Author Topic: NASA JSC Solicitation: VASIMR  (Read 21799 times)

Offline docmordrid

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6334
  • Michigan
  • Liked: 4207
  • Likes Given: 2
« Last Edit: 03/09/2011 09:41 am by Chris Bergin »
DM

Offline Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 39271
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 25240
  • Likes Given: 12115
Re: NASA JSC Solicitation: VASIMR
« Reply #1 on: 01/29/2010 11:14 pm »
Yes! Sustainability for the Moon and beyond!
Chris  Whoever loves correction loves knowledge, but he who hates reproof is stupid.

To the maximum extent practicable, the Federal Government shall plan missions to accommodate the space transportation services capabilities of United States commercial providers. US law http://goo.gl/YZYNt0

Offline clongton

  • Expert
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12053
  • Connecticut
    • Direct Launcher
  • Liked: 7348
  • Likes Given: 3749
Re: NASA JSC Solicitation: VASIMR
« Reply #2 on: 01/29/2010 11:35 pm »
Wow! From abandoning the technology, to someone picking it up and running with it themselves, to now purchasing services from that entrepreneur for the very technology they abandoned. What a twisted web we weave.

Thanks Chris - this could be a paradigm shift in in-space propulsion if implemented.
Chuck - DIRECT co-founder
I started my career on the Saturn-V F-1A engine

Offline Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 39271
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 25240
  • Likes Given: 12115
Re: NASA JSC Solicitation: VASIMR
« Reply #3 on: 01/29/2010 11:41 pm »
After reading it a couple times (I'm not always good with this sort of convoluted wording), it appears that this is asking for a "cryocooler for conduction cooling" to replace their current liquid cyrogenic cooling system, which isn't really suited for use in a vacuum, I guess.

It goes on to say: "In addition, Studies will be conducted to evaluate a Lunar Tug concept utilizing Variable Specific Impulse Magneto-plasma Rocket (VASIMR) engine capabilities from Low Earth Orbit to Lunar Orbit and libration points."

So, can anyone give a real, clear interpretation of exactly what they are asking for?

EDIT: This is a very exciting solicitation, because it's more proof that NASA is serious about using this technology. I hope it has something to do with the announcement on Feb 1st...
« Last Edit: 01/29/2010 11:42 pm by Robotbeat »
Chris  Whoever loves correction loves knowledge, but he who hates reproof is stupid.

To the maximum extent practicable, the Federal Government shall plan missions to accommodate the space transportation services capabilities of United States commercial providers. US law http://goo.gl/YZYNt0

Offline A_M_Swallow

  • Elite Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8906
  • South coast of England
  • Liked: 500
  • Likes Given: 223
Re: NASA JSC Solicitation: VASIMR
« Reply #4 on: 01/30/2010 12:10 am »
A VASIMR space tug cannot land on the Moon.  Will some form of chemical propellant cargo lunar lander be needed?

Offline simonbp

  • Science Guy
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7138
  • Liked: 314
  • Likes Given: 183
Re: NASA JSC Solicitation: VASIMR
« Reply #5 on: 01/30/2010 12:35 am »
A VASIMR space tug cannot land on the Moon.  Will some form of chemical propellant cargo lunar lander be needed?

Of course. VASMIR is a purely low-thrust technology, and would require massive amounts of power to be anything else.

The point of a VASMIR (or other low-thrust technology) tug would be to slowly and efficiently move cargo and propellant from LEO to either lunar orbit or a libration point. The latter is preferable, as it is easier for a low-thrust spacecraft to get into/out of. Humans would still need to ride a chemical rocket to the Moon/L-points, in order to keep down the radiation dose, relative to a VASMIR rocket slowly spiraling through the Van Allen Belts.
« Last Edit: 01/30/2010 12:36 am by simonbp »

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 37441
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 21451
  • Likes Given: 428
Re: NASA JSC Solicitation: VASIMR
« Reply #6 on: 01/30/2010 02:45 am »
A VASIMR space tug cannot land on the Moon.

This has nothing to do with landing on the moon.  It is just a test vehicle.
« Last Edit: 01/30/2010 02:46 am by Jim »

Offline Longhorn John

  • Regular
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1570
  • Liked: 60
  • Likes Given: 130
Re: NASA JSC Solicitation: VASIMR
« Reply #7 on: 01/30/2010 02:52 am »
Has anyone got the link to the NASA procurement page that has the raw solicitation data? These things are usually publically released.

Offline docmordrid

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6334
  • Michigan
  • Liked: 4207
  • Likes Given: 2
Re: NASA JSC Solicitation: VASIMR
« Reply #8 on: 01/30/2010 05:56 am »
A VASIMR space tug cannot land on the Moon.

This has nothing to do with landing on the moon.  It is just a test vehicle.

So was the first version of everything that moves under its own power, but agreed this isn't for an LV.  It's for getting cargo to where the LV would be useful.



