Main Engine Prototype Development for 2nd Generation RLV RS83

1
Main Engine Prototype Development for 2nd
Generation RLV RS-83

• Mark Fisher
• John Vilja
• April 12, 2002

2
Program Objectives

• Retire risks for a 2nd Generation Reusable Engine
• All technologies demonstrated in prototype
• Build to most challenging conditions
• Component operation (e.g. combustion stability)
• Manufacturing capability (e.g. forgings)
• Enable commercial engine viability
• Work to requirements flowed to engine from
  program
• Loss of crew 1 in 10,000
• Loss of vehicle 1 in 1,000
• 1000/lb to LEO

3
Overview Schedule
CY2000 2001 2002
2003 2004
2005
IPD
- Milestones

• Technologies
• Hydrostatic Bearings
• H2 Compatible Materials
• Turbine Damping

STAS 3B
NRA 8-27
PDR
CDR
SRR
ATP
SDR

• RS-83 Prototype
• Design
• Technology Risk Red.

Basic
Option 1

• Technology Maturation
• Materials
• Components
• IVHM

Prototype Test

• RFP
• Prototype Fabrication
• Prototype Test

4
RS-83 Management Team
NASA COTR Mark Fisher
Location
RPP
MSFC
Funded by subcontracts with primes
Boeing Raj Varma LMA Steve Fusselman NG/OSC
Dan Levack
Program Manager John Vilja
NASA RPP REP Jeff Bland
DPM Walt Janowski
DPM Roger Campbell
NASA Systems Engineer Mike Ise
Chief Program Engineer Vernon Gregoire
Business Manager Gale Augur
SEI Steve Hobart
Engine Integration IPT Jon Volkmann
Turbopump IPT Brian Shinguchi
Thrust Chamber IPT Mike Krene
Injectors IPT Ken Hunt
Engine Development IPT Eric Stangeland
NASA IPT Mike Mims
NASA IPT Michael Haynes
NASA IPT Dave Sparks
NASA IPT Dave Sparks
NASA IPT Mike Mims Charlie Nola
5
Team has Recent Rocket Engine Development
Experience
SSME Block II
RS-68
RS-83 Team
XRS-2200
Fastrack
IPD
RS-72
AR2-3
6
Integrated Systems Engineering Processes
Requirements
Risk Mgmt
Safety/Hazards Reliability Maintainability Operabi
lity Affordability Schedule Performance Transients
Weight
Functional analysis
Selection Criteria
U Calcs
Specs
ICDs
Utility Analysis
Trade Studies
Allocation Reports
TPMs
VV
RS-83
Balance Rev. 1.7d
1/15/01
TPM Quicklook Report
Margin /
Unit of Measure
Spec Value
Current Status
Trend Chart
TSR
TPM
Variance
Vacuum Specific Impulse
sec
0xx
yyy
x0
Green
Engine Weight
lbm
zzzz
aaaa
xxx2
Green
Mean Time Between Catastrophic Failures
flights
zzzz
yyyy
zzz9
Green
Mean Time Between Benign Failures
flights
xxx0
?
VALUE!
VALUE!
Turnaround Time
shifts
xx
zz
x
Green
Probability of Unscheduled RR
nondimensional
0.x
0..0yyy
0.www
Green
TPM reports
Minimum Throttle
RPL
rr
uu
tt
Green
Unit Cost
M
uu
pppp
qqqq
Green
Operations Cost
M
1
cccc
0yyy
Green
Development Cost
M
1xx
hhhh
jjjj.8
Green
Time to IOC
months
iii
jjj
lll
Green
Boeing Utility
nondimensional
0
0.1271
0.1271
Green
Lockheed Utility
nondimensional
0
0.5298
0.5298
Green
NASA Utility
nondimensional
0
0.mmm
0.nnn
Green
Variance is shown by a negative number
Report Owner
Chris Garrett, SLI SEI
x6-1576
christopher.j.garrett_at_boeing.com
7
Requirement Analysis and Development
Reqts Synthesis for Risk Reduction Prototype
NRA 8-27 (Vehicle Reqts)
Additional Vehicle Reqts
PSRD
Proposed Engine
Derived Reqts
SRR/ PIDS
Conceptual Development
Reqts Allocations
Component Limits
Trade Studies
Engine Balance
Utility Analysis
8
Catastrophic Loss of EngineAllocation to
Subsystems and Component Teams
Engine Derating Health Management System
Component Design
Allocation goal 50 risk reduction (2 times MTBF
improvement)
10
Allocation Goal with reserve
9
Health Management System Component Design
Allocation goal 40 risk reduction (1.67 times
MTBF improvement)
7
Single Engine Catastrophic Failure MTBF
5
Allocation goal 60 risk reduction (2.5 times
MTBF improvement)
PIDS Reqt
Component Design
3
SSME Block II point of departure
Reference
Resource/Time line/Risk Management Milestones
9
SSME Block II Failure Probabilityby Component
HPFTP 25
Propellant Valves 6.54
HPOTP 15
Main Inj. 4.75
LTMCC 10
Nozzle 10
10
Reliability, Maintainability Supportability
Vehicle Figure of Merit
Engine Figure of Merit
Failure Modes
Reliability
Crit 1
Loss of Vehicle, Loss of Crew
Cat. Failures
Planned Maintenance
Benign Engine Shutdown
Loss of Mission
Crit 1R or 2
Availability Cost/Eng/Flt
Unplanned RR/ Maintainability
Crit 3
Unplanned Maintenance
Maintainability Supportability
Logistics Support Plan
11
Operations Effects Modeled forAll Design Trade
Studies
Land
Launch
Prep for Launch
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Land, Safe
Propellant
and Provide
External Insp Drying
Vehicle to Launch Pad
Maintenance (planned unplanned)
Loading
Access
3.2.5.6 Turnaround Time
3.2.5.1 Maintenance Time
3.2.5.2 Engine Change Out
3.2.5.7 Routine Pre-Launch Maintenance Time
3.2.5.9 Call up Time
3.2.5.5
Chilldown
Time
Key Operation Drivers being Derived from FFBD to
Support Requirements
EXPORT CONTROLLED
12
Utility-Based Trade MethodologySystem-Level
Trades
Option Assessment with respect to Decision
Attributes
Translate Assessment into Figures of Merit
Determine Overall Rankings
Traded Options

