Transcript Fission Surface Power (FSP) Presentation to: Constellation

A Lunar Fission Surface Power (FSP) System
Presented to:
Nuclear and Emerging Technologies for Space
NETS 2009
James Werner/INL, Project Lead
June 15, 2009
Pre-Decisional, For Discussion Purposes Only
1
History of Space Nuclear Power
• Fission Reactor Systems
SNAP-10A
(Agena)
– SNAP-10A (launched 1965)
– SP-100 (cancelled 1992)
– Jupiter Icy Moons Orbiter
(cancelled 2005)
– Fission Surface Power (Present)
SNAP-27
(Apollo)
• Radioisotope Power Systems
– 44 Successful U.S. Radioisotope
Thermoelectric Generators (RTG)
Flown Since 1961
– Some Examples:
•
•
•
•
•
SNAP-19
(Viking)
Apollo SNAP-27 (1969-72)
Viking SNAP-19 (1975)
Voyager MHW-RTG (1977)
Galileo GPHS-RTG (1989)
New Horizons GPHS-RTG (2005)
Pre-Decisional, For Discussion Purposes Only
2
Recent interest in Fission Surface Power (FSP) to
support moon / Mars exploration
• Continuous Day/Night Power for Robust Surface Ops
• Same Technology for Moon and Mars
• Suitable for any Surface Location
– Lunar Equatorial or Polar Sites
– Permanently Shaded Craters
• Environmentally Robust
– Lunar Day/Night Thermal Transients
– Mars Dust Storms
• Operationally Robust
– Multiple-Failure Tolerant
– Long Life
• Highly Flexible Configurations
– Excavation Shield Permits Near-Habitat Siting
– Option for Above-Grade System or Mobile System (with
shield mass penalty)
– Option for Process Heat Source (for ISRU or habitat)
Pre-Decisional, For Discussion Purposes Only
3
Recent interest in Fission Surface Power (FSP) to
support moon / Mars exploration
• Safe During All Mission Phases
– Launched Cold, No Radiation Until Startup
– Safe after Shutdown with Negligible Residual
Radiation
• Scalable to Higher Power Levels (kWs to MWs)
• Competitive Cost with PV/RFC
– Detailed, 12-month “Affordable” Fission Surface Power
System Cost Study Performed by NASA & DOE
– LAT2 FSP and PV/RFC Options had Similar Overall
Cost
– Modest Unit Cost Enables Multiple Units and/or
Multiple Sites
• Technology Primed for Development
– Terrestrial Reactor Design Basis
– No Material Breakthroughs Required
– Lineage to RPS Systems (e.g. Stirling) and ISS (e.g.
Radiators, Electrical Power Distribution)
Pre-Decisional, For Discussion Purposes Only
4
Affordable Fission Surface Power System Study
Reference Concept
• Modular 40 kWe system with 8-year design life suitable for global lunar
and Mars surface applications
• Emplaced configuration with regolith shielding augmentation permits
near-outpost siting (<5 rem/yr at 100 m separation)
• Approximately 7 metric tons and <60 m3 volume is a good match for
Altair capability
Deployed
Stowed
3x3x7m
Pre-Decisional, For Discussion Purposes Only
5
Keys to Affordability
• Reactor: low temperature, well known UO2 fuel, stainless steel
construction, liquid metal NaK coolant well-tested
• Stirling power conversion: high efficiency at low temperature, 1980’s
test experience, RPS leverage
• Heat rejection: ISS mechanical design heritage, simple water heat pipes
• System: Power density of nuclear reactor allows heavier, simpler, more
robust components
Pre-Decisional, For Discussion Purposes Only
6
Notional FSP Flight Development Schedule
Task
FY
Tech Demo.
Unit (TDU)
ETDP
Devt. Test
Models (DTM)
07
Study
08
09
Design
Ref. Concept
Selection
10
11
Fab
Form, Fit & Function
Flight
Models (FM)
13
14
Test
LSS
MCR
1/4 Power, Full-Scale System Test
Prim. & Sec. Fluid Test Loops
Coupon/Component Radiation Tests
Engineering
Models (EM)
12
Non-nuclear
TRL6
Study
LSS
SRR
15
16
17
18
19
20
1/2 Power, Full-Scale System Test
Environ. Eval. (Radiation, Vib, etc.)
