4% 2 0 1998 osti - unt digital library › ark: › 67531 › metadc691931 › ... · semi annual...

Semi Annual Technical Progress Report Lockheed Martin Document No. RR16

29 September 1997 through 29 March 1998 1

TECHNICAL PROGRESS BY MAJOR

TASK 1 SPACECRAFT INTEGRATION AND LIAISON The Cassini spacecraft was successfully launched from Cape Canaveral Air Station Space Launch Complex 40 at 0443 hours on 15 October 1997. Initial telemetry data show excellent RTG performance, with power within 0.25% of pre-launch predictions. Subsequently, JPL analyses concerning early flight telemetry and pre-launch on-pad power readings continued to show excellent RTG performance. On-pad individual RTG pre-launch power measurements (backfilled with xenon) agreed with predictions to within 6-9 watts (out of 209-219 watts). Flight telemetry for beginning of mission showed 890 watts which was only two watts from the prediction of 888 watt c TASK 2 ENGINEERING SUPPORT 4% 2 0 1998

O S T I RTG Fuel Form, Fueling, and Test SuppotWLiaison During this period support was provided for the return of the F-5 flight spare from KSC to Mound. Procedures were reviewed and approved and a Lockheed Martin representative was on hand at Mound for unloading.

The preferred post-defueling configuration for the F-5 converter was defined in a letter to Mound if the decision is subsequently made by DOE to defuel the generator.

As RTG Cassini System Integration Contractor for DOE, Lockheed Martin is assisting DOE in evaluating proposals for possibly relocating RTG assembly and test work from Mound to another facility. Pursuant to this evaluation effort, visits were made to Savannah River Site, Hanford, Idaho Falls, Oak Ridge, Los Alamos National Laboratory, Nevada Test Site and PanTex in Texas. Proposals have been reviewed and visits to the above sites have been made. At the close of this report period the evaluation is on-going.

Specifications and Drawings The effort to organize drawing files on electronic media and set up new back-up files on our dedicated network servers was completed during this period.

I


29 September 1997 through 29 March 1998

TASK 3 SAFETY ANALYSIS TASK Following the Cassini launch on 15 October 1997, the safety analysis task shifted from launch approval support to:

- Update of EGA analysis for the 800 km swingby trajectory - Review of INSRP comments and compiarison of SAR methodologies - Delta I I launch accident analysis - Launch accident and consequence model documentation

During this reporting period, sub-panel reports from all INSRP sub-panels, prepared in support of the SER, were received. For each sub-panel, a list of issues was gatheredl and corresponding replies were documented in memoranda provided to DOE. These issues were discussed with DOE and TTNUS in meetings held on 26 February in Valley Forge, PA, and on 4 March at Albuquerque, NM.

Launch Support Activities A set of 900 simulations of the dominant accident case 1.1 (Total Boost Vehicle Destruct), without SRMU coincident impact release, were performed to provide plots of ground deposition isopleth and maximum distance of contamination. Concerns about the extent to which launch accident scenarios could induce offsite Contamination have led to the evaluation of the maximum distance from launch complex 40, at which land contamination could exceed 0.2 micro C:i/m2. The conditional probability of land contamination exceeding 0.2 micro Ci/m2 beyond a 10 km radius from the launch pad was found to be less than 0.02 (Le., above the 98th percentile case), confirming that high ground concentration levels would be expected to be restricted to KSC/CCAS following a launch area accident.

EGA Analysis An EGA analysis was performed to incorporate updated GIS orientation statistics from recent Lockheed Martin 6DOF analysis along with Earth impact probabilities from the 800 km swingby trajectory update from NASA. Compared to the FSAR Addendum Supplement results, the mean health effects drops about 34%, mainly due to ii

reduction of in-air release and a higher probability that impacts would occur in latitude bands containing low population densities. In addition to health effects and land

2

DISCLAIMER

This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States Government. Neither the United States Government nor any agency thereof, nor any of their employees, makes any warranty, express or implied or assumes any I@ liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or use- fulaess of any information, apparatus, product, or proass disclosed, or represents that its w would not infringe privateiy owned rights. Refemcc herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufac- turer, or otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recom- mendation. or favoring by the United States Government or any agency thereof. The views and opinions of authors e x p d h m i n do not n d y state or reflect those of the United States Government or any agency thereof.

