESAS CaLV to Ares V Current Reference ! Original ESAS Capability • 46.0 mt Allowable Lander Mass • 20.0 mt CEV Mass • No Loiter in LEO • TLI total "v = 10,236 ft/sec • 7.4 mt TLI performance reserve • 73.4 mt CaLV gross payload at TLI capability ! Concept refinement to reduce cost and maximize commonality between Ares I and Ares V • Core Stage " SSME derived to RS-68 • SSME Isp = 452.1 sec • RS-68 Isp = 414.7 sec " 27.5 ft. to 33 ft. diameter • RSRB " ESAS RSRB used HTPB, MEOP = 1066 psi, thrust trace optimized for CaLV " Current RSRB uses PBAN, MEOP = 1016 psi, thrust trace optimized for Ares I (53-06) • EDS " 2 J-2S+ (451.5 sec) engines to 1 J-2X engine (448 sec) • Other concept and analysis maturation • 73.1 mt CaLV gross payload at TLI capability • CxCB approval May 2006 ! CARD Requirements and Groundrules Changes- Current Baseline Reference • 14 Day Loiter Requirement Assumed (CARD TBD) • TLI total "v = 10,417 ft/sec • FPR 2.4 mt propellant (400 ft/sec) • Parking Orbit change (160 to 120 nmi) • 64.6 mt CaLV gross payload at TLI capability National Aeronautics and Space Administration 7368.7 5 RS-68 Core, 5 Seg. SRB, 1 J-2X EDS 1.5 Launch TLI – 14 Day Loiter Vehicle Concept Characteristics EDS Stage 14 day Loiter Propellants LOX/LH2 Usable Propellant 492,753 lbm GLOW 7,326,376 lbf Propellant Offload 0.0 % 72.2' Payload Envelope L x D 33.0 ft x 24.5 ft Stage pmf 0.8853 27.5' Shroud Jettison Mass 12,868 lbm Dry Mass 47,503 lbm Burnout Mass 48,735 lbm Booster (each) Suborbital Burn Mass 290,000 lbm Propellants PBAN (166-06 Trace) Pre-TLI Overboard Mass 9,757 lbm Overboard Propellant 1,380,873 lbm FPR 5,319 lbm Stage pmf 0.8558 # Engines / Type 1 / J-2X Burnout Mass 232,608 lbm Engine Thrust (100%) 294,000 lbf @ Vac 76.4' # Boosters / Type 2 / 5 Segment SRM Engine Isp (100%) 448.0 sec @ Vac Booster Thrust (@ 0.7 sec) 3,510,791 lbf @ Vac Mission Power Level 100.0 % Booster Isp (@ 0.7 sec) 267.4 sec @ Vac Stage Burn Time 751.7 sec Burn Time 126.6 sec 33.0' Delivery Orbit 1.5 Launch TLI Core Stage LEO Delivery 120 nmi circular @ 28.5° 361.9' Propellants LOX/LH2 TLI Payload from 100 nmi 142,543 lbm 64.6 MT* Usable Propellant 3,078,410 lbm Performance Reserve 8,913 lbm 4.0 MT Propellant Offload 0.0 % CEV Payload Mass 44,500 lbm 20.2 MT Stage pmf 0.9017 LSAM Payload Mass 89,130 lbm 40.4 MT Dry Mass 301,883 lbm Insertion Altitude 122.0 nmi Burnout Mass 335,684 lbm T/W @ Liftoff 1.36 # Engines / Type 5 / RS-68 Max Dynamic Pressure 637 psf 213.3' Engine Thrust (106%) 688,693 lbf @ SL 784,000 lbf @ Vac Max g’s Ascent Burn 3.86 g Engine Isp (106%) 360.8 sec @ SL 414.2 sec @ Vac T/W @ Booster Separation 1.35 176.7' Mission Power Level 106.0 % T/W Second Stage 0.44 Core Burn Time 325.3 sec T/W @ TLI Ignition 0.75 Delivery Orbit Interstage Core/EDS LEO Payload @ 120 nmi 283,913 lbm 128.8 MT Dry Mass 17,847 lbm Single Launch Lunar Direct 119,521 lbm 54.2 MT * LEO delivery orbit is 120 nmi circ @ 28.5°, assumes orbital decay to 100 nmi during 14 day loiter for CEV rendezvous and dock prior to TLI burn National Aeronautics and Space Administration 7368.8 Ongoing Requirements’ Trade Studies ! Teams are continuing to assess the requirements, balancing the Lunar Lander trade space with the Areas V trade space. • Continual assessment will occur through SRRs • Changes in diameters are being assessed ! Ares V capabilities will adjust with some of the Ares I design refinements • Commonality of some propulsion components ! Trade study to assess Ares I Launch Before Areas V • Possible reduction of loiter time from 14 days to 4 National Aeronautics and Space Administration 7368.9 National Aeronautics and Space Administration VVaalluuee SSttrreeaammiinngg PPrroocceessss www.nasa.gov Ares Capabilities Value Stream ! Abbreviated process with 2 objectives 1. Identify development needs not met with current capabilities 2. Formulate capability/technology development to meet defined capabilities ! Two phases to the process ! Phase 1: Identify development needs not met with current capabilities • Input from system designers, chief engineers, lead system engineers, etc. • Simple survey questions to identify needs " From your point of view describe the key technical challenges in designing to meet your requirements. If we could overcome the challenges what capability/technology would allow us to significantly improve margins or push the requirement further? • Examples • Mass of subsystem • Reliability of subsystem • Number of maintenance items • Thermal capability • Specific material properties " Can you identify any worthwhile technologies that could address your technical challenges? ! Input evaluated and prioritized by a Technology Review Panel ! Phase 2: Formulate Technology Projects • Align Technology development with the specific design team needs National Aeronautics and Space Administration 7368.11 APO Technology Priority Groups ! Composites ! Cryogenic Fluid Management ! Solids ! Automation ! Liquid Propulsion ! Control/Separation National Aeronautics and Space Administration 7368.12 Ares Project Office Major Prioritized Technology Needs 1. Large Composite Manufacturing 2. HTPB Propellant 3. Long-term Cryogenic Storage 4. Composite damage tolerance/detection 5. EDS state determination/abort 5. Composite joining technology 7. Liquid Level Measurement 8. Multi-layer Insulation 9. Leak detection 10.Non autoclave composites 10.SRM composite metal technology 12.Develop composite dry structures 13.Composite damage failure detection for abort and damage identification 14.Composite Nozzle NDE 15.Nozzle sensitivity to pocketing/ ply lifting using HTPB with higher heat flux 16.TVC architecture development to minimize operations (EHA Ares I upgrade)