Activities Rei July 1976 to June 1977 Vol.

2 Detailed Report July 1977

(NASA-TM-74942) SOLAB POWER SATELLITE. I CONCEPT EVALUATION. ACTIVITIES REPORT. VOLUME 2: DETAILED REPORT Progress Report. Jill. 1976 - Jun. 1977 (NASA) 1166 p A99/MF A01 CSCL 10A G3/44

N77-33600 Unclas U7857

<^J-

. as

rtKtfl QCT

SOLAR POWER SATELLITE CONCEPT EVALUATION

ACTIVITIES REPORT JULY 1976 to JUNE 1977

VOLUME I - SUMMARY VOLUME II - DETAILED REPORT

Lyndon B. Johnson Space Center Houston, Texas 77058

SOLAR POWER SATELLITE CONCEPT EVALUATION REPORT OF ACTIVITIES JULY 3976 to JUNE 1977 VOLUME II - DETAILED REPORT

I. INTRODUCTION II. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS III. PROGRAM REQUIREMENTS

A. B. C. D.

U. S. Projected Energy Demand SPS Implementation Impact on Projected Energy Demand U. S. Rectenna Siting Considerations Electrical Power Demands for Western Hemisphere/World

IV. SATELLITE POWER STATION

A. Satellite System Definition B. Solar Energy Collection System (SECS) 1. Energy Conversion a. Energy Conversion System Comparison b. Solar Cell Technology Status c. Solar Array Design Analysis 2. High-Voltage/Space Plasma Interaction 3. Structural Considerations C. Microwave Power Transmission System (MPTS) 1. Microwave System Analysis a. Antenna Illumination Functions b. System Size Trade-offs c. Cluster Concept Evaluation d. Antenna Pointing Parameters 2. Microwave System Design Concepts a. Microwave Generators b. Phase Control

3-.Structure-Considerations 4. Thermal Analysis of Klystrons and Amplitrons . Microwave Reception and Conversion System (MRCSJ 1. Rectenna Power Collection 2. Grid Interface 3. Structural Support and Ground Preparation APPENDIX - Rectenna, Power Collection Requirements
V. SPACE CONSTRUCTION AND MAINTENANCE SYSTEM

A. System Definition Study Construction Results B. Orbital Construction Support Equipment (OCSE) C. Automated Space Fabrication
VI. SPACE TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM

A. SPS Transportation System Definition Study B. Heavy Lift Launch Vehicles (HLLV) 1. Booster Engine Concept Evaluation 2. Launch Vehicle Design Analysis 3. Modified Single State-to-Orbit Concept 4. Launch Vehicle Cost Analysis 5. Design Considerations 6. Western U. S. Launch Sites for the HLLV C. Orbit Transfer Systems 1. Orbital Propellant Handling for OTV 2. Personnel Orbit Transfer Vehicle Definition 3. COTVG Reference Configuration Trade Analysis 4. COTV LEO Construction D. Orbital Transfer Mission Analysis E. Propellant Costs F. SPS Transportation Scenario Synthesis APPENDIX A - Preliminary Design Analysis of a SPS Heavy Lift Launch System APPENDIX B - Western U. S. Launch Sites for the Heavy Lift Launch Vehicle
VII. ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS

A. Microwave Transmission Reception 1. Cumulative Side Lobe Effects 2. Ionosphere Tests a. Heating b. Communications

3, Microwave Radiation Biological Effects 4. Rectenna Heating B. In-Space Operations 1. Radiation a. Environmental Description p. Biological Considerations to Establish Shielding ' Criteria 2. Energetic Particle Precipitation 3. Space Collision Probabilities
VIII. MANUFACTURING, NATURAL RESOURCES, TRANSPORTATION AND ENERGY CONSIDERATIONS

A. Natural Resources 1. Rectenna Aluminum Materials Usage 2. Gallium Resource Supply B. Surface Transportation Requirements 1. Continental U. S. 2. Equatorial Launch Considerations C. Energy Payback D. System Energy Balance APPENDIX - Output from Energy Payback and Resource Analysis Program for SPS

ix. PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT PLAN

A. NASA/ERDA SPS Concept Development and Evaluation 1977-1980 Program Plan B. Technology Advancement Plan 1980-1987 1. Technology Advancement Requirements 2. Ground Activities 3. Flight Activities a. Flight Experiments b. Flight Projects c. Scaling Considerations 4. Space Transportation . Related Activities X._ PROGRAM COST A. Cost Sensitivity Studies

B. Methodology Documentation C. Comparative Cost Analysis D. Systems Cost Analysis APPENDIX A - Cost Computer Program Sample Output APPENDIX B - Cost Computer Program Listing
XI. COMPARISONS WITH ALTERNATE SYSTEMS

Sutfmary Study Approach Electrical Energy Requirements Projected Demand Source Mix Projections Alternative Power System Technologies 1. Conventional Systems 2. Advanced Systems F. Comparative Analysis' 6. Related Contractual Study

A. B. C. D. E.

I. INTRODUCTION

Larry E. Bell Systems Evaluation Off.

Increasing requirements for energy in the United States and the world continue to deplete the fossil fuels at an alarming rate. Projections of the U. S. requirements show an increase in consumption of major proportions (figure 1-1). The conscious efforts by consuming nations to initiate energy policies will slow the rate of increase in consumption, but these efforts do not provide a permanent solution. The energy plan proposed in April 1977 by President Carter 'is a vital measure for the near term, emphasizing conservation and heavier dependence on coal. For long-term solutions, emphases must be placed on "renewable" or "nondepletable" energy sources such as solar, geothermal, and ocean thermal. The most promising candidate as a nondepletable energy source appears to be solar power, because of its technical maturity, environmental attractiveness, and abundant availability. Two types of solar power systems to be considered are ground-based and space solar power satellites (SPS). The use of ground-based solar power has the inherent disadvantage of reduced solar radiation (insolation) by the atmosphere, clouds, haze, and nightfall. The use of solar power satellites circumvents this limitation by providing constant power, 24 hours a day, on a near-continous basis. The Lyndon B. Johnson Space Center report entitled "Initial Technical, Environmental, and Economic Evaluation of Space Solar Power Concepts" (JSC11568) released in 1976 established the technical feasibility of an SPS program to provide a significant portion of the future electrical demand, starting as early as 1995. Several scenarios of SPS implementation rates were developed, and one (scenario B) was selected as a basis for more detailed evaluation in the period of time documented in this report. Scenario B proposes'an installed capacity of 1120 GW by the year 2025, or about 30 percent of the Federal Power Commission extrapolated projection. The power output on the ground of each SPS is 10 GW, transmitted via two 5-GW microwave subsystems, resulting in a total of 112 satellites in orbit, jhe construction rate varies from one per year initially (1995) to seven per year during the last 3 years of the 30-year period. The technical feasibility and economic viability of the SPS concept were found to be sufficiently promising to deserve more detailed evaluations. This report, which concerns effort from June 1976 to June 1977, presents cpmparative data among various design approaches to thermal engine and photovoltaic SPS concepts, to provide criteria for selecting the most promising systems for more detailed definition. The major areas of the SPS system to be examined include solar cells, microwave power transmission, transportation, structure, rectenna, energy payback, resources, and environmental issues.

1-1

The objectives of the SPS activities during this study period were to concentrate on those areas that are major cost factors or of greatest technical uncertainty. These studies include the following: 1. Satellite systems definition: evaluation and selection of preliminary systems definition. 2. Solar cell cost and mass: assessment of the state-of-the-art and projections for cost and mass. 3. Microwave power transmission system: analysis and evaluation of design concepts. 4. Transportation system: definition and costing. 5. Space construction and maintenance: evaluation of structural configurations and the associated manufacturing and assembly concepts. 6. Environmental factors: establishment of space radiation criteria and biological considerations. 7. Natural resources and energy consideration. 8. Program planning and development: description of key ground tests experiments, early flight projects, and technology advancement. 9. Program costs: costing methodology and systems cost analysis. This document (volume II) represents the results of this year's efforts by the various technical disciplines in support of the SPS effort. The summarization and conclusions of the effort are presented in Volume I.

1-2

POWER GENERATION CAPACITY PROJECTIONS 6000 . Source: ERDA 76-141 (discussion draft) Draft Final Report (Revision A)

5000

4000 .

HIGH DEMAND GROWTH CASE

>: i- sooo ii o
<c o

2000

1000

LOW DEMAND GROWTH CASE

1970

1980

1990 YEAR

2000

2010

2020

Figure I-I

1-3

II. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION

The summary and conclusions of this yearls effort are contained in Volume I of this report. This Volume (Volume II) contains the individual contributions by the JSC Solar Power Satellite (SPS) study team members. The scenario B defined in the 1976 JSC report on "Initial Technical, Environmental, and Economic Evaluation of Space Solar Power Concepts" was utilized as the basis for study.

II-l

III. PROGRAM REQUIREMENTS

UNA*. U. S. PROJECTED ENERGY DEMAND

T, E. Redding Systems Evaluation Off.

JSC's previous in-house SPS study (ref. 1) included a projection of the nation's electrical energy requirements through the year 2025. This projection (shown in figure III-A-1) was based on a Federal Power Commission (FPC) projection through 1990 with an extrapolation by JSC to the year 2025. Numerous other organizations have made projections of electrical energy consumption as indicated in figure III-A-2. For reference purposes, the previously used FPC projection is also shown in figure III-A-2 along with projections by the Department of Interior (ref. 2). "Electrical World" magazine (ref. 3), Shell Oil Company (ref.4), the Electric Power Research Institute (ref. 5) and the Energy Research and Development Administration (ERDAJ (ref. 6). The FPC projection is a pre-1973 oil embargo projection that assumed an historical growth (about 6 percent) rate. As a result it is somewhat higher than the other projections, which include the effects of various levels of conservation. A recent ERDA projection of installed capacity requirements is shown in figure III-A-3. The high demand growth case is similar to the corresponding capacity requirements of the FPC energy demand projection. The assumptions for this.ERDA projection are as follows: a. b. c. d. 7 percent growth rate to 1985. 6.4 percent growth rate from 1985 to 2000. 3.3 percent growth rate from 2000 to 2025. Continuing shift by users from other forms of energy to electricity.

The low demand growth case is based on the following assumptions: a. 3.7 percent growth to 2000. b. 2.4 percent growth from 2000 to 2025. c. Significant conservation efforts and no increased degree of electrification. As indicated in figure III-A-3, a greater than factor of two difference exists in the projected capacity requirements in the year 2025, depending on the growth rate assumed.

III-A-1

35 x 10C

Reference:

(a) 1970 Federal Power Survey, Volume 1 Federal Power Commission

3500

30

(b) ERDA-48, Volume 1, June 1975 Energy Research and Development Administration

3000

25

2500

20
OJ

1 2000
E
3 CJ

c: cu en

o ro o. to o
CO

1500
a)

(112 units) B

a.

1 10 k.

1000

-1_>

u
OJ

500

1 1975 1980

Oi

1^ 1990

2000 Year

2010

20202025

Figure III-A-1 - Projections of U.S. electrical energy requirements and possible SPS implementation scenarios.

III-A-2

r/

o o
|0 'CM
CO

o
<c

'o

NJ

o a: o

CO

>-

03

CO 0) CO
O

0
iOO

o a.
<c CJ ii a: o

'o

IrH

m r^ o

CVJ

<u
1
CM

1
'CO 1

1
IvO

1
|<tf-

1
|CM

\
1C>rH

en
O

iH

1 0

ja/wod

III-A-3

POWER GENERATION CAPACITY PROJECTIONS 6000 1

Source: ERDA 76-141 (discussion draft) Draft Final Report (Revision A)

5000

4000 J

HIGH DEMAND GROWTH CASE

" 3000 1

2000 I

1000 I

LOW DEMAND GROWTH CASE

3.7%
1970

2.4%
1990 YEAR 2000 2010 2020

1980

Figure III-A-3

III-A-4

III-B. SPS IMPLEMENTATION IMPACT ON PROJECTED ENERGY DEMAND

T. E. Redding

Systems Evaluation Off. In JSC's initial SPS study, the SPS implementation rates (shown in figure III-A-1) were developed for study purposes. The three scenarios developed were constructed to provide the following percentage of new capacity requirements. Scenario A - 25 percent by 2015 Scenario B - 50 percent by 2010 Scenario C - 100 percent by 2005 Scenario B was utilized as an illustrative example to determine program requirements and to perform economic analysis. This scenario results in SPS providing about 30 percent of the projected electrical energy demand in 2025 (FPC projection). Sized at 10 Gw per SPS, a total of 112 satellites would be required in 2025. In view of the lower demand projections previously discussed, a reassessment of SPS implementation rates was made. The reassessment was based on the ERDA installed capacity projections shown in figure III-A-3. The low demand growth case reaches a capacity of about 1800 Gw and an energy demand of 8.7 X lO^2 kwh in 2025. An average SPS installation rate of one 10 Gw unit per year beginning in 1995 would result in an SPS capacity of 300 Gw in 2025 or about 17 percent of the total. At an average plant factor of 0.92, SPS would provide about 28 percent of the electrical energy (kwh) demand in this case. A total of 30 satellites would be required. The high demand growth case reaches 4700 Gw capacity in 2025. The corresponding electrical energy output is 22 X 10'2 kwh. In this case, an average SPS installation cate of three 10 Gw 12 units per year for 30 years would yield 90 satellites producing 7.25 X 10 kwh (33 percent) with a capacity of 900 Gw (19 percent) in the year 2025. Based on the above cursory evaluation, it appears that average SPS installation rates of one to three units per year would result in providing significant quantities of electrical capacity and energy in the year 2025. These rates are significantly lower than the peak rate of seven units per year used in the reference scenario B case.

III-B-1

III-C. UNITED STATES RECTENNA SITING CONSIDERATIONS INTRODUCTION

Systems Evaluation Off.

V, Shields

The most important factor for considering locations of rectenna in the U.S. 1s?population density. Energy demands across the U.S. generally reflect population. Highly populated regions have high energy demands, and Americans are becoming concentrated in localized regions. At the turn of the century, 60 percent of our population lived on farms and in small villages with low population densities. Migration trends to metropolitan areas have been altered such that 71 percent of the population lived in Metropolis by 1970. This number is expected to increase to 85 percent by the year 2000. It appears that metropolitan growth is a basic-characteristic of the social and economic transformation of American culture. We have transcended from an agrarian, to an industrial, and now to a service-oriented economy. The lifestyles resulting in the-mass move to metropolis will be reflected in increased demands for electricity. This report examines the areas expected to have the largest population densities in the U.S., and looks at possible rectenna locations for the ultimate distribution of electrical energy from a solar satellite power system. POPULATION In the year 2000, the metropolitan population is expected to be concentrated in twenty-five major areas in the U.S. These twenty -five areas are given in figure III-C-1 and represent 85 percent of the total U.S. population in that time frame. These figures are based on a twochild family projection and were prepared for the U.S. Commission on Population Growth in 1972 by Jerome P. Pickard. If our national population distributes itself according to these projections, 54 percent of all Americans will be living in the two largest urban regions. The metropolitan belt stretching along the Atlantic seabord and westward past Chicago would contain 41 percent of our population. Another 13 percent would be in the California region lying between San Francisco and San Diego. The proposed strategy is to consider locating the first rectenna systems in these areas. Specific sites will be determined from geographical and economic consideration associated with land acquisition. Guidelines for establishing the number of rectenna that are feasible is given in Section IV-D-2 of this document.
U^S. ENERGY/POPULATION RELATIONSHIPS

Of the total energy per capita used in this country today, about 30 percent is in the form of electricjty. This percentage is expected to increase to approximately sixty by the year 2025,creating a tremendous burden on the existing utility grid structure. Table IIf-C-l~ gives projected population/energy relationships and provides the projected population by regional grid out to the year 2000. Figure III-C-2 shows a map of the U.S. with the regional councils (grids) identified. III-C-1

Urban Regions: Year 2000

Mtiopolltan Beit I * Atlantic Seabord I t> Lower Great Lakes c*Morma Region ' 'ot.da Peninsula Cuil Coast " I\\ Central Texas Red River iouih.rn Piedmont North GeorgiaSouth East Tennessee "uiel Sound '>n Cities Region Colorado Piedmont ^'ni Louis ' ''"opohtan Arizona

13 Willamette Valley 14 Central OklahomaArkansas Valley 15 MissouriKawValley 16 North Alabama 17 Blue Grass 18 Southern Coastal Plain 19 Salt Lake Valley 20 Central Illinois 21 Nashville Region 22 East Tennessee 23 Oahu island 24 Memphis 25 El PasoCludad Juarez

Based on 2-child family projection Source Jerome P Pickard, "US. Metropolitan Growth an Expansion, 1970-2000, with Population Projections" (preparei for the Commission, 1972).

