opag rps & update on technology february 3, 2020€¦ · – develop system concepts and...

OPAG RPS & UPDATE ON TECHNOLOGY

FEBRUARY 3, 2020

www.nasa.gov

Topics Covered• Program Highlights

– DOE– Mars 2020– Dragonfly– MMRTG

• National Security Presidential Memoranda -20• Next Gen RTG Technical Progress/Accomplishments• DRPS Technical Progress/Accomplishments• Summary

2

Program Highlights - DOE

• Excellent relationship with DOE and RPSP • Managing opportunities and threats from other NASA

nuclear activities

• CRP on track• DOE pulling in schedule for new Hot Press - IOC will

now be before 2021• Implementing continuous Improvement model to

increase production• Tripled target production• At half way mark to full production • Reduction in operation steps cut by 50%

• Material Inventory Model delivers confidence in availability by providing an integrated model. Allows quick response to NASA requests and potential what-ifs

3

Program Highlights – Mars 2020

• Mars 2020 – On Track!• MMRTG F2 Pre-Ship Review: 12 Feb 2020

• Assess completeness of the MMRTG and readiness to proceed with the integration and test activities at the next higher level of integration as well as development activities.

• MMRTG F2 HRCR: 26 Feb 2020• Formal review hosted by QA for the transfer of hardware from Power

Systems to ATLO (Assemble, Test and Launch Operations).• DOE prepared for ATLO with GSE and Operations Procedures• MMRTG F2 is certified passing acceptance tests with no DOE Class I

PFRs

4

Program Highlights - Dragonfly

• Dragonfly• DOE/Dragonfly/RPS Kickoff

• Working potential MMRTG accommodation/modification trades and studies

• Established Dragonfly MMRTG Integration Lead Roles, Responsibilities, and reporting requirements with RPS Program Office.

• NEPA • EA/EIS approach starts in March• RPS personnel assigned to

support EMD • DOE developing GPHS Module

Documented Safety Analysis (DSA)

5

Program Highlights - MMRTG

• MMRTG Production/Sustainment• INL contact with ARD to

produce 1 MMRTG 48-couple module on track

• INL Negotiated F4, F5, and F6 MMRTG Production Contract – to be executed depending on outcome of Discovery 2019 key

6

RPS Launch Approval Management • RPS Program providing support to OSMA

SARD for the implementation of NSPM-20 – Drafted Interagency Nuclear Safety Review Board

(INSRB) Charter - In review at INSRB Agencies– Member and Facilitator for OSMA’s Nuclear Safety

Working Group • Consists of 12 members from, GRC, GSFC, JPL, OCHMO,

KSC, and LaRC– Drafted NASA Interim Directive to replacing Chapter

6, Nuclear Safety for Launching of Radioactive Materials, of NPR 8715.3, NASA General Safety Program Requirements

• NID to be eventually replaced with new NPR• Potential companion standard is proposed as a means

to accompany the NPR to address requirements and associated technical basis

7

RPS Launch Approval Management

• NEPA– Member of Environmental Management Division’s NEPA Working

Group– Programmatic Environmental Assessment for RHUs

• FONSI in process – SMD meeting February to sign• Coordinating TIM for DOE to have a technical discussion with

LAE and LSP – Council on Environmental Quality update (CEQ)

• Ensuring that all Agency NEPA and Nuclear Launch approval related language is consistent with NSPM-20 within documentation throughout the agency

• Launch Approval– Documented Safety Analysis (DSA) for RHU to be completed by

DOE by end of FY 20– Initiating DSA for GPHS Module in FY20

Next Gen RTGTechnical Progress/Accomplishments

• Level I Requirement– Develop and qualify a vacuum-rated RPS by 2028

• Approach– Develop system concepts and identify thermoelectric

conversion technologies to meet the System Requirements Document

– Mature the thermoelectric conversion technology leading to a successful flight system design

– Develop the Next Gen RTG and test to Qualification Levels– Develop Flight Systems as required to support Planetary

Missions• Two Contractor Teams

– Aerojet Rocketdyne and Teledyne – Lockheed Martin and Novus

9

Next Gen RTG Key SRD Requirements3.2.1.7 EODL Power:• The Next Gen RTG shall have an EODL power of greater than

[290] We (electrical), assuming:– Sink temperature: uniform -269°C (4K)– Load voltage 30V– Q=250WTH/GPHS at BOL– Vacuum of deep space– 16-GPHS sized variant– Assuming a free-flying Next Gen RTG

3.3.1 Fueled system mass: • The fueled system mass of the largest Next Gen RTG shall be

less than [65] kg including optional cooling tubes.3.1.3 Modularity: • The Next Gen RTG shall be modular to allow for multiple

variants of the Next Gen RTG, numbering up to 16 GPHSs while meeting the operating voltage

3.2.1.2 Allowable Flight Operating Voltages: • The Next Gen RTG shall operate across a load voltage range

from 22V to 36V.

