1 A Lunar Fission Surface Power (FSP) System Presented to: Nuclear and Emerging Technologies for Space NETS 2009 James Werner/INL, Project Lead June 15,

Slides:

Advertisements

Similar presentations

1 Precursor In-situ Lunar Oxygen Testbed - PILOT PISCES 2008 PILOT Hydrogen Reduction Field Demonstration and Commercialization Implications D. Larry Clark.

Advertisements

Plutonium-238 for Solar System Exploration Status Leonard A. Dudzinski Program Executive NASA Headquarters, Washington, DC Presentation to NASA Astronomy.

Charles Nola Lisa Blue June 21, 2006 Charles Nola Lisa Blue June 21, 2006 Crew Launch Vehicle (CLV) Upper Stage Avionics & Software Acquisition Planning.

1 National Aeronautics and Space Administration John H. Glenn Research Center at Lewis Field Dave Taylor Deputy Director, Plum Brook Station.

Copyright 2011 | Company Proprietary Parachute Development for Venus Missions Christopher Kelley – Airborne Systems Robert Sinclair – Airborne Systems.

Lunar Advanced Science and Exploration Research: Partnership in Science and Exploration Michael J. Wargo, Sc.D. Chief Lunar Scientist for Exploration Systems.

Minimalist Human Mars Mission Surface infrastructure discussion July 26 th, 2008.

CEEAM Components for Energy Efficiency in Transport by Additive Manufacturing Piyal Samara-Ratna Mechanical Engineer & Project Lead Space Research Centre.

Survey of Space Nuclear Power Options. Dr. Andrew Kadak And Peter Yarsky MIT

AAE450 Senior Spacecraft Design Courtney Rogge Week 2: January 25 th, 2007 Power Nuclear Power Capabilities.

WP 3: Thermal System Strictly Confidential 1 Workpackage 3: Thermal System Project Meeting, May 11, 2006.

Delivery Systems Joseph T. Wunderlich, Ph.D.. APOLLO 11 SATURN V ROCKET LUANCH VIDEO :

NASA_G_O_02_09_05.ppt 1 National Goals and Objectives National Goal To advance U.S. scientific, security, and economic interests through a robust space.

A Comparison of Nuclear Thermal to Nuclear Electric Propulsion for Interplanetary Missions Mike Osenar Mentor: LtCol Lawrence.

Return to the Moon: Looking Glass 204 Magic Envelope Chun-Yih Hsu

Ares Aloft: Martian Atmospheric Entry and In-Situ Resource Use via CubeSat Jeffrey Stuart Jet Propulsion Laboratory California Institute of Technology.

Flying, Hopping and Perching Microbots for Extreme Environment Exploration Deployed Using CubeSats Jekan Thanga 1, Jim Bell 1 Space and Terrestrial Robotic.

Habitat & Waypoints Picture. 2-Dec-04 USC 2004 AME 557 Space Exploration Architecture Design Requirements: A safe, reliable, low maintenance habitat to.

Evolutionary and Game Changing Technologies for Solar Power Generation Ted Stern Vanguard Space Technologies, Inc. San Diego, CA

Spent Nuclear Fuel Timothy Pairitz. Nuclear Power 101 Uranium-235 is enriched from 0.7% to 3-5%. Enriched fuel is converted to a uranium oxide powder.

Nuclear Fundamentals Part II Harnessing the Power of the Atom.

Jet Propulsion Laboratory California Institute of Technology National Aeronautics and Space Administration National Aeronautics and Space Administration.

National Aeronautics and Space Administration Introduction to Lunar Excavator Senior Design Project Mission Objective: Design a excavator to dig lunar.

NASA’s Nuclear Systems Initiative Overview. Safety is the absolute highest priority Three components to this technology initiative Radioisotope power.

Nuclear Power Fission and Radioisotope Presented to: Propulsion and Power Panel Aeronautics and Space Engineering Board National Research Council by Joseph.

The Pursuit for Efficient S/C Design The Stanford Small Sat Challenge: –Learn system engineering processes –Design, build, test, and fly a CubeSat project.

Melting Probe Progress Meeting: Radioactive Power Supply for the Melting Probe E. Kaufmann, N.I. Kömle, M. Steller, G. Kargl Space Research.

IMPRS June Space Research, in praxis, illustrated by a ground-based example The „Ozonometer“ as a student project.