Figure III-C-1 III-C-2

CVJ

(U

OO

Ln
CSI CD CSI

hO OO CSI

CD CD hO
CSI

(^ oo

Cn

un

CSI UD

CD! CD! CD! CSB I

Ln oo .=r csi

..j.
CD CD OO

oo
OO

CN

LO OO

cn
CD

cn ii csi
en
LO

CD

^O

1 *

=r CD
UD

CD

=r ti

CN

CD

t-H

LO

CN

CN =r

UD

cnj .=r

1 Ln cnl csi
i CSI

CD

Ln
UD

r1

LO CSI

Q_

oo

CD| cnl UD cnl ho

iI

OO CD f*^ UD

cn

i-H

CSI

3C 00
*X^m

CD
1 3

UJ

Ln oo cn cn csi
i 1

, 1 1 I

CSI

Ln ^y
hO

CD

LO

11

CSJ

CD CD

Cl

oo
0)

3 E
t~\ CD Q_

oil iii cnl

Lr

LO CD LO LO CSI
i1 i 1

CSI

r J3 (O

i CNJ csi 1

cn CD
CSI CSI UD

>LU
1^ rf^i

LU
OO

Ln cn ii 1

Ln r<n ii csi

i i i CD CD CSI

cr cn

cn csi csi cn
CD

UD CD

LU 00

>- C
CD
I

o_ oo hn

ZCD OO rv LU

C_i O LU r

OO LU OO i

<C Q_ <C (_)

5 3 ^3
ca
I

oo >>-

Q_ *-^ CD UD Q_ CD ^H

_J ^^

CD

<_> OO

> t_> 3: x I iS oroi 1 i cn

^ C _ J 0 Q_LU^H CD_J*-' Q_ LU

i LU
i. _|

c_>
_

I
Z

CD Qi o o c _ > iC _ 3 t<r _>

OO <J3 Q - L U Q _

t_>

<_> Q_ Di Q_

oo

LU

oo

^S.

_ OO

I Ii I Ii Z_ICD

III-C-4

III-D. ELECTRICAL POWER DEMANDS FOR WESTERN HEMISPHERE/WORLD

J. Rippey

Systems Evaluation Off. The assessment of the future energy requirements of other countries is desirable in the consideration of a major advanced energy system such as the Solar Powered Satellite (SPS). For this preliminary study, several representative major-developed and lesser-developed countries (LDC's) are investigated on the basis of a statistical analysis to determine a projection of electrical energy consumption into the SPS operational time frame. Long-range projections of energy requirements for any country is an exceptionally venturesome task. Experts who are only looking at estimates for the United States alone generally provide numerous scenarios beyond a few year's time and projections beyond a decade*s time are considered highly speculative. Yet, those experts have utilized the most extensive statistical records of any country in the world. With such hazards in mind, this exercise will attempt to provide a general indication of energy requirements 1n the Western Hemisphere and the World. This analysis involves the use of population and electrical energy consumption statistical data and historical trends. The United States, Canada, Mexico, and Brazil were chosen as being indicators of Western Hemisphere energy consumption. 1. Population and Population Rates of Change Figure III-D-1, from reference 7, presents a projection of the world's population growth to the year 2000 assuming constant fertility levels. The figure shows that it took all the recorded time to year 1830 for the world to reach its first billion population. As sanitation improvements spread and scientific medicine developed, the world reached its second billion in only a hundred years about 1930. With rapid advances in medicine, including the discovery and widespread use of antibiotics, the third billion was reached in just 30 years 1960. The fourth billion was reached in half-the-time, 15 years 1975. By the year 2000, it 1s projected to take about 3 years to add a billion people. The United Nations is actively involved in accumulating population statistics and trends. They are also providing information and services for countries to control their birth rates. Figure III-D-2 illustrates numerous scenarios of world population projections based on various fertility rates. It shows that if a level of fertility required to replace the parental generation....that is, a Net Reproduction Rate of Unity (NRR=1), implying an average of 2.1 to 2.5 children per couple; depending on mortality conditions was reached in the reasonably near future, population would continue to grow for many decades until Zero Population Growth (ZPG) came about. Several scenarios of fertility rate decline for Mexico are shown in figure III-D-3 to show the population growth potential of lesserdeveloped major country 1n this hemisphere. III-D-1

in
CVI

Q I

cc
Cfl

CO

oo eo

III-D-2

PRESENT FERTILITY CONTINUED 55,300,000,000 BY 2070

DECLINI NG FERTILITY /\ NRR 1.0 O

1920

1960

2000

2040

2080

2120

THE WORLD'S MOMENTUM OF POPULATION GROWTH

Figure III-D-2

III-D-3

PRESENT FERTILITY CONTINUED 2,200,000,000 BY 2070

X
to o

2
Q-

DECLiNING FERTILI TY A NRR = 1.0

40

1980 1970 1990

2000 2010

2020 2030

2040 2050

2060

THE MOMENTUM OF POPULATION GROWTH IN MEXICO Figure III-D-3 III-D-4

In order to obtain energy consumption requirements Into the next century, estimates on population growth are needed. The following assumptions are made to obtain a population estimate; a. Presently the growth rate of the world's population is about 2 percent per year. Brazil Is currently experiencing about 3.2 percent Increase and Mexico 3.5 percent. According to ref. 8, the NRR for Brazil was 2.3 and for Mexico 2.5 1n 1970. Due to the momentum of these Increases, for this analysis both countries are expected to reach NRR 1.0 about year 2003 with ZPG by year 2060. This 1s one of the scenarios shown In figure III-D-3 for Mexico. b. Recent U. S. Census Bureau releases show that our population growth rate 1s declining, citing a 1.1 percent growth rate 1n 1970, 0.8 percent In 1975 and 0.7 percent 1n 1976. These figures Include Immigration quotas which correspond to an annual Increment of about 0.2 percent. Canada's growth rate 1s currently about 1.1 percent according to ref. 8. Both countries had a NRR = 1 . 1 1n 1970 and, for this analysis, are assumed to reach NRR = 1.0 within the decade, c. Latin America and the world's population growth rates are dictated primarily by the developing countries and, therefore, projections follow closely their rate trends. Historically, however, most long-range demographic projections have erred on the low side. Reference 9 suggests that the U.N. "low variant" predictions should be used into the next century because "a drastic rise in the death rate will either slow or terminate the population explosion, unless efforts to avoid such a tragic eventuality are immediately mounted." Reference 9 Indicates that such efforts are underway. Since 1965, programs to slow down rates of population growth in over 80 percent of the under-developed and developing countries have been initiated. Therefore, for this study, the U.N. "low variant" projection 1s used. Utilizing the fore-mentioned assumptions fertility rates, figure III-D-4 has been constructed levels for each of the candidate countries and areas The historical data shown on the figure from 1950 to tracted from ref. 10. and the corresponding to show the population to the year 2050. the present was ex-

The figure shows that by year 2035, Mexico will have reached the population level experienced by the United States in 1950 (152 million) and Brazil, at the same time, will have surpassed the United States as the most populous country in the western hemisphere with a population over 270 million. Both of these events will occur earlier if the "low variant" projections prove to be over-optimistic. 2. Electrical Energy per Capita Consumption An assessment of a nation's energy consumption and future energy requirements frequently is the result of extensive record keeping on a great

III-D-5

WORLD POPULATION PROJECTION IN COMPARISON WITH SEVERAL DEVELOPED AND DEVELOPING REGIONS ON THE AMERICAN CONTINENTS Figure III-D-4 III-D-6

many energy sources, A simpler Indicator of the overall energy picture is the consumption of electrical energy. This 1s because there generally are fewer energy sources used for electrical energy generation and there are better records available on its production. For these reasons, this study deals only with electrical energy although correlation with the overall energy picture 1s evident. Figure III-D-5 graphically illustrates the per capita Electrical Energy Consumption Statistics and Projections from 1950 to 2020 for the selected countries. The statistical data was selected from references 11 and 12. The straight line projections for all of the study areas were derived by determining the rate of change in per capita electrical consumption for the 1970 to 1975 period and applying the same rate in 5 year increments from 1980 to 2020. The 1970 to 1975 period Includes the first effects of the oil embargo and fuel price escalations and serves as a very simple indicator of future energy consumption patterns. Of the countries illustrated, 1t 1s apparent that the United States felt the effects of the high fuel prices the most, U.N. data shows in recent years (1973 & 1974), Brazil annually imported over 73 percent of its primary energy, Mexico about 11 percent, and the United States about 17 percent. Because of our extensive Industrial base, the rapid increases in energy costs obviously produces a more noticeable effect on our industrial growth rate. Although Canada was also effected by the higher fuel costs, their per capital electrical energy consumption indicates no noticeable effect. Investigation of their energy self-sufficiency shows that they were able to export energy during the entire 1970 to 1975 period, thus helping to continue their preembargo per capita energy growth rate. Another notable trend in figure III-D-5 is the similarity of the United States and the world's energy consumption per capita. Apparently most of the developed nations felt the major effects of rapid fuel cost increases. Certainly the United States, with less than 6 percent of the world's population, but currently utilizing about 30 percent of the world's consumed energy, is the major factor in this parallel. The simple fixed rate method used in the electrical energy projections excludes the effects of major variables such as significant changes in population rates and major energy resource discoveries. The effects of dwindling energy supplies is not reflected here other than in the large cost increase during the early 1970's and the resulting rate projections. Utilizing the population projections from figure III-D-4 and the per capita electrical energy consumption values shown in figure III-D-6, table III-D-1 was constructed to show the sharp Increases of energy needs from 1960 to year 2020. In the 60 year period, the world's electrical energy consumption is shown to increase by a factor of 26 over the 1960 level. The United States' consumption will multiply almost 13 times, Brazil 75 times, and Mexico 117 times. Early into the 20th century, both Mexico and Brazil will require energy levels currently consumed in the United States. It should be realized that the following table 1s based on constant rate increases of electrical energy consumption indicated by

III-D-7

, ELECTRICAL ENERGY CONSUMPTION i PER CAPITA, 1950-2020

Figure III-D-5
IttO fllO

aoro YEAR

III-D-8

energy availability of recent years. Assuming the gap between energy supply and demand will continue to narrow, increased competition for the available energy will become more pronounced,
TABLE III-D-1 1960

World U.S.A. Canada Brazil Mexico

2301 844 114 23 11

(1975) 6236 1982 273 69 43

1980 8199 2444 365 104 67

2000 22701 5296 1149 474 325

2020 61021 10875 3316 1721 1266

TOTAL Electrical Energy Consumption from 1960 to 2020 in KWH X 109

III-D-9

1 1 PREFERENCES

1. Initial Technical, Environmental, and Economic Evaluation of Space Solar Power Concepts, NASA Johnson Space Center, Report JSC-11568, August 31, 1976. 2. United States Energy Through the Year 2000, Bureau of Mining, U. S. Department of the Interior, December, 1975, 3. Electrical World Magazine, December 15, 1976, pages 58-62. 4. The National Energy Outlook 1980-1990, Shell Oil Company, September 1976. 5. Role of Fossil Fuels for Electricity Production, draft report Electric Power Research Institute, February 2, 1977. 6. Comparing New Technologies for the Electric Utilities, draft report (revision A) ERDA 76-141 (discussion draft), Energy Research and Development Administration, December 9, 1976. 7. The Population Explosion A Present Danger, by the Office of Population Affairs, United States State Department. 8. The Two-child Family and Population Growth: An International View, U. S. Department of Commerce/Bureau of the Census, September 1971. 9. Population, Resources, Environment by Ehrlich & Ehrlich, Stanford University, 1972. 10. Statistical Yearbooks for 1965 & 1975, United Nations. 11. .__ World Almanac & Book of Facts 1977, Newspaper Enterprise Association, The 12. World Energy Supplies 1950-1974, United Nations, 1976.

III-D-10

IV. SATELLITE POWER STATION

Clarke Covington Spacecraft Design Division

This section presents the results of the in-house and contracted efforts which together make up the SPS system definition and concept evaluation study for the power station (including the rectenna). The contracted part of the study was funded with $500K in FY76 funds allocated for SPS system definition as defined in Section IX-A of this report. The contracted studies and where their results are summarized are as follows: SPS System Definition - $375K (Section IV-A) 0 Phase Control System Hardware Simulation - $40K (Section IV-C-2-b) Klystron Evaluation - $15K (Section IV-C-2-a) Solar Cell Evaluation - $20K (Section IV-B-l-b) t Rectenna Structural Design - $10K (Section IV-D-3) In addition, the following two studies were also funded which derived data useful in the development of design criteria for the SPS system: GEO Radiation Environment Analysis - $10K (Section VII-B-1-a) 0 Energetic Particle Precipitation - $15K (Section VII-B-2) Most of the results included in this section are primarily a collection of individual studies related to specific areas of special interest rather than an "across-the-board" analysis of the total satellite system as was last year's system definition study.
A. SATELLITE SYSTEMS DEFINITION

Most of the SPS system definition work in this period was done in the first part of a two-part study contracted to Boeing ("SPS System Definition Study", NAS 9-15196). Part I of the study began November 22, 1976 and ended May 1, 1977, and had as its objectives the development of comparative data to aid NASA in the evaluation of two basic questions which remained after the 1975-76 JSC in-house study report. These two major questions were: 1) What is the overall most effective means of accomplishing solar energy-to-electrical energy conversion on an SPS in geosynchronous orbit? IV-A-1

2) At what location (or locations) in space should the various phases of SPS construction and assembly be done? As a point of departure, two reference configurations were established at the beginning of the study. These were the JSC planar truss photovoltaic system described 1n the August 31, 1976 JSC study report (JSC-11568), and the Boeing Brayton thermal engine system developed in a 1976 study for MSFC (NAS 8-31628). Energy Conversion Question A range of energy conversion candidates was considered which included the following: Photovoltaic Single Crystal Silicon Gallium Arsenide Advanced Thin Film Silicon Gallium Arsenide Cadmium Sulfide Copper-Indium Selenide Thermal Cycle Brayton Modified Brayton Rankine Thermionic A comparative evaluation was made of these candidates using a set of evaluation factors designed for relative assessment of each candidate. These evaluation factors, or "comparators", were: SPS performance Performance degradation SPS size SPS mass System complexity System maintainability IV-A-2

Construction requirements Transportation requirements Technology advancement requirements System cost differential factors Environmental effects differential factors Materials differential factors

The results of the energy conversion evaluation can be summarized as follows: (1) There are at least four viable energy conversion candidates: photovoltaic silicon, photovoltaic gallium arsenide, thermal Brayton cycle, and thermal Rankine cycle. (2) Thermal engines are more complex, but require less technology advancement. (3) Photovoltaics are simple in concept, but a continuous production process for solar cells must be developed or the concept is Impractical. (4) There are no large differences in DDT&E or production cost projections for energy conversion between the four viable candidates. Part II of the Boeing study will produce a complete SPS system definition with each element of the system defined to the same level. A goal of the study is to reduce the range of uncertainty in the weight and cost estimates to one-half the range developed in the 1976-77 JSC study. To do this, the number of energy conversion candidates must be reduced to those which show the promise of being most effective considering all factors, and then doing the more detailed system definition with those selected concepts. Boeing's recommendations concerning energy conversion, for the purposes of Part II of this study are as follows: (1) As a Part II study reference or "baseline", proceed with both the photovoltaic silicon system (with concentration ratio of one and annealable), and a thermal engine system using the Brayton cycle. (The Rankine cycle may, in time, supplant the Brayton cycle if recent significantly reduced weight estimates for Rankine turbine compressors for use In space can be substantiated.) (2) The photovoltaic Gallium Arsenide system concept should be carried into Part II of the study as an advanced technology option. IV-A-3

(3) The potential for a large mass reduction 1n the thermal engine system using the Potass1um-Rankine cycle should be further evaluated. (4) Thin-film photovoltaic systems should be discontinued in this study until a better data base is available. (5) The steam Rankine system and the thermionic system should be dropped because of their relatively high masses. The detailed results and supporting analyses of the energy conversion evaluation may be found in the Boeing final report of Part I, published in June 1977, and in Section IV-B of this report. Construction Location Question In the consideration of where the construction of an operational SPS should be accomplished, the primary choices are low earth orbit (LEO) below the earth's radiation belt, geosynchronous equatorial orbit (GEO), or some combination of the two. The most significant difference between the two locations 1s that LEO construction allows a low-thrust transfer from LEO to the operational GEO location using a high-Isp electric propulsion system installed on the SPS and powered by the part of the operational electric generating capability of the SPS itself. Several factors favor GEO construction. Atmospheric drag effects are negligible and gravity gradient forces are much less severe. Construction can take place in near-continuous sunlight. The SPS design does not have to accommodate transfer loads or the installation of the transfer propulsion system. The risk of collision with other orbiting objects during construction and transfer is nearly eliminated. Although orbital transfer with chemical systems are less efficient, they are well known and much quicker than electric systems. On the other hand, LEO construction has the potential of considerably reducing the launch rate and overall transportation requirements, and could be about 25 percent lower in overall transportation costs. A summary of the evaluation factors for the construction location question and the associated relative merits of the two alternatives is shown in Table IV-A-1.

