Conceptual design of a fully reusable manned launch system

Stanley, Douglas O.; Talay, Theodore A.; Lepsch, Roger A.; Morris, W. D.; Wurster, Kathryn E.

doi:10.2514/3.25496

Cited by 19 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 6 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Stanley et al 10 conducted conceptual design studies for the fully reusable Advanced Manned Launch System (AMLS), a potential replacement of the Space Shuttle. They found improvement in gross weight of 25.6% and in dry weight of 22.6% by using crossfeed.…”

Section: A Activities and Issues Related To Crossfeedmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cryogenic Propellant Tank and Feedline Design Studies in the Framework of the CHATT Project

Schwanekamp

Ludwig²,

Sippel³

2014

19th AIAA International Space Planes and Hypersonic Systems and Technologies Conference

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The EU-funded project CHATT (Cryogenic Hypersonic Advanced Tank Technologies) has been initiated early 2012 and is part of the European Commission's SeventhFramework Programme (FP7). CHATT focuses on the development of novel cryogenic tank and propellant supply technologies. One of the tasks within the project is the investigation of adequate propellant crossfeed systems. Propellant crossfeed principally allows large mass savings for parallel burn vehicles such as the visionary passenger transport concept "SpaceLiner" which has been proposed by the Space Launcher Systems Analysis Department of the German Aerospace Center DLR. Therefore the tank and feedline systems of the SpaceLiner concept are studied by means of reference data and the results of simulations conducted with in-house and commercial tools. Nomenclature CFRP = Carbon Fiber Reinforced Plastic GH2 = Gaseous Hydrogen GLOW = Gross Lift-Off Weight GOX = Gaseous Oxygen LH2 = Liquid Hydrogen LOX = Liquid Oxygen MECO = Main Engine Cut-Off NPSP = Net Positive Suction Pressure PMP = Propellant Management Program TPS = Thermal Protection System SL7 = SpaceLiner 7 SLME = SpaceLiner Main Engines SSME = Space Shuttle Main Engines ε = Expansion ratio g 0 = Gravitational acceleration I sp = Specific impulse n x = Load factor in x direction n z = Load factor in z direction n tot = Total load factor p = Pressure t = Time ∆v = Velocity difference -9.81 m/s 2 s ---Pa s m/s

show abstract

Section: A Activities and Issues Related To Crossfeedmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cryogenic Propellant Tank and Feedline Design Studies in the Framework of the CHATT Project

Schwanekamp

Ludwig²,

Sippel³

2014

19th AIAA International Space Planes and Hypersonic Systems and Technologies Conference

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Al-Li = aluminum-lithium b = equation coefficient g = acceleration of gravity, 32.2 ft/s 2 gg = gas generator H 2 = hydrogen HC = hydrocarbon 7 V = specific impulse, s (LH 2 )f r = LH 2 mass flow rate fraction of total propellant mass flow rate LH 2 = liquid hydrogen (at 4.43 lb/ft 3 ) LO 2 = liquid oxygen (at 71.2 lb/ft 3 ) Aftr = transition Mach number n = number of configuration variables O/F = oxidizer-to-fuel ratio O 2 = oxygen P/L = payload P c = chamber pressure, psia sc = staged combustion (7nc)fr = fraction of lift-off thrust generated by hydrocarbon-fueled engines T/W = thrust-to-weight ratio TIW G = thrust-to-gross-weight ratio T s i = sea level thrust, Ib r vac = vacuum thrust, Ib V = incremental velocity, ft/s Y = response-surface value y = configuration variable value s = nozzle expansion ratio SSSME = SSME nozzle expansion ratio…”

Section: Nomenclaturementioning

confidence: 99%

Dual-fuel propulsion in single-stage Advanced Manned Launch System Vehicle

Lepsch

Stanley

Unal

1995

Journal of Spacecraft and Rockets

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

As part of the United States Advanced Manned Launch System study to determine a follow-on, or complement, to the Space Shuttle, a reusable single-stage-to-orbit concept utilizing dual-fuel rocket propulsion has been examined. Several dual-fuel propulsion concepts were investigated. These include: a separate-engine concept combining Russian RD-170 kerosene-fueled engines with space shuttle main engine-derivative engines; the keroseneand hydrogen-fueled Russian RD-701 engine; and a dual-fuel, dual-expander engine. Analysis to determine vehicle weight and size characteristics was performed using conceptual-level design techniques. A response-surface methodology for multidisciplinary design was utilized to optimize the dual-fuel vehicles with respect to several important propulsion-system and vehicle design parameters in order to achieve minimum empty weight. The tools and methods employed in the analysis process are also summarized. In comparison with a reference hydrogenfueled single-stage vehicle, results showed that the dual-fuel vehicles were from 10 to 30% lower in empty weight for the same payload capability, with the dual-expander engine types showing the greatest potential. = chamber pressure, psia sc = staged combustion (THc)fr = fraction of lift-off thrust generated by hydrocarbon-fueled engines T W = thrust-to-weight ratio T Wa = thrust-to-gross-weight ratio T_ = sea level thrust, lb Two = vacuum thrust, lb V = incremental velocity, ft/s Y = response-surface value y = configuration variable value = nozzle expansion ratio eSSME = SSME nozzle expansion ratio

show abstract

“…Our literature search on existing design frameworks parallels the one executed by Frank et al [14][15][16] and Burgaud et al [17]. We found 12 sizing and synthesis codes [14][15][16][18][19][20][21][22][23][24][25][26][27][28][29]. They were compared in terms of computational speed, availability, ease of use, ability to explore the architectural space, and their level of abstraction suitable for conceptual studies.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Dominant Suborbital Space Tourism Architectures

Guerster

Crawley

2019

Journal of Spacecraft and Rockets

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the early stages of maturity of a system built for a specific function, it is common for the solutions to lie in a broad architectural space, in which numerous concepts are being developed, built, and tested. As the product matures, certain concepts become more dominant. This pattern can currently be observed in the suborbital tourism industry, in which the obvious question is what system architecture will provide the best combination of cost and safety and in the long run become the dominant architecture. This paper addresses this question by defining a broad architectural space of thousands of possibilities and exploring it comprehensively. We identified 33 feasible architectures, 26 of which had not been proposed earlier. A genetic algorithm optimizes each architecture with respect to the launch mass (a proxy for cost) and operational safety. The launch mass has been calculated in a design analysis framework consisting of four modules: weight/size, propulsion, aerodynamics, and trajectory. A validation of this framework shows relative differences below 7%. A quantitative safety analysis is developed and validated with a survey of 11 leading experts. We identify six dominant architectures. These form a set from which optimal variants are likely to come.

show abstract

Conceptual design of a fully reusable manned launch system

Cited by 19 publications

References 6 publications

Cryogenic Propellant Tank and Feedline Design Studies in the Framework of the CHATT Project

Cryogenic Propellant Tank and Feedline Design Studies in the Framework of the CHATT Project

Dual-fuel propulsion in single-stage Advanced Manned Launch System Vehicle

Dominant Suborbital Space Tourism Architectures

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About