1. CONTRACTOR 3 Manifest Destiny Michael Pierce Jacob Hollister Jack Reagan Alex Herring Andrew Nguyen Sarah Atkinson Chris Roach AERO 426 – Fall 2012 Texas A&M University October 23,2012 1

2. CONTRACTOR 3  Mission Guidelines  Functional Requirements  Design Concept Introduction Trade Tree Overview  Structures Trade Tree  Power System Trade Tree  Propulsion Trade Tree  Mass Estimates  Floor Space and Volume  Power System  Propulsion  Food Source Comparison  Life Support  Design Advantages Overview 2

3. CONTRACTOR 3  Mission Statement: Our mission is to expand the domain of humanity beyond the Earth for the betterment, preservation, and advancement of all humankind by creating a mobile habitat capable of long-duration, exploratory voyages while ensuring the physical and psychological well-being of its inhabitants. Mission Guidelines 3  Mission Requirements: Assume 12 crew members and trip times > 24 months. Minimum resupply from Earth A space-only craft (no atmospheric flight or re-entry) All technologies must be credible based on current capabilities and trends; no “miracle cures”

4. CONTRACTOR 3 Design Concept Introduction 4 Our philosophy: make it affordable, make it buildable, and make it a reality F UNCTIONAL R EQUIREMENTS : Interplanetary travel StructuresPropulsionPower Physical and psychological well- being of crew Artificial gravity Living space Food supply Radiation shielding

5. CONTRACTOR 3 Design Concept Trade Tree 5 Design Concept Toroid Pros : 1. Meets functional requirements 2. Simple shape Cons: 1. Complex construction 2. Unproven technology 3. Too big Lug Wrench Pros: 1. Meets functional requirements 2. Simple shapes 3. Reduces size Cons: 1. Complex construction 2. Unproven technology Manifest Destiny Pros: 1. Meets functional requirements 2. Tried and true technology 3. Simple construction 4. Expandable Cons: 1. Minimizes living area 2. Transportation between pods

6. CONTRACTOR 3 Design Concept Manifest Destiny 6

7. CONTRACTOR 3 Design Concept Peas in a Pod 7

8. CONTRACTOR 3 Design Concept 8 Payload

9. CONTRACTOR 3 Design Concept 9 Payload

10. CONTRACTOR 3 Design Concept 10

11. CONTRACTOR 3 Design Concept 11

12. CONTRACTOR 3 Launch Cost Analysis 12

13. CONTRACTOR 3 Structures Trade Tree 13 Radial Structure Cable Pros: 1. Cheap 2. Simple 3. Lightweight Cons: 1. Motion sickness can occur 2. Not sturdy enough Pressurized Cylinder Pros: 1. Allows for complete connectivity 2. Multi-purpose Cons: 1. Expensive 2. Difficult to build 3. Differential acceleration Truss Pros: 1. Strong 2. Simple 3. Proven Cons: 1. Must EVA to central hub

14. CONTRACTOR 3 Power System Trade Tree 14 Power Systems Photovoltaic Pros: 1.High specific power 2. Unlimited power 3. Relatively inexpensive Cons: 1. Affected by orientation 2. Low maneuverability Radio-isotope Pros: 1. Low degradation 2. Unaffected by sun’s position Cons: 1. Expensive 2. Low specific power 3. Low fuel availability Nuclear Reactor Pros: 1. Low degradation 2. Unaffected by sun’s position 3. High power range Cons: 1. Low specific power 2. Low fuel availability 3. Very high nuclear threat

15. 15 Propulsion Trade Tree Engine Trade Study Overview ISS Zvezda Capsule Engines Features 1. Two 3070N thrusters on ISS Zvezda, 2 axis mounted 2. Pressure fed from 4 tanks 3. Fuel: Nitrogen tetroxide/ unsymmetrical dimethyl hydrazine Pros 1. Significant time spent in space Cons 1. Engines used only for maintenance purposes 2. Complicated fuel 3. No throttling SpaceX Merlin Vacuum 1C Features 1. 569,000N thrust in vacuum 2. Fuel: RP-1, standard rocket grade kerosene 3. Can be throttled between 60%-100% Pros 1. Much greater thrust capability 2. Fuel readily available 3. Throttling capability Cons 1. Has significantly less space heritage than ISS engines