IV-A-4

EVALUATION FACTOR

PREFERRED CONSTRUCTION LOCATION

LEO GEO

DECISION DRIVER

a) TRANSPORTATION REQUIREMENTS b) CONSTRUCTION REQUIREMENTS c) SPS OVERALL DESIGN REQUIREMENTS d) SPS PERFORMANCE AND DEGRADATION POTENTIAL e) LAUNCH SITE DIFFERENTIAL EFFECTS f) SYSTEM STARTUP REQUIREMENTS g) OPERATIONS CONSIDERATIONS h) COLLISION CONSIDERATIONS i) SYSTEM COST DIFFERENTIAL FACTORS j) ORBITAL TRANSFER COMPLEXITY FACTORS

LEO REQUIRES LESS FLIGHTS AND LESS ON ORBIT PROPELLANT TRANSFER 'LEO DRAG & DARK PERIODS VS. GEO RADIATION & DISTANCE LEO REQUIRES MODULARIZATION & OTHER SPECIALIZATION DEGRADATION DUE TO VAN ALLEN RADIATION CAN BE COMPENSATED FEWER LAUNCHES FOR LEO LEO STARTUP MORE COMPLEX LEO HAS MORE DISTINCT KINDS OF OPERATIONS ABOUT 15 COLLISIONS/SPS FOR LEO VS 2 FOR GEO LEO ACOUT 25% CHEAPER OVERALL TRANSPORTATION

NO SELECTION

ELECTRIC PROPULSION (LEO) MORE COMPLEX

TABLE IV-A-1

The results of the construction location evaluation are that either LEO or GEO construction is a viable option, but there is no clear choice at this time. It is possible that both modes would be used, depending upon requirements other than technical. Boeing's recommendation for Part II of the study is to defer the decision until program requirements are more clear. For the construction facility analysis, the recommendation is to use a modular SPS construction concept which would be required for GEO construction and is a viable approach for GEO construction also. The detailed results and supporting analyses of the construction location evaluation may be found in the Boeing final report of Part I, published in June 1977. IV-A-5

IV. SATELLITE POWER STATION

Clarke Covington Spacecraft Design Division

B. SOLAR ENERGY COLLECTION SYSTEM (SECS) 1. Energy Conversion a. Energy Conversion System Comparison - Most of the past year's work in evaluating the relative merits of the various candidate energy conversion concepts was done in Part I of the SPS System Definition Study contracted to Boeing (NAS 9-15196). This study began by taking as points of departure the truss configuration with single-crystal silicon solar cells (CR=2) which was developed in the 1976 JSC in-house study, and the Brayton thermal cycle system developed by Boeing in a study for MSFC. These reference systems were used in comparative analyses of transportation and construction alternatives. The evolution of these analyses and the resulting configuration concepts are shown in figure IV-B-1. A comparative evaluation was made of the energy conversion candidates listed on page IV-A-2 by using the set of evaluation factors (also on page IV-A-2) derived for relative assessment of each candidate. A summary of the results of each evaluation factor is given in the following: SPS Performance - Initially it was believed that the thermal engine systems were much more efficient overall than the photovoltaics; however, the difference is not nearly as large as first thought. Efficiency of a system generally follows technology advancement, and the systems with more development tend to show up as more efficient. As it turns out, in the overall system performance evaluation, efficiency is not a major discriminator unless it is very low. Efficiency comparisons are shown in figure IV-B-2. Performance Degradation - Every candidate system is subject to radiation degradation, but to varying degrees. The thermal engine systems suffer the least, followed by the gallium arsenide and then silicon photovoltaic systems. The left side of figure IV-B-3 shows how the output of these candidate systems degrades with time, while the right side presents the degradation normalized to show what percentage of total satellite mass is affected by the degradation. For example, the thermal systems degrade because of the gradual loss of reflectivity in the thin film concentrators which account for only a small part of the total satellite mass. For all the recommended concepts, degradation was compensated for in some way for the system comparisons, whether by initially oversizing, periodic adding on more energy collector, by annealing or some other maintenance. This compensation can be represented by size, mass, and cost, which makes radiation degradation relatively unimportant as an independent evaluation factor.

IV-B- 1

O
HH

o o o

i
CO II CO

CO

8 3 St
IV-B-2

zg o
Ul

i~
z h-

m t-

o i
CO

aa
O 5
Ul jj;
c/)
tt

o
GO t^

o o

21 1
5O

Z 5
H it
ui 9J

o
CO II

o"-

it O
u

a:

O < < O

i"
UJ

l l
55 < 5 o
o u_ a: LU a.
CM i
CQ

^ tt O C M - I

^ cc o ec o co < < o ui

8 U. M .

-j ui ec flC U

CD

in

10

3MOd OIU1D313 QHVO8NO Ol IHOHNOS 'AON3IDIJJ3

IV-B-3

H O

C < "* ^. I <

oc o
ID

m z o
til

Q
O IU N

m oc O

o <s>
II C

13 v>

cn O

g
o o

X oc

Ci

O OC O O

C3 UJ O

O w

O- 2 * 5 oS 5 ui

CO

(-

O U_ OL IU QI CO I CO

IU Z

ow 02

5<
QC 3 CD

oc <

IV-B-4

Satellite Size - As shown in figure IV-B-4, an annealable gallium arsenide system has the smallest area with the Brayton system ranking second. Silicon systems with no concentration (CR=1) are considerably smaller than those which have a concentration ratio of two (CR=2). The estimate for thin film photovoltaics is much more uncertain than the others because less data is available for these systems today. Total planform area does not seem to be as strong a discriminator as some others. Satellite Mass - Figure IV-B-5 shows a relative mass comparison with no margin included in the totals. The reference silicon (CR=2) system was sized for a beginning-of-life (B.O.L.) output of 10 GW total and, for reference, carried no penalty for maintaining a relatively constant output. This comparison clearly shows the tremendous potential advantage in having the capability to anneal radiation damage to restore initial conditions as opposed to periodically adding new energy collector to maintain B.O.L. power output. Initial tests were made of an annealing concept which uses an electron beam to heat the outer, damaged part of the solar cell momentarily with a directed energy pulse without any significant heat diffusing into the substrate. Initial estimates indicate that about six remotely-operated annealing machines, each about 2m square by 3m long, could keep the performance of a silicon photovoltaic system near 100 percent by continually traveling the surface of the solar array. The lightest concept was the gallium arsenide system. Both the steam Rankine and thermionic systems were so heavy that it is recommended that they be dropped from competition. System Complexity - Complexity is difficult to quantize. For instance, the thermal systems have about five times as many unique parts or subassemblies as the photovoltaic systems. However, the photovoltaics are made up of 1000 times as many total pieces. Since integration complexity of systems is usually a function of the number of unique parts, the thermal systems are considered more complex than the photovoltaic systems. The complexity comparison is represented pictorially in figure IV-B-6. Maintainability Factors - Every candidate system has potential maintainability problems, but, when the systems are categorized into either photovoltaic or thermal systems, concepts for solving the potential problems can be conceptualized. The photovoltaics are sensitive to individual cell failures in the strings of solar cells. This problem can be overcome by paralleling the strings and with diode shunting. This results in an equivalent maintenance load of about five to ten man-hours/hour for annealing or array addition to make up the loss. The thermal systems may be vulnerable to NaK system reliability problems, necessitating maintenance equivalent to about ten man-hours/hour for mechanical repairs and replacement. Other solutions could be an intensive technology advancement effort to increase the reliability, or an innovative redesign to eliminate NaK. IV-B-5

cc

ui
Z <
K

o
OJ CM
< DC CC O 00 c3 UJ 9 5

a:

CO II

LU

z
CO

UI o C/>

ilio
2
H u. o
IU

CO

1
CC
N M

_w2 2-1
35 w ^ ( -J to 2

CQ
M

<oc z c
IU

C9 U

CD

CO

EA

v<
SILICON REFERENCE CR=2

^
0

IV-B-6

8-8 r-

S r-

(HJJWOUO ON) 0)1 90l

IV-B- 7
G

SdS
SILICON ARRAY ADDITION CR2 SILICO ANNEA INQ CR1 GALLIUM ARSENIDE ANNEALING CR1
LU I LU

2z

p
O c

SILICO "EF (DECRAO CR2

THIN FILM ,

oc:

SS
t/>

LT>

II _1

5
LU C

CO I

HH U_

p ^ o

<
o
CO I1

<c o.
1 O in > O ;

a:

*iO
I X

a. t

S 2
i a. Z tu
I D

8
co >CO

ia

UD I CD

C3

sanewassvans/siuvd

IV-B-8

Construction Requirements - Figure IV-B-7 illustrates relative constructability of candidate concepts at LEO and GEO, and is based on a number of factors developed in the construction analysis. The length of the bars is a weighted, relative measure of constructability with a longer bar indicating a better rating, such as a combination of smaller construction crew size. The photovoltaic systems are easier to construct because they are less mechanically complex. Here can be seen one of the reasons for the desirability of no-concentration photovoltaic systems over those with concentration. The construction process is considerably less complex. Transportation Requirements - Although there was no great difference in total launch mass between the best photovoltaic and thermal systems, the photovoltaics have a significant advantage in packaging density. Photovoltaic system components and materials can be packaged for launch to a density about 20 times that of the thermal systems. Some thermal engine components will barely fit into the reference launch vehicle payload dimensions. The average achievable packaging density was about 1300 Kg/m2 (81.16/ft3) for the photovoltaics and about 72 Kg/m2 (4.5 lb/ft3) for the thermal systems. Technology Advancement Requirements - Table IV-B-1 lists those technology advancement requirements considered most significant. The Brayton thermal cycle and the silicon photovoltaic systems appear to have the least development risk with the Brayton being the most advanced. A continuous solar blanket manufacturing process would be more important to overall system cost than an increase in solar cell efficiency. For instance, a 14 percent solar cell manufactured with a continuous production process would make a silicon system very attractive, whereas an 18 percent cell made with today's processes would not allow an economically competitive system. Environmental Effects Differential Factor - No serious environmental effects were found with any concept.The main factor is launch vehicle emissions which are not very significant and occur only in the launch year. Launch emissions are essentially proportional to SPS mass. A postulated accident with a fire on the launch pad presents some problem with gallium arsenide. There does not appear to be much of a toxicity problem, however, since analysis indicates that arsenic concentrations in any resulting smoke cloud would drop to allowable concentrations very quickly. Materials Differential Factors - Gallium is the only material with a potential availability problem. Assumptions for recovery of gallium from various sources influence availability conclusions. Gallium today is recovered from the waste products of aluminum production, and processes are known which could improve the recovery process by a factor of 4. Alcoa has stated that more gallium could be recovered if more money was IV-B-9

LU

LO
LU

O LU a:

>
N E

Z U

Uj

X
OL

o.

5 1
/> Z

n
LU

Eg il

II
OC U.

I I
oo
LU

ec o

a. w ii
CO

m
WM 1
>$$
_l

LU

a: to o

ZD

LU

LU

THERMA SATELLI'

o LU

a: i
CQ

CD

IV-B-10

8
z
Z 0

>
0

I
oc
111
H

g 5

oc Q x

^ uj Z

H 5 H

HERMAL CYCLE

RANKINE

. go 5 i u j f s . l s "l^t~ z 5 - tl x t; 2 U - oZ rn < -J D
CC ^ UJ X UJ 5 H "J _i O CC u. U

f-

JP g ^ oc
CO

a 1
CD rf < QP UJ _i O OC u. U

UJ

cr UJ ct:

:
mJ

\L 2 ^
X

s 3
do
u. z

0 31

S ^j

oS3

c "^
CC OC a. a.

^*

2 X Q 0 - U 1O O

3 UJ

o _i o

X UJ H H
UJ

u
<
111
-J UJ _J CO <CC

Z UJ *j*

. H yj

I
CO

> O*^ ,_

ii

ll

il
H j O O Z _ i O O O LU CC CC O O ft. ft.

o
ft.

"<

i^^O -^S.O | X<ft.CC f- O < ft.

< 1 1
<

CO

8
-J

w 5JJ z g|l

**

H j Q 0 "i Z _i 0 0 1 |
O UJ CC CC

U U a. a.

<

iv-e-n

invested in recovery equipment. Production rate capability could be more of a limiter than total reserves. At the present time, availability of gallium does not eliminate the gallium arsenide system as a serious alternative concept. Energy Conversion Evaluation Conclusions - Conclusions for this study are summarized on page IV-A-3.Detailed results and supporting analyses of the energy conversion evaluation may be found in the Boeing final report for Part I, published in June 1977.

IV-B-12

IV. SATELLITE POWER STATION B. SOLAR ENERGY COLLECTION SYSTEM Harold E. Benson

Systems Evaluation Off. 1. Energy Conversion b. Solar Cell Technology Status (Contracted Results) A brief study effort of approximately 3 months has been conducted with the A. D. Little Corporation regarding solar cells. The objective of the study was to assess various solar cell materials and manufacturing methods to identify options which show greatest promise of leading to the development of a cost-effective SPS design. Underlying this objective is a tie-in between the current ERDA National Photovoltaic Conversion Program and requirements needed for a successful SPS solar cell program. The prime goals of the ERDA solar cell program are to provide 500 megawatts of power per year, sell them at a price of less than $500 per peak kilowatt by 1986, and for the array efficiency to exceed 10 percent over an operating lifetime of at least 20 years. The primary focus is on reducing the cost of silicon solar cells by improving the manufacturing technology and by increasing production capacity. SPS Requirements: For the SPS to produce a 5000 Mw output at the receiving antenna on Earth, its solar energy conversion subsystem will have to generate about 9000 Mw to allow for solar conversion and microwave transmission system inefficiencies. A production scenario in which 112 SPS's would be placed in operation by 2025 would require the deployment of up to 7 SPS's per year. Thus, the objectives of the ERDA National Photovoltaic Conversion Program, although supportive of SPS development goals, do not address the following production requirements of large photovoltaic arrays for the SPS: o o o o o o Low mass, High efficiency, Long life in the space environment, Ease of assembly, Capability of being transported to synchronous orbit, and Materials availability.

These requirements imply a diverging development effort for the SPS photovoltaic arrays, whose focus would be on thin-film solar cells, but in addition to single-crystal silicon would also include the development of the following photovoltaic materials: o Amorphous silicon o Cadmium sulfide, and o Gallium arsenide. Therefore, the cost projections which are being obtained in the Low Cost Silicon Solar Array (LSSA) project being carried out by JPL for ERDA are only IV-B-13

partially applicable to the definition of the most cost-effective photovoltaic arrays for the solar energy conversion subsystem of the SPS. The directly transferable development efforts in the LSSA project pertain to the production of semiconductor-grade silicon which presently has a market price of about $65/kilogram. One of the objectives of the LSSA project is to develop processes for producing silicon which have been optimized for application to solar cells at high volume and low cost. The silicon production process which promises to meet the production goal of $10/kg is based on the reduction of SiCl4 by zinc in a fluidized-bed reactor. In addition, an objective of the LSSA project is to develop a number of methods potentially suitable for growing silicon crystals for solar cell manufactures; e.g., ribbon growth processes, such as edge-defined film fed growth; inverted Stepanov growth; laser zone ribbon growth; and web-dendritic growth. Among the ribbon growth processes the web-dendritic process appears to be very promising as a method of producing single-crystal silicon which could approach the mass and efficiency requirements of the SPS photovoltaic arrays. Sheet growth processes are also being investigated. Of these, the amorphous silicon method appears to be capable of producing thin-film solar cells with low mass. (The required silicon thickness is only about Cost Projection Methods^ Several methods can be used to project costs for silicon solar cells which have already reached an advanced development level and are gaining market acceptance: e.g., the design-to-cost concept, experience curve projection, and mature industry projection. Design-To-Cost Projection: In this approach, portions of the total cost are allocated to the various process elements so that each orocess element can be tested against its individual cost goal. This permits key cost barriers to be identified and evaluated to point the way to required technical innovations to achieve cost reductions. The allocation of the total cost of the individual process elements relies primarily on engineering judgement and is influenced by known factors. For single-crystal silicon solar cell efficiencies in the range of 15 percent to 18 percent, the following design-to-cost allocations appear reasonable: $/m Range
Silicon Single Crystal 25 to 35

Junction Formation Metallization Anti-reflection Array assembly

10 5 5 15 60

to to to to to

15 15 10 30 100

The cost per unit area is a function of solar cell efficiency and the solar flux, which also is related to the cost per watt. For example, a cost goal of 504 per watt of 15 percent efficiency (AMD) translates into $100/m2, 30<f per watt at 15 percent into $60/m2. An 18 percent efficient cell could be allocated $120/m2 to achieve a 50<t per watt cost goal and $72/m2 for a 304 IV-B-14

per watt cost goal. The costs for the substrate (1 mil Kaptron), cell Interconnects (copper ribbon) and cover glass (10 ujn glass resin) are allocated about $3/m2, indicating that the major costs are associated with the silicon solar cell production. Experience Curve Projection: Fig. IV-D-7A shows cost projections for silicon solar cell arrays based on the actual and projected experience with cost reductions as industry-accumulated volume grows. The experience curves relate the production volumes required to achieve projected costs. This approach is useful where marketing data for a number of years are available and where the growth of the market will not be strongly influenced by one application. The substantial impact on industry-accumulated volume represented by the SPS means that experience curve projections must be used with caution. Furthermore, the assumption that there is a steadily growing market and that industry has the opportunity to make capital investments which can be amortized over a reasonable time span introduces additional uncertainties. At best, experience-curve projections are applicable to single-crystal silicon, since solar cells based on amorphous silicon, cadmium sulfide and gallium arsenide have not yet reached the stage where market factors determine costs. Mature Industry Projection: The approach* which indicates how a mature industry relates materials output to costsi represent a historical view of cost reduction. Photovoltaic materials of the type being considered for SPS may differ in their value-added components if government, funding were to stimulate production of solar cells, as most likely would be the case in an SPS program development. The various projections indicate that likely cost ranges for singlecrystal silicon solar cells for the SPS photovbltaic arrays are:
50 - 70$/Watt by 1985 15 - 25^/Watt by 1995

