Human Travel into Deep Space Using Currently, or Imminently Available Technology A Design Study of...
-
Upload
darlene-haynes -
Category
Documents
-
view
231 -
download
2
Transcript of Human Travel into Deep Space Using Currently, or Imminently Available Technology A Design Study of...
Human Travel into Deep Space Using Currently, or Imminently Available Technology A Design Study of long-duration interplanetary spacecraft
1
Prof. David Hyland
Mech Aero – 2014
Hilton Philadelphia Airport Hotel
September 8 -10, 2014
Project Overview
2
Design project for aerospace engineering students in final year of undergraduate program
Subgroups developed initial goals, which were later integrated into a final spacecraft
Presented to board of industry and academic reviewers in Dec. 2012
Mission Statement
3
“To expand the domain of humanity beyond the earth for the betterment, preservation, and advancement of all humankind by
creating a self-sustaining, mobile habitat that ensures the physical and psychological well-being of its inhabitants.”
>24 Month Trip Time12 Crew MembersCapable of Interplanetary Space Travel
What’s the Purpose? Scientific
Advance the state of the art in diverse technological areas Innovations for space usually have important terrestrial
applications Economic
Mining of asteroids could yield many valuable materials High demand for space tourism, research opportunities
Exploratory Spark a new age of enthusiasm for the sciences Inspire next generation of scientists and explorers
4
Ultimate goal Attain economic viability and sustainability of the interplanetary
habitat through a range of revenue-generating activities, primarily mining of asteroids
5
Presentation Outline
6
Design DriversDetailed DesignCompetitive Advantages
Design DriversDetailed DesignCompetitive AdvantagesPresentation Outline
7
Design Goals Elements of a viable system
Livability – Crew must be able to function, survive Practicality – Magic solution will not appear, must deal with
proven feasibility of technology Modularity – Assembly must be simple, repairs must be efficient,
expansion must be an option
8
Challenges of a Interplanetary Space Physiological Physiological
Weightlessness Livability Radiation
Cost barriers to entry
9
Design Driver: Physiological Factors in Prolonged Spaceflight
No human being has ever traveled into interplanetary space In 5 decades of manned spaceflight, our understanding of
physiological change during long duration missions remains limited
Physiological impacts are significant and variedDuring the course of a mission: 0-g effects (bone loss, muscle
loss, immune system impairment, etc.), radiation exposure and immunological depression
Return to Earth: cardiovascular de-conditioning and orthostatic intolerance
Both in-flight and post-flight physiological issues must be countered
Design Driver: Countering 0-g Effects
There is no completely satisfactory approach to countering 0-g effects aside from sustained artificial gravity.
We do not know how much “g” is required to maintain human health indefinitely (besides zero g = bad, and one g = good)
We will not know the answer to this for a long time, since long term experiments are required.
Therefore, in this design study, we require: 1 g artificial gravity.Acceptable levels of Coriolis effectsExposure to 1g almost all the time
1g
0.035 g
Limit of low
traction
6 m/s rim speed
Apparent gravity
depends on direction of
motion
4 rp
mO
nse
t o
f m
otio
n
sick
ne
ss
Comfort zone
Artificial gravity becomes more “normal” with increasing radius
Countermeasures – Artificial Gravity
To avoid motion sickness, we must rotate below 4 rpm (while keeping the rotation radius as small as possible)
1
Physiological Factors Size and Rotation Rate
1 g artificial gravity and acceptable levels of Coriolois forces motivate: Rotation rate = 3.5 rpm Rotation radius = 70m
(Thus max dimension can’t be less than 140m)Exposure to 1g almost all the time means entire s/c must rotate (a separate wheel with an attached zero-g component is not practical)
Design Driver: Interplanetary Space Environment
High levels of radiation present in interplanetary spaceMaterial must limit radiation exposure to levels on par
with ISS astronautsMicrometeorite protection must also be includedLivable temperature must be maintained
Design Driver: Mass
Support needed to keep structure togetherLaunch costs are around $2,000 per pound of materialStandard trusses would add unnecessary mass;
alternative solution needed
The crew has to breathe!
