Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Constellation
Launch Vehicles
Overview
Part 1
www.nasa.gov
Current Development for
Future Exploration Capabilities
Deep Space
Asteroids and
Robotics
Near-Earth Objects
Commercial
and Civil Low
Earth Orbit (LEO) Mars Surface,
Phobos, Deimos
Lunar Orbit,
Lunar Surface (Global)
Ares Overview
• Ares Family
• Legacy Launch Systems
• Ares I/V Commonality
• Benefits of the Ares Approach
• Top-level Breakout of the Ares I Vehicle
• State-by-state National Team
• Ares I Schedule
• Earned Value Management
• Quality, Safety, Teamwork
Ares
Launch
Vehicles
www.nasa.gov
Ares Family of Launch Vehicles
400 ft
Crew Altair
Lunar
300 ft Lander
Overall Vehicle Height
Earth Departure
Orion Stage (1 J-2X
S-IVB LOX/LH2 engine)
(One J-2 Liquid
Oxygen/Liquid
Hydrogen Upper Stage
(LOX/LH2) (One J-2X
200 ft
engine) LOX/LH2 engine)
S-II
(Five J-2 LOX/ Core Stage
LH2 engines) (Six RS-68
Two 4-Segment LOX/LH2
Reusable Solid engines)
100 ft Rocket Boosters
One 5-Segment
(RSRBs)
S-IC RSRB
(Five F-1 LOX/
RP-1 engines) Two 5.5-Segment
RSRBs
0
Saturn V: 1967–1972 Space Shuttle: 1981–Present Ares I: First Flight 2015 Ares V: First Flight 2018
Height 360.0 ft 184.2 ft 325.0 ft 381.1 ft
Gross Liftoff
Mass (GLOM)
6,500.0K lbm 4,500.0K lbm 2,057.3K lbm 8,167.1K lbm
*National Research Council, “Launching Science: Science Opportunities Provided by NASA‟s Constellation System”, 2008
C E D Mars Moons
A B
Lunar Surface (2 Launches
Req‟d for Crew)
Lagrange
Only
E
Circum
Lunar
Ares I & V
Saturn V
Ares I
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 TLI - t
Overview of
Ares I Launch
Vehicle
www.nasa.gov
Ares I Acquisition Model
Instrument Unit
NASA Design/
Boeing Production ($0.83B)
Orion Crew
Exploration Upper Stage Engine
Vehicle Pratt and Whitney Rocketdyne ($1.28B)
Upper Stage
NASA Design/Boeing Production
($1.16B) First Stage
ATK Launch Systems ($1.98B)
Overall Integration
NASA-led
Multi-generational program
Lessons learned from DoD: robust internal
systems engineering, tightly managed
requirements
NASA becomes “smart buyer” downstream
Marries best of NASA and industry skills
DAC 2 TR 7
National Aeronautics and Space Administration 7764.11
4,000 Ares Team Members Nationwide
324 Organizations in 38 States
ATK Space
Systems
Glenn Research
Center
NASA
HQ
JPL
Marshall Space
Flight Center Langley
Research
Center
Pratt &
Whitney
Rocketdyne
Kennedy Space
Michoud Center
Johnson Assembly Facility
Ames Stennis Space Center
Space Center Boeing
Research
Center
To date, the Ares I project has completed a total of 204 design reviews, ranging from
components up through subsystems, elements, and the integrated Ares launch vehicle.
National Aeronautics and Space Administration 7764.13
Earning Value –
Rigorous Implementation of EVM
Schedule 0.0%
–7.7%; –4.7% -1.7%
Variance
CPI
0.96 1.00 0.99 0.98
Cum
SPI Cum 0.92 1.00 0.95 1.00
Awarded the NASA EVM Award of Excellence in June 2009 for the
progress made in implementing earned value on a Government-
managed project
The Path to a
Safer Crew Launch Vehicle:
The Ares I Story
www.nasa.gov
Premise of New CLV Design
“The design of the system [that replaces the current Space Shuttle] should give overriding priority
to crew safety, rather than trade safety against other performance criteria, such as low cost
and reusability, or against advanced space operation capabilities other than crew transfer.”