Thin-Film Solar Cells: The attraction of thin-film solar cells, including amorphous silicon, cadmium sulfide, and gallium arsenide, is the potential for continuous mass production at a rapid production rate. Illustrative of the requirement to deploy 3 SPS's/year is an hourly production rate of 15,000 m2 of photovoltaic arrays, assuming a 15 percent solar cell efficiency. This implies that if there is an installed manufacturing capability to produce photovoltaic arrays of 2-meter widths, about 50 machines would be required, at a linear manufacturing rate of 4 cm/sec. This manufacturing rate could be approached by automated processes being considered for thin-film *Boeing SPS System Definition Study Presentation on May 6, 1977. IV-B-15

-production, including spray techniques, vacuum-deposition techniques, and discharge techniques. For example, should it be desired to achieve the required manufacturing rate using an edge-defined film-fed ribbon process with a growth rate of 7.5 cm/min., assuming a 7.5-centimeter-wide ribbon, about 43,000 simultaneous ribbons would have to be grown and integrated with the photovoltaic array production lines. \ Cost projections for thin-film solar cells are being developed, indicating the following cost goals: Amorphous Silicon Cadmium Sulfide 15-30< per watt 10-20< per watt

Gallium arsenide production processes are not yet well enough developed to permit reasonable goals to be established. A. D. Little Conclusions The ERDA National Photovoltaic Conversion Program, although furthering the photovoltaic materials and solar cell production technology, will not meet the development program objectives of the SPS. Valuable information and experimental data are being obtained which are useful for the SPS system and economic studies. However, the goals of the SPS development program are sufficiently different so that a dedicated photovoltaic development program will be required. Considerations based on materials availability indicate that solar'cells using silicon should be given the highest priority with cadmium representing a potential alternative material. Gallium arsenide solar cell applications may be limited because of gallium availability, unless low-cost processes to extract gallium from potential sources such as bauxite, flyash and oil residues are developed. Single-crystal silicon will continue to be the leading candidate for photovoltaic arrays for the SPS because of significant production experience and an extensive data base. A. D. Little Recommendations o Perform R&D on candidate solar cells for SPS to achieve: - Low mass-per-unit area, - High efficiency, - High radiation resistance, - Capability of being packaged for subsequent deployment and assembly in orbit, - Capability of integration with extended lightweight structures, and - Capability of approaching initial performance with suitable processing (e.g., annealing) after prolonged exposure to the space environment. IV-B-16

o Define and develop processes for space manufacture of solar cells. o Monitor on-going terrestrial cell material development programs, and select for in-depth evaluation and development those materials which are most promising for SPS. o Establish an on-going orbital test program for flight testing of candidate solar cells, photovoltaic arrays, and structure-array integration methods on shuttle/spacelab missions. o Establish an orbital program for flight testing of candidate photovoltaic arrays and assembly methods appropriate for the SPS.

IV-B-17

O O

CO

o
oo

ro

O O

CO

o c c
r-

03*

"5 T3

oo a: u_ oo
o ii o
O Q-

in

o .2
~ 3

E u
CJ

a:

oo o

s~ a
f^ t/t

en r*. en
CO CO

a c

ca i

a: ^
CD

en
CM O
CD

en

in o

to o

CM O

IV-B-18

James L. Cioni Propulsion and Power Division IV-B-l-b. Solar Cell Technology Status. (In-house Assessment)

Over the past year, since the publication of the first JSC report on SPS activities, close contact has been maintained with those active in the development of solar cell technology both inside and outside of NASA. Considerable progress has been reported in areas of particular importance to SPS activities. Much work of interest is being performed with terrestrial solar power as the driving force; however, in most cases a form of the technology has applicability to SPS. The following is a summary of some of the highlights of the past year's work. Single Crystal Silicon CellsWork has been proceeding toward the fabrication of thin (50 micron) solar cells. The work, sponsored by JPL, involves the thinning of wafers sliced from large single crystals which start at conventional cell thickness and are subsequently etched to the 40 to 80 micron thickness. Though cells prepared in this manner will probably have little direct application for SPS, the high efficiency (11-12 percent) already achieved, and the low breakage loss from handling give credibility to the predicted utility of 50 micron thick cells in an SPS. Results from testing show lower degradation from radiation in the thin cells than from conventional cells. Figure IV-B-8 shows the relative power versus radiation dose level up to the levels predicted for an operational SPS. This factor could show weight savings in the use of thin solar cells beyond the basic mass per unit area difference even if the efficiency attained is below the 16-18 percent range. The impact of these recently reported results will be examined further over the coming year. Other activities aimed purely at improving solar cell efficiency have proceeded to the point where production cells can now be made available with efficiencies in the 14-15 percent range. In addition, progress has been made in the fabrication techniques for producing wraparound contact cells. Silicon Ribbon GrowthTwo programs are being funded to develop processes for continuous growth of single crystal silicon ribbons. The EFG (edge defined film fed growth) is producing large area material; however, the present process is such that impurities and defects in the crystal are limiting the quality of the cells. Though the process may produce material of sufficient quality for terrestrial solar cells, it may be unable to produce cells of the quality necessary for SPS application. The other process, dendritic web growth, is making good progress and has produced prototype production hardware which has been successfully operated. This process has shown the capability of growing webs of uniform thickness in the 100 to 300 micron range through control of the rate at which the web is drawn from the melt. Past work on this process has shown the ability to produce high quality ribbons from which high quality solar cells can be made. The dendritic web growth process IV-B-19

% Power

inn

ULTRA-THINELL (2 mil)

,o

io

io

Peak Power Degradation vs. Electron Flusnce (1 MeV elecfrons)

Figure IV-B-8 IV-B-20

shows strong promise to produce high volume cells of a quality suitable for SPS use. It may be possible to combine the web process growing 100 micron thick blanks with the etch thinning process of Solarex to provide low cost thin single crystal silicon solar cells for SPS use. Noncrystalline Silicon CellsThe most dramatic improvement in solar cell technology over the past year has been in the field of noncrystalline silicon solar cells. Investigators in the U.S. and Europe have produced solar cells from polycrystalline material which exhibits AMI efficiencies in the 10-12 percent range. There are several characteristics about polycrystalline silicon solar cells which make them preferable to single crystalline cells. First, the manufacturing process is more nearly direct from molten silicon to a layer of material ready to have final processing into a solar cell and is thus inherently less costly to manufacture. Second, they can be readily manufactured in any convenient size and the thickness required is normally less than single crystalline. Third, polycrystalline cells show a high tolerance to impurities in the silicon. This is even shown in the "high" efficiency cells produced over the past year. Thus, the need for "hyperpure" silicon does not apply and the inexpensive metallurgical grade silicon is used. Early efforts to produce polycrystalline cells were limited to low efficiency due to the inability to deposit the silicon and achieve anything but small crystal grains (several microns in diameter); however, recent activities have been able to achieve large grain size (millimeters) with a high degree of order. Another development in silicon cells is the recent publication of results in which solar cells have been produced from amorphous silicon and have achieved efficiencies in the 5-6 percent range. The researchers feel that they will be able to ultimately produce amorphous silicon cells with efficiencies of 14 percent. All the positive attributes associated with polycrystalline silicon cells apply to amorphous silicon cells except that amorphous silicon cells should be cheaper to produce. Gallium Arsenide Solar CellsOver the past few years an everexpanding number of organizations have begun investigations into producing high efficiency GaAs solar cells. In almost all cases the new groups have made rapid progress to catch up with those already in the field. Today several organizations are producing GaAs cells with efficiencies in excess of 15-16 percent with the highest reported being 19 percent. The activity at Hughes Research Laboratories is in many ways typical of the rapid progress being made. A major difference is that Hughes has concentrated its activities on cells sized typical of conventional silicon cells; i.e., 2 x 2 cm. Figure IV-B-9 isx a plot of the chronology of progress at Hughes and their near-term objective. The high efficiency devices being produced consist of very thin active layers (10 micron) on a GaAs substrate which is on the order of

IV-B-21

6731-1R1

zu 19 18 _ 17

1977 OBJEiCTIVE-^f-* 19%

JAN 1977
^

t/

+ O 17.5% -

X 1

a?
UJ

NOV1976 fe^O 16.8%

o z

16 15

o <

13 12 11 10

DEC 1975 -/{ ) 13%

Xo _

>
1975 1976
TIME *

1977

Hughes Research Laboratories GaAlAs/GaAs solar cell efficiency.

Figure IV-B-9 IV-B-22

200 microns thick. To become an attractive candidate for SPS use, GaAs cells must use Gallium only in the thin active layer. Work is going on to find other suitable substrates on which to grow or lay active GaAs layers. Thus far no high efficiency devices have been produced by this method. Cadmium Sulfide CellsConsiderable activity is seen in the development of cadmium sulfide solar cells. The emphasis of this work is nearly exclusively for terrestrial use. Recent advances in this country and in Europe have enabled the fabrication of cells approaching 8 percent efficiency. Cadmium sulfide and others in the family of similar thin film devices are extremely interesting to consider for use in an SPS since by their nature they are lightweight, low cost devices. However, unless such a device can be fabricated with efficiencies in region of 11-14 percent, the assembly and transportation costs will offset these advantages.

IV-B-23

IV-B-l-c. Solar Array Design Analysis. The solar array work which was performed since the publication of JSC's first annual report on in-house SPS study activities has been significantly different in character than the first year's work. The solar array work in the first year concentrated on establishing a reference configuration which would provide a basis for whole system assessment from a variety of points of view; i.e., .construction, transportation, economics, etc. In so doing, all elements involved in the JSC activity developed methods of analysis within their own area of interest. The first year laid a foundation which revealed many of the areas of sensitivity for SPS feasibility assessment. Major among these sensitive areas is the solar array which is the single largest mass and cost driver. Therefore, in this second year, solar array analyses have emphasized the study of areas in which either cost and/or blanket mass might be reduced. As can be seen from the discussion of solar cell technology, many significant advances have been made in the past year. Two major areas of investigation were pursued: (1) GaAs solar cells used in concentrated arrays (2X to 10X) and used in unconcentrated arrays, and (2) Thin film cells (e.g., polycrystalline silicon) with AMD efficiencies of 10 percent or greater. These concepts were then compared with the reference system from the previous year. In the course of making the comparison, additional factors arise which influence relative "pros and cons" of the system concepts. With GaAs the availability and price of Gallium becomes a question (see Gallium availability section, this volume) and when using high concentration, the rate at which concentrator material degrades relative to solar arrays is a major concern. Assessing the newly emerging "high" efficiency polycrystal silicon solar cell is hampered by the lack of data generated to date on temperature and radiation degradation coefficients. GaAs SystemsTo investigate concentrated GaAs systems the Rockwell concept of linear parabolic troughs was used as a basis (see figure IV-B-10). Figures IV-B-11 and IV-B-12 show temperature and blanket performance characteristics used. The analysis shows a very large weight benefit based on BOL (beginning of life) performance. The unsupported mass of the GaAs blanket and concentrator would reduce the mass relative the JSC 1976 reference by approximately 60 percent, but the system projected area would increase by 60 percent. Table IV-B-3 shows the assumptions upon which these results are based. The potentially large weight savings would be partially offset by the additional structure needed due to the significantly larger area of the system. The support of the reflectors in the linear parabolic trough configuration will require more structure to hold the shape of the concentrator and achieve the assumed 80 percent efficiency. In addition, the more highly distributed area will result in significantly higher distribution mass. Therefore, with IV-B-24

UJ

l/J

I
6

H- cr UJ ^~ CO tr

o
CQ

s_
O)

a. o ai

IV-B-25

400
TEMPERATURE

VS.
CONCENTRATION RATIO

NORMAL FILTER

g
UJ

200

SELECTIVE FILTER

a.

100

' 3

1 0

CONCENTRATION RATIO

Figure IV-B-11 IV-B-26

',

RELATIVE BLANKET OUTPUT VS. CONCENTRATION RATIO

I <
CO

J^"
Q-

UJ

tx.

8
CONCENTRATION RATIO

10

Figure IV-B-12 IV-B-27

ASSUMPTIONS AND CHARACTERISTICS - GALLIUM ARSENIDE SYSTEMS

Cell Efficiency Temperature Degradation Operating Temperature Concentrator Efficiency Concentrator Degradation Cell Thickness Cover Thickness Substrate Thickness Interconnect (Al) Radiation Degradation Blanket Mass Concentrator Mass

18-21% (AMO, 28C - 20% nom) -0.25%/C 10X con. unconcentrated 55UC 300C "" 80% 40% (30 years 6SO) 25 microns 25 microns 25 microns 25 microns 15% (30 years GSO) 328 gm/r 20 gm/M*

OPERATING CHARACTERISTICS

Beginning of Life
1 Ref) GaAs(10:l) 14.2 M2/Kw 0.75 Kg/Kw

GaAs(uncon.) 4.0 M2/Kw 1.31 Kg/Kw

Area (planform) Mass*

30 Year GSO Area (planform) Mass*

7.34 M2/Kw 2.02 Kg/Kw

11.84 M 2 /Kw 3.26 Kg/Kw

16.3 M2/Kw 0.86 Kg/Kw

5.01 M 2 /Kw 1.65 Kg/Kw

* Mass is blanket and concentrator only, no supporting structure.

Table IV-B-3 IV-B-28

the added structure and power distribution required due to the large area increase and the more stringent geometric precision of the reflectors, the whole of a 60 percent weight reduction would not be realized and would probably result in no more than a 30-40 percent reduction in mass. Table IV-B-3 contains the characteristics of the concentrated GaAs system. The degradation shown assumes uniform loss of reflectivity and makes no allowance for nonuniform illumination on the solar converter. Table IV-B-3 also contains performance characteristics of an unconcentrated GaAs system. The use of GaAs solar cells in an unconcentrated array was at first thought to be an inappropriate concept due to the cost and availability of Gallium. However, the concept which was assessed shows that significant weight and area reductions over the silicon reference. The results shown for both GaAs concepts are predicated on the use of a very thin GaAs solar cell with an active GaAlAs layer of 10 microns or less (see GaAs discussion, Solar Cell Section). The effect of this assumption is to significantly reduce amounts of Gallium necessary to build a large number of operational SPS's. Data which is currently available on degradation of GaAs solar cells suggests that the basic energy conversion element of the GaAs system will degrade no more than 15 percent over the 30-year life of an SPS. In fact, in the concentrated concept where the operational temperatures are between 200 and 300C, a certain degree of damage annealing would occur continually which would reduce the expected degradation of the GaAs solar cells well below the 15 percent level. However, in the concentrated system the performance hinges on the characteristics of the reflector material. From the limited data which is available it appears that the reflective material will degrade by 40-50 percent over the 30-year lifetime of the system. The data further suggests that 20-30 percent degradation will be experienced during the first year or two of system operation. The conclusions to be drawn from the preceding discussion are that under the assumed conditions, an unconcentrated GaAs array would allow the SPS array to be smaller, lighter, and over the 30-year operational lifetime of the system could be less expensive than the silicon array represented by the JSC reference system. The use of concentration up to 10X would enable a substantial weight savings. The much smaller area of active GaAs solar cells would result in less pressure from the Ga cost and availability issues. However, if the assumptions on reflector degradation are correct, the large investment (time and complexity) in the 10X concentration is hardly warranted since its efficacy wanes so rapidly. Nonconcentrated Single Crystal SiliconFollowing the publication of the JSC SPS first annual report, further investigation of degradation effects were undertaken. It then showed that the concentrator IV-B-29

degradation over a short period of time was considerably greater than was to be expected from the solar blankets. A study was then begun to take a more careful look at the relative impact on system performance due to degradation in the space environment. No consideration was given in this activity, to the degradation which might be suffered in a slow trip through the Van Allen belt which would be experienced during orbital transfer operations. Table IV-B-4 shows a list of the initially assumed characteristics which were used in the comparison. The results showed that the unconcentrated system would have a total area requirement approximately 30 percent less than the concentrated array which used the same cell, cover, and substrate assemblies. The weight of the unconcentrated array was 26-32 percent greater due to its requiring approximately 46 percent more active solar array blanket than the concentrated version. This first comparison showed that there exists a possibility of less overall cost associated with the unconcentrated concept than with the concentrated version from the first JSC reference. The next step was to look into the reduction of system mass through lighter weight blanket. Table IV-B-4 also contains the characteristics of a "lightweight" blanket which has a mass per unit area of .35 kg/kw. The lighter weight evolves primarily from the use of a 50 micron cell but retains the 50 micron cover. When comparing this light-~ weight approach to the reference system the area relationships remain the same, but the unconcentrated system shows a weight advantage of 7 percent BOL and 12 percent 30 year. Thus, if the blanket cost can be kept the same as for the heavier version, a significant reduction in overall system cost will result. This cost reduction comes from (1) lower structure cost due to the significantly lower area to be built; (2) lower transportation cost due to the reduced mass; and (3) lower operational costs due to the less stringent orientation constraints which result from a planar array. Polycrystalline Silicon SystemsFrom the section of this report on solar cell status, it is readily seen that the recent advances in polycrystalline silicon and amorphous silicon devices offer hope for achieving not only low cost and lightweight solar arrays, but a potential of combining these desirable attributes with reasonably high efficiency. Based on these recently published results from U.S. and European researchers, an assessment was made of the impact these cell types could have on an SPS. For the purpose of this study it was assumed that the radiation degradation and temperature coefficient of the silicon devices would be the same as for single crystal silicon (though there is reason to believe they will be more tolerant to particulate radiation). Table IV-B-5 contains the characteristics assumed for cells and blankets. The results show that with a device with a specification efficiency of 12 percent, the satellite area would be 3-7 percent less than the reference but would cause an increase in blanket mass of from 4-9 percent. The major advantage to be accrued from a concept of polycrystalline silicon or any thin film device is the potential to achieve $100/kw costs; i.e., approximately 20-30 percent of the reference system cost for blankets and concentrators. Thus, if IV-B-30

CHARACTERISTICS SUMMARY - SINGLE CRYSTAL SILICON SYSTEMS JSC REFERENCE (2:1 con) LIGHTWEIGHT (unconcentrated)

Cell Efficiency Temperature Degradation Operating Temperature Concentrator Efficiency Concentrator Degradation Cell Thickness Cover Thickness Substrate Thickness Interconnect Radiation Degradation Blanket Mass Concentrator Mass

16% -0.45%/C 100C 80%

40%(30 year GSO) 100 micron 50 micron 50 micron 25 micron (Cu) 35% (30 wear GSO)
499 gm/lf 40 ^

same same 556C n/a n/a 50 micron 50 micron 25 micron 25 micron (A!) 17% (30 wear GSO) 350 gm/Mr n/a

OPERATING CHARACTERISTICS BEGINNING OF LIFE

Area (pi anform)

Mass* 30 YEAR GSO
Area (planform) Mass*

7.34 M2/Kw 2.02 Kg/Kw

5.62 M2/Kw 1.97 Kg/Kw

11.84

MVKw

6.61 MVKw 2.31 Kg/Kw

3.26 Kg/Kw

* Mass is blanket and concentrator only, no supporting structure.