Atmospheric compositionpO2
22.7 +/- 9 kPa(170 +/- 10 mm Hg)
p(inert gas; most likely N2) 26.7 kPa
pCO2 < 0.4 kPa
pH2O1.00 +/- 0.33 kPa
(7.5 +/- 2.5 mm Hg)
Total pressure = ½ atm
2
What Shape?
½ Atm pressurization & centrifugal loading Solids of revolution are the most efficient pressure vessels
Sphere
Large ratio of pressurized
volume to useful floor space
(projected area)
Long cylinder
Axis of minimum inertia = rotation axis
Energy dissipation results in disruptive nutation
Active attitude control of this = one more thing to go wrong
Torus
Minimum ratio of pressurized volume to
useful floor space
Rotation axis = axis of maximum inertia
Attitude is passively stable
1
Space useSurface arearequired,m2/person
No. oflevels
Projectedarea, m2
Estimatedheight, m
Volume,m3/person
Residential 49 4 12 3 147
Offices 1 3 0.33 4 4.0
Assembly rooms & radiation storm shelter 1.5 1 1.5 10 15
Recreation andentertainment 1 1 1 3 3
Storage 5 4 1 3.2 16
Mech. subsystemCommunication distr.switching equipment
0.5 1 0.5 4 0.2
Waste and water treatmentand recycling
4 1 4 4 16
Electrical supply anddistribution 0.1 1 0.1 4 0.4
Miscellaneous 2.9 3 1 3.8 11.2
Subtotals 65.0 - 21.43 - 212.8
Agricultural space (a) Plant growing areas 44 3 14.7 15 660
(b) Food processingcollection, storage, etc. 4 3 1.3 15 60
(c) Agricultural drying area 8 3 2.7 15 120
Totals 121.0 - 40.13 - 1052.8Note: This is Table 3.2 of cited reference 2, but with several categories of space removed owing to the limitations of a 12-person vessel. The spaces removed are: Shops, schools and hospitals, public open space (500 m3) service industry space, transportation and animal areas.
How Much Space Do People and Plants Need?
Total Projected area per person
= 40 m2
Total Volume per person
= 1050 m3
Is a Complete Torus Too Roomy?
x, xb
z, zb
y, yb
R 2 r
With R=70m, r=5m and three “floors”:
Projected area ~ 10X2RX3 ~ 12,600 m2
Enough for 315 people! But we only need to sustain 12 …..
1
Solution: Use only what you need!
• Modular pod configuration• Attach modules as needed to support volume requirements
• Addressing new challenges• Vibration damping using tensioned cables and compression
columns• Natural frequencies causing motion sickness are avoided
• Capitalizing new advantages• Engines may be placed along outer radius of structure
without interfering with livable area
Mission Requirements Minimize delta-v required for transportation 2-3 year mission duration
21
Solution Constant thrust departure from LEO to Lagrange points “Grand Tour” of interplanetary space in Earth – Sun system
Drift along energy boundary of Earth-Sun system with little to no delta-v
Orbit cycle used by many asteroids, could allow for rendezvous and mining
Initial Deployment: Spiral out to E-M L1
3385 10 km
Start in 300 km circular orbit about Earth
Thrust always aligned with the velocity vector
Full thrust up until 11 days and coasting to L1 thereafter
Spiral out to a coasting trajectory to the E-M L1 “throat”.
Meld into the Lyapunov orbit of L1 Station and refuel
Propellant mass: 21 MTTrip duration: 5.6 months
22
1
From E-M L1 to S-E L2: Start of the First Grand Tour
Moon
L1 Lyapunov Orbit
Orbit of the Moon
Earth-Moon Frame Sun-Earth Frame
L2
L2
L1
Sun
E-L1 to S-L2: V=12m/s, 50 days
122,720 km
After refueling, leave L1 on the outward invariant manifold.
