ALBERT

Description: NASA's Cross-Cutting Technology Development Program identified formation flying as a key enabler for the next generation Earth and Sciences campaign. It is hoped that this technology will allow a distributed network of autonomous satellites to act collaboratively as a single collective unit paving the way for extensive co-observing campaigns, coordinated multi-point observing programs, improved space-based interferometry, and entirely new approaches to conducting science. APL as a team member with GSFC, funded by the Earth Sciences and Technology Organization (ESTO), investigated formation deployment and initialization concepts which is central to the formation flying concept. This paper presents the analytical approach and preliminary results of the study. The study investigated a simple mission involving the deployment of six micro-satellites, one at a time, from a bus. At the initialization state, the satellites fly in an along-track trajectory separated by nominal spacing. The study entailed the development of a two-body (bus and satellite) relative motion propagator based on Clohessy-Wiltshire (C-W) equations with drag from which the relative motion of the micro-satellites is deduced. This code was used to investigate cluster development characteristics subject to "tip-off' (ejection) conditions. Results indicate that cluster development is very sensitive to the ballistic coefficients of the bus and satellites, and to relative ejection velocity. This information can be used to identify optimum deployment parameters, along with accuracy bounds for a particular mission, and to develop a cluster control strategy minimizing global fuel and cost. A suitable control strategy concept has been identified, however, it needs to be developed further.

Description: STEREO (Solar-TErestrial RElations Observatory) is the third mission in the Solar Terrestrial Probes program (STP) of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA). STEREO is the first mission to utilize phasing loops and multiple lunar flybys to alter the trajectories of more than one satellite. This paper describes the launch computation methodology, the launch constraints, and the resulting nine launch windows that were prepared for STEREO. More details are provided for the window in late October 2006 that was actually used.

Description: STEREO (Solar-TErrestrial RElations Observatory) is the third mission in the Solar Terrestrial Probes program (STP) of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Science Mission Directorate Sun-Earth Connection theme. This paper describes the successful implementation (lunar swingby targeting) of the mission following the first phasing orbit to deployment into the heliocentric mission orbits following the two lunar swingbys. The STEREO Project had to make some interesting trajectory decisions in order to exploit opportunities to image a bright comet and an unusual lunar transit across the Sun.

Description: The Solar Dynamics Observatory (SDO) includes three advanced instruments, massive science data volume, stringent science data completeness requirements, and a custom ground station to meet mission demands. The strict instrument science requirements imposed a number of challenging drivers on the overall mission system design, leading the SDO team to adopt an integrated systems engineering presence across all aspects of the mission to ensure that mission science requirements would be met. Key strategies were devised to address these system level drivers and mitigate identified threats to mission success. The global systems engineering team approach ensured that key drivers and risk areas were rigorously addressed through all phases of the mission, leading to the successful SDO launch and on-orbit operation. Since launch, SDO's on-orbit performance has met all mission science requirements and enabled groundbreaking science observations, expanding our understanding of the Sun and its dynamic processes.

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: 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.