Table IV-B-4 IV-B-31

CHARACTERISTICS SUMMARY - POLYCRYSTALLINE SILICON SYSTEM

Cell Efficiency Temperature Degradation Operating Temperature Cell Thickness Cover Thickness Substrate Thickness Interconnect Radiation Degradation Blanket Mass

12% (AMD, 28C) -0.45%/ C 55 C 50 microns 50 microns 25 microns 25 microns (Al) 35% (30 years GSO) 310 gm/Mz

OPERATING CHARACTERISTICS

BEGINNING OF LIFE Area (planform) Mass* 30 YEARS GSO Area (planform) Mass* 10.96 M2/Kw 3.40 Kg/Kw 7.12 M2/Kw 2.21 Kg/Kw

* Mass is blanket mass only, no supporting structure.

Table IV-B-5 IV-B-32

blanket/concentrator elements constitute 60 percent of the cost and weight of the whole SPS, a polycrystalline silicon design for an SPS would add less than 6 percent to the whole system weight, but would reduce the cost for the whole system by almost 50 percent. Efficiency and Degradation EffectsBeyond the single point concepts discussed in the previous sections, an evaluation was made of the impact (relative and absolute) of varying levels of efficiency achievement in the basic solar cells which are now considered major candidates. The information gives blanket mass and area for designs based on beginning of life conditions and 30-year conditions. Values were normalized against the JSC reference with a 2:1 concentration solar array. Figures IV-B-13 and IV-B-14 show the relative mass and area versus efficiency. The efficiency plotted is not the operating level but rather the specification efficiency at room temperature conditions. The degradation does not make allowance for a trip through the Van Allen belt which is associated with the self-powered LEO to GEO transfer mode of operation. It also makes no allowance for annealing the cells to reduce damage. Figures IV-B-15 and IV-B-16 are plots of the actual area and mass values used and are given per nominal kilowatt. Conclusions (Energy Conversion Concept Options)From the preceding discussion the following conclusions can be drawn: (1) The use of concentrators with photovoltaic energy conversion introduces considerable additional complexity to an inherently simple system and the little data available at this time cast strong doubt on their long-term performance. Thus, before one can feel comfortable about concentrators fulfilling their primary role of reducing system cost and weight, a great deal of data needs to be generated not only on long-term performance but also on beginning of life conditions; (2) The potential of high efficiency coupled with low degradation over 30 years makes Gallium Arsenide photovoltaics a compelling option for consideration. If the problem of Gallium availability can be resolved, the performance benefits might offset the increased energy conversion costs which are to be expected from this type of system. This is an option which, at this time, must be refined; (3) The recent advances which have been achieved in polycrystalline silicon devices and the promise of a reasonably high efficiency amorphous silicon device, potentially change the whole balance of relative cost with an SPS system. The realization of low cost, lightweight devices of this type (or any thin film device) could be the key to the ultimate economic viability of an SPS program.

IV-B-33

BEGINNING OF LIFE
1.2

1.1

POLY Si
1.0

1:1

SINGLE CRYSTAL SI (JSC REFERENCE) 2:1 AREA & MASS

0.9

0.8

RELATIVE MASS & AREA VS. EFFICIENCY AREA

0.7

MASS
0.6

0.5

AREA

0.4

10

12

14

16

18

20

22

24

EFFICIENCY - (25C)

Table IV-B-13 IV-B-34

AFTER 30 YR GSO
1.2

1.1

SINGLE CRYSTAL Si tJSC REFERENCE) 2:1 AREA & MASS POLY Si 1:1 MASS RELATIVE MASS & AREA VS. EFFICIENCY

1.0

0.9

0.8

AREA

0.7

0.6

0.5

MASS GaAs 1:1

0.4

AREA"'

12

14

16

18

20

22

24

EFFICIENCY - (25C)

Table IV-B-14 IV-B-35

12

JSC REF. J30 YR)

AREA VS. EFFICIENCY

11

POLY Si (30 YR)

10

s
POLY Si (BOL)

8
JSC REF. CBOL)

GaAs (30 YR)

GaAs (BOL)

12

14

16

18

20

22

24

EFFICIENCY - (25C)

Figure IV-B-15 IV-B-36

4.0

JSC REF. (30 YR)

MASS VS. EFFICIENCY

3.0

POLY
2.0

JSC REF. (BOL)

GaAs (30 YR) GaAs (BOL)

1.0

12

14

16

18

20

22

24

EFFICIENCY - (25C)

Figure IV-B-16 IV-B-37

IV. SATELLITE POWER STATION

B. SOLAR ENERGY COLLECTION SYSTEM

2. High Voltage/Space Plasma Interaction

R. C. Kennedy Control Systems Development Div.

Introduction Matter is generally considered to exist in,three states: solid, liquid, or gas. The specific state is"a function of the energy content and the state can be changed by the addition or removal of energy. If the energy addition is orders of magnitude above the level required for a change of the common states ionization occurs creating a substance composed of free electrons and free positive ions. When the number of charged particles is sufficient to establish the essential cnaracterization of the substance (which remains electrically neutral as a whole) a fourth state of matter - the "plasma" - is said to exist. For example, while plasmas are generally associated with gaseous states, a plasma state can be observed in a solid such as a semi-conductor since it is characterized through the motion of electrons and holes in the substance (Ref. 1). In space, proton bombardment from the sun strips electrons from neutral atoms creating the plasmasphere and which in turm creates the concerns relative to the operation of high voltage systems in this charged particle environment. The previous year's study activities recognized the two fundamental spacecraft/plasma interaction phenomena which could occur in geosynchronous orbit. Spacecraft charging, due to the so-called "magnetic substorms", is of concern to the SPS concept definition and is receiving considerable attention through a combined Department of Defense/NASA program. It is anticipated that solutions, or at least approaches to solutions, will be developed through this activity. The second, the interaction with the quiescent plasma, was not explored in any detail due to study priorities and in recognition of the (presumably) minimal severity of the problem at geostationary altitudes. However, with the advent of the concept of a low earth orbit (LEO) SPS test and demonstration article, the problem is greatly magnified because of the increased plasma density at the proposed operating altitudes (300-500 km). This section will not attempt to present uniquely original material nor is it intended to reiterate all the various data, theories, and speculations concerning the problem. Rather, an overview assessment will be made as to how -the interaction phenomenon may influence the formulation of the LEO test vehicle's power distribution and processing system. It should be recognized that this system represents a small, if not trivial, part of the overall problem when the solar arrays and RF

I'V-B-38

converter tubes are included as a part of the complete power system. However, many of the interaction effects, such as ion collection, insulator response, and arcing are common to the various power system elements. Toward this end the JSC Science and Application Directorate recently conducted a workshop which addressed the problem in general. It is anticipated that the published findings will treat the interaction phenomenon, as it impacts the solar arrays and RF converters, in some detail. Discussion The operational photovoltaic SPS will be electrically configured to operate at a nominal 20K VDC or 40K VDC for DC-RF conversion by amplitroms or klystrons respectively. From a power distribution point of view it is desirable to operate the LEO test article at the design voltage level for system weight efficiency. Using another approach, scaling work on a 1/15 scale structural similitude model recently completed by ES/Dr. R. Ried indicates that a 2700 VDC level (for the 40K VDC operational system) is preferred. While the voltage level requirements on the test configuration may vary an order of magnitude, the point to be recognized is that even the lowest level is more than an order of magnitude above what we have used in spaceabout 100 VDC. When a potential is applied between different parts of a spacecraft - the conductor and return busses in this instance - the charge particles in the ambient plasma are attracted to the part of the vehicle with the opposite polarity (Figure IV-B-17). This current loop through the spacecraft represents a power loss with the magnitude a function of the applied potential. Insulation of the metallic conductors to minimize the current circulation would seemingly offer a straightforward approach; however, Reference 2 reports some interesting experimental results on insulators tested in a plasma environment. The electric fields generated by virtue of the applied voltage serve to attract the charged plasma particles to the insulator surface thereby greatly increasing the voltage gradient across the insulator. If high enough, the gradient will exceed the rupture strength and accelerate the reaction. Standard tests conducted on wiring insulator shows Kapton to have a dielectric strength of about 5000 volts/mil for normal spacecraft production wiring. Notch sensitivity tests on selected samples show an 85% reduction in strength when notched to two-thirds the material thickness. Any breakdown or damage that permits electrons to stream through the insulator will result in further erosion and damage to the material in the localized vicinity of the rupture. An even more interesting phenomenon cited in the previous reference is the yet-to-be-explained dependency of the leakage current on the area of the insulation surrounding the hole. This phenomenon is referred to as a "funneling" effect wherein the insulator is conceived to play an active role in increasing the current flow orders of

IV-B-39

magnitude over what would otherwise be the expected. Experimental data indicate that a pinhole surrounded by a 100 cm2 area of Kapton would leak about 0.5 milliamps at a potential of +3000 volts in a plasma density of 2 x 101* electrons per cubic centimeter (Figure IV-B-18). Before drawing inferences from these data, the specific array voltage levels need to be examined. Predictions of large leakage power losses from high voltage arrays are discussed in references 3 and 4. One example is cited wherein an array in LEO with 10% exposure of conductor (bare interconnects) would leak more power than the array can generate at a +16 KV level. The key here is that the assumption of a positive potential (electron collection) may not be rigorous since the array voltage will float to maintain compatibility with the environment. For example, a 20 KV array in LEO could stabilize to -15 KV and +5 KV (Figure IV-B-19). This means that the current flow, if it occurs, will be primarily from collection of the more massive slow-moving positive ions and any leakage current would be expected to be significantly reduced. The solar array voltage biasing aspect is discussed briefly in reference 5, and experimental data in reference 2 bears out the reduced leakage current for negatively biased electrodes (Figure IV-B-20). Because of the presumed negative voltage bias across the array and the fact that the surface area of the power busses is small (even assuming flat-sheet conductors) compared to the array area, the relative power leakage from the distribution system will be of little significance even at high voltage levels. A more serious concern would be localized arcing to an adjacent part of the spacecraft at a different electrode potential. This possibility can be minimized by maintaining adequate separation between conductive paths and the use of additional insulation in areas with critical separation dimensions. Finally, if the program decision is made not to configure the LEO test vehicle as a high voltage system, the power processing and distribution system could be mechanized to include a DC-DC converter to boost the collection voltage from a few hundred volts to the voltage level required by the DC-RF converters. Reference 6 indicates that such devices can be built at about 1 Kg/KW (2.2 Ib/KW) for 100-watt converters. It is anticipated that converters up to 50 KW can be developed near this weight-to-power ratio and will operate at 95-97% efficiency. Summary Remarks The power processing and distribution system for the high voltage LEO test vehicle should not contribute significantly to power leakage to the ambient plasma. Arcing after damage to the insulator can occur and can be minimized through good design practices. Additional test and evaluation of candidate insulators is required and

IV-B-40

should include an assessment of susceptibility to mechanical damage due to micrometeorite impacts and other types of hazards. Quality control on insulator production should be examined in an attempt to minimize or eliminate manufacturing imperfections. If low voltage collectors are utilized a DC-DC converter can be developed for about 1 Kg/KW. It would be cost effective to standardize the voltage level (200-600 VDC) between the LEO test vehicle and the Space Station or Space Construction Base power system in order to maintain common power processing components and equipments. References 1. Bachynski, M. P., An Introduction to Plasma Phenomena; Research Laboratories, RCS Victor Company, Ltd. 2. NASA TM-X-71544; The Interaction of Spacecraft High Voltage Power Systems With the Space Plasma Environment; Domitz S. and Grier N.; 1974. 3. Oman , H,, Cost of Earth Power from Photovoltaic Power Satellite; Boeing Aerospace Company. 4. Kennerud, K. L.; High Voltage Solar Array Operation in the Ionosphere; The Boeing Company; Paper presented to the IEEE Photovoltaic'Specialists Conference, August 1970. 5. Final Report MDC G6715, Space Station Systems Analysis Study; McDonnell Douglas Astronautics Company, February 1977. Contract NAS 9-14958. 6. Harrigill, W. T. and N|yers, I. T.; Efficiency and Weight of Voltage Multiplier Type Ultra Lightweight DC-DC Converters; Paper presented to the Power Electronics Specialists Conference, January 1975.

IV-B-41

Photoemission Light

a) Current loop through spacecraft

T1e1V lines'^

Insulated Electrodes

inhole

b) Charge buildup on undamaged insulator

FIGURE IV-B-17

c) Current flow through rupture

- PLASMA INTERACTION EFFECTS (REF. 1)

1.0

8KV

j.cm.

.8
(O

.6

t i. ^ t_>
OJ

.4
1KV

c\_

.2

50

100

150

200

Kapton Insulator Area, Sq. Cm. FIGURE IV-B-18 - INSULATOR FUNNELING EFFECT SURROUNDING PINHILE (REF. 2) IV-B-42

Array
20

Assumed potential

o Q-

Assumed Potential
-L -20

a) Constant Positive Voltage (Electron Collection)

b) Negative Bias Voltage (Low Collection)

FIGURE IV-B-19 - 20 KV ARRAY POTENTIAL MODELS (REF. 5)

10-5 lO'6

n=10 3 c/cm 3 0.05 era hole 330 cm Insulator area

CL

10-7

<c
0)

10-8

i .
<D O> (O

Negative
10-9

<u

10-1
10,-H
-12

10

101

102 103 104 Electrode Potential, Volts

FIGURE IV-B-20 - EFFECT OF VOLTAGE BIAS ON LEAKAGE CURRENT (REF. 2) IV-B-43

IV. SATELLITE POWER STATION B. Solar Energy Collection System 3. Structural Considerations A Candidate Structural Member

T. J. Dunn Structures and Mechanics Div.

Introduction - Structural Requirements - Due to the impracticality of employing human labor for large scale construction in space, the fabrication of a gigantic structure must be amenable to automation of repetitive forming, placing, and attaching operations. If necessary, human labor might be used to join structural subassemblies with simple universal fittings but this is to be avoided if possible. The ratio of stiffness to material volume is much more important to the structural support of a solar power station than is the ratio of strength to material volume; therefore, both the material and the structural design should be selected to yield the least amount of mechanical and thermal distortion. And finally, the design should be selected by the total material and tooling weight as well as its packaged density. Design Concept and Fabrication Approach - Figure IV-B-21 shows a test model of a structural member which can be constructed from coils of rods. This isotropic cylinder, whose surface consists of an open gridwork of equilateral triangles, is efficient in reacting axial, torsion, bending, or shear loadings and is uniquely configured to take full advantage of the orthotropic stiffness of uniaxially reinforced composite rods. The structure consists of a set of longitudinal rods attached to two sets of overwrapped helical rods which are wound in opposing helical directions. The longitudinal rods can be placed outside, inside, or between the helical rods. Since the rods can be joined by welding, the only debris problem occurs if the ends have to be trimmed. Unusually high length to radius of gyration ratios have been calculated for this type of structure. Figure IV-B-22 shows a tooling concept which might be used to fabricate this structural member. The three sets of coiled rods are stored in freely rotating nested concentric containers which are attached to a powered tool consisting of three concentrically rotating rings which contain rod guides and feeding rollers. Automatic welding apparatus attached to the inner and outer rings weld the rods together as they emerge from the tool. Test Results - The concept verification model shown in Figure IV-B-21 was made of 2017 aluminum alloy round wire and weighed three-fourths of a pound per foot. It failed under a compressive load of thirty-two hundred pounds. Development Work Required - Material best suited for this structural concept is not available off-the-shelf because there has been no demand for it. Some development work will be necessary in the pultrusion process using graphite reinforced thermoplastic resin to obtain development quantities of rectangular rods of the desired sizes in unlimited lengths. It may be necessary to wind some of the graphite fibers to prevent the longitudinal fibers from separating under compressive loadings and to obtain a near zero coefficient of thermal expansion.