“The Astronaut Office recommends that the next human-rated launch system add abort or
escape systems to a booster with ascent reliability at least as high as the Space Shuttle‟s,
yielding a predicted probability of 0.999 or better for crew survival [1 in 1000 LOC] during
ascent. The system should be designed to achieve or exceed its reliability requirement with
95% confidence*.”
“Astronaut Office Position on Future Launch System Safety”, Memo from CB Chief, Astronaut
Office to CA Director, Flight Crew Operations, May 4, 2004
*Interpreted to mean 95% certainty
Architectural trades, in quest of a safer launcher, date back to Challenger before ESAS
♦ The progression of safety driven analyses, since Challenger, led to the development of the “single
stick” booster concept, and the combination of heritage-reliability, performance and cost mandated
the solid booster option from ESAS
Saturn
Ariane
Soyuz
Atlas
Delta
Crew Safety per Launch
1 in 100,000 ® ® ® ® ®
1 in 10,000
.95
Crew Escape
.9
Target from crew memo Apollo Forecast Reliability
1 in 1,000 .8
.7
SRR
Physics of failure sensitivities
and understanding of major risk drivers
SDR
Focused analysis
with detailed design data
(Critical Design Review)
From: Ares CSR CDR
National Aeronautics and Space Administration 7764.20
First Order Look at Configurations
Shuttle Derived
Shuttle
Side Mount (SSME) Hold-down & Separation
Strap-Ons
Upper Stage & Engine
Core Engine & Stage
Ares-I ESAS Ares-I RSRM V
Add LAS
Add Upper Stage
Ares-V Crewed
Adapt SRB
Program risk-
Program risk-
Aero acoustic loads
New Engine
Increasing Performance Aerodynamics (length)
Thrust Oscillation
Aero Start SSME
New Propellant
Program risk-
EELV 3.2* New Engine
EELV 4.1-100% EELV 4.1-75% EELV- J-2X New Propellant
*does not meet performance requirements
Man Rated
Certification
Goldsim Dynamic
2
0
-20
-4
20 40 60 80 100 120 Quantification of Assessment
Failure Time
♦ This study uses results of the detailed model to apply a relative AE factor to each failure
environment bin (mildest environment = best abort effectiveness gets 100% factor)
National Aeronautics and Space Administration 7764.22
Relative Results of an
Independent Assessment
Relative error bars are smaller than absolute values
• Errors on building blocks shared between different configurations
• Errors on common assumptions made in the modeling of all stages
Relative error bars confirm the mature Ares I is the safest of all options with high confidence
LOM LOC
5
1 Ares I Baseline
I
0
Ares I Ares V Shuttle C EELV 3.2* EELV 4.1 EELV 4.1 EELV J2X
100% 75%
Ares I
Elements
www.nasa.gov
Ares I First Stage
Tumble Motors
(from Shuttle)
Same propellant
Asbestos free insulation/liner as Shuttle (PBAN)-
optimized for
Ares application Modern electronics
DAC 2 TR 7
National Aeronautics and Space Administration 7764.26
First Stage Accomplishments
Ares I-X Forward Skirt Extension Separation Test Ares I-X Motor En Route to KSC
Promontory, UT Corinne, UT
Main Parachute Drop Test Ares I-X Forward Assembly Transfer to VAB
Yuma Proving Ground, AZ Kennedy Space Center, FL
(A) (B)
Built-up Thrust Vector Control/Discrete Interface Thrust Oscillation Flexure Design (A) and Testing (B)
Module San Luis Obispo, CA
Cincinnati, OH
Ares I
Elements
www.nasa.gov
Ares I Upper Stage
LOX Tank
Feed Systems
Ullage Settling Motors
Common Bulkhead
Composite
Interstage Common Bulkhead
Interstage
Avionics
Instrument
Unit Avionics
Thrust
Cone
Avionics
Aft Skirt
Avionics Mass: 2,425 lbm Avionics
Electrical Power: 5,145 Watts
First Friction Stir Weld of ET Dome Gore Panels Development of the Ares Vertical Milling Machine