Swing by the Moon and exit the E-M L2 throat in time to meld with a heteroclinic orbit leading to the Sun-Earth L2
Take one turn around the Lyapunov orbit and enter the external domain of the Sun-Earth system
23
1
Asteroid Mining Tours: Exterior Realm
L1
1. Drop off cargo at L1 Station. Leave L1 Lyapunov orbit. Follow heteroclinic orbit to L2 (pink line, left to right) (drop off cargo at Earth-Moon system)
2. Meld into L2 Lyapunov orbit, follow for ¾ of a period, then follow the unstabile manifold (green line, heading down)
Sun-Earth Frame
L2
3.0 million km
24
1
Through S-E L2 to the Grand Tour of the Exterior Realm
Sun
3-2 resonance
Apophis
3. Follow the homoclinic, exterior domain orbit (green path issuing from L2 and going clockwise)
4. Mine Amors and Apollos on the way (3 years)
Then: see next slide
1 AU
25
1
Heteroclinic Transfer Between Exterior and Interior Realms
L1
5. Follow homoclinic exterior domain orbit to L2 on the stable manifold (green line, pointing down, left). Refurbish and repair at L2 Station
6. Meld into L2 Lyapunov orbit, follow for ½ of a period, then follow the heteroclinic orbit to L1 (pink line, right to left).
7. Deliver cargo to Earth-Moon system. Meld into L1 Lyapunov orbit, Exchange crew and refuel at L1 Station.
8. Follow Lyapunov orbit for one period, then follow the homoclinic interior domain orbit (blue line heading to the left).
L2
3.0 million km
26
1
Through S-E L1 to the Grand Tour of the Interior Realm
Sun
3-2 resonance
Apophis
9. Follow the homoclinic, interior domain orbit (red path issuing from L1 and going counter clockwise)
10. Mine Atens and Apollos on the way (two years)
11. Then follow the stable manifold to L1 (blue line in previous slide, heading to the right).
12. Refuel and exchange crew at L1 station.
Go to step 1 and repeat.
Forbidden zone
27
1
Presentation Outline
28
Design DriversDetailed DesignCompetitive Advantages
SystemTeams
29
Budget & Scheduling
ManagementPM: Ryan Haughey
Assistant PM: Blaise Cole
System Architecture
Life Support
Propulsion
Power
Stress & Thermal
Goal:
Synergize design concepts to meet functional requirements
Challenges: Physiological: radiation, bone loss, air Psychological: confinement, productivity System stability
System Overview – ArchitectureMichael Pierce, Paola Alicea, Terry Huang, Luis Carrilo,
Christopher Roach, Mario Botros
30
Budget & Scheduling
Management
System Architecture
Life Support
Propulsion
Power
Stress & Thermal
Moment of Inertia Overview
x,y,z axes = Principal axes of inertia
Ixx = 203,300 MT-m2
Iyy = 463,600 MT-m2
Izz = 641,300 MT-m2
Total Mass = 350MT
xy
z
15MT
23MT
18MT
46MT
(total)4MT
Izz is largest moment of inertia; rigid body nutation of the spin axis due to energy dissipation coupling is suppressed
Architecture Overview
Inflatable Living Pod Modeled on NASA Transhab study (Inflatable pod) Nearly 2 dozen layers in 1-ft thick skin provide thermal, ballistic, and radiation
protection Radiation Protection: conservatively 30 rem/yr (ISS is 50 rem/yr) Ballistic Protection: Micrometeorite and Orbital Debris Shield Each pod provides living space for four crew members
8.4 m
13 m
32.5 m
10 m
6 m
33
Auxiliary pods Identical to living pods Low-gravity environment: sufficient to allow for proper survival by plants One pod optimized for food growth, other for oxygen generation
Engine & Power Pods Provides housing for power plant and engine Power plant selected as nuclear reactor (further discussion later) Shielding for nuclear reactor assists structure in deep space
radiation and micrometeorite protection
35
Water Ballast Stores system water Displace water along structure length to adjust
moments of inertia Thermal management of water could be accomplished
using heat pipes from power source High levels of redundancy needed to protect against
micrometeorite impacts on water column
36