• Isp
• Weight
• Cost
• Reliability
• Safety
• Operability
• Risk

On Select trades
Utilities
13
RS-83 Designs in High Reliability and Cost
Reduction

• Series turbines
• Eliminate potential for Run Away
• Higher efficiency reduces turbine temp
• Reduced hot gas temperature
• Improve turbine life
• Eliminate hot-gas duct cooling
• Liquid/Liquid Preburners
• Eliminates turbine temp spikes
• Turbopumps
• Hydrostatic bearings provide long life
• Hydrogen compatible materials
• Eliminate reliability, cost, and maintenance
  issues with plating
• Powder metal enables large parts

14
RS-83 Prototype Engine

• Thrust
• Sea Level 664 klb
• Vacuum 750 klb
• Specific Impulse
• Sea Level 395 sec.
• Vacuum 446 sec.
• Weight 12,700 lbm
• Life 100 Missions
• Dimensions
• Length 171 in.
• Diameter 115 in.
• Demonstrates all candidate technologies for FSD
  engine

15
Designs Maturing Rapidly
CoDR completed on all major parts
16
Key Risk Mitigation Tests in Work
Advanced Matls Processes
Model Correlation
Flow Characterization
Technology Evaluation
Component Demo
Component Characterization
17
Summary

• RS-83 engine meets all SLI requirements with
  margin
• Project is on budget schedule
• High performance NASA/contractor team in-place
• Trades based on rigorous systems engineering
  processes
• CoDRs conducted for Turbopumps and Combustion
  Devices
• Early retirement of key risks taking place
• Communication within team enhanced by web-based
  information technology
• All elements in-place to assure success