DISCLAIMER

Portions of this document may be illegible electronic image products. Images are produced from the best available original document.



contamination, the number of persons exposed to 12 dose levels was estimated. For this analysis, over 11,000 accident simulations were performed. A detailed comparison with the FSAR Addendum Supplement results was provided to DOE in a memo document.

Comparison of SARs Methodologies - Review of INSRP Comments The consequence prediction methodologies employed in the Galileo, Ulysses, and Cassini FSARs were reviewed for comparison of dominant risk contributors. The dose effectiveness (or collective dose per unit mass of source term) was compared for various mission phases and the main factors contributing to the differences were determined. Due to the complexity of each FSAR analysis, simplified test cases were needed to reveal the effects of key parameters such as source term, resuspension, and deposition velocity. Important intermediate results such as air concentrations and ground deposition were evaluated to help understand the differences.

Delta II Analysis The Delta4 accident (17 January 1997) represents a unique launch accident in that relatively good documentation on atmospheric dispersion conditions and plume configuration are available for transport model validation:

Rawinsonde and surface wind data were collected before and after the launch explosion.

A NEXRAD radar station of the National Weather Service (NWS) in Melbourne tracked the plumes from the solid/liquid fuel fires several hours after release.

An activity was initiated to validate the cloud transport results from the PUFFKPARRC codes from these data.

Video footage from different sources were acquired along with technical papers from Lawrence Livermore National Laboratories (LLNL), ENSCO, and ACTA. These papers provide estimates of fuel energy involved and evaluation results for the plume height stabilization. Although radar images of the cloud resulting from burning rocket fuel are mentioned, measurement data of ground concentrations appear to be unavailable. A comparison of the accident simulation results from LLNL and ACTA Inc. revealed a significant difference in assumption of HCI source term generated from

3

Semi Annual Technical Progress Report Lockheed Martin Document No. RRl6


the burning solid propellant. Using the Rocket Exhaust Effluent Diffusion Model (REEDM) for dispersion analysis, ACTA ernployed a HCI source term about twice thalt of LLNL. It was felt that the unburned fuel ,Fraction would be a key factor in determining the HCI source term. in addition to the technical paper mentioned above, a series of radar images from the Melbourne NWS station were obtained from ENSCO. These images will be used to estimate the cloud stabilized heights and dimensions.

For this effort, SATRAP was modified to accept simple rawinsonde profiles as wind field input and to report the size and location of various tracked clouds at specified travel times, A new option allows the user to define several successive rawinsonde profiles for simulations of time-dependent wind components at high altitudes;. Preliminary results show the output for trajectories of various clouds compared favorably with the radar images and simulation results from LLNL. This analysis is in progress.

Consequence Analysis Model Documentation The documentation of several shell codes and programs used in the consequence analysis process for Cassini was completed. For this application, a shell code consists of a set of UNlX operating system commands designed to perform tasks such as data transfer or program execution. There are three groups of shelf codes: 1) the sampling shell codes which involves the Latin Hypercube Sampling (LHS) program and the preparation of input parameters for various accident scenarios, 2) the shell codes which generate detailed SPARRC input files and the execution of analyses, and 3) the post-processor codes which were used in the late launch and EGA reentry accident analyses. Documentation of shell codes/programs related to the first two groups was completed. For the third group, documentation of the EGA post-processor was completed. Whenever possible, modelirig details with the Cassini mission specific inputs or with possible improvements were noted for future application. An overview of the LHSEPARRC analysis process with flow diagrams of various contributing shells/programs was provided in a separate memorandum. This activity is continuing.

4



Launch Accident Model Documentation Unit Development Folders for the following launch accident codes were completed:

LASEP-T (Launch Accident Scenario Evaluation Program - Titan), Revision 1 LASEP-T, Revision 2 LASEP-T Phase 0 (On-Pad Accidents) LASEP-T Full Stack Intact Impact SRESP (SRMU Propellant Fallback Response Model) S RMU P rope1 lant Fall back Integration

A Unit Development Folder was also completed for the Safety Analysis Uncertainty Simulation.