Docking Module Standardized module allows for docking of rendezvous craft ISS PIRS module may serve as good model
Combination docking port and airlock
37
Image credit: NASA
Floor Space Summaries
38
Living Pod Summary
Floor Area per Pod (m2) 79.48
Number of Pods 4
Number of Crew 12
Floor Area per Person (m2) 26.49
Stanford Study per Person Requirement2 (m2)
19.83
Agriculture Pod Summary
Floor Area per Pod (m2) 142.98
Number of Pods 2
Number of Crew 12
Floor Area per Person (m2) 23.83
Stanford Study per Person Requirement2 (m2)
18.70
Goal:
Synergize design concepts to meet functional requirements
Findings: Modular, inflatable habitation pods Water ballast Locate power, engine away from
the axis of rotation
System Summary – Architecture
39
Budget & Scheduling
Management
System Architecture
Life Support
Propulsion
Power
Stress & Thermal
40
Goal:
Create an environment conducive to healthy human functions with minimal re-supply for duration of mission
Challenges:Crew nutrition & healthWater recycling & distributionWaste ManagementOxygen regeneration
Budget & Scheduling
Management
System Architecture
Life Support
Propulsion
Power
Stress & Thermal
System Overview – Life SupportMegan Heard, Sarah Atkinson, Mary Williamnson, Jacob Hollister, Jorge Santana, Olga Rodionova, Erin Mastenbrook
Crew Nutrition Modeled on diet of residents of Greek island of Ikaria, noted for
exceptional health and longevity For missions past 21 months, more practical to self-sustain food Some portions of diet require bringing food along (meats, oils) Proposed solutions:
Aeroponically grow food in low-gravity agriculture pods Maintain cold storage for stowed perishable food
41
Image credit: Tower Garden
Nutrition Logistics
42
Aeroponics Farming: Tower Gardens
Height (m) 1.83
Base (m2) 0.58
Number of Towers 12
Plants per Tower 28
Max Plant Output 336
Aeroponics Farming: Shelf
Total Area (m2) 6.69
Tower gardens used to grow range of fruits, vegetables, and herbs.Shelf used to grow potatoes
Stored Farming (12 people, 2 years)
Total Stored Mass (kg) 8165
Total Stored Volume (m3) 13
Stored food consists of all which can not be grown in tower gardens. Includes: meats, grains, sugars, salts, & milk
Combination of produce and stored food allow for full sustainment of crew for around 3 years
Water Treatment Must handle waste-water and gray-water Prevent disease development Effective water recycling becomes advantageous after 0.5 months Proposed solution
Utilize ECLSS system currently in place on ISS (~95% efficient)
43
Water Summary Mass (kg) Volume (m3) Power (kW)
Water for Humans: 5100 5.1 N/A Water for Algae: 7920 7.92 N/A Water for Agriculture: 1514 1.514 N/AECLSS Water Recycling System (2 units):
1782 6.51 4.42
Total: 14801.8
718.81 4.42
Waste Management Isolation of outpost requires full effective recycling Human waste can serve as effective crop fertilizers, reducing need
for artificial fertilization (added mass) Proposed solutions
Closed-loop system with high-efficiency composters & ECLSS water filtration system
Tie-in to agriculture system for fertilization
44
Waste Summary
45
Solid Waste Mitigation Summary
Solid Waste Production (kg/person/day)3 0.2
Number of Crew 12
Daily Waste Production (kg/day) 2.4
Waste Processor Performance (kg/unit/day)4 0.43
Number of Processors 10
Waste Capacity (kg/day) 4.3
Excess Waste Handling (kg/day) 1.9
Liquid Waste Migitation Summary
Liquid Waste Production (l/person/day)5 2
Gray Water Production (l/person/day)6 19
Number of Crew 12
Daily Waste Production (l/day) 252
Water Processor Performance (l/unit/day)7 140
Number of Processors 2
Waste Capacity (l/day) 280
Excess Waste Handling (l/day) 28
Oxygen Regeneration Standard CO2 scrubbing and Oxygen Generation Systems consume
water in production of oxygen After 21 months, a closed-loop system becomes more efficient Proposed solution
Convert CO2 into O2 using green algae (Spirulina) tanks
