Search

In Spring of 2005, the NASA Engineering Safety Center (NESC) was engaged by the Space Shuttle Program (SSP) to peer review the suite of analytical tools being developed to support the determination of impact and damage tolerance of the Orbiter Thermal Protection Systems (TPS). The NESC formed an independent review team with the core disciplines of materials, flight sciences, structures, mechanical analysis and thermal analysis. The Math Model Tools reviewed included damage prediction and stress analysis, aeroheating analysis, and thermal analysis tools. Some tools are physics-based and other tools are empirically-derived. Each tool was created for a specific use and timeframe, including certification, real-time pre-launch assessments. In addition, the tools are used together in an integrated strategy for assessing the ramifications of impact damage to tile and RCC. The NESC teams conducted a peer review of the engineering data package for each Math Model Tool. This report contains the summary of the team observations and recommendations from these reviews.

In Spring of 2005, the NASA Engineering Safety Center (NESC) was engaged by the Space Shuttle Program (SSP) to peer review the suite of analytical tools being developed to support the determination of impact and damage tolerance of the Orbiter Thermal Protection Systems (TPS). The NESC formed an independent review team with the core disciplines of materials, flight sciences, structures, mechanical analysis and thermal analysis. The Math Model Tools reviewed included damage prediction and stress analysis, aeroheating analysis, and thermal analysis tools. Some tools are physics-based and other tools are empirically-derived. Each tool was created for a specific use and timeframe, including certification, real-time pre-launch assessments, and real-time on-orbit assessments. The tools are used together in an integrated strategy for assessing the ramifications of impact damage to tile and RCC. The NESC teams conducted a peer review of the engineering data package for each Math Model Tool. This report contains the summary of the team observations and recommendations from these reviews.

Since the loss of Columbia on February 1, 2003, the Space Shuttle Program (SSP) has significantly improved the understanding of launch and ascent debris, implemented hardware modifications to reduce debris, and conducted tests and analyses to understand the risks associated with expected debris. The STS-114 flight rationale for expected debris relies on a combination of all three of these factors. A number of design improvements have been implemented to reduce debris at the source. The External Tank (ET) thermal protection system (TPS) foam has been redesigned and/or process improvements have been implemented in the following locations: the bipod closeout, the first ten feet of the liquid hydrogen (LH2) tank protuberance air load (PAL) ramp, and the LH2 tank-to-intertank flange closeout. In addition, the forward bipod ramp has been eliminated and heaters have been installed on the bipod fittings and the liquid oxygen (LO2) feedline forward bellows to prevent ice formation. The Solid Rocket Booster (SRB) bolt catcher has been redesigned. The Orbiter reaction control system (RCS) thruster cover "butcher paper" has been replaced with a material that sheds at a low velocity. Finally, the pad area has been cleaned to reduce debris during lift-off.

The characterization of the aeroshape selected for the X-38 [Crew Return Vehicle (CRV) demonstrator] is presently being performed as a cooperative endeavour between NASA, DLR (through its TETRA Program), and European Space Agency (ESA) with Dassault Aviation integrating the aerodynamic and aerothermodynamic activities. The methodologies selected for characterizing the aerodynamic and aerothermodynamic environment of the X-38 are presented. Also, the implications for related disciplines such as Guidance Navigation and Control (GN&C) with its corresponding Flight Control System (FCS), Structural, and Thermal Protection System (TPS) design are discussed. An attempt is made at defining the additional activities required to support the design of a derived operational CRV.