Marshall Space Flight Center, AL Chicago, IL
Common Bulkhead Seal Weld Process Development Aluminum-Lithium (Al-Li) 2295 Y-Ring Delivery
Marshall Space Flight Center, AL Marshall Space Flight Center, AL
Delivery of FSW Tooling with Weld Head Al-Li Panel Structural Buckling Testing
Michoud Assembly Facility, LA Marshall Space Flight Center, AL
Ullage Settling Motor System (USMS) Ares I Roll Control Engine Test
Heavy Weight Motor Hot-Fire Test Sacramento, CA
Marshall Space Flight Center, AL
Reaction Control System (ReCS) Development Test Thrust Vector Control (TVC) 2-Axis Test Rig
Article Delivery Glenn Research Center, OH
Marshall Space Flight Center, AL
National Aeronautics and Space Administration 7764.35
National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Ares I
Elements
www.nasa.gov
Upper Stage Engine
Used on Ares I and Ares V
HIP-bonded MCC
Regeneratively Cooled Nozzle Section
• Based on RS-68
• Based on long history of RS-27 success
demonstrated technology
Turbine Exhaust Gas Manifold
• Performance and cooling of
Nozzle extension
J-2X Powerpack 1A Testing J-2X Powerpack Removal from A-1 Test Stand
Stennis Space Center, MS Stennis Space Center, MS
Constellation
Launch Vehicles
Overview
Part 2
www.nasa.gov
Part 2 Agenda
Ares V Overview
Summary
Progress on
Ares Risks
www.nasa.gov
Progress on Key Risks
4.0
psi
Response g's Response TO “Football”
~12 Hz
3.5
time time
3.0
Acceleration (g‟s)
2.5 <10 Hz
Staging
2.0
1.5 Max Q
3-100 Hz
1.0
0.5 Abort
Scenarios Manual Control
0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300
MET (sec)
Status:
June Program Review was completed with decision to baseline and implement
Dual Plane (DP) Isolation
• Baseline design established as a DP isolation system with the first plane between first stage
and upper stage with a reference stiffness of 8M lb/in and an upper plane between US and
Orion, on the US side of the interface with a reference stiffness of 1.2M lb/in
• The crew testing yielded in a requirement recommendation of 0.21 g‟s root mean square over a
5-second period and not to exceed 0.7 g‟s PEAK at 99.865% ( in order to maintain Crew
situational awareness)
• The performance analysis shows that DP isolators are very close to meeting this requirement
with 93.8% for Lunar and 98.1% for International Space Station (ISS) cases
• Orion will provide the design changes necessary to achieve 99.865%
• Upper Stage will begin design efforts to include the second plane isolator and coordinate
interface design requirements with Orion
Integrating project level risks into single program level risks
Response
Mitigation:
Crew testing
Requirements for crew seat responses
Design updates to the ISS Orion configuration
Thrust forcing
Design/analysis/model verification of Loads Analysis 4 Finite Structural function
Element Models mode
Background:
First stage thrust misalignment and launch site winds
result in launch vehicle drift and potential tower and/or
launch mount re-contact
Launch drift can result in tower damage due to plume
impingement and can increase refurbishment cost and
schedule between flights
Apollo Saturn V had similar issues and used
active steering
Current 3-sigma May 2008,
drift curve 3-sigma
Mitigation: drift curve
Background:
Ring Forging with
The first stage–upper stage separation approach used a 30-gr/ft LSC and
linear shaped charge (LSC) device with a pyrotechnic load 0.18″ Groove
of 55-grains/ft.
Shock levels were conservatively predicted using 75
grains/ft, yielding very high pyro-shock levels, especially at
nearby components.