16. CONTRACTOR 3 Bringing vs. Growing Trade Tree Food Trade Overview Bringing Food to Space Pros 1. Less weight in equipment 2. Quicker 3. More options 4. Gives all needed vitamins and minerals Cons 1. Limited supply 2. Produces waste in packaging Growing Food in Space Pros 1. Prolonged sustainability 2. Less weight in food 3. Unlimited food supply 4. Bioregenative process Cons 1. Has not been done yet 2. More weight in equipment 3. More time spent preparing food 4. Less options 16

17. 17 Mass Estimates  Mass Estimates Pods (4) = 114,000 kg Solar Panels = 88,900 kg Truss= 96,000 kg Engine/Rockets = 3,150 kg Radiation Shielding = 220,000 kg Fuel at Launch (assuming refuel at L1 point)= 90,000 kg Food = 15,100 kg Water = 66,400 kg  Total Mass 767,000 kg (Including 10% margin)

18. CONTRACTOR 3  Floor Space Estimates 1 Floor Floor Height = 3 m Total Area per Pod = 113.59 m 2 Total Floor Area = 454.38 m 2  Volume Estimate Total Volume per pod = 441.52 m 3 Total Volume = 1766.11 m 3 Floor Space and Volume 18

19. 19 Power System (1/2)  Power Required Solar panels need to generate at least 110 kW to match ISS Power used for propulsion, homeostasis, and experiments  Power Storage Lithium-Ion batteries store twice the specific energy of Nickel-Hydrogen batteries (used in the ISS) Batteries used for “eclipse” times when there is no readily available sunlight

20. CONTRACTOR 3 Power System (2/2) 20

21. 21 Propulsion  Merlin Vacuum 1C chosen Vacuum Thrust: 569kN Vacuum Isp: 304s  Proposed configuration: One Merlin Vacuum 1C in center of spacecraft for translational maneuvers One Merlin Vacuum 1C on each pod, mounted with ability to gimbal within plane of mounting ○ Allows for maneuvering redundancy in case of engine failure ○ Allows for main engine assistance with translational maneuvers, if necessary ○ Allows for establishment of artificial gravity for spacecraft simultaneously References: http://www.spacelaunchreport.com/falcon9.html, http://www.spacex.com/falcon1.php#merlin_engine 21

22. CONTRACTOR 3  The space shuttle carries about 3.8 pounds of food, including 1 pound of packaging, per astronaut for each day of the mission  The astronauts get three meals a day, plus snacks  Assuming 12 astronauts, 2 years: 15,100 kg 22 Bringing Food

23. 23 Life Support (1/2) Achieve multiple redundancy on critical functions Life Support Must: Shield crew from radiation Provide atmospheric conditions Provide air filtration system Provide thermal and humidity control Provide water recycling Design goal: To utilize flight tested hardware for maximum reliability

24. CONTRACTOR 3  High density Polyethylene radiation shield - Total mass: 220,000 kg  Atmosphere provided 14.7 psi, ~21% O 2, 79% N 2  Water electrolysis to produce oxygen  Recyclable METOX canisters provide air scrubbing  Multi-layer insulation and ammonia system featuring heat exchangers to provide thermal control  Humidity control via condenser/heat exchanger and rotary water separator  Highly efficient ECLSS water recycling system  Design capable of multiple redundancies for critical life support systems Life Support (2/2) 24 The majority of life support functions are currently utilized on the International Space Station

25. CONTRACTOR 3  All technologies proposed have already been successfully used in space  Components can be easily assembled in LEO  Structure allows for comfort of astronauts while being as small a system as is possible  Propulsion system allows for different modes of operation and accounts for possible engine failure  Redundancies exist in life support system to account for component failure Manifest Destiny Advantages 25

26. CONTRACTOR 3  Contractor 3 would like to thank all reviewers for their time and will now open the floor for questions 26 Questions?