A Perspective on the NASA Space Power and Energy Storage Roadmap National Research Council Panel Power Workshop March 21, 2011 H. Sterling Bailey, Ph.

What's ahead in space exploration: Potential roles for the INL and the CSNR Steven D. Howe, Ph.D. Director Center for Space Nuclear Research 7/17/07.

Filling Mars Human Exploration Strategic Knowledge Gaps with Next Generation Meteorological Instrumentation. S. Rafkin, Southwest Research Institute

The ISECG Global Exploration Roadmap Status update at Target NEO2 Workshop July 9, 2013 NASA/Kathy Laurini Human Exploration & Ops Mission Directorate.

Challenges & Strategies for Lunar Habitation Systems Larry Toups Advanced Projects Office Constellation Program October 2006.

Nuclear Engineering Department Massachusetts Institute of Technology L unar S urface R eactor Group Progress Report 2 Decisions and Models Lunar Surface.

MIT : NED : Mission to Mars Presentation of proposed mission plan

Minimalist Mars Mission Establishing a Human Toehold on the Red Planet Executive Summary DevelopSpace MinMars Team.

Construction of an International Space Vehicle Using the Space Station Dan Roukos ASTE 527 December 15, 2009.

The Augustine Committee Review of Human Spaceflight Plans Committee Briefing to COMSTAC October 29, 2009 Review of US Human Space Flight Plans Committee.

Universal Chassis for Modular Ground Vehicles University of Michigan Mars Rover Team Presented by Eric Nytko August 6, 2005 The 2 nd Mars Expedition Planning.

1 GLAST LAT ProjectMechanical Systems Mechanical Systems Mechanical / Thermal Hardware December 2004 Status Marc Campell, Subsystem Manager.

PREDECISIONAL FOR PLANNING AND DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY 1 Humans to the Martian System Preliminary Summary of Strategic Knowledge Gaps P-SAG (jointly sponsored.

Dr. Richard R. Vondrak Director, Robotic Lunar Exploration Program Science Mission Directorate NASA Headquarters September 2004 NASA Robotic Lunar Exploration.

Overview of DOE’s Plans for Radioisotope Power Systems for Future NASA Space Exploration Missions Overview of DOE’s Plans for Radioisotope Power Systems.

Human Exploration of Mars Design Reference Architecture 5

AAE450 Senior Spacecraft Design Project Aquarius Rogge - 1 Courtney Rogge Week 6: February 22 nd, 2007 Power Group Nuclear Power Capabilities TV Nuclear.

Nuclear Engineering Department Massachusetts Institute of Technology M artian S urface R eactor Group Nuclear Reactors for The Moon and Mars Tyler Ellis.

November, 2008 Lunar Fission Surface Power Design - Relap5 Point Kinetics D. S. Lucas INL.

AAE450 Senior Spacecraft Design Project Aquarius Kowalkowski - 1 2\22\2007 Mike Kowalkowski Week 6: February 22 nd 2007 Project Aquarius Power Engineering.

Solar Probe Plus A NASA Mission to Touch the Sun March 2015 Instrument Suite Name Presenter's Name.

Crew Mobility for Lunar Surface Exploration Dr. Rob Ambrose NASA-JSC May 2008.

National Aeronautics and Space Administration February 27, 2013 Defining Potential HEOMD Instruments for Mars 2020 A Work in Progress... NOTE ADDED BY.

Approved For Public Release © The Aerospace Corporation 2009 June 17, 2009 Initial Summary of Human Rated Delta IV Heavy Study Briefing to the Review of.

CSRP NASA Workshop NASA’s Revised Budget. CSRP NASA Workshop NASA’s New Vision and Objectives (as of January 14, 2004)  VISION  The fundamental goal.

AAE450 Senior Spacecraft Design Project Aquarius Kowalkowski - 1 Mike Kowalkowski Week 8: March 8 th 2007 Project Aquarius Power Engineering Group Surface.

October, 2005 NASA’s Exploration Architecture. 2 A Bold Vision for Space Exploration  Complete the International Space Station  Safely fly the Space.

Lunar Surface Atmosphere Spectrometer (LSAS) Objectives: The instrument LSAS is designed to study the composition and structure of the Lunar atmosphere.

1 MINUS EIGHTY DEGREE LABORATORY FREEZER FOR ISS (MELFI) MSFC Briefing February 2005 John Cornwell

NON-PROPRIETARY July NASA Ames Research Center ARC ISS Utilization Office Cell Bio Tech Demo Payload Overview POIWG MSFC July 25, 2012.

