ALBERT

Description: System studies have shown that large deployable aerodynamic decelerators such as the Adaptive Deployable Entry and Placement Technology (ADEPT) concept can revolutionize future robotic and human exploration missions involving atmospheric entry, descent and landing by significantly reducing the maximum heating rate, total heat load, and deceleration loads experienced by the spacecraft during entry [1-3]. ADEPT and the Hypersonic Inflatable Aerodynamic Decelerator (HIAD) [4] share the approach of stowing the entry system in the shroud of the launch vehicle and deploying it to a much larger diameter prior to entry. The ADEPT concept provides a low ballistic coefficient for planetary entry by employing an umbrella-like deployable structure consisting of ribs, struts and a fabric cover that form an aerodynamic decelerator capable of undergoing hypersonic flight. The ADEPT "skin" is a 3-D woven carbon cloth that serves as a thermal protection system (TPS) and as a structural surface that transfers aerodynamic forces to the underlying ribs [5]. This paper focuses on design activities associated with integrating ADEPT components (cloth, ribs, struts and mechanisms) into a system that can function across all configurations and environments of a typical mission concept: stowed during launch, in-space deployment, entry, descent, parachute deployment and separation from the landing payload. The baseline structures and mechanisms were selected via trade studies conducted during the summer and fall of 2012. They are now being incorporated into the design of a ground test article (GTA) that will be fabricated in 2013. It will be used to evaluate retention of the stowed configuration in a launch environment, mechanism operation for release, deployment and locking, and static strength of the deployed decelerator. Of particular interest are the carbon cloth interfaces, underlying hot structure, (Advanced Carbon- Carbon ribs) and other structural components (nose cap, struts, and main body) designed to withstand the pressure and extremely high heating experienced during planetary entry.

Description: Planetary entry vehicles employ ablative TPS materials to shield the aeroshell from entry aeroheating environments. To ensure mission success, it must be demonstrated that the heat shield system, including local features such as seams, does not fail at conditions that are suitably margined beyond those expected in flight. Furthermore, its thermal response must be predictable, with acceptable fidelity, by computational tools used in heat shield design. Mission assurance is accomplished through a combination of ground testing and material response modelling. A material's robustness to failure is verified through arcjet testing while its thermal response is predicted by analytical tools that are verified against experimental data. Due to limitations in flight-like ground testing capability and lack of validated high-fidelity computational models, qualification of heat shield materials is often achieved by piecing together evidence from multiple ground tests and analytical simulations, none of which fully bound the flight conditions and vehicle configuration. Extreme heating environments (〉2000 W/sq. cm heat flux and 〉2 atm pressure), experienced during entries at Venus, Saturn and Ice Giants, further stretch the current testing and modelling capabilities for applicable TPS materials. Fully-dense Carbon Phenolic was the material of choice for these applications; however, since heritage raw materials are no longer available, future uses of re-created Carbon Phenolic will require re-qualification. To address this sustainability challenge, NASA is developing a new dual-layer material based on 3D weaving technology called Heat shield for Extreme Entry Environments (HEEET). Regardless of TPS material, extreme environments pose additional certification challenges beyond what has been typical in recent NASA missions. Scope of this presentation: This presentation will give an overview of challenges faced in verifying TPS performance at extreme heating conditions. Examples include: (1) Bounding aeroheating parameters (heat flux, pressure, shear and enthalpy) in ground facilities. How to certify TPS if environments can't be bounded or aeroheating parameters can't be simultaneously achieved. (2) Higher uncertainties in ground test environments (facility calibration and analytical predictions) at extreme conditions. (3) Testing in flows similar to planetary atmosphere composition (H2/He for Gas and Ice Giants). (4) Test sample size limitations for qualifying seam designs. (5) Lack of computational tools capable of simulating all significant aspects of TPS performance (including initiation and propagation of failures). This presentation will provide recommendations on how the EDL community can address these challenges and mitigate some of the risks involved in flying TPS materials at extreme conditions. Examples include: (1) Dedicated activity to understanding TPS failure modes. Develop computational tools capable of modelling fluid interaction with material's thermostructural response. Validate these tools through failure testing. A better understanding of failure mechanisms may eliminate the need to fully bound all aeroheating parameters in ground testing. (2) Enhancements to current testing facilities to simulate flight-like ablation mechanism (ex. testing in Nitrogen at Ames Interaction Heating Facility to limit oxidation in favor of more sublimation). (3) Improved characterization of test conditions with new diagnostic methods and determination of environment uncertainty through rigorous statistical analysis of available data. (4) Design margin policies that are directly tied to uncertainties in ground test environments and modelling fidelity