Shock panel testing showed that the 55-grains/ft shock
levels were too high for the nearby avionics to tolerate
without significant design and mass impacts External Debris Shield/
Compression Ring
Mitigation: Linear Shaped Charge Splice
Plates
The NASA Design Team, Boeing, and Ensign
Bickford developed and traded several options
for reducing the shock load. Two candidate
approaches were traded: a 30-grains/ft frangible
joint and a 30-grains/ft LSC
The frangible joint was selected because it
generates the lowest shock levels and was
judged to be a lower overall risk for the upper
stage design
Further panel testing is planned to verify the
shock levels at the avionics. It is expected that
this testing will show that the shock levels at the Stage separation wind tunnel test
Arnold Air Force Base, TN
avionics components are within acceptable limits
National Aeronautics and Space Administration 7764.49
Upper Stage Vibroacoustics
Background:
Ares I has a high dynamic pressure trajectory resulting in significant induced
vibroacoustic environments. This results in design challenges that may result
in additional component development and / or qualification.
Mitigation:
A layered mitigation strategy has been developed to mitigate the redesign risk
to the Program, including:
• Confirm vibroacoustic environments are accurate and appropriate, given the Ares I trajectory
and configuration based on the latest trajectory, wind tunnel data, and latest configuration. This
activity is underway but not yet complete
• Investigate possible global solutions for
affected subsystems and components.
This activity includes removing external
protuberances, if possible, and is complete
unless an unforeseen opportunity is found
• Design components and subsystems to
survive the environment. To date, four
components are being assessed in detail
RCS thrusters, RCS propellant tank,
interstage avionics, and aft skirt avionics
Rigid buffet model testing in transonic dynamic tunnel
Langley Research Center, VA
Mitigation:
Several options are available to mitigate the
high vibration, including:
• Moving components to an area with less stressing
environments
• Developing systems to absorb transmitted energy
and isolate components from the environment.
The figures illustrate the concept of using a group
of wire rope isolators to reduce vibration loads on
the panelized components. Early testing has shown
a 50–60% reduction in transmitted energy.
This activity is underway and additional tests
are planned
• Combining components into panels or manifolds to
change the structural response. As components
are combined, detailed analysis will be conducted
to determine the effectiveness and the resulting
structural loads on the connecting and the
primary structures
• Hardening the components to withstand the
vibration levels or develop the isolation system
25,000
24,000
Ares Gross Performance
23,000 Ares Net Performance
3σ Performance Knockdowns
22,000 Net w/ T&O & pending
A-106
ARES 1 Project Margin =1926 kg (9.5%)
21,000
Mass (kg)
20,312 kg (CA1000-PO)
20,000
Level II (Program) Reserve
19,296 kg (CA4164-PO)
19,000 Predicted w/ T&O
Project Margin 974 kg (8.4%)
18,000 606-G 4 crew members
Orion Predicted Mass *ESTIMATE*
17,000
Current MGA = 1481 kg (12.7%)
16,000 Orion Basic
Mass
15,000
Oct 08 Nov 08 Dec 08 Jan 09 Feb 09 Mar 09 Apr 09 May 09 Jun 09 Jul 09 Aug 09 Sep 09
Orion PDR
Status/Trend*
Color of arrow indicates current status: Green is compliant;
Yellow is acceptable but at risk; Red is noncompliant Ares I Total Margin 22.5%
Direction of arrow indicates trend from last data point: Up is
improved; Right is unchanged; Down is worsened Orion Total Margin 21.1%
• First Stage Thrust Oscillation – Plan in place, baseline selected and being
implemented
• Mobile Launch Platform Lift-off Clearance -- Re-Contact resolved
mitigating plume tower interaction
• Separation System Pyro-shock – Mitigation in place with selection of
separation system
• Upper Stage Vibroacoustics – Using total vehicle approach to refine
environments and develop component solutions
• Ares I Payload Mass Performance –Meeting requirements and holding
adequate mass margins. Mass is continually monitored as a top
performance metric.