If that works, and someone gets smart and develops a space reactor powerful enough to power 2-3 VASIMR's and one of those artificial magnetospheres that were being worked on, it might even be useful for flying humans around the solar system and even through those pesky Van Allen belts.

Link from JSC: https://www.fbo.gov/index?s=opportunity&mode=form&id=35a99fd8aa65c86cb633fe8940243aad&tab=core&_cview=0

Response Due: Feb 08, 2010

« Last Edit: 01/30/2010 06:30 am by docmordrid »
DM

Offline Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 39271
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 25240
  • Likes Given: 12115
Re: NASA JSC Solicitation: VASIMR
« Reply #9 on: 01/30/2010 06:19 am »
The idea for VASIMR-based crewed interplanetary travel is that you start at EML1/2 instead of LEO, that way your crew doesn't need to travel slowly through the Van Allen belts.

BTW, the VASIMR uses a strong enough superconducting magnet that it just might be worth using it as an electromagnetic shadow shield from solar flares. I'd need more details on the magnet before I could model this.
Chris  Whoever loves correction loves knowledge, but he who hates reproof is stupid.

To the maximum extent practicable, the Federal Government shall plan missions to accommodate the space transportation services capabilities of United States commercial providers. US law http://goo.gl/YZYNt0

Offline Serafeim

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 299
  • Greece
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: NASA JSC Solicitation: VASIMR
« Reply #10 on: 01/30/2010 06:20 am »
if nasa likes so much vasimr  maybe its better to give it a lift to Iss with the shuttle?

Offline Jorge

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6404
  • Liked: 529
  • Likes Given: 67
Re: NASA JSC Solicitation: VASIMR
« Reply #11 on: 01/30/2010 06:26 am »
if nasa likes so much vasimr  maybe its better to give it a lift to Iss with the shuttle?

VASIMR won't be ready before the shuttle is retired.
JRF

Offline docmordrid

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6334
  • Michigan
  • Liked: 4207
  • Likes Given: 2
Re: NASA JSC Solicitation: VASIMR
« Reply #12 on: 01/30/2010 06:53 am »
Per Ad Astra's executive summary issued this week, it sounds like the shuttle is not part of "the plan" given the dates.

http://www.adastrarocket.com/EXECUTIVE%20SUMMARY240110.pdf

Quote
Following the December 8, 2008 agreement, activities with NASA are also underway to develop the configuration for the 2013 space flight test. Five “gates” or milestones are identified in the document, which both Ad Astra and NASA must cross in preparation for space flight. Gate #1, the signature of the Payload Integration Agreement (PIA), was crossed on June 3, 2009. Gate #2, the Preliminary Design Review (PDR) is planned for mid 2011. The other gates are: #3, Critical Design Review (CDR) in early 2012; #4, Certificate of Flight Readiness (COFR) in mid 2013 and #5, Flight Readiness Review in late 2013 at the launch facility just before launch.
« Last Edit: 01/30/2010 06:53 am by docmordrid »
DM

Offline A_M_Swallow

  • Elite Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8906
  • South coast of England
  • Liked: 500
  • Likes Given: 223
Re: NASA JSC Solicitation: VASIMR
« Reply #13 on: 01/30/2010 11:09 pm »
If that works, and someone gets smart and develops a space reactor powerful enough to power 2-3 VASIMR's and one of those artificial magnetospheres that were being worked on, it might even be useful for flying humans around the solar system and even through those pesky Van Allen belts.


A tug for the outer planets may use nuclear but ones to the Moon are going to be solar powered.

The video shows a VASIMR with semiconductor solar arrays.  If the tug only goes through the Van Allen belts 4 or 5 times in its life a radiation protection coating may work.  An alternative is a mechanical heat engine.  Possibly liquid filled pipes heated by parabolic mirrors feeding the gas or liquid into a Stirling engine.  The liquid could be water, LOX, hydrogen, freon or helium.  Many rocket engineers can probably make a space solar heat engine using nitrogen.

Offline robertross

  • Canadian Member
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 17939
  • Westphal, Nova Scotia
  • Liked: 659
  • Likes Given: 7692
Re: NASA JSC Solicitation: VASIMR
« Reply #14 on: 01/31/2010 05:51 pm »
Super cool  :)

Offline Serafeim

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 299
  • Greece
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: NASA JSC Solicitation: VASIMR
« Reply #15 on: 01/31/2010 06:43 pm »
the so biig solar panels -bigger than Iss- are feasible?

Offline tamarack

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 275
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: NASA JSC Solicitation: VASIMR
« Reply #16 on: 01/31/2010 11:05 pm »
... it appears that this is asking for a "cryocooler for conduction cooling" to replace their current liquid cyrogenic cooling system...

It goes on to say: "In addition, Studies will be conducted to evaluate a Lunar Tug concept utilizing Variable Specific Impulse Magneto-plasma Rocket (VASIMR) engine capabilities from Low Earth Orbit to Lunar Orbit and libration points." ...

