Update on Team Projects

Transcription

1 Update on Team Projects NEO Mission Presentation by NASA program executive X-Hab activities Systems Definition Review tomorrow 2-4 Exo-SPHERES Flexible Path missions U N I V E R S I T Y O F MARYLAND David L. Akin - All rights reserved Update on Team Projects ENAE 483/788D - Principles of Space Systems Design

2 ENAE 483/484 Matrix Organization Avionics and Software Crew Systems Loads, Structures, Mechanisms Power, Propulsion, Thermal Mission Planning and Analysis Systems Integration Near Earth Object Mission Lia Sacks William Canan Steve Sherman Zhen Zhao Aʼarika Hawkins Kyle Mason Nikolay Ivanov Justin Deal Anuj Patel Thuythao Nguyen Cassie Alberding Sean Henely Exo- SPHERES Olatunde Sanni Simon Knister Connie Ciarleglio Tyler Lilly- Salkowski Vicente Rodriguez Clare McGlory Mark Walsh Matthew Bulow Navid Daneshvaran Forest Harrington Daniel Mattern Tommy Johanson Zak Kaler Jacob Stopak X-Hab Pau Redo Puente Mohammad Khan Michael De Van Andy Ross Ahn-Duc Van U N I V E R S I T Y O F MARYLAND 2 Update on Team Projects ENAE 483/788D - Principles of Space Systems Design

3 Opportunities for Near Earth Object Exploration Future In-Space Operations Colloquium Lindley Johnson Program Executive NASA HQ 29 Sep

4 Terminology Near Earth Objects (NEOs) - any small body (comet or asteroid) passing within 1.3 Astronomical Unit (AU) of the Sun 1 AU is the distance from Earth to Sun = ~ 150 million kilometers (km) NEOs are predicted to pass within ~ 45 million km of Earth s orbit Population of: Near Earth Asteroids (NEAs) Near Earth Comets (NECs) also called Earth Approaching Comets (EACs) 85 currently known Potentially Hazardous Objects (PHOs) small body that has potential risk of impacting the Earth at some point in the future NEOs passing within 0.05 AU of Earth s orbit ~ 8 million km = 20 times the distance to the Moon Appears to be about 20% of all NEOs discovered Human mission accessible objects are a subset of PHOs 2

5 Earth s Cratered Past

6 Our Big Buddy Jupiter Our Big Brother Jupiter continually takes hits from relatively large objects, including two sighted this summer. The impact of comet Shoemaker-Levy 9 in July 1994 brought both astronomical and media attention to the impact threat

7 The Hard Rain Fireball Data Points U.S. early warning satellites detected a flash that indicated an energy release comparable to the Hiroshima burst. We see about 30 such bursts per year, but this one was one of the largest we have ever seen. The event was caused by the impact of a small asteroid, probably about 5-10 meters in diameter, on the earth's atmosphere. --Statement of Brigadier General Simon P. Worden, Deputy Director for Operations, United States

8 Impact Frequencies and Consequences Type of Event Diameter of Impact Object Impact Energy(MT) Average Impact Interval (years) High altitude break-up < 30 m < Tunguska-like event > 30 m > Regional event > 140 m ~150 5,000 Large sub-global event > 300 m ~2,000 25,000 Low global effect > 600 m ~30,000 70,000 Medium global effect > 1 km >100K 1 million High global effect > 5 km > 10M 6 million Extinction-class Event > 10 km >100M 100 million

9 Effects of TUNGUSKA EVENT June years ago

10 NEO Observation Program US component to International Spaceguard Survey effort Has provided 98% of new detections of NEOs Began with NASA commitment to House Committee on Science in May, 1998 Averaged ~$4M/year R&A funding since 2002 Scientific Objective: Discover 90% of NEOs larger than 1 kilometer in size within 10 years ( ) NASA Authorization Act of 2005 provided additional direction (but no additional funding) plan, develop, and implement a Near-Earth Object Survey program to detect, track, catalogue, and characterize the physical characteristics of near-earth objects equal to or greater than 140 meters in diameter in order to assess the threat of such near-earth objects to the Earth. It shall be the goal of the Survey program to achieve 90 percent completion of its near-earth object catalogue within 15 years [by 2020]. 8

11 Minor Planet Center (MPC) IAU sanctioned Int l observation database Initial orbit determination NEO Program JPL Program coordination Precision orbit determination Automated SENTRY NASA s NEO Search Program (Current Systems) LINEAR Catalina Sky Survey NEO-WISE JPL Sun-synch LEO Pan-STARRS MIT/LL Soccoro, NM UofAZ Arizona & Australia Uof HI Haleakula, Maui 9

