Publication Date:
2013-06-19
Description:
Engine-out (EO) is a condition that might occur during flight due to the failure of one or more engines. Protection against this occurrence can be called engine-out capability (EOC) whereupon significantly improved loss of mission may occur, in addition to reduction in performance and increased cost. A standardized engine-out capability has not been studied exhaustively as it pertains to space launch systems. This work presents results for a specific vehicle design with specific engines, but also uniquely provides an approach to realizing the necessity of EOC for any launch vehicle system design. A derived top-level approach to engine-out philosophy for a heavy lift launch vehicle is given herein, based on an historical assessment of launch vehicle capabilities. The methodology itself is not intended to present a best path forward, but instead provides three parameters for assessment of a particular vehicle. Of the several parameters affected by this EOC, the three parameters of interest in this research are reliability (Loss of Mission (LOM) and Loss of Crew (LOC)), vehicle performance, and cost. The intent of this effort is to provide insight into the impacts of EO capability on these parameters. The effects of EOC on reliability, performance and cost are detailed, including how these important launch vehicle metrics can be combined to assess what could be considered overall launch vehicle affordability. In support of achieving the first critical milestone (Mission Concept Review) in the development of the Space Launch System (SLS), a team assessed two-stage, large-diameter vehicles that utilized liquid oxygen (LOX)-RP propellants in the First Stage and LOX/LH2 propellant in the Upper Stage. With multiple large thrust-class engines employed on the stages, engine-out capability could be a significant driver to mission success. It was determined that LOM results improve by a factor of five when assuming EOC for both Core Stage (CS) (first stage) and Upper Stage (US) EO, assuming a reference launch vehicle with 5 RP engines on the CS and 3 LOX/LH2 engines on the US. The benefit of adding both CS and US engine-out capability is significant. When adding EOC for either first or second stages, there is less than a 20% benefit. Performance analysis has shown that if the vehicle is not protected for EO during the first part of the flight and only protected in the later part of the flight, there is a diminishing performance penalty, as indicated by failures occurring in the first stage at different times. This work did not consider any options to abort. While adding an engine for EOC drives cost upward, the impact depends on the number of needed engines manufactured per year and the launch manifest. There is a significant cost savings if multiple flights occur within one year. Flying two flights per year would cost approximately $4,000 per pound less than the same configuration with one flight per year, assuming both CS and US EOC. The cost is within 15% of the cost of one flight per year with no engine-out capability for the same vehicle. This study can be extended to other launch vehicles. While the numbers given in this paper are specific to a certain vehicle configuration, the process requires only a high level of data to allow an analyst to draw conclusions. The weighting of each of the identified parameters will determine the optimization of each launch vehicle. The results of this engine-out assessment provide a means to understand this optimization while maintaining an unbiased perspective.
Keywords:
Launch Vehicles and Launch Operations
Type:
M11-0778
,
M12-1575
,
M11-1235
,
M12-1465
,
IEEE Aerospace Conference 2012; 3-10 Mar. 2012; Big Sky, MT; United States
Format:
application/pdf
Permalink