10


Major Milestones Contract award 8/2019 Contract kick off 9/2019• Phase 1 Technical Interchange Meeting,

4/2020• Gate 1 Concept Review, 6/2020• Phase 2 Tech Mat Award, 9/2020• Gate 3 Final Tech Review, 6/2022• Qualification Unit, 9/2028

11

Modular System – Modularity TBD


12

Qual Unit

TRL 1-2Gate 1 Gate 2 Gate 3Gate 0

End Tech Dev

Commit to Flight System Dev

Start Flt Sys Dev (7120.5)

Tech Dev & Mat (7120.8)

Conceptual Sys Design

Update Design

Prelim DesignLevel 1&2

Req’s

Tech Adv Tech Mat

• TRA #1• Promising Tech• TRL 2/3

• TRA #2• Tech Mat Starts

• TRL 3/4

• TRA #3• Tech Freeze• TRL 4/5

Hi FidelityTech

Iterative Cycles

• TRA #4• TRL 6 Critical Tech

• Sys at TRL 5• Final Gate

Informs Tech Adv• Relevant

Environ• Testing

Govt Concept

SIC Led Process

Tech Led Process

Note: 7123.1 applies to end-to-end process

Technology to System Development Plan


• Concept Design Review at end of Phase I

13

Entrance Criteria Exit Criteria

1. A design concept that can be shown to meet requirements and key technical performance goals

1. A preliminary flow down of requirements and associated verifications is provided.

2. Information on mass, power and size including assumptions, uncertainties, Current Best Estimate (CBE), not to exceed estimates, contingencies and margins.

2. The conceptual design is expected to meet the requirements with adequate margins. The concept considers the assessment of single point failures and potential mitigations. Provide evidence that calculations and analyses are performed under a specific quality standard and that data used in analyses are appropriate and traceable. Provide any predictions on performance and life properties.



14


3. Concept Design Review Presentation and Documents.

3. Cost and Schedule estimates for Phase 2 are credible

4. Phase 2 Technology maturation Plan.

4. Phase 2 Technical Plan is credible

5. Technology readiness assessment (updated as needed from TIM)

5. The testing and modeling approach for Phase 2 is comprehensive and the planning for assembly, integration and test of prototype hardware is sufficient. All test support equipment has been identified with cost and schedule included in the Phase 2 planning.



15


6. Risk assessment and management/ mitigation plans.

6. Adequate technical and programmatic margins (e.g. size, mass and power) and resources exist to complete Phase 2 within budget, schedule and known risks.

7. Phase 2 Cost and Schedule estimates

7. Risks for success are understood, documented and credibly assessed with plans and resources to adequately manage them.



16


8. Safety and Mission Assurance (S&MA) requirements and risks, including Nuclear launch safety, are addressed.

8. Any new or custom material property tests are either complete or have been identified and design analyses have been performed to identify loads, stress, fracture control, environment, compatibility, and contamination control and their predicted effect on thermoelectric performance and life properties.9. S&MA considerations have been adequately addressed in the system design concept and are at the appropriate maturity level to begin Phase 2. With safety, reliability, and quality risks at an acceptable level.



17


10. Manufacturability has been adequately considered in the design concept.11. Preliminary compliance with requirements, standards, processes, and procedures has been demonstrated.

Preserve Ability to Deliver System for 2030 Mission

• RPS Program is assessing rebuild or remake of GPHS-RTG – Rebuild of available parts

requires re-qualification of TE unicouples

– Trade GPHS Modules Step 1 and Step 2 system and launch approval impacts

– Reproduce Unicouples– “Redesign” GPHS-RTG– GPHS-RTG requires 572

thermoelectric unicouples.• INL is the custodian of available

GPHS-RTG legacy hardware and associated fabrication tooling.

• Timeline and resources identified by June 2020

18

DRPS Technical Progress/Accomplishments

19

Dynamic RPS Generator and Convertor Designs

AMSC FISC

Convertor

Creare TBCConvertor

Sunpower SRSC

Convertor

AMSC System Concept

Sunpower System Concept

Creare System Concept

DRPS Technical Progress/AccomplishmentsDRPS Convertor Development

• Contracts – Delivery 2020• Extended life testing of legacy convertors in

GRC Stirling Research Lab (SRL); TDC #13 now exceeds 121,000 hours and will reach 14 years in March

DRPS Generator Development• Generator

• DRPS Generator system concept reviews conducted,

• Qualified Bidders List for Lunar DRPS development coordinated with INL; companies notified

• Controller Development• Continuing Dual Convertor Controller

development with APL• Analog Controller completed; ready for testing

• Planning generator test article development

20

NASA Analog Controllerpopulated circuit board

TDC #13 approaching 14-years of faultless operation

Dual Convertor Controller

RPS Program Summary

21

• RPS Program and DOE working together to provide NASA a robust, end-to-end program capability– Continued strong NASA & DOE partnership– CRP on track

• Targets in HFIR and ATR – Mars 2020 MMRTG Ready– Dragonfly in work– Prepared if Discovery 2019 has an RPS Step-1 – Two Contractors developing concepts and technology for

Next Gen RTG• “GPHS-RTG” backup option for 2030 mission

– DRPS hardware being delivered in 2020

Power to Explore

SPW 2019 22