12 Discovery Metrics Discovery Rate of >1km NEOs

13 Discovery Metrics } Estimated Population Goal Achieved minimum goal 903* (85-95%) as of 9/27/10 *Includes 85 NECs 6393 smaller objects also found

14 Known Near Earth Asteroid Population Start of NASA NEO Program

15 Population of NEAs by Size, Brightness, Impact Energy & Frequency (Harris 2006) Numbers (powers of 10) 300,000 20,000 1, m 140 m 1 km

16 Known Near Earth Asteroid Population ~40% ~8% < 1% << 1% 85% 14

17 Recent Close Approaches Two Small Asteroids Pass Close by Earth on September 8,

18 Missions to NEOs Opportunities and Constraints 16

19 Encounters to Date YEAR MISSION OBJECT NEO FLYBY ORBITAL SAMPLE 1985 ISEE-3/ICE C/Giacobini-Zinner X 1986 Vega 2 C/Halley X 1991 Galileo Gaspra X 1993 Galileo Ida (& Dactyl X 1997 NEAR Mathilda X 1999 Deep Space 1 Braille X 2000 NEAR Eros X X 2001 Deep Space 1 C/Borrelly X 2002 Stardust AnneFrank X 2004 Stardust C/Wild 2 X X 2005 Deep Impact C/Tempel 1 X 2005 Hayabusa Itokawa X X X? 2008 Rosetta Steins X 2010 Rosetta Lutetia X

20 Near Earth Asteroid Rendezvous (NEAR) First Discovery-class mission Launched February 1996 Flyby Mathilde June 1997 Accidental Flyby Eros December 1998 Started Eros orbit February 2000 End of Mission February 2001 Touch down on Eros!

21 Deep Impact Discovery 8 mission Launched January 2005 Probe impacts Tempel 1 July 4 th, 2005 Main spacecraft flies by Begins EPOXI mission in 2007

22 Hayabusa (Muses-C) Japanese space agency mission Launched May 2003 Arrived Itokawa September 2005 Sample collection attempt Nov 2005 Started return April 2007 Sample Capsule returned June 2010

23 Comparing Asteroids (and Comet Nuclei)

24 Comparing Asteroids Itokawa

25 The Future Encounters YEAR MISSION OBJECT NEO FLYBY ORBITAL SAMPLE FUTURE ENCOUNTERS 2010 EPOXI C/Hartley 2 X 2011 Stardust NExT C/Tempel 1 X 2011 Dawn Vesta X 2014 Rosetta C/Churyumov-Gerasimenko X 2015 Dawn Ceres X PROPOSED MISSIONS OSIRIS-Rex 1999 RQ36 X X X xprm Potential HSF Destinations X X Marco Polo Various X X X Don Quijote' 2003 SM84? X X

26 Exploration Precursor Robotic Missions (xprm) xprm to be uniquely poised to provide critical Strategic Knowledge for Exploration for diverse set of destinations. xprm starting in this decade would enable Human Exploration in the next. Analogous to robotic Surveyor landers ahead of Apollo human missions Proposed scope uniquely focuses on HSF objectives while leveraging unique capabilities of partners. No other program would fulfill this objective. Fully consistent with current best estimate objectives for future HSF at NASA xprp CY NEO Lunar Lander NEO Mars MoOs MOO1 MOO2 MOO3 MOO4 MOO5 xscout s xs1 - NEO xs2 xs3 xs4 NOTIONAL Point of Departure Subject to Change 24 24

27 Why Missions to NEOs? Planetary Science Material represents the most primitive building blocks of Solar System Human Space Exploration Early destinations for push out into Solar System Unique Resources For exploration of space and return to Earth Planetary Defense To design and test methods to deflect impactors

28 HSF NEO Mission Constraints Preliminary outline of possible constraints for human mission success and safety: Accessible with projected capability = < 7.5 (?) km/sec dv Mission less than 180 (?) days round trip Return entry velocity less than 12 km/sec Greater than 50 meter sized object Object in simple axis, slow rotation Accessible by robotic precursor mission at least 3 years prior to crew launch

29 NEO Human-spaceflight Accessible Targets Study (NHATS) Preliminary Results 27

30 NEO Human spaceflight Accessible Targets Study (NHATS) Preliminary Results 28

31 Population of NEAs by Size, Brightness, Impact Energy & Frequency (Harris 2006) Numbers (powers of 10) 300,000 20,000 1, m Need to find objects in this population 140 m 1 km