Description: Planetary entry vehicles employ ablative TPS materials to shield the aeroshell from entry aeroheating environments. To ensure mission success, it must be demonstrated that the heatshield system, including local features such as seams, does not fail at conditions that are suitably margined beyond those expected in flight. Furthermore, its thermal response must be predictable, with acceptable fidelity, by computational tools used in heatshield design. Mission assurance is accomplished through a combination of ground testing and material response modelling. A material's robustness to failure is verified through arcjet testing while its thermal response is predicted by analytical tools that are verified against experimental data. Due to limitations in flight-like ground testing capability and lack of validated high-fidelity computational models, qualification of heatshield materials is often achieved by piecing together evidence from multiple ground tests and analytical simulations, none of which fully bound the flight conditions and vehicle configuration. Extreme heating environments (〉2000 W/cm2 heat flux and 〉2 atm pressure), experienced during entries at Venus, Saturn and Ice Giants, further stretch the current testing and modelling capabilities for applicable TPS materials. Fully-dense Carbon Phenolic was the material of choice for these applications; however, since heritage raw materials are no longer available, future uses of re-created Carbon Phenolic will require re-qualification. To address this sustainability challenge, NASA is developing a new dual-layer material based on 3D weaving technology called Heatshield for Extreme Entry Environments (HEEET) [1]. Regardless of TPS material, extreme environments pose additional certification challenges beyond what has been typical in recent NASA missions.Scope of this presentation: This presentation will give an overview of challenges faced in verifying TPS performance at extreme heating conditions.

Description: Venus is one of the important planetary destinations for scientific exploration, but: The combination of extreme entry environment coupled with extreme surface conditions have made mission planning and proposal efforts very challenging. We present an alternate, game-changing approach (ADEPT) where a novel entry system architecture enables more benign entry conditions and this allows for greater flexibility and lower risk in mission design

Description: NASA accomplishes its strategic goals through human and robotic exploration missions. Many of these missions require launching and landing or returning spacecraft with human or return samples through Earth's and other planetary atmospheres. Spacecraft entering an atmosphere are subjected to extreme aerothermal loads. Protecting against these extreme loads is a critical element of spacecraft design. The safety and success of the planned mission is a prime concern for the Agency, and risk mitigation requires the knowledgeable use of thermal protection systems to successfully withstand the high-energy states imposed on the vehicle. Arc jets provide ground-based testing for development and flight validation of re-entry vehicle thermal protection materials and are a critical capability and core competency of NASA. The Agency's primary hypersonic thermal testing capability resides at the Ames Research Center and the Johnson Space Center and was developed and built in the 1960s and 1970s. This capability was critical to the success of Apollo, Shuttle, Pioneer, Galileo, Mars Pathfinder, and Orion. But the capability and the infrastructure are beyond their design lives. The complexes urgently need strategic attention and investment to meet the future needs of the Agency. The Office of Chief Engineer (OCE) chartered the Arc Jet Evaluation Working Group (AJEWG), a team of experienced individuals from across the Nation, to capture perspectives and requirements from the arc jet user community and from the community that operates and maintains this capability and capacity. This report offers the AJEWG's findings and conclusions that are intended to inform the discussion surrounding potential strategic technical and investment strategies. The AJEWG was directed to employ a 30-year Agency-level view so that near-term issues did not cloud the findings and conclusions and did not dominate or limit any of the strategic options.

Description: When Apollo was designed to carry astronauts safely back from the Moon, at return speeds exceeding 11 km/s, it required development of a new lightweight ablative material to protect the capsule and crew from the intense heat of entry. Soon after the Apollo program, successful Mars Viking Lander missions employed a different and much lighter ablator in more benign entry conditions. On the other hand, the Pioneer-Venus and Galileo Probe missions that followed required yet another ablative system, to manage the extreme heating at those destinations, which was like flying a ballistic missile nose tip into a thermonuclear explosion. NASA had to invent a new heat-shield concept based on the rocket nozzle and ballistic missile ablative materials. In the mid 1990's, as the Science focus returned to Mars, advances in manufacturing, testing and materials technology led to innovative lightweight ablators that enabled comet and asteroid sample return missions and facilitated large lander missions such as MSL and Mars 2020. NASA's current plans for robotic and human exploration of the Moon, Mars and beyond introduce different constraints and new expectations for ablators. Human missions to Moon and Mars, sample return missions from Mars, and exploration of Uranus and Neptune, the two planets we are yet to explore, will require ablators that can withstand extreme environments, with verifiable robustness, and with raw materials and manufacturing approaches that are sustainable in the longer term. This talk will review the history of ablators as well as current ablative TPS development that addresses the requirements for future missions to Moon, Mars and beyond.