IV-B44

Joining techniques need to be developed to determine the fastest and most energy efficient method of welding the thermoplastic rods at their contiguous intersections. Ultrasonic, thermal, and electro-magnetic processes have been used on similar materials, but the best method for this application has not been established. An automatic fabrication tool must be developed to demonstrate this concept and to produce test articles that fully represent the final product.

IV-B- 45

Y OK PMI 18 POOR

THE

Figure IV-B-22

ISOGRID CYLINDER FABRICATOR

IV-B-47

IV, C.

MICROWAVE POWER TRANSMISSION SYSTEM G. D. Arndt Avionics Systems Engineering Division 1. Microwave System Analysis Introduction The analysis tasks of the SPS microwave systems discussed in the 1976 JSC report "Initial Technical, Environmental, and Economic Evaluation of Space Solar Power Concepts - Volume II," were concerned mainly with system sizing and tradeoffs, definition of subsystem efficiencies, and development of performance requirements. As a result of those analyses, a 1 Km diameter, 5 GW antenna system was defined, employing a 10 dB, gaussian, taper illumination across the array surface. An error budget with 10 RMS phase error, + 1 dB amplitude variation across each surface, and 2% failure rate for the DC-RF power converter tubes (klystrons or amplitrons) was developed. The subsequent analysis tasks, as discussed in this second JSC report, investigate alternate options including (1) other antenna illumination functions, (2) smaller SPS system sizes (3) multiple transmit antenna (cluster concept) and (4) performance requirements for mechanical pointing of the transmit array. Based upon inhouse analyses and system studies by outside contractors it appears that the SPS microwave system can attain with greater certainty the required performance for efficient power transmission. a. Antenna Illumination Functions '

(1) Gaussian - The aperature distribution function across the transmit array should maximize the amount of RF power intercepted by the ground rectenna and minimize the sidelobe levels. The previous analysis (reference IV.CJ) had a truncated Gaussian taper of the form.
E

(r) ' e

where dB - is the amount of taper from the center to the edge of the array. r/r - is the normalized radial position across the circular transmit array. which is a good approximation for an optimum aperature distribution. Considering the thermal limitations in the transmit array and the estimated power density limitations due to ionospheric interactions, a 10 dB Gaussian 'taper was selected which has an 88% collection . efficiency at an rectenna radius of 5,125 meters. The power density

IV.C.I

2 at the center of the rectenna is 22 raw/cm for a 1 Km, 5 GW antenna system with the reference error parameters a = 10, + 1 dB and 2% failure rate. This performance data, as shown in figures IV.C.I through IV.C.5 will be used to ascertain the relative performance of alternate antenna illumination functions.

Other illumination functions, specifically the cosine on a pedestal and the quadratic functions, operating in the presence of phase and amplitude errors and element failures, will now be examined. If the same error parameters, i.e., a = 10, + 1 dB, and 2% failures, are applied to these illumination functions, their relative performance can be obtained from collection efficiency curves and antenna pattern data. These calculations are performed using a simulation program in which the electric field at each point on the ground is the sum of the individual radiation patterns from each of the 7,850 subarrays on the transmit antenna. The magnitude and phases of the electric fields at each point on the ground are evaluated and summed over a two dimensional region to determine the fractional power content relative to the total power transmitted. The percentage collection efficiency for the total antenna system will vary with collector area. For the SPS concept, only a portion of the main lobe will be collected; the sidelobe energy occupies a very large area at minimal density levels and is not economically feasible to collect. (2) Cosine on a Pedestal - The cosine on a pedestal illumination may be represented, for a circular aperature, by
E

(r)

=C S

where n - is the exponent weighting factor r/r - is the normalized radius o

P - is the pedestal height

T(t)J-

The collection efficiency curbes are shown in figure IV.C.I, for exponent weightings of 1/2, 1, and 2, pedestal heights of .5 and .8, and angles of 80 and 90. For these calculations the 10m X 10m subarrays in the phased array have uniform phase and amplitude illumination across the transmitting surface. The errors in amplitude and phase are gaussian with mean square values of +ldb and 10, respectively. The mean phase error is assumed zero. The data indicates higher efficiencies are achieved with larger exponent weightings (n = 2) and 6 = 90. The next step in the analysis is to vary the pedestal height with n = 2 and 6 = 90 being held constant as shown in figure IV.C.2. The highest collection efficiency at a rectenna radius of 5125 meters is 87.95% for a pedestal height of .4. IV.C.2

Figure JV.C.l

-Collection Efficiency vs Various Cosine Tapers With Specified Parameters (O = 10 + 1 dB, 2%)

100

Conditions:
a = 10 + IdB, 2%

90

80

70
Collection Efficiency 60 At Rectenna Coll. ' E f f . at 10,250m diameter 1) cosine - cos w 90(r/r )| +.5 % = 85.59 | oJ 2) cos15 j^90(r/r o )| +.8 % = 84.45 % - 87.65 % = 86.37 % = 86.26 % = 87.85 % = 86.79 % = 97.76

50

3) cosl [90(r/r Q )]+.5 4) cos

X

[90(r/r o )|+.8

5) cos * j^80(r/r o )J+.5 6) cos 7) cos

2 2

[90(r/r o )]+ .5 [90(r/r o )]+.8

30
Reference lOdB Gaussian

20

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

7000

Rectenna Radius (m) IV.C.3

Figure IV,C.2 - Collection Efficiency vs Various Cosine Tapers With Specified Parameters (a = 10, + ids, 2%)

10

90

80

70

% Collection Efficiency At 60 Rectenna

Coll. Eff. at 10,250m diameter

50

30

reference lOdb Gaussian

% = 87.76

20

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

7000

Rectenna Radius (m) IV.C.4

The malnlobe and sidelobes of the antenna patterns at the rectenna are shown in figure IV. C.3 for the cosine function with a pedestal height of .4. The results Indicate an improvement (a reduction) of 1.2 mw/cm at boresight for the cosine function when compared to the lOdb Gaussian taper function. There is also a considerable improvement in the sidelobe levels (a factor of 8 reduction) for the cosine function. Thus for the cosine distribution, the optimum parameters are

(r)

+ .4

(3)

It is Interesting to note tha't the power density at the edge of the transmit array is approximately one-tenth (1/10) of the maximum density at the center of the array - which is also true for the lOdb Gaussian taper function chosen as the reference. The maximum power density at the center of the transmit array is calculated to be 27.61Kw/m2, which is higher than the present maximum limit of 2lKw/m2 as determined by thermal limitations (3) Quadratic - The quadratic on a pedestal illumination function is given by: I /_/_\^

V)

The collection efficiency curves as a function of exponent weighting and pedestal height are shown in figure IV.C.4. The highest operating efficiency at the reference radius of 5125 meters is obtained with n = 2. Expanding the results to include varying the pedestal height as shown In figure IV.C.5, a maximum efficiency of 88.23% occurs for

V)
The corresponding maximum power density at rectenna boresight is shown in figure IV.C.3 for this quadratic illumination function with a pedestal height of .4. An improvement of 1.0 mw/cnr (a reduction) is possible for the quadratic function when compared to the lOdb Gaussian taper used as the reference. The sidelobe levels for the quadratic illumination are lower than those for the gaussian taper by a factor of 6.3. As was'seen to be true for both the Gaussian and the cosine functions, the quadratic illumination has the best performance when the power density at the edge of the transmit array is approximately one-tenth ( / 0 of the maximum density at the center of the array. The maximum 11) power density at the transmit antenna is 25.15 kw/m2. which is better IV.C.5

Figure IV.C.3

-Power Density at Rectenna for Gaussian, Cosine, and Quadratic Tapers

Conditions: = 12.25 C = 10, + quadrat POWER DENSITY

raw/ci .m

1 3 cosine () (I) Gaussia

.OQ1
20
Rectenna Radius (Km) IV.C.6

Figure IV.C.4 -% Collection Efficiency vs Various Quadratic Tapers With Parameters (a = 10, + IdB, 2%)

Conditions: a = l(o,ldB, 2% A = 12.25 cm

100

90

80
Coll. E f f . at 10,250m dia. 1) quadratic [ 1- /r/r \ * [l-fr/r }
% = 85.19

70

% Collection Efficiency 60 (at rectenna)

2) quadratic

+ .8 % = 84.12
+.5
+ .8 + .5

3) quadratic [l-(r/rQ) 4) quadratic fl-(r/ro)

% = 87.40
= 86.15

50

5) quadratic [l-(r/r )2 b ' O" ~ r 212

6) quadratic fl-pr/r } I

= 88.07 = 86.95 = 87.76

+.8

reference lOdB Gaussian

40

30

20

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

7000

Rectenna Radius (m) IV.C.7

. T.. _ . .
I '

Figure IV,C.4 -Collection Efficiency vs Various Quadratic < Topers' with Specified Parameters ('a - 1 + idB, 2%) ' 0,

100

90

80

70

% Collection Efficienc
RO

Coll. Eff. at 10,250m dia.

50
1) quadratic [l- (r/r ] 2J
f\

+0 +.3

= 80.36 = 88.06

40

2) quadratic fl-(r/r^2]
21
2

3) quadratic fl-(r/r ) J +.4 % = 88.23

4) quadratic [l-(r/r J J,

+.6 % = 87.75

30
reference lOdB

= 87.76

20 .

1
1000 2000 3000" 4000 5000 6000 7000

Rectenna Radius (m)

I * '
~~

IV.C.8

(lower) by 2.5 kw/m than that for the cosine function, but still exceeds the maximum set by thermal limitations. Summary of Optimum Illumination Functions - The_ operating characteristics of each of the three Iliumnation functions, i.e., Gaussian, cosine, and quadratic, optimized to achieve maximum collection efficiently within a rectenna radius of 5, 125 meters are summarized as follows: Amplitude Distribution E(r) Function % Collection Efficiency for 10, 250m Rectenna a = 10, + Idb, 2% Max. Power Density at Rectenna (boresight) (mw/cm2)

Gaussian (lOdB taper) Cosine Quadratic

-1.15[r/ro]

87.76

22.0

.4

87.95 88.23

20.8 21.0

First Sidelobe Level Referenced to Main Beam -24.7db -30.9db -28.7db

Maximum Power Density at Transmit Array (Kw/m2) 20.88

27.61 25.15

When considering the two constraints for maximum power density in the transmit array and at the rectenna, the lOdb Gaussian taper has the best overall performance of the three optimized illumination functions. If the power tubes become more efficient and thereby reduce the thermal limitations In the transmit array, the quadratic illumination should be considered. At this time, however, the Gaussian taper is the most viable candidate. IV.C.9

IV.C.l.b System Size Tradeoffs - The initial sizing for the Satellite Power Station was a 1 Kw transmit array with 5 GW of DC power out of the rectenna. This sizing was based upon: (1) achieving the maximum output power (2) a thermal limitation of 21 KW/m2 in the transmit array and (3) a peak power density limit of 23 mW/cm2 in the ionosphere. There are however some advantages in having a smaller system size. Commercial utility companies can probably handle 1 GW increments easier than 5 GW} the implementation cost of a 1 GW system is lower; and the sidelobe radiation levels near the rectenna are lower. Disadvantages of smaller systems"include lower end-to-end microwave transmission efficiency and an increase in the overall cost of electricity (mills/KWH). The downlink operating frequency is another tradeoff consideration. The SPS reference system operates at 2.45 GHz, which is at the center of a 100 MHz band reserved for government and non-government industrial, medical, and scientific (IMS) use. This band has the advantage that all communication services operating within the 2450 + 50 MHz limits must accept any interference from other users. There is another IMS band at 5.8 GHz which should be considered. One way to reduce the terrestial land usage requirements for the SPS rectenna is to increase the operating frequency while maintaining the same antenna size. This reduction in rectenna size must, however, be traded-off against the large temporary degradation in transmission efficiency under extremely adverse weather conditions at the higher frequency. The purpose of this section is to determine the end-to-end microwave transmission efficiency for smaller SPS systems operating at different frequencies. The variable parameters include: Ground DC power output ( 1 - 5 GW) Transmit antenna diameter (.5 - 2 Km) Rectenna diameter (3.8 - 12 Km) Rectenna RD-DC conversion efficiency (77 - 90%) Transmit frequency (2450 MHz, 5800 MHz) The nominal microwave transmission efficiency, from the rotary joint in the satellite to the DC/AC power interface at the output of the rectenna, is shown in figure IV.C.6. This end-to-end efficiency, for f = 2450 MHz, may be written Microwave Eff = .794 \ Eff .. coll X Eff "I conv (6)

For the reference system given in the initial JSC report where Eff ,, = .88 and Eff = .90, the microwave link efficiency is 62. coll conv (reference IV.C.I.)- This efficiency will be used as a reference for comparing smaller SPS systems.

IV.C.10.

Figure IV.C.6

-Nominal Efficiencies for the Microwave System ( 4 0 MHz) 25

ROTARY JOINT TRANSMIT ANTENNA POWER DISTRIBUTION

Eff = .98

* DC-RF CONVERSION

Eff = .87 Eff = .96

4
TRANSMITTING ANTENNA

x:
<r
AVERAGE ATMOSPHERE

Waveguide - .98 Feed loss Mech. Misalign .98

Eff

- .98

* RECTENNA ENERGY COLLECTIO N (INCLUDES 10 PHASE ERROR 1 dB AMPLITUDE ERROR, & 2 FAILURE RATE) * RF-DC CONVERSION

1E U. con vl il

f ff 1
Eff = .99

r
J DC POWER INTERFACE

COLLECTED DC POWER OUTPUT

IV.C.ll

The RF-DC conversion efficiency, Eff , depends upon the input power conv level to the rectifying diodes connected to the half-wave dipole elements in the rectenna. During the past year excellent progress has been made at the Lewis Research Center, Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL), and Raytheon Company in developing higher efficiency diodes, particularly at lower power levels. This RF-DC conversion efficiency, consisting of the collection efficiency of the individual dipole elements times the diode rectifying efficiency, is shown in figure IV.C. -7 as a function of incident power density. This data assumes a 3 percentage point improvement in the next decade over the present achievable conversion efficiency. This rectenna configuration has multiple dipole elements feeding a single rectifying diode at low density levels. The operating frequency for this efficiency curve is 2450 MHz. In equation (6) the rectenna collection efficiency, Eff ... is a function of incident power density and incremental rectenna area while the conversion efficiency, Eff conv, varies only with power 3 * * density. The end-to-end microwave transmission efficiency may be rewritten
TW Nn (rx - rx-1 -,) D(x)
Eff

conv T, D

Microwave Eff = .794

P

(7)

TRANS

where PT,OA,.TC - the total power transmitted through the i atmosphere - the outer radius of rectenna x - the incremental rectenna radius P D(x) - the incident power density at a distance X from rectenna boresight . For a sample calculation of microwave efficiency, the power density patterns for the main lobes of a 1 Km transmit array operating at f = 2450 MHz and f = 5800 MHz are shown in figure IV. C. -8. The total DC power out of the rectenna is varied from 5GW down to 1 GW. Integrating under these curves and then dividing by the total transmit power through the atmosphere, the rectenna collection efficiency is obtained. Collection efficiencies for various transmit array sizes operating at 2450 MHz as shown in figure IV. C. 9. Each of these antennas have a lOdb, guassian taper for the illumination function, with error parameters of a = 10, + Idb, 2% failures. The microwave efficiency for each SPS system size may now be determined from the data in these last three figures and applied in equation ( ) 7. The degradations in end-to-end microwave efficiency for smaller SPS sizes are summarized in figures IV. C. 10 and IV. C. 11 for operating frequencies of 2450 MHz and 5800 MHz, respectively. The 62.88% reference efficiency is that performance expected for IKm, 5GW SPS

IV.C.12

Figure IV.C.7

-Total Rectenna Efficiency (Collection Eff X Conversion Eff) vs Incident Power Density

100

90

f = 2450 MHz

80

o Z
W H O H

w <
H O

70

H O H

60

.01

.05

.1

.5

1.

10

Incident Power Density (mw/cm ) IV.C.13

Figure IV.C.8 -Power Density at Rectenna for IKm Array f = 2450 MHz

10
O) 4-> <J O) CsL fO

J
U1
OJ

Conditio IKm Arra lOdB Gau si an Tape a = 10, +ldB, 2%

O Q .