TASK 4 QUALIFIED UNICOUPLE FABRICATION No activity during this reporting period. This task has been successfully completed.

TASK 5 ETG FABRICATION, ASSEMBLY, AND TEST No activity during this reporting period. This task has been successfully completed.

TASK 6 GROUND SUPPORT EQUIPMENT (GSE) No activity during this reporting period. This task has been successfully completed.

TASK 7 RTG SHIPPING AND LAUNCH SUPPORT Launch Activity Prior to launch, the RTG xenon gas exchange cycles started on 29 September 1997. This was a 24-hour per day activity and lasted six days. The RTGs were on open circuit for these gas exchange cycles to raise the hot side temperatures to aid in removal of the residual helium and argon gases.

The xenon gas exchange cycles were completed for F-2, F-6 and F-7. F-6 required 10 gas cycles to obtain maximum power. F-2 and F-7 required 9 gas cycles. During the gas exchange cycles the RTG open circuit voltage was monitored. When the voltage changed less than 0.1 volt between gas cycles, the cycles were terminated. Following the completion of the gas cycles, the RTGs were placed under a 30 volt foad and a four hour stability test was performed. The initial open circuit voltage with argon/helium and the final open circuit voltage with xenon gas and final RTG power are shown as follows:

5

Semi Annual Technical Progress Report Lockheed Martin Document No. RRIS


I RTG-F-2

~~

Arg on/Hel ium XENON RTG Power

44.10 Volts 53.24 Volts 221.34 Watts ~~~ ~~~

RTG-F-6 43.39 Volts 52.00 Volts 21 1.48 Watts

RTG-F-7 44.27 Volts 53.01 Volts 21 9.23 Watts

I I I NIA 40.98 Volts 49.92 Volts I On F-5 (spare RTG) the xenon gas cycles were suspended after two gas cycles due to lack of xenon gas. The following week two hundred liters of additional xenon gas were available to complete the 10 gas cycles. No load performance test was performed on F-5 due to other activities required for the flight RTGs.

On 6 October the RTGs were prepared for flight by removing the gas flex hoses and other non-flight hardware and the protective covers were installed onto the BPCA bases. The three flight RTGs were transferred to the launch pad via the DOE trailers on 10 October. The RTG loading began at 04100 hours and the move to LC-40 began al 0500 hours. The unloading and lift to level 6 began at approximately 0615 hours and was completed around 0830 hours. The lifts from level 6 to level 14 were completed at 1100 hours. RTG power to the spacecraft was started at 1300 hours. All operations; were completed satisfactorily.

I

The Cassini spacecraft was launched on 15 October at 0443 hours from Cape Canaveral Air Station. The three RTGs performed nominally and power was 890 watts; after achieving stability. F-2 was 299.7 watts, F-6 was 293.1 watts, and F-7 was 297.4. watts after accounting for spacecraft cable llosses.

On 20 October Lockheed Martin RTG personnel were allowed to return to the launch pad to remove BPCAs and other GSE from level 6 and return it to the RTGF. Also on 20 October we initiated the F-5 exchange of the xenon gas back to argon gas. Nine gas cycles were completed on F-5 by 24 Olctober 1997. A PTU performance test was performed on this RTG to provide a reference for receipt at DOE Mound.



The PTU test data are shown as follows:

F-5 RTG PTU Data

I Voltage I 1.234 volts I ~ _ _ _ -1 14.92 amps 1 ~~ I Current

RTD Average 158.6"C

Resistance (Internal) 2.195 ohms Open Circuit Voltage 33.99 volts Resistance to Case 868k ohms

I RTG Pressure I 23.2 psia I - -~ ~

The RTG Shipping Package was prepared for receiving the RTG on 27 October. F-5 was installed into the package on 28 October and loaded into the Transportation System Trailer. The convoy left KSC the following morning and arrived at DOE Mound on 30 October. The package was unloaded and F-5 was removed.

Prior to shipment, PTU performance testing and RTG pressure check were performed on the F-5 RTG at KSC and again following receipt at Mound. The data were in good agreement, indicating no adverse effects during shipment.