AME-557 Nuclear Power Supply for Initial Lunar Colony AME-557 Jeremy L. Pollay Energy (Nuclear)

MVDC Collaboration MVDC Issues and Viability of Red Demo in Philadelphia.

2005 Joint Propulsion Conference Tucson, AZ July 10-13, 2005 Candidate Near-Term Fuel Options for Conventional and Bimodal NTR Engines J. A. Halfinger.

SLS Derived Vertical Habitat

National Goals and Objectives

Callisto Mission LaRC Option

The ISECG Global Exploration Roadmap Status update at Target NEO2 Workshop July 9, 2013 NASA/Kathy Laurini Human Exploration & Ops Mission Directorate.

Date of download: 12/28/2017 Copyright © ASME. All rights reserved.

Adam Koelling Jake Charnock Matthew Nesselrodt Kyle Raney

NuScale Micro-Reactor Technology

TRL tables: power conversion and lifetime

Team A Propulsion 1/16/01.

Presentation transcript:

1 A Lunar Fission Surface Power (FSP) System Presented to: Nuclear and Emerging Technologies for Space NETS 2009 James Werner/INL, Project Lead June 15, 2009 Pre-Decisional, For Discussion Purposes Only

2 History of Space Nuclear Power Fission Reactor Systems –SNAP-10A (launched 1965) –SP-100 (cancelled 1992) –Jupiter Icy Moons Orbiter (cancelled 2005) –Fission Surface Power (Present) Radioisotope Power Systems –44 Successful U.S. Radioisotope Thermoelectric Generators (RTG) Flown Since 1961 –Some Examples: Apollo SNAP-27 ( ) Viking SNAP-19 (1975) Voyager MHW-RTG (1977) Galileo GPHS-RTG (1989) New Horizons GPHS-RTG (2005) SNAP-10A (Agena) SNAP-27 (Apollo) SNAP-19 (Viking)

Pre-Decisional, For Discussion Purposes Only 3 Recent interest in Fission Surface Power (FSP) to support moon / Mars exploration Continuous Day/Night Power for Robust Surface Ops Same Technology for Moon and Mars Suitable for any Surface Location –Lunar Equatorial or Polar Sites –Permanently Shaded Craters Environmentally Robust –Lunar Day/Night Thermal Transients –Mars Dust Storms Operationally Robust –Multiple-Failure Tolerant –Long Life Highly Flexible Configurations –Excavation Shield Permits Near-Habitat Siting –Option for Above-Grade System or Mobile System (with shield mass penalty) –Option for Process Heat Source (for ISRU or habitat)

Pre-Decisional, For Discussion Purposes Only 4 Safe During All Mission Phases –Launched Cold, No Radiation Until Startup –Safe after Shutdown with Negligible Residual Radiation Scalable to Higher Power Levels (kWs to MWs) Competitive Cost with PV/RFC –Detailed, 12-month “Affordable” Fission Surface Power System Cost Study Performed by NASA & DOE –LAT2 FSP and PV/RFC Options had Similar Overall Cost –Modest Unit Cost Enables Multiple Units and/or Multiple Sites Technology Primed for Development –Terrestrial Reactor Design Basis –No Material Breakthroughs Required –Lineage to RPS Systems (e.g. Stirling) and ISS (e.g. Radiators, Electrical Power Distribution) Recent interest in Fission Surface Power (FSP) to support moon / Mars exploration

Pre-Decisional, For Discussion Purposes Only 5 Affordable Fission Surface Power System Study Reference Concept Modular 40 kWe system with 8-year design life suitable for global lunar and Mars surface applications Emplaced configuration with regolith shielding augmentation permits near-outpost siting (<5 rem/yr at 100 m separation) Approximately 7 metric tons and <60 m 3 volume is a good match for Altair capability Stowed 3 x 3 x 7 m Deployed

Pre-Decisional, For Discussion Purposes Only 6 Keys to Affordability Reactor: low temperature, well known UO 2 fuel, stainless steel construction, liquid metal NaK coolant well-tested Stirling power conversion: high efficiency at low temperature, 1980’s test experience, RPS leverage Heat rejection: ISS mechanical design heritage, simple water heat pipes System: Power density of nuclear reactor allows heavier, simpler, more robust components