Mechanically filter other impurities Back-up system (in case of disease or catastrophic failure) would
be standard OGS/C02 scrubber similar to ISS
46
Image Credit: California State University – Long Beach
47
Goal:
Create an environment conducive to healthy human functions with minimal re-supply for duration of mission
Findings:High-nutrition, efficient dietRecycle, grow as much as possibleMultipurpose systems
Waste used as fertilizer
Budget & Scheduling
Management
System Architecture
Life Support
Propulsion
Power
Stress & Thermal
System Summary – Life Support
48
Goal:
Develop a stable structure capable of withstanding loading profile
Challenges:Rotational Loading & Rigidity
Truss design
Vibration Mitigation Cable design and placement
Thermal Environment Management
Budget & Scheduling
Management
System Architecture
Life Support
Propulsion
Power
Stress & Thermal
System Overview – Stress & ThermalAlex Herring, Brendon Baker, Scott Motl, Keegan Colbert, James Wallace, Travis Ravenscroft
Structural Layout: Tensioned Cable
49
Cables connect pods in rotation plane to central column Transfers centrifugal loads from rotation plane Significantly reduces need for trusses, total structure mass Manages vibration propagation Total compressive force: 782 kN
Vibration mitigation drives cable size
Why such a complicated design? Another structural configuration: “Bola”
Habitation areas connected by cable in rotation Suited to small structures, with few crew members Scale, mass of current structure would cause serious vibration
problems Tensioned cable with column gives structural rigidity in all 6 rigid body
DOFs Additional benefits
Thrust located off the spin axis More maneuverable, allows for easier docking
Much more expandable Pods can be more easily located at intermediate points in structure
50
Structural Rigidity Trusses needed to maintain craft’s shape, operate in
case of no centrifugal loading (much lower loads) Dimensions of structure require advanced materials
to minimize weight Proposed solutions:
Composite (carbon-fibre) truss structure Outer connecting tubes enclose truss, prevents
outgassing & radiation degradation of composite
51
Vibration Mitigation Torus has been segmented, resulting in vibration instability Cable dimension driven by vibration mitigation, not centrifugal
loading Failing to address vibrations could result in structure shaking itself
apart Augment tension cables to mitigate vibration in other planes Avoid natural frequencies which induce motion sickness (0.05 – 0.8
Hz), 8 Hz (need more detailed model to address)
52
Cable Sizing Summary
X-translation mode minimum size (cm) 2
Y-translation mode minimum size (cm) 0.8
X-rotation mode minimum size (cm) 0.8
Thermal Management Nuclear reactor will produce large amounts of waste heat Near constant exposure to solar radiation once in deep space Simple white exterior to living pods renders a temperature on order
of -60oF Proposed solution
Black/white surface coating combination (43% white, 57% black) passively raises temperature to comfortable levels
Radiator of around 200 m2 sized using Idaho National Labs CERMET study (design basis for nuclear reactor)10
Heat pipes convey additional heat throughout structure to utilize as needed
53
54
Goal:
Develop a stable structure capable of withstanding loading profile
Findings: Tensioned-cable structure reduces
truss mass, vibrationPassive cooling can accomplish
thermal control, with minor support
Budget & Scheduling
Management
System Architecture
Life Support
Propulsion
Power
Stress & Thermal
System Summary – Stress & Thermal
55
Goal:
Provide sufficient thrust to transport space craft into interplanetary travel
Challenges:Mission durationLong-duration thrust developmentAttitude control
Budget & Scheduling
Management
System Architecture
Life Support
Propulsion
Power
Stress & Thermal