3 Rectenna Radius IV.C.14

lii'-; tSLj-gSr- M^ Jii5_ciL: j giM^Efc^;; 353PB L^3

J-k i I l-r t- -' i-l

I - f n1- i

,. i

. I J-J

---

,i r . i

. |, I II

I ,

III

-11 I

' , ' I ... J _

, .

i" ' [_ .

, J

i r" f" ' ^ M;J ;' -,, . f _J_'__ i

;
.^^^^^^ '

r" "17'T ^'^

I

! 'I

]'

"' r "' f"~^~1

' I I
1 1

LJ

'i i"'~*"r"i^"T l*-"t~^ "r t Lil1'=,% 'it'.I.-'; *lt!--Tltr

o
CM

r-

LD

l-l a)
in ^r to CM ii
63

1
00

l
I

t
O
CM

CM
CM

rjCM

%9 3HL WOdd AD^eI^Idda NOISSIWSNVHl 3AVMOHDIW NI NOIlVOW)3a

("4) 2 awmoA NI NHAID sv annasva

CTi

O
LO

8
LO

u
M

LO

E-I

M 3 00
LO

01

c>f> Ki VO

CM tH

vO I

O iI I

(VI

rH I

3RL

(%) 2 "IOA NI NHAI9 SV ADN3I3IJd3 NDISSIWSNVliJ, 3AVMOH3IW NI

%9

system operating with a constant 90% RD-DC conversion efficiency in the rectenna.
\

The difference in performance between the 5 GW and the 1 GW systems as shown in figure IV.C.10 is due to a reduction in rectenna conversion efficiency at the reduced power density levels associated with the 1 GW system. Also, for transmit arrays with a diameter less than 1 Km, the power beam is dispersed over a wider area at the ground due to reductions in antenna gain. This dispersion reduces the amount of energy intercepted by the rectenna and further reduces the RF-DC conversion efficiency. The data indicates that smaller SPS powers are feasible, provided the antenna size is not reduced. That is, a 1 Km, 1 GW SPS system will have only a 4-5% (percentage points) reduction in microwave transmission efficiency as compared to a 5 GW system. The transmission efficiency for systems operating at 5800 MHz as given in figure IV.C.ll is interesting in that there is very little degradation in performance at the reduced power levels. The reason is that the power density levels at the rectenna are considerably higher for the 5800 MHz systems and hence, little degradation in RF-DC conversion efficiency occurs as the power is reduced. There is also a constant degradation'relative to the 62.88% reference efficiency due to lower efficiencies in several of the microwave subsystems operating at the higher 5800 MHz frequency. These degradations include a 5% reduction in DC-RF conversion efficiency in the microwave tubes (82%); a 1% reduction in the nominal atmospheric transmission (97%), and a 2% reduction in RF-DC conversion efficiency from the curve shown in figure IV.C.7. These transmission efficiencies for the 5800 MHz systems do not take into account the large degradations in atmospheric transmission during heavy rain storms. Since there could be as much as a 50% reduction in total transmitted power at 5800 MHz through a heavy rain, rectennas for these systems could have intermittent power reductions unless located in dry, southwest regions. There is significant reduction in rectenna size at the higher frequency as shown in figure IV.C.12. If rectenna costs and land usage requirements become major factors, then operating at 5800 MHz should be seriously considered. The sidelobe patterns in the near-vicinity of the rectenna are shown in figure IV.C.13 for several SPS antenna configurations and operating frequencies. The nominal 5 GW, 1 Km antenna with the 10 db gaussian illumination taper and operating at 2450 MHz is used as a reference (Curve 2). The smaller, 1 GW, 1 Km system has the power density reduced by a factor of 5 as given in curve 3. By going to a larger antenna size and increasing the taper, the sidelobe levels can be further reduced. By increasing the operating frequency to 5800 MHz as shown in curve (4), the first sidelobe level is down to.14mw/cm2, while the radius required to meet the USSR radiation level of .01 mw/cm^ is reduced to 9 Km.

IV.C.18

CD
iI

<

o
CD OO LO

]o

LT

X
CNJ

in

CD
X
CVJ

in x
CXI

o
M
CD OO LO

o
O

CSJ

X
CSJ

3-

Osl

x
OJ

CJD

5 GO

CO Q_ OO

Q_

o
UJ OO

o_ l
CD

M 00

oo z:

CD Q_

ca

<C UJ UJ

i i rj LU a:
Qi OO OO

CD UJ

CD

cc:

Figure IV.C.13

-Power Density at Rectenna For Various SPS Sizes and Frequencies

Power Density 5 At Rectenna (raw/cm^)

W, f = 245 ussian Tap

5GW, f= 5. ussian Tap

.05

.01

.005-

.001

Rectenna Radius (Km) IV.C.20

The results of the system sizing study indicate: 0 Reduced power levels have only small degradation in efficiency (- 4% loss between 5 GW and 1 GW). Antennas with less than 1 Km diameter @ 2450 MHz and .75 Km diameter @ 5800 MHz are not practical. Larger transmit antennas will reduce rectenna area and sidelobe levels. 2450 MHz and 5800 MHz frequencies have similar end-to-end transmission efficiencies for lower transmit powers. Primary advantage of 5800 MHz frequency is reduced rectenna land area (1/5) but must be traded off against adverse weather degradations.

IV.C.lc. Cluster Concept Evaluation - The concept of dividing a single, large SPS satellite into a number of smaller, physically separate subsatellite was evaluated. Under MSFC contract NAS 8-31842, The Aerospace Corporation, recently investigated a number of SPS cluster configurations (reference 2). These schemes included segmented microwave transmitting antennas, combined with various solar array configurations. The purpose of this analysis is to compare the rectenna collection efficiency of a single large microwave transmit antenna with that expected from a multiple of smaller antennas. In concept, these multiple antennas are physically separate, but phased together to transmit to one rectenna. One particular cluster configuration of interest is shown in figure IV.C.14. There are three 576-meter diameter antennas whose summed area is equivalent to that of a single 1 Km diameter antenna. The multiple antennas are separated a variable distance d. Each of the three antennas have a lOdb, gaussian taper, with error parameters a = 10, + Idb, and 2% failures. The components of the field patterns from all three transmit antennas are vectorially summed at each point in the ground rectenna to get a composite pattern. The peaks and nulls for the sidelobes of the composite pattern are dependent upon the separation of the antennas. The percent collection efficiency as a function of rectenna radius is shown in figure IV.C.15 for the three-antenna cluster. At a radius of 5,125 meters the cluster collection efficiency is only 60% as compared to the 88% efficiency for the single antenna. Thus the cluster antenna concept has a poor microwave transmission efficiency in comparison to a single large antenna. This degradation in performance is due to high sidelobes and grating lobes for the segmented antenna. The amount of degradation depends upon the size and spacing of the multiple antennas. In summary the cluster concept is not recommended due to degradations in rectenna collection efficiency.

IV.C.21

Figure IV.C.1A

-"Cluster" Antenna Concept

SEPARATION D I S T A N C E d IS A V A R I A B L E

DOWNLINK POWER BEAM

/UPLINK PILOT BEAM FOR PHASING

GROUND RECTENNA

IV.C.22

Q %.>
o o o

o o o
vO

si
o >
o o o

60 H

o o o

O O

o oo

o t--

o
LTJ

IV.C.23

IV.C.l.d. Antenna Pointing Parameters - In the August 1976 JSC report the mechanical pointing tolerance for the microwave antenna was given as + 3 arc minutes, which resulted in a 2% loss in effective subarray gain. The corresponding subarray size was approximately 10 meters by 10 meters for this 2% loss. Each subarray can be thought of as a single antenna which must be mechanically pointed towards the rectenna to within 3 arc minutes of boresight. The fine pointing is then performed by electronic phasing of the subarray beam with all the individual subarray beams.
i

The mechanical "pointing, requirement has two components: (1) the steering or pointing of the entire~-l- 'Km "microwave antenna towards the rectenna, and (2) the- pointing' of .each subafray-.l->The steering of the 1 Km array is a function ,of the' attitude contrpl system of 'the antenna. The subarray pointing is performed', by 'initlal-ly aligning, -each ' subarray using; three screwiacks attached to the structure.C'<'r-Vi , " -, ' ' , ^ -1 ' l" - , ' " ' ' "' -' - - ""'- " " '" This study investigates the former pointing -requirement^ "iVe.-jv steeringt; of the entire 1 Km array, assuming the1 ' individual -subar rays' 'are perfectly aligned across a -flat plane. This' *ana-rysiSj,co'nsiders, qnly the' amplitude effects of boresight misalignment. A follow-on --study, will calculate ' the magnitude of grating lobes produced by misalignments and will also -' determine the pointing requirements for individual subarrays .
v t r r J f

The subarray antenna pattern is given by the equation:

= sin
TT L

sin 0

(8)

where 0 - is the angle of boresight L - is the length of the subarray The reduction in subarray gains as a function of angle misalignment (0) may be included in the transmit array/rectenna simulation program to compute collection efficiency. The results as shown in figure IV.C.16 and IV.C.17 indicate that antenna misalignments up to 7-arc minutes produce only a 1% degradation in collection efficiency. However a maximum misalignment of 15-arc minutes should not be exceeded the SPS system would probably be shut-down if attitude control errors exceed 15-arc minutes. The physical tilt at the edge of the total 1 Km array for a 7-arc minute 1 - 1.02 meters. boresight misalignment is L = (500) 7 (60) (57.3)

IV.C.24

^
1

I _-:j"..-!---:^-J:j_4_!
a
',""'
( ' ' '

,TT

FuppTtliftf "oF'Totai Array "Misalignment

' I t

'

16dB Gaussian taper -A * 12,25m ; 1 a 1 , + IdB, ?% 0, Uniform phase iliumin&tion ""' " amplitude (gain) chariges"~onl"y^
90

80

70 Rectenna Collection Efficiency (%)

60

Coll Eff- at- 10,250m diameter

50

30

20

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

7000

Rectenna Radius (m)

j . .1 .

CONDITIONS: 10 dB Gaussian Taper 0 = 10, + IdB, 2% 10m X 10m Subarrays X = 12.25 cm (2450 MHz)

88

86

8A
0) H O H
<4-l

M-l W

C O H 4-1 0 0)

82

u tfl
01 4J O

80

10

15

Array Misalignment Tilt in Arc-Minutes

Figure IV.C.17 -Percent Collection Efficiency for Rectenna Diameter of 10,250 Meters vs Array Misalignment

IV.C.26

R. H. Dietz Tracking and Communications Development Division IV. SATELLITE POWER STATION C. Microwave Power Transmission System 2. Microwave System Design Concepts

As a result of the JSC in-house study effort last year, documented in JSC 11568, "Initial Technical, Environmental and Economic Evaluation of Space Solar Power Concepts, " dated August 31, 1976, it is recognized that the microwave system will require development in three major areas. These are the microwave generators (DC/RF converters), the phase control system, and the transmitting antenna array and subarrays. These three areas have continued to be investigated to the extent that in-house capabilities and contract funding would allow. In addition to coordinating with Lewis Research Center on the work they have contracted on the amplitron, JSC awarded a contract to Varian Associates, Inc., to determine and evaluate the optimum electrical characteristics of an existing 50 kilowatt Klystron operating at 2.45 GHz. Work also began on the design and analysis of the phase control system to be used on the microwave power transmission system. The Lincom Corp., was awarded a contract to evaluate phase control techniques, and develop a baseline system. In-house efforts continued on developing the transmitting antenna array and subarray conceptual designs. These three areas will be discussed in the following sections.

IV-C- 27

IV. SATELLITE POWER STATION C. MICROWAVE POWER TRANSMISSION SYSTEM (MPTS)

2. Microwave System Design Concepts

Louis Leooold Tracking & Communications Development Division

a. Microwave Generators - Initial feasibility studies for converting solar power in geosynchronous orbit into microwave power at 2.45 GHz for transmission to earth indicate that only amplitrons and klystrons achieve efficiencies in excess of 80 percent which are the required goals of the SPS program. Klystron Preliminary evaluation of a klystron amplifier at Varian Associates indicates that its overall efficiency with a depressed collector augmented can be as high as 85 percent if the power output is kept at 50 kW or higher. To do this, klystrons must use a beam-focusing field with the body-wound solenoid providing one possible solution. Actual emission tests predict a potential life of 20 to 40 years. However, many tests of a high-efficiency flight qualified klystron are required to determine the validity of reliable operation for 30 years. The advantages and disadvantages of a klystron continuous wave amplifier for the SPS are as follows:

Advantages
1. High gain amplifier a. Low RF drive b. Phase control at low RF level 2. High power output 3. Potential high efficiency (optimum in narrow bandwidth klystron) 4. Relatively low noise output (amplified shot noise) 5. Harmonics over 30 db down 6. Potential long life 7. Bakeable solenoid (tube bakeout with solenoid power) 8. Small efficiency change with temperature 9. Control and protective electrodes

IV-C-28

Disadvantages 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Requires solenoid and heater power Requires phase control (multiple tube use) May require tuner trimming control High beam voltage Requires depressed collector for highest efficiency Efficiency somewhat lower than crossed field devices

The estimated operating characteristics of the cw klystron for the SPS are as follows: Frequency, MHz Bandwidth (3 db), MHz Beam Voltage, kV Beam Current, A Power Output, kW Beam Efficiency, % Overall Efficiency, % Saturated Gain, db AM Noise, db PM Noise, db Heater Power, W Electromagnet Power, kW 2450 3 34-40 1.8-2.4 48-77 75-80 84-86 40-50 -130 -115 40 -1

Cooling

Radiation

The advantages of a klystron are its high gain of 40-50 db, allowing phase control at drive levels of one watt; very low noise, higher power per tube and bake-out in space with its own solenoid. The operating voltage of 35-40 kV, the tube size, the hot cathode and the requirement of a depressed collector to exceed 75 percent efficiency are some of its disadvantages. The estimated physical characteristics of a 20 kW klystron and a 50 kW klystron for use in space are as follows: Length Width (diameter) Voltage 20 kW Klystron 25 1/2" 12" 34 1/2 kV 50 kU Klystron 34" 12" 40 kV

'

IV-C- 29

Width Tube Only Width (tube & magnet) Weight Cooling

20 kW Klystron 58 Ibs. Radiator (.8 square meter)

50 kW Klystron 5" 12" 75 Ibs. Heat Pipes Radiation (1 meter diameter)

To establish the current state-of-the-art of cw high power klystrons, tests have been done to determine and evaluate the optimum electrical characteristics of a cw 50 kW power output klystron at 2.45 GHz. The tube known as the VKS-7773 cw amplifier is a high efficiency, 2450 MHz, wideband klystron originally designed for industrial heating applications and for terrestrial use. The characteristics which are being optimized are the tuning (narrow banding), the gain, and the efficiency before it is fully evaluated. Measurements will be made of the following parameters during optimum efficiency performance: (1) Electron Beam Voltage (2) Magnetic Field (3) Cavity Tuning (4) Variations in Load Impedance (5) RF Drive Level (6) Current (7) Temperature of cathode and anode during various cw power operations (8) Noise spectrum as a function of input current and as a function of transient conditions at start-up and shut-down (9) AM noise and PM noise in a narrow bandwidth (1-3 KHz) for frequency displacement from the carrier frequency (10) Gain and bandwidth Some further technologies will be evaluated in the development of a spaceborne microwave power converter. They are detailed as follows: (1) Minimum weight and operating power (2) Adaptability to radiation cooling augmented with heat pipes (3) Ultimate use of a multi-staged depressed collector to increase total efficiency (4) Bake-out processing of the tube in space with its own solenoid (5) Mechanical design compatible with launch vibrations IV-C-30

(6) Open envelope (7) Operating temperature in the space environment (8) Low emission density cathode to comply with the design objective of a 30-year lifetime (9) Provision for frequency stabilization (10) Design for phase stability and minimize the change in phase characteristics with variations of parameters (11) Design for GEO environment with radiative rejection of waste heat Automated Klystron Manufacture - An order for 100 or so high power klystrons today is a "large" order.Manufacturing techniques are not greatly different from those employed in a job shop where a great deal of individual personal attention is focused on the tubes by various individuals. Functional organizational arrangements are often employed to reduce manufacturing costs, but tube designs are not changed greatly from those stemming from development. An order of hundreds of thousands of tubes to be delivered at a high rate of 5000 per month, for example, assumes at the outset that emphasis has been placed on klystron design for such large-scale manufacture. Individual parts must be shaped for fabrication on automatic or nearautomatic machinery, such as automatic screw type machines. Stampings and coined parts must be used where feasible. Simplicity of design must be stressed in every area. Parts are fabricated through a variety of other techniques, each chosen for its large volume applicability. Extrusion, powdered metal fabrication, centrifugal casting, photo etching, electro deposition and similar methods may be mentioned. In assembly, self-stacking arrangements are used and/or simple fixtures maintain alignments. Automatic conveyor type furnaces are used for assembly brazing. Automatic machines are employed where welding is necessary. Automatic exhaust and bakeout systems are used. Perhaps these would be patterned after the rotary exhaust systems used today in some cases. If hot testing is necessary, automatic test systems will be devised. This may result in a completely new and different type of klystron factory, all facilities aiming at fabrication of the one device. The design of this unit represents a challenge as difficult, perhaps, as that of design of the klystron in the first place. IV-C-31

An estimated program for the development and test of a high efficiency SPS klystron is described as follows: Phase 1: 18 months Enhancement of present 75 percent basic klystron efficiency through computation, experiment, and modifications. Construction of several models demonstrating results. Phase 2: 18 months Computation and experiment leading to implementation of depressed collector. Introduction of work on lightweight focusing and on radiation cooling. Construction of several models demonstrating results. Phase 3: 18 months Continuation of work on collector depression, lightweight focusing, and radiation cooling. Continued study on possible further klystron basic efficiency improvement. Construction of several models demonstrating results. One or more of these to be tested in the space chamber. One to be flown in low earth orbit and tested in the space shuttle. Amplitron The estimated characteristics of an SPS amplitron are listed in table IV-C-1. Comparison of the SPS amplitron with the existing microwave oven magnetron is noted in figure IV-C-18. Construction of the amplitron and the magnetron are similar and the manufacturing techniques would have much in common. The changes required to convert the magnetron to the amplitron and the cost per kilowatt with high volume production are listed. A model of an amplitron interphasing with microwave waveguides and the waveguide transmitting through slots are shown in figure IV-C-19. The upper disk is the cathode radiator. The lower plate is the anode radiator for cooling purposes. The feed at the right of the amplitron accepts the input signal. The feed at the left of the amplitron conducts the amplified RF power output (6 1/4 kW) to the waveguide at the left. The waveguide and antenna shown in figure IV-C-19 are not necessarily the SPS configuration. Other types of antenna arrays are under study in addition to the slotted array.