32 Population estimates One-way Delta-v Accessible range in semi-major axis Accessible range in eccentricity Accessible range in inclination 3 km/s <0.168 < Estimated number of NEOs >30 m diameter* 5 km/s <0.251 < *Based on NEO population studies of Bill Bottke, et al 30

33 NEOStar Concept X Spitzer Kepler NEOStar 31

34 32

35 33

36 Bottom Line: For finding Human Exploration targets, a telescope in a Venus-like orbit is the most technically viable option ~400 potential targets from 2 years of observing For Planetary Defense (detection & tracking of all PHOs), an IR telescope in a Venus-like orbit speeds up the search by a decade 34

37 X-Hab Vision U N I V E R S I T Y O F MARYLAND 37 Update on Team Projects ENAE 483/788D - Principles of Space Systems Design

38 Lunar Surface Systems Architecture U N I V E R S I T Y O F MARYLAND 38 Update on Team Projects ENAE 483/788D - Principles of Space Systems Design

39 Project Definition Vision: Facilitate human lunar exploration by exploring technologies which may provide longterm habitation with minimum mission impact Goal: Develop, demonstrate, and evaluate an inflatable habitat for simulated lunar exploration Mission: Develop an inflatable habitat compatible with Desert RATS testing of the NASA Habitat Demonstration Unit U N I V E R S I T Y O F MARYLAND 39 Systems Definition Review UMd X-Hab Project

40 Project Objectives Design, develop, test, and evaluate a 5 meter diameter inflatable envelope compatible with the NASA HDU upper deck Develop detailed design for implementation of inflatable technology into a fully functional lunar habitat Provide maximum fidelity for Earth analog testing of prototype consistent with program constraints Maximize opportunities for student involvement at all levels consistent with educational objectives for associated courses U N I V E R S I T Y O F MARYLAND 40 Systems Definition Review UMd X-Hab Project

41 Work Breakdown Structure (1) 1.Project Management 1.1.Project Management 1.2.Business Management (Department of Aerospace Engineering) 1.3.Procurement (University of Maryland) 1.4.Training 2.Systems Engineering 2.1.Project Systems Engineering 2.2.Configuration Management 2.3.Parts Tracking 2.4.Mass/Power/Cost Budgeting 3.Safety and Mission Assurance 3.1.Safety Engineering 3.2.Reliability Engineering 3.3.Analysis Q&A 3.4.Hardware Q&A 3.5.Software V&V 4.Technology Development 4.1.Technology Management 4.2.Technology Test Operations 4.3.Production Techniques U N I V E R S I T Y O F MARYLAND 41 5.Habitation and Habitability 5.1.Habitat Elements Ventilation Power Distribution Lighting Waste Management Water Distribution Food Preparation and Storage Storage Facilities and Systems General Storage Personal Storage Food Storage Emergency Storage 5.2.Fire Detection, Warning, and Protection 5.3.Personnel Accommodations Bunks/Berths Eating Accommodations Hygiene Radiation Protection Privacy and soundproofing Systems Definition Review UMd X-Hab Project

42 Work Breakdown Structure (2) 6.Habitat System 6.1.Pressure Envelope Inner safety/abrasion layer Pressure bladder Restraint layer Radiation shielding layer Thermal insulation layer Micrometeoroid/orbital debris shield Long-term environmental effects 6.2.Sealing surface(s) 6.3.Docking/restraint system(s) 6.4.Window(s) and access hatch(es) 6.5.Envelope support system(s) 6.6.Packaging Transport Envelope installation Interior accommodations 7.Mission Operations 7.1.Launch packaging and restraints 7.2.Surface package handling 7.3.Installing package on HDU 7.4.Initial deployment 7.5.Securing of sealing surface 7.6.Inflation 7.7.Acceptance testing 7.8.Deintegration 7.9.Repackaging U N I V E R S I T Y O F MARYLAND Removal and Disposal 8.Launch Vehicle/Services 8.1.Launch vehicle restraints 8.2.Bus installation and integration 9.Ground Systems 9.1.Access systems for upper levels 9.2.Test fixture for UMd inflation testing 10.Systems Integration and Testing 10.1.Envelope fabrication Sewing machines Heat/RF sealing 10.2.Machining and Rapid Prototyping 10.3.Development testbeds m sealing surface NBRF installation and testing hardware Subscale test hardware and facilities Materials tension test rig Envelope configuration inflation rig Wind tunnel test equipment Inflation base Force balance Surface shape measurement 11.Education and Public Outreach 11.1.Public Affairs (Clark School of Engineering) 11.2.Outreach coordination Systems Definition Review UMd X-Hab Project