Much like a regen chemical engine, VASIMR currently chills the superconductive magnets used to contain plasma with the cryogenic fuel to be energized. This sounds like NASA wants the magnets to have a seperate cooling system; Possibly to ensure the magnets are sufficiently cooled prior to firing, Possibly for better performance under throttling, Possibly for reliability reasons.

The second part gives the impression AdAstra has developed its technology enough for near-term pratical applications. This modification request and study, along with the upcoming ISS demostration, are precursors to an evolution in space propulsion that NASA seems very interested in.

Offline 2552

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 486
  • Liked: 42
  • Likes Given: 522
Re: NASA JSC Solicitation: VASIMR
« Reply #17 on: 02/06/2010 10:28 pm »
This could probably enable Cassini-style orbiters for Uranus and Neptune without needing to wait for Jupiter slingshot windows!

Offline William Barton

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3487
  • Liked: 8
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: NASA JSC Solicitation: VASIMR
« Reply #18 on: 02/06/2010 10:43 pm »
If that works, and someone gets smart and develops a space reactor powerful enough to power 2-3 VASIMR's and one of those artificial magnetospheres that were being worked on, it might even be useful for flying humans around the solar system and even through those pesky Van Allen belts.


A tug for the outer planets may use nuclear but ones to the Moon are going to be solar powered.

The video shows a VASIMR with semiconductor solar arrays.  If the tug only goes through the Van Allen belts 4 or 5 times in its life a radiation protection coating may work.  An alternative is a mechanical heat engine.  Possibly liquid filled pipes heated by parabolic mirrors feeding the gas or liquid into a Stirling engine.  The liquid could be water, LOX, hydrogen, freon or helium.  Many rocket engineers can probably make a space solar heat engine using nitrogen.

Funny, I was just thinking about the parabolic mirror heat engine in the context of the 200MWe VASIMR we were talking about in another thread, wondering how big something like that would have to be, as an alternative to heavy nuclear reactors and parking-lot sized solar panels. It's the technology was visualized for in-space power generation pre-photovoltaic, on, for example, Von Braun's original space station propsoal.

Offline Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 39271
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 25240
  • Likes Given: 12115
Re: NASA JSC Solicitation: VASIMR
« Reply #19 on: 02/06/2010 11:56 pm »
If that works, and someone gets smart and develops a space reactor powerful enough to power 2-3 VASIMR's and one of those artificial magnetospheres that were being worked on, it might even be useful for flying humans around the solar system and even through those pesky Van Allen belts.


A tug for the outer planets may use nuclear but ones to the Moon are going to be solar powered.

The video shows a VASIMR with semiconductor solar arrays.  If the tug only goes through the Van Allen belts 4 or 5 times in its life a radiation protection coating may work.  An alternative is a mechanical heat engine.  Possibly liquid filled pipes heated by parabolic mirrors feeding the gas or liquid into a Stirling engine.  The liquid could be water, LOX, hydrogen, freon or helium.  Many rocket engineers can probably make a space solar heat engine using nitrogen.

Funny, I was just thinking about the parabolic mirror heat engine in the context of the 200MWe VASIMR we were talking about in another thread, wondering how big something like that would have to be, as an alternative to heavy nuclear reactors and parking-lot sized solar panels. It's the technology was visualized for in-space power generation pre-photovoltaic, on, for example, Von Braun's original space station propsoal.
A parabolic heat engine would be the same size as a similar photovoltaic array, since the state-of-the-art for both is about just under 30% efficient (and I believe photovoltaic has made more progress than heat engine ones, and promises continued progress).


Why are we afraid of large structures in space? There's certainly a lot more room up there (hence the name "space" ;) ), and drag isn't an issue beyond LEO. I know it provides more engineering difficulties than smaller structures, but so what? Can't we just get over that and start testing large structures with "New Millenium"-style space technology missions? They don't require a lot of money just to test if it's viable. In fact, we'd know already if these solar-sail-sized structures were feasible if we hadn't canceled Space Technology 8. In fact, we do know they are feasible. The Shuttle Radar Topography Mission used a 60-meter boom, and we can do a lot better. The ISS is over 100 meters long (and has a far heavier truss because it has to handle reboosting burns with relatively high-thrust hypergolic engines).
Chris  Whoever loves correction loves knowledge, but he who hates reproof is stupid.

To the maximum extent practicable, the Federal Government shall plan missions to accommodate the space transportation services capabilities of United States commercial providers. US law http://goo.gl/YZYNt0

Tags:
 

Advertisement NovaTech
Advertisement Northrop Grumman
Advertisement
Advertisement Margaritaville Beach Resort South Padre Island
Advertisement Brady Kenniston
Advertisement NextSpaceflight
Advertisement Nathan Barker Photography
0