IV-C-32

CXL

CO CO

l _J
1

CO CO

"-Z ZJ00

PASSIVE RADI ' CULAR COOL

3-8 KILOWAT

DC

O
o
Tf

CM

s
CO 1

o
o o
CO
CO

1 CO

oo A

z o z

UJ

CO

1
CM

- ^ 1
Tj1

3 UJ t
"J

45 CM Q-

O
Z
_J

EMITTING
I o
CO

$z

UJ CO
V

UJ O
0_ CO
>

o U
UJ

HH-

o
_J

UJ

0
II 1
M M

ID ID

<

0.

UJ CO

a.

O
Q

O
U

MAGN!

ID

O
UJ C U_

a.

u. tt

ft
U

0^

LU

CO

IV-C-33

CATHO

M M

WEIGH'

^ O < UJ 1 = <

3 us < z

VACUU

UJ

CATHO

C UJ

z z

o > >- o u
2

0 -J UJ 0
>
1

>

_J UJ U .

<

UJ

U UJ l O it i

z <
UJ

u. Q

CONDARY

U O C

I U
UJ Of

UJ

ii i U

O r

2 en
CO

0)

CN

CD =* CO

o
o.

>1*S$

t 10
* 1

oo in . -- 1

.rl ? o

O IT)

jr
4-

-v

4 3

o. o>
c

UJ

X'C
U CD

J J
(U TJ O

VI

TJ O

D (U O TJ O (iC O i . p

en "o
TJ o r^s OC

8
o "u

0>

u
0)

u: o uj-U
0> F
0) u_ U

J| o -^

X
k. O L*. Q.

"5 i
_c
1 V
"In trt

'ronment

Z
UJ
0)
14-

Q c

sJ
i/ ^ 0 -> *" X. TJ JO

J
_* U _Q I TJ
(b CU U_

e ^
Q.

c <u

"o U o> -^ +.
UJ

c
TJ <

'E

15
TJ

c2 _<u "o
^ *5

8. 1/1 i)

.E
u_

.. .

11
"o o *~
TJ TJ < <K *~ O

ecessary

~o

13 o>

0) 14.

"o

s X
(U

0) 0)

X
*/>

"o
o U

oo
I o I

o
N

O TJ 'Z c

"2 D.

<u o c X

I I
se
c

s> -

8-S c
" 00

o OJ /i
"o a>

-B. o

6
_0

e Vacuum vantage o)

Convert t

2 o u.

E < o

O) c r.~ . u.

0>

0 TJ C O

eg

U & O CO

- D 2
Q) ^

<u
*-

c~

1-9 ,= z UJ

,_

a:
CJ3

8
CN

O u
LU
r:

"S 0

<

^^ ^^

51 i e o 1 p

">'o
X. Q_ TJ TJ <

"o
Q> _Q 3 0)
^^

to a> a> .0

c
w 0 o

I n
3

* TJ ?<

^ OJ

a. v O

1 . "7

'Ej^
m
^ 0
^^

8. 0 ^

v:

O) 0)

> .

<u I o > _

^_ c c 8. o o . ir - : - 3 u "5 JS 3 C >
1
r-x -o

ISTING

1
t/1
CO

LLJ

^>1 ^- g^=e 8 O i_
X a. 2:

IV-C-34

I o

IV-C-35

REPRODUCIBILITY OF THE ORIGINAL PAGI IS POOR

IV. SATELLITE POWER STATION C. MICROWAVE POWER TRANSMISSION SYSTEM (MPTS)

2. Microwave System Design Concepts

j y Tracking & Communications Development Division

b. Phase Control System - The Phase Control System is presently under study by Dr. W. C. Lindsey of the LinCom Corporation for Johnson Space Center. The study was initiated in April 1977, and Phase 1 will be completed in 6 months. In the time since the contract was awarded, some significant findings have been provided which are summarized in this section. The SPS (solar power satellite) phase control problem basically breaks up into three areas: (1) the distribution of phase information to many distribution points in the system, (2) the phasing of the power amplifiers and (3) the antenna power beam steering. In order to properly steer or point the antenna power beam, precise phase relationships of all the antenna subarray groups must be known, and must be maintained so that the resultant overall antenna power beam wavefront is pointed only toward the rectenna with minimal overflow beyond the rectenna surface. Using pilot beam phase conjugation, the pilot tone received signal at the center of the array system is used as a phase reference for comparison, at each subarray group, with the pilot beam phase received at that subarray group. Three methods of distributing a constant reference phase to the many distribution channel/points in the array antenna system are under consideration: the master slave phase control method, the hierarchial master slave phase control method, and the total mutual synchronous method. Each of these approaches to distribution of the reference phase required for conjugation of the pilot signal at each subarray group is somewhat dependent on the geometrical layout of the system phase control components. Two geometric arrangements which provide the needed symmetry have been identified and are shown in figures IV-C-20 and IV-C-21, respectively. These figures show sketches of a rectangular layout assuming 10 X 20 meter subarrays and a square layout assuming 14 X 14 meter subarrays. The dashed lines indicate interconnection of oscillators for phase distribution, and the dots indicate phase distribution (oscillator) points throughout the system. For both the square and rectangular configurations, a total of 4096 subarrays would be required with a total of 1365 oscillators or phase distribution points. The concept behind the master slave system is described as follows: the master oscillator, located at the center of the antenna, phase locks to the pilot beam sent from the earth-based transmitter located at or near the receiveing rectenna. This phase is then IV-C-36

FIGURE IV-C-20 - SPS RECTANGULAR LAYOUT PHASE CONTROL

1
,__i

H;* i

. .

>....

. . j,

REPRODUCIBILJTY OP THB ORIGINAL PAGE IS POOR

IV-C >37

FIGURE IV-C-21 - SPS SQUARE LAYOUT PHASE CONTROL

"r T' T

j- - -

rv. -

t.

A >.-. 4

f
-w'-i.

VA "

'"

REPHODUOiBlUTY OF THE ORIGINAL PAG1 IS POOR IV-O38

distributed to the first level of slave oscillators by way of the master slave synchronization. There are four (22X1) such oscillators. All of them are symmetrically situated with respect to the master. These four oscillators In turn send the phase to the second level of slaves. This goes on until the ftfth level of slaves is reached. There are 1024 (2^5} such oscillators. These oscillators are called terminal oscillators, for obvious reasons, and each of the terminal oscillators feeds four 10 X 20 meter subarrays in the rectangular configuration or four 14 X 14 meter subarrays in the square configuration. The symmetry of the slaves around their immediate master is key to the control of line delays. If this symmetry could be strictly enforced, then, the phases at the terminal oscillators would all be the same. The hierarchial master slave approach has a similar configuration to that of the foregoing system with the prime difference being that, at each level, the slave oscillators are phase-locked. Symmetry is still required to take care of the delays. This method is better suited for compensating delay variation due to non-uniform antenna temperature gradients, but it should be pointed out that none of these methods offers a complete solution to the temperature delays. This method also offers improved oscillator stability, i.e., less phase drifting due to the final level of mutual coupling. The mutual synchronous system concept breaks up into two different classes depending upon processing of the signals. One of them is called the Equational Timing System and the other Returnable Timing System. Both of these compensate for the delay effects without invoking any kind of strict symmetry relation between the slaves, but do require symmetry between the master and the receiving oscillators. The main advantage of these two schemes is in providing compensation for tranmission line delay. Also,the uneven temperature gradients do not pose as great a problem. The major disadvantage that this system has is the large number of connections requiring a large number of cables, thus adding significant weight. The area of power amplifier phase control is also under investigation and, again, can generally be considered in the master slave or mutual synchronous class of synchronization categories. The final stages will incorporate phase conjugation of the pilot signal at each subarray for pointing the power beam. All of these phase distribution/control areas are still in the early investigative phases, and a preliminary recomnended approach will not be arrived at until mid-July 1977. Another area affecting the final power beam-forming system involves the effects of frequency separation between the pilot and

IV-C-39

power beam signals. Th.is area is presently under study, and recommendations are expected in mid-July, also. The basic effect of a frequency difference between the pilot and power beam is to squint or point the beam off at an angle Incident to the arriving pilot beam. This effect may be compensated for by locating the pilot transmitter at the proper location relative to the earth-based rectenna. Also, use of different pilot frequencies may provide an effective method of phase control system isolation from one SPS to another. These effects have not yet been analyzed in detail and are part of the ongoing study.

IV-C-40

IV. SATELLITE POWER STATION

C. Microwave Power Transmission System (MPTS) 3. Structural Considerations

Frederick J. Stebbins Structures and Mechanics Div.

JSC in-house activity since the publication of the August 31, 1976, report has been concentrated on an MPTS structural concept more amenable to construction than that originally proposed. The new concept is a hexagonal planar truss composed of repeating tetrahedrons. (Thus, the concept is called the tetratruss.) Contract effort was used to develop two "building block" deployable elements which may be used in a myriad of combinations for Shuttle sortie missions in support of SPS development. This contract (NAS9-14914) with The Boeing Aerospace Company culminated in an oral presentation at JSC on April 27, 1977, The Boeing Aerospace Company reported an application of the two "building block" elements to the JSC MPTS tetratruss concept. The concept of two-tier or "double bed" construction was first used by the Grumman Aerospace Corporation in the development of a one-kilometer microwave antenna employing 18-meter-square subarrays in an earlier study. One tier serves as primary structure and a second tier offers subarray support on relatively close spacing. The secondary structure (second tier) is an adapter bridging the relatively coarse spaced primary structural joints to the subarrays. The tetratruss is a two-tier structure. A 10-meter-square subarray was modified to 10.746 meters by 9.306 meters (see Reference 1). This offers the same transmission surface area (100m2) and matches an equilateral grid of the node points on the secondary planar truss (see figure IV-C-22). The secondary planar truss could be a deployable structure as reported in the NAS 9-14914 contract (Reference 2). Every other apex of the hexagonal secondary truss structure is supported by a primary node point (see Figure IV-C-23). The primary structure is composed of 660 members joined at 166 joints. Each of the 660 members is 130-284 meters in length. Sixty-one planar trusses compose the second tier structure. Each secondary planar truss and each subarray are supported at three points in a determinate manner. A determinate support allows a structure to be pointed without introducing internal stresses. Three options exist for mechanical pointing of the MPTS antenna. The options are: (1) a completely passive structure, (2) active control of 61 planar trusses, and (3) active control of 7854 subarrays. The determination of the viable option will be made pending control system analysis and engineering analysis of flatness and stiffness parameters. An FY-77 contractual effort has been initiated to investigate the achievable flatness in the MPTS tetratruss antenna. Detailed review of manufacturing and fabrication variables will be made to determine if the initial flatness of the second tier structure of the tetratruss will meet the microwave

IV-C-41

transmission requirements. A further objective is to determine if active figure control is required. A NASTRAN model of the tetratruss (see Figure IV-C-24) was prepared inhouse and sufficient runs were made for a parametric study of the tetratruss dynamic characteristics. A graphite material was assumed with Young's moduli of 137895x106 N/m* (20x106 psi) and 68948x1Ob N/m? (10? psl). A density of 1661 kg/m^ was used for all runs. Secondary structural mass and primary structural joint mass were assumed to be included in the 8,125,000 kg of nonstructural mass. The 8,125,000 kg mass was distributed in a manner that reflected the Guassian distribution of microwave power transmission. Three cross-sectional areas, two values for Young's modulus, and two mass conditions were used in a parametric study of the NASTRAN model of the tetratruss. Figure IV-C-25 depicts the influence of mass on the structure for two values of Young's modulus. The cross-sectional area of each of the 660 members was held constant at .001 meters?. The relatively large nonstructural mass lowers the first natural frequency less than one order of magnitude over the frequency for tare mass only. The frequency varies as the square root of the ratio of Young's moduli. Figure IV-C-26 illustrates the influence of the ratio of structural mass to total mass. The cross-sectional area of each of the 660 truss members was alternately set at .0001, .001, and .01 meters?. Practical upper limits are apparent in seeking higher natural frequencies thru additional structural mass. The message is clear that the natural frequency of the MPTS structure may not be significantly altered from a relatively narrow one order of magnitude band. Figure IV-C-27 shows the well-ordered characteristic of the tetratruss dynamic response. NASTRAN plots of the first 5 modes beyond the rigid body modes are shown in Figures IV-C-28 through IV-C-32. The deformed shape has been superimposed on the undeformed structure. The first two modes are anticlastic while the third mode exhibits polar symmetry. The NASTRAN structural response data herein presented offers a point of departure for the stability and attitude control engineer. References 1. "Initial Technical, Environmental and Economic Evaluation of Space Solar Power Concepts," Volume II-Detailed Report-JSC 11568, August 31, 1976 2. "Large Space Erectable Structure," Building Block Structures Study, Final Report - NAS 9-14914, April 1977, The Boeing Aerospace Company

IV-C -42

in < I

REPRODUCiBlUTV OF THfi DRJGINAl PAGI JS POOR

!05>ftODUCTBILnT' OF THE ORIGINAL PAGE IS POOR

f/12/77

MX-DEF

1 08001750

FIGURE IV-C-24 MPTS ANTENNA-TETRATRUSS NASTRAN model

SftTKUlTC SOLM MMCI SVSTCft-MIC*OMm MTEIHM TCTM

rl

MDML NFOH- SUCSf I

*>BK *

0 000120

IV-C-45

o>

*0

in CM

en

vr

<

<r\

UJ
ITv

IV-C-46

IV-C-47

uJ
CO

I
co ja
CO 0

=)

!-

!->

s-

*Z 8 ill 0

CVI

c <u

cr <u
o: i => co <o CD I -a
i4

u_ s: E:

Q-

8 9

IV-C-48

nl-OEF

1 I852M-,

FIGURE IV-C-28 MPTS ANTENNA-TETRATRUSS Mode 1

SATCUITE SOLM roue* smtM-mciioum MTCNM Tern*

IV-C-49
MODAL ocroH. SUICASC i woe r rio o

25

i/12/77

HM-OEF

1 1T803HO

FIGURE IV-C-29 MPTS ANTENNA-TETRATRUSS Mode 2

SATCLLlTf StLM MMC* STI-KICOMl MTtMM TET**

*t Mrw. SUICMI i

MM t

MM. .mm IV-C-50

FIGURE IV-C-30 MPTS ANTENNA-TETRATRUSS Mode 3

SOLM POWCM SVSTfl-ICIIOMVC

TETH

MOAL ocroi. suictst i woe meg o ttozn

IV-C-51

ir

i/I?/T7

HAX-DEF

FIGURE IV-C-31 MPTS ANTENNA-TETRATRUSS Mode 4

SATELLITE SOLM POHCD SVSTCN-HICHOUAVE AMTEMA TETM*
M)0L OEFOK SUBCASE I NODE 10 MEQ 0

IV-C-52

FIGURE IV-C-32 MPTS ANTENNA-TETRATRUSS Mode 5

SOL**

SySTFft-MICftOWAVC

ANTfNtt* TfFS*

MO*L orron

SU*C*SF i

Mor 11

sum

IV-C-53

IV. SATELLITE POWER STATION ~~~~~~^~~~~~~~~^~~~~~~~~~~~~~ C. Microwave Power Transmission System (MPTS) 4. Thermal Analysis of Klystrons and Amplitrons

Structures & Mechanics Division D c Harris ' '

Large quantities of waste heat are generated due to inefficiencies of the microwave generators, either klystrons or amplitrons. This waste heat must be dissipated to space using thermal radiators in order to maintain microwave generator temperatures at acceptable levels. A preliminary parametric analysis was conducted to establish radiator weight requirements for various levels of microwave generator output power and efficiency. In this analysis, pyrolytic graphite was used as the radiator material because of its low ratio of density to thermal conductivity. A comparison of klystron radiator weight requirements