Description: Flight proven entry system and TPS technologies are critical for the successful execution of in-situ science missions at Venus. Emerging new technologies point to new possibilities and offer innovative approaches to delivering small satellites for orbital science. Venus entry can be very demanding and there are only a few flight proven TPS, some developed by Industry and others by NASA, capable of meeting the mission needs. NASA developed TPS has predominately been transferred to Industry and it is assumed industry will maintain the fabrication capability. However, lack of mission needs may result in obsolence of TSP fabrication capability if there is no money and no motivation. Even within NASA, its' expertise could be diverted to higher priority objectives and thereby the readiness for particular material systems can be impacted or lost. Atrophy of capabilities can come about in other ways as well such as changes to raw materials. Even small manufacturing process changes can demand requalification and TRL may be degraded. Carbon-Phenolic is a text book example. After a long period of absence of US Venus missions, VEXG and the Science community is making the case for future missions. It is insufficient to assume the TSP technologies will be there in 5 or 10 years without active and continual planning and assessment. After Galileo, Carbon-Phenolic materials and fabrication skills were allowed to atrophy. Then when missions needed it, in early 2000, it was no longer possible to make the heritage Carbon-Phenolic. What do we need to do? The first step is to advocate for the establishment of TPS readiness assess-ment. The assessment will involve understanding threats and opportunities, and the development of risk mitigation strategies. VEXAG needs to advocate for such an active monitoring of the needed capabilities, assessment of emerging risks and development of risk mitigation strategies with implementation plans. Such an approach reduces the threat of material obsolence and helps maintain the availability of entry system and TPS technology capabilities, both old and new. Venus probes, landers, balloons and other variable altitude missions, and skimmer missions such as "Cu-pid's Arrow" as well as aerocapture missions to deliver small spacecraft require qualified entry systems and ablative TPS. VEXAG advocated for HEEET in 2013/2014 and the community is well versed with the need to sustain it. But, other TPS that need to be sustained may not be apparent to VEXAG community. The following figure summarizes the ablative TPS capabilities vs Venus mission needs for both primary heatshield and backshell.

Description: This analysis pertains to the applicability of optimal sensitivity information to aerospace vehicle design. An optimal sensitivity (or post-optimality) analysis refers to computations performed once the initial optimization problem is solved. These computations may be used to characterize the design space about the present solution and infer changes in this solution as a result of constraint or parameter variations, without reoptimizing the entire system. The present analysis demonstrates that post-optimality information generated through first-order computations can be used to accurately predict the effect of constraint and parameter perturbations on the optimal solution. This assessment is based on the solution of an aircraft design problem in which the post-optimality estimates are shown to be within a few percent of the true solution over the practical range of constraint and parameter variations. Through solution of a reusable, single-stage-to-orbit, launch vehicle design problem, this optimal sensitivity information is also shown to improve the efficiency of the design process, For a hierarchically decomposed problem, this computational efficiency is realized by estimating the main-problem objective gradient through optimal sep&ivity calculations, By reducing the need for finite differentiation of a re-optimized subproblem, a significant decrease in the number of objective function evaluations required to reach the optimal solution is obtained.

Description: The Heat shield for Extreme Entry Environment Technology (HEEET) Project is a NASA STMD and SMD co-funded effort. The goal is to develop and mission infuse a new ablative Thermal Protection System that can withstand extreme entry. It is targeted to support NASA's high priority missions, as defined in the latest decadal survey, to destinations such as Venus and Saturn in-situ robotic science missions. Entry into these planetary atmospheres results in extreme heating. The entry peak heat-flux and associated pressure are estimated to be between one and two orders of magnitude higher than those experienced by Mars Science Laboratory or Lunar return missions. In the recent New Frontiers community announcement NASA has indicated that it is considering providing an increase to the PI managed mission cost (PIMMC) for investigations utilizing the Heat Shield for Extreme Entry Environment Technology (HEEET) and in addition, NASA is considering limiting the risk assessment to only their accommodation on the spacecraft and the mission environment. The HEEET ablative TPS utilizes 3D weaving technology to manufacture a dual layer material architecture. The 3-D weaving allows for flat panels to be woven. The dual layer consists of a top layer designed to withstand the extreme external environment while the inner or insulating layer by design, is designed to achieve low thermal conductivity, and it keeps the heat from conducting towards the structure underneath. Both arc jet testing combined with material properties have been used to develop thermal response models that allows for comparison of performance with heritage carbon phenolic. A 50% mass efficiency is achieved by the dual layer construct compared to carbon phenolic for a broad range of missions both to Saturn and Venus. The 3-D woven flat preforms are molded to achieve the shape as they are compliant and then resin infusion with curing forms a rigid panels. These panels are then bonded on to the aeroshell structure. Gaps exist between the panels and these gaps have to be filled with seams. The seam material then has to be bonded on to adjacent panels and also to the structure. The heat-shield assembly is shown in Figure 1. One of the significant challenges we have overcome recently is the design, development and testing of the seam. HEEET material development and the seam concept development have utilized some of the unique test capabilities available in the US. The various test facilities utilized in thermal testing along with the entry environment for Saturn and Venus missions are shown in Figure 2. The HEEET project is currently in it's 3rd year of a four-year development. Figure 3 illustrates the key accomplishments to-date and the challenges yet to be overcome before the technology is ready for mission infusion. This proposed presentation will cover both progress that has been made in the HEEET project and also the challenges to be overcome that is highlighted in Figure 3. Objective of the HEEET project is to mature the system in time to support the next New Frontiers opportunity and we believe we are well along the way to mission infuse HEEET.

Description: ComGeom2, a tool developed to generate Common Geometry representation for multidisciplinary analysis, has been used to create a large set of geometries for use in a design study requiring analysis by two computational codes. This paper describes the process used to generate the large number of configurations and suggests ways to further automate the process and make it more efficient for future studies. The design geometry for this study is the launch abort system of the NASA Crew Launch Vehicle.