Pre-Decisional, For Discussion Purposes Only Tech Demo. Unit (TDU) ETDP Devt. Test Models (DTM) Engineering Models (EM) Form, Fit & Function Flight Models (FM) Design Life Test ≤5 yrs Test Des Design Life Test ≤3 yrs Fab Study LaunchATLOATPCDR Prime Contract Non-nuclear TRL6 LSS MCR Ref. Concept Selection PDR/NAR Test Ship KSC Full Power, Full-Scale System Test Structural & Environ. Qualification Engineering Core Criticals Subsystem, Module, and System Flight Acceptance Testing 1/4 Power, Full-Scale System Test Prim. & Sec. Fluid Test Loops Coupon/Component Radiation Tests 1/2 Power, Full-Scale System Test Environ. Eval. (Radiation, Vib, etc.) Physics Core Criticals TaskFY LSS SRR Revised 8/1/08 Notional FSP Flight Development Schedule

Pre-Decisional, For Discussion Purposes Only Concept Definition 2.1 Concept Selection Lead: Lee Mason (GRC) 2.2 Modeling and Tool Development Lead: Scott Harlow (DOE) 1.0 Fission Surface Power Systems Project Management Project Manager: Don Palac (GRC) Principal Investigator: Lee Mason (GRC) DOE Lead: Scott Harlow MSFC Lead: Mike Houts Business Analyst: Annie Delgado-Holton (GRC) 4.0 Risk Reduction 4.1 System Risk Reduction Lead: Lee Mason (GRC) 4.2 Primary Test Circuit Risk Red. Lead: Mike Houts (MSFC) 4.3 Reactor Component & Irradiation Testing Lead: Scott Harlow (DOE) 4.4 Power Conversion Risk Reduction Lead: Lee Mason (GRC) 4.5 Heat Rejection Risk Reduction Lead: Don Jaworkse (GRC) Fission Surface Power Project

Pre-Decisional, For Discussion Purposes Only 9 FSP Technology Project: Concept Definition Radiator & Deployment System Reactor Heat Transport Loop Integration Stirling Convertor Concept Reactor Core Modeling Stirling CFD Modeling Radiator Model Validation

Heat Rejection Pre-Decisional, For Discussion Purposes Only 10 FSP Technology Project: Component Pathfinders 1 kWt Radiator Demo Unit Ti-H2O Heat Pipe Life Test 2 kWe NaK Stirling System 10 kWe Stirling Alternator Test Rig NaK Electromagnetic Pump 20 kWt NaK Reactor Simulator Reactor 2 kWe Direct Drive Gas Brayton Power Conversion

Pre-Decisional, For Discussion Purposes Only 11 Notional TDU Test Layout in GRC Vacuum Facility #6 Technology Demonstration Unit – The Core of the Fission Surface Power Systems Project Demonstrate system-level technology readiness in an operational environment ¼ power, full scale hardware demonstration

Pre-Decisional, For Discussion Purposes Only 12 Lunar Surface Systems Architecture Planning FSP Off-Loaded & Buried FSP Remains on Lander Notional Concept for FSP-Lander Delivery

Pre-Decisional, For Discussion Purposes Only 13 Summary FSP has many advantages –Day/night power –Location independence –Environment tolerance –Moon/Mars commonality –High power, low mass Mission integration options are plentiful –Buried or Landed, Early or Later, With or without PV –Minimal impact on crew –Major impact on surface capabilities FSP Technology Development Project is addressing the fundamental issues Affordability = Conservative, Simple, Robust –Known materials, generous margins –Modest requirements –Self-regulating controls –Fault tolerant, designed to recover from anomalies –Hardware-rich test program –Low risk, accept mass penalties if necessary

Pre-Decisional, For Discussion Purposes Only 14 Positive Press NASA News Release “NASA Developing Fission Surface Power Technology” Katherine Martin (9/10/08) –Picked up by Dozens of Internet Sites including SpaceRef and Science Daily –100’s of Blogs… mostly supportive and positive DiscoveryChannel.com “NASA Eyes Nuclear Reactor for Moon Base” Irene Klotz (9/15/08) Space.com “NASA Eyes Nuclear Power for Moon Base” Jeremy Hsu (9/17/08) Athens Post “Athens Business to Develop Power Converter for NASA” Amanda Liles (10/6/08) Popular Science Magazine “Gone Fission” Dawn Stover (Dec 2008 Issue)