The PTU test data are shown as follows:

Parameter KSC Mound

Voltage 1.234 volts 1.260 volts

Current 14.92 amps 14.69 amps

RTD Average 158.6"C 1550°C

Resistance (Internal) 2.1 95 ohms 2.248 ohms Open Circuit Voltage 33.99 volts 34.28 volts Resistance to Case 888 k ohms 790 k ohms RTG Pressure 23.2 psia 23.2 psia

The KSC RTG ground support equipment was loaded on trucks on 29-30 October for return to Valley Forge, ending the KSC/CCAS launch support activities.

A summary of the RTG electrical data and pressure history at KSC and a partial listing of Mound data are shown in Tables 7-1 through 7-4.

7

Table 7-1. RTG F-2 Data



Notes: 1 2

Data taken after extended period in OPEN mode, during adapter installation. Conditions were unstable. Stable data taken after JPL adapter was installed.


29 September 1997 through 29 March I998


RTG RTG RTG Case Case RTD RTD RTD RTD RTD RTG RTG Case load res

res res 2 min Date PSlA VDC Amps VDC VDC VDC Deg.C Deg.C Deg.C Deg.C Deg.C Watts Ohms Ohms KOhms

3/25/97 2485 1118 1255 3052 0168 000054 1581 1567 1567 1565 1570 140 2343 0089 3101 1 4\8/97 2475 1071 1250 3033 0161 000058 1581 1576 1585 1592 1584 134 2341 0086 27659

4/14/97 2475 1112 1249 3031 0155 000053 1563 1550 1549 1548 1553 139 2338 0089 29145

RTG shorted shorted OpenCir Open Cir CloseCir #I # 2 # 3 # 4 Avg RTG internal pressure voltage current voltage voltage voltage temp temp temp temp temp power

MOUND

4/14/97 2360 1112 1249 3031 0155 000053 1563 1550 1549 1548 1553 139 2338 0089 29145 KSC 4/24/97 2355 1115 1247 3024 0218 000052 1580 1585 1578 1576 1580 1390 2336 0089 41823 4/29/97 23 55 4/29/97 2450 5/13/97 24 61 6/2/97 1086 1248 3016 0189 000053 157 1584 156 1567 1570 1355 2330 0087 35560 6/3/97 24 81

RTG in NORMAL OADMODE ARGON GAS 611 81971 25 1 I 30 061 I 412) 40081 21 9221 18771 15561 15591 15411 15451 1550l 12388) 24321 72951 10679

7/25/97 24 52 7/25/97 2400 1214 1391 3410 0257 000218 1545 1559 1550 1539 1549 1689 2364 0087 11689 011 9/97 1212 1377 3379 0251 000207 155 1556 1541 1534 1544 1669 2366 0088 12026 8120197 2450

I

Notes: 1

2 Data taken after extended period in OPEN mode, during adapter installation. Conditions were unstable.

Stable data taken after JPL adapter was installed.




812Ol971 25.251 I I 8/20/97] 24.941 RTG IN NORMAL LOAD MODE 1 013197 I 24.71 30.011 7.05 45.641 27.07 15.47 NA 161.8 161.5 161.9 161.7 211.48 2.218 4.259 750.1

XENON GAS

I t I I I I

Notes: 1 2

Data taken after extended period in OPEN mode, during adapter installation. Conditions were unstable. Stable data taken after JPL adapter was installed.

Semi Annual Technical Progress Report Lockheed Martin Document No. RRI6



Semi Annual Technical Progress Report; Lockheed Martin Document No. RRI(3

29 September 1997 through 29 March 1998,

TASK 8 DESIGNS, REVIEWS, AND MISSION APPLICATIONS 8.1 Galileo/Ulysses Flight Performance Analysis The most recent flight performance data were received from JPL in January 1998 ancl showed continued agreement with pre-launch predictions.

8.2 No activity during this reporting period. Thiis task has been successfully completed.

Individual and Module Multicouple Testing

8 .3

No activity during this reporting period. This task has been successfully completed.