Ares I-X
Overview
www.nasa.gov
Ares I-X Flight Test Overview
Upper Stage/
P1) Demonstrate controllability Crew Module/
Launch Abort System
Simulator
free fall into ocean
First Stage recovery
Flight Test Profile P3) Demonstrate assembly
and recovery of an Ares I similar first stage
National Aeronautics and Space Administration 7764.55
Ares I-X Status
First Stage center
First Stage: Motor from Space Shuttle inventory motor segment
mated with its aft
delivered to Kennedy Space Center (KSC) in motor segment
March 2009. Aft skirt and forward structures
completed in May 2009. Turned over to
System/Ground Operations in June 2009
Upper Stage Simulator (USS): Hardware
completed and delivered to KSC in
November 2008 Orion Simulator
Roll Control System (RoCS): Modules A and B
delivered to KSC April 2009. Installed in the
USS interstage
Avionics: Sensor, harnesses, airborne avionics
boxes, and support ground subsystems delivered
to KSC except for inertial navigation unit (INU). RoCS with USS
segments in the
INU in test background Avionics Module
Ares V
Overview
www.nasa.gov
Ares V Elements
Current Point-of-Departure
Elements from
U.S. Air Force RS-68B
Shuttle
First Stage from Delta IV RS-68
(5-Segment
RSRB)
Elements from
Ares I
Ares I Range: full stage to Ares V
case/nozzle/booster
systems
NASA has begun preliminary concept work on vehicle. Over 1,700 alternatives
investigated since ESAS
Focused on design of EDS, payload shroud, core stage, and RS-68 core
stage engines
Recent point of departure update following the Lunar Capability
Concept Review
• Adds additional performance margin using an additional RS-68
• Adds half segment on the first stage boosters
Shroud size dictated by eventual size of Altair lunar lander
Also investigating alternate uses for Ares V not related to human
space exploration
• Astronomy applications (e.g., large aperture telescopes)
• Deep space missions
• DoD applications
• Other applications
Crew Capability
using Ares I Upper
Stage with Ares V Crew
Core Capability
(35 t) (45–51 t)
Single Launch
Capability
(55–63 t)
Summary
www.nasa.gov
7764.63
Advancing Technology:
Partnerships with Industry and Researchers
Ares I and V development is the fastest and most prudent path to closing the human
spaceflight gap while enabling exploration of the Moon and beyond
Selection of the Ares architecture was made after systematic evaluation of hundreds of competing
concepts and represents the lowest cost, highest safety/reliability, and lowest risk solution to
meeting Constellation‟s requirements
Ares is built on a foundation of proven technologies, capabilities, and infrastructure
The Ares I team has met all key milestones since Project inception, including four major prime
contract awards and a successful Preliminary Design Review
• Unanimous PDR Board and independent Standing Review Board (SRB), agreement that Ares I is ready to proceed
to CDR
• Progress includes release of over 1,800 Ares I design drawings
Ares V project is well underway
• Draft Phase I Request for Proposal released November 2008; Industry proposals under review
Ares V will be considered a national asset with unprecedented performance and payload volume
that can enable or enhance a range of future missions
• Current architecture delivers ~60% more mass to TLI than Saturn V and ~35% more mass to LEO than Saturn V
External assessments continue to validate the architectures
• National Advisory Council: “The NAC is confident that the current plan is viable and represents a well-considered
approach . . .” – October 2008
• Government Accountability Office: “NASA has taken steps toward making sound investment decisions for Ares I.”
– November 2007
• Standing Review Board: “The SRB believes that the Project is managing and executing the vehicle development
appropriately, including visibility of the individual risk items.”
• National Research Committee: “The unprecedented mass and volume capabilities of NASA‟s planned Ares V cargo
launch vehicle enable entire new mission concepts.”
National Aeronautics and Space Administration 7764.65
Ares Online Outreach
http://www.facebook.com/NASA.Ares
http://twitter.com/NASA_Ares
http://www.youtube.com/AresTV
http://streaming.msfc.nasa.gov/podcast/ares/ARES.xml
http://streaming.msfc.nasa.gov/podcast/ares/ARES_SD.xml
http://www.thefutureschannel.com/dockets/space/ares/
http://www.teachertube.com/videoList.php?pg=videonew&cid=38
http://www.nasa.gov/ares