Physics Core Criticals
Life Test ≤5 yrs
Des Fab Test
Full Power, Full-Scale System Test
Structural & Environ. Qualification
Engineering Core Criticals
Prime
Contract
Design
Fab
Test
Subsystem, Module, and System
Flight Acceptance Testing
PDR/NAR
Design
ATP
Life Test ≤3 yrs
CDR
Fab
Test
ATLO
KSC
Ship
Launch
Revised 8/1/08
Pre-Decisional, For Discussion Purposes Only
7
Fission Surface Power Project
1.0 Fission Surface Power Systems Project Management
Project Manager:
Principal Investigator:
DOE Lead:
MSFC Lead:
Business Analyst:
2.0 Concept Definition
2.1 Concept Selection
Lead: Lee Mason (GRC)
2.2 Modeling and Tool Development
Lead: Scott Harlow (DOE)
Don Palac (GRC)
Lee Mason (GRC)
Scott Harlow
Mike Houts
Annie Delgado-Holton (GRC)
4.0 Risk Reduction
4.1 System Risk Reduction
Lead: Lee Mason (GRC)
4.2 Primary Test Circuit Risk Red.
Lead: Mike Houts (MSFC)
4.3 Reactor Component & Irradiation Testing
Lead: Scott Harlow (DOE)
4.4 Power Conversion Risk Reduction
Lead: Lee Mason (GRC)
4.5 Heat Rejection Risk Reduction
Lead: Don Jaworkse (GRC)
Pre-Decisional, For Discussion Purposes Only
8
FSP Technology Project:
Concept Definition
Reactor Heat Transport
Loop Integration
Stirling Convertor Concept
Stirling CFD
Modeling
Radiator Model
Validation
Reactor Core
Modeling
Pre-Decisional, For Discussion Purposes Only
Radiator & Deployment System
9
FSP Technology Project: Component Pathfinders
Power
Conversion
Reactor
Heat
Rejection
2 kWe NaK Stirling System
10 kWe Stirling
Alternator Test Rig
20 kWt NaK Reactor Simulator
Ti-H2O Heat Pipe Life Test
1 kWt Radiator
Demo Unit
NaK Electromagnetic Pump
10
2 kWe Direct Drive Gas Brayton
Pre-Decisional, For Discussion Purposes Only
Technology Demonstration Unit – The Core of the
Fission Surface Power Systems Project
• Demonstrate system-level technology readiness in an
operational environment
• ¼ power, full scale hardware demonstration
Notional TDU Test Layout in GRC Vacuum Facility #6
Pre-Decisional, For Discussion Purposes Only
11
Lunar Surface Systems Architecture Planning
FSP Off-Loaded & Buried
Notional Concept for FSP-Lander Delivery
FSP Remains on Lander
Pre-Decisional, For Discussion Purposes Only
12
Summary
• FSP has many advantages
–
–
–
–
–
Day/night power
Location independence
Environment tolerance
Moon/Mars commonality
High power, low mass
• Mission integration options
are plentiful
– Buried or Landed, Early or
Later, With or without PV
– Minimal impact on crew
– Major impact on surface
capabilities
• Affordability = Conservative,
Simple, Robust
– Known materials, generous
margins
– Modest requirements
– Self-regulating controls
– Fault tolerant, designed to
recover from anomalies
– Hardware-rich test program
– Low risk, accept mass
penalties if necessary
FSP Technology Development Project
is addressing the fundamental issues
Pre-Decisional, For Discussion Purposes Only
13
Positive Press
• NASA News Release “NASA Developing Fission Surface Power
Technology” Katherine Martin (9/10/08)
– Picked up by Dozens of Internet Sites including SpaceRef and Science Daily
– 100’s of Blogs… mostly supportive and positive
• DiscoveryChannel.com “NASA Eyes Nuclear Reactor for Moon Base”
Irene Klotz (9/15/08)
• Space.com “NASA Eyes
Nuclear Power for Moon
Base” Jeremy Hsu
(9/17/08)
• Athens Post “Athens
Business to Develop
Power Converter for
NASA” Amanda Liles
(10/6/08)
• Popular Science
Magazine “Gone
Fission” Dawn Stover
(Dec 2008 Issue)
Pre-Decisional, For Discussion Purposes Only
14