Structural Characterization of (Candidate Improved N- and P-Type SiGe Thermoelectric Materials

8.4 Technical Conference Support At the Space Technology and Applications International Forum (STAIF 98) held in Albuquerque, NM, 26-29 January, three papers were presented by Lockheed Martin Space Power personnel. They were entitled:

“Lessons Learned from RTG Programs”

“Deconvolution of Variability and Uncertainty in the Cassini Safety Analysis”

“Cassini Nuclear Risk Analysis with SPARRC

This year‘s Schreiber-Spence Award was presented to the Cassini Power System Team and was accepted by a representaitive from DOE on behalf of all those who contributed to the successful development of the Cassini RTGs.

Following the conference, Lockheed Martin representatives attended the AMTEC: Technology Workshop on 30 January, sponsored by the Air Force Research Laboratory.

8.5 No activity during this reporting period. Thiis task has been successfully completed.

Evaluation of an Improved Performance Unicouple (Module 18-2)

8.6 Solid Rivet Feasibility Study No activity during this reporting period. Thiis task has been successfully completed.

’1 2



8.7 Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) No activity during this reporting period. This task has been successfully completed.

8.8 Technical International Conference Support No activity during this reporting period. This task has been successfully completed.

8.9 Additional Safety Tasks No activity during this reporting period. This task has been successfully completed.

8.1 0 Small RIG Design Study No activity during this reporting period. This task has been successfully completed.

8.1 1 FSAWPost FSAR Support Because this task is closely related to the Task 3 safety activity, technical progress is reported under that task.

8.12 Scale Model GPHS-RTG No activity during this reporting period. This task has been successfully completed.

8.1 3 AMTEC RPS Program Plan Results of this study were reviewed with DOE Germantown during September 1997. Additional cost studies related to the program plan were performed at the request of DOE. The RPS Program Plan was updated in October and submitted to DOE. Lockheed Martin also support several RPS telecons and meetings held at OSC (Germantown, MD) and at JPL (Pasadena, CA) to review AMTEC lifetime and modeling issues. This task was completed in March 1998.

8.1 4 Equipment Transfer to Ames (Iowa) Equipment donated by Lockheed Martin has been shipped to Ames Laboratory at Iowa State University, with packing and shipping costs provided by DOE. The shipment consisted of several tons of equipment that had been used in the Thermoelectric Materials Development Laboratory, and included equipment for measuring Hall Effect. This successfully completes this task.

13

Semi Annual Technical Progress Reporl: Lockheed Martin Document No. RRIf3


TASK 9 PROJECT MANAGEMENT, {QUALITY ASSURANCE, AND

9.1 Project Management All monthly contractual reports were deliveired on schedule during this period.

RELl AB I LlTY

Work continued on the preparation of the Final Technical Progress Report for the Cassini program which was submitted to DO€ as a draft for review on 30 January 1998. Comments from OSC were received and an in-house review of the report was also completed.

Lockheed Martin attended and participated in the Space Technology and Applications; International Forum and the AMTEC Techniology Workshop held in Albuquerque, NM, 26-30 January 1998, a Cassini Program Review at DOE HQ, and a Safety Analysis; Meeting held in Albuquerque, NM, 5 Marchi 1998.

Lockheed Martin, as System Integrator Contractor, is assisting DOE in reviewing proposals to possibly relocated the converter assembly and testing facility, currently located at Mound Laboratory. Several site visits were held during this report period.

Attached are the Cassini calendars for 3Q97 and 1Q98 showing program meetings; and important related events for this period.

No significant environmental, health, or safety incidents occurred during this period.

9.2 Quality Assurance

Quality Plans and Documents No plans were initiated or modified during this period. Process Readiness and Production Readiness Reviews No readiness reviews were conducted this period. Quality Control in Support of Fabricistion There was no activity in this area during this reporting period.

Material Review Board There were no Class I (major) nonconformisnces generated this reporting period.

I I 4



Quality Assurance Audits There was no activity in this area during this reporting period.

Quality Assurance Status Meeting There were no meetings held during this period.

TASK H CONTRACTOR ACQUIRED GOVERNMENT OWNED (CAGO) PROPERTY ACQUISITION

This task has been successfully completed.

15


29 September 1997 through 29 March 199Ei

Cassini RTG Program Calendar As of 23 998

Ir_l Cassini Launch

2 ) 1 3 )

I Semi Annusl Rewrts

F-5 Unkadng 8

-Mound - Reinstrom



Cassini RTG Program Calendar As of 23 February 1gg8