System Overview – PropulsionKyle Monsma, Benjamin Morales, Carl Runco, Paul Schattenberg, Mark Baker, Steven Swearingen
Engine Selection Continuous thrust system is most practical Electrodeless Lorentz Force (ELF) thrusters are emerging as
(relatively) high thrust, high Isp engine at a low weight & size
56
Engine Comparison ELF8 VASIMR9
Engine Mass (MT) 3.8 7.6
Thrust (N) 66.5 47.5
Fuel Mass (% total) 8.74 7.84
Burn Time (days) 279 389
ELF Operation & Fuel
57
Image credit: University of Washington, Dept. of Aerospace Engineering
Xeon provides maximum efficiency
Xeon has greater compatibility with existing spacecraft technologies
Spin-up & Attitude Control Need to attain 3.5 RPM for 1g conditions in given craft Engines are mounted on edge of rotation plane, allowing gimballing
to combine spin and forward propulsion Proposed solution:
During transit to Lagrange point, angle both engines to produce rotation
CMGs could also be used to provide heading maintenance
58
Spin-Up Detail
59
Properties Summary
Total Mass (MT) 350
Principle Moment of Inertia (kg m2)
6.63 E8
Required Angular Velocity (rpm) 3.5
Moment Arm (m) 70
60
Goal:
Provide sufficient thrust to transport space craft into interplanetary travel
Findings:Low thrust, high-Isp engine (ELF)
Xeon fuelDeflect engines to obtain spin
Budget & Scheduling
Management
System Architecture
Life Support
Propulsion
Power
Stress & Thermal
System Summary – Propulsion
61
Budget & Scheduling
Management
System Architecture
Life Support
Propulsion
Power
Stress & Thermal
System Overview – PowerCollin Marshall, Andrew Tucker, Carl Mullins, Jack Reagan, Colby Smith, Andrew Nguyen
Goal:
Provide reliable electrical power to meet spacecraft systems requirements
Challenges:High power requirements by enginesMass, size constraintsRadiation managementSystem redundancy
Powerplant Estimated power requirements around 2
MWe Solar array would be prohibitively large and
expensive INL CERMET study demonstrated conceptual
feasibility of space nuclear reactors of this rating10
Emergency power must be available for sustaining limited life support functions in event of outage
Power distributed using similar system to ISS
62
Image credit (modified): Boeing Defense, Space &
Security
Reactor Core
63
2 separate reactors placed on opposite arms of ship Each reactor supports minimum power requirements Location near engine reduces transmission cable mass
Passively stable with active control rods Allows for variable power output Conserves fuel and reduces overall mass
Shielding & Power Generation Be-W-LiH Layered Shielding covers broad spectrum protection Required thickness: 0.28m; mass of 1,450 kg per reactor
Shadow shielding – Only shield craft needing protection Power generated with standard Brayton cycle
High efficiency due to near 0K heat sink Helium is working fluid No regeneration
Each reactor-turbine combination produces
1.5 MWe Heat pipes circulate waste heat around structure
64
Note: Cut-away view, shield is
hemispherical
To center of craft
Power Conversion
65
Power Conversion Specifications10
Turbine Inlet Temperature (K) 1500
Pressure Ratio 15
Specific Mass (kg/kWe) 7.67
Total Mass (kg) 23,000
Efficiency 52%
Total thermal output (kWt) 5770
Total electrical output (kWe) 3000
Total waste heat (kWt) 2770
Emergency Power Solar panels capable of providing minimum life-support functionality
paired with each pod Back-up OGS system & heating will require 20 kW
66
Solar Panel Array Specifications
Panel Efficiency11 0.29
Panel Area per Pod (m2) 16.7
Panel Mass per Pod (kg) 176
67
Budget & Scheduling
Management
System Architecture
Life Support
Propulsion
Power
Stress & Thermal
System Summary – Power
Goal:
Provide reliable electrical power to meet spacecraft systems requirements
Findings:Dynamic cycle power generationNuclear reaction heat productionSolar panels provide back up power
68
Budget & Scheduling
Management
System Architecture
Life Support
Propulsion
Power
Stress & Thermal
System Overview – Budget & SchedulingBlaise Cole, Kevin Davenport, Lisa Warren
Goal:
Track the mass, power, and monetary requirements for the system, and prepare a feasible deployment plan
Challenges:Developing funding structureCreating deployment schedule
Systems Overview
69
System Mass (MT)
Architecture 235.4
Structure 7.0
Propulsion 40.8
Power 28.3
Life Support 34.9
Total 346.4
System Power (MW)
Architecture 0.35
Propulsion 1.9
Life Support 0.3
Power Required 2.56
Power Produced 3.02
Funding Program would have extremely high costs for full integration Significant levels of government support would be unlikely,
undesirable due to loss of control Very risky nature of project would make significant levels of debt
unattainable, equity can lose direction Proposed solution:
Use bootstrapping plan: start developing core components of craft with terrestrial applications; provides revenue stream while supporting further R&D of technology
Develop LEO research, tourism platform for further partnerships & revenue streams
70
Deployment Significant number of launches would be required to deploy full craft Assembling at Lagrange point would be extremely difficult and
impractical Proposed solution:
Assemble the structure in LEO, use as platform for research and tourism
After built, transfer to Lagrange point (while unmanned) Crew rendezvous with craft at Lagrange point, mission starts at
this point
71
Design DriversDetailed DesignSummaryPresentation Outline
72
73
Design Goals Livability
Artificial gravity, radiation shielding, diet ensure long-term health Internal architecture provides psychological comfort
Practicality All technology grounded in present or near-future developments
Modularity Assembly, repairs simple due to common pod Can incrementally grow station by adding modular pods Potentially attain full torus
Potential Applications Asteroid mining (would need further development of additional
spacecraft for use in mining)
Space tourism (deep space or near-earth)
Debris removal and recycling
Scientific research platform
Permanent space station at Lagrange point
74
Acknowledgements Dr. David Hyland Department of Aerospace Engineering, Dwight Look College of
Engineering, Texas A&M University The Fall 2012 AERO 426 team leaders and team members
75
Sources1 Hyland, David, “Class Lectures,” AERO 426, Texas A&M University, Fall 2012.
2 R.D. Johnson, C Holbrow, editors, Space Settlements: A Design Study, NASA, SP-413, Scientific and Technical.
3 “Feces,” Encyclopedia Brittanica Online Edition, 2013.
4 Oshima, T., Moriya, T., Kanazawa, S., Yamashita, M., “Proposal of Hyperthermophilic Aerobic Composting Bacteria and Their Enzymes in Space Agriculture,” Biological Sciences in Space, Vol. 21 No.4, 2007.
5 “Urinalysis,” Mercer University School of Medicine. 1994-2012 [http://library.med.utah.edu/WebPath/webpath.html#MENU].
6 Johnson, David, “Graywater Treatment and Graywater Soil Absorption System Designs for Camps and Other Facilities,” Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation, May 2005.
7 Beasley, Dolores, “NASA Advances Water Recycling for Space Travel and Earth Use,” NASA News, Nov. 2004
8 Slough, J., Kirtley, D., Weber, T., “Pulsed Plasmoid Propulsion: The ELF Thruster,” 31st International Electric Propulsion Conference. Sept. 2009.
9 Ad Astra Rocket Company, Company Website, 2009-2013, [http://www.adastrarocket.com/aarc/VX200].
10 Webb, J. A., Gross, B. J., “A Conceptual Multi-Megawatt System Based on a Tungsten CERMET Reactor,” Nuclear and Emerging Technologies for Space 2011, Idaho National Laboratory, Feb. 2011.
11 Gaddy, Edward M., "Cost performance of multi-junction, gallium arsenide, and silicon solar cells on spacecraft," Photovoltaic Specialists Conference, 1996., Conference Record of the Twenty Fifth IEEE, IEEE, 1996.
76
Questions?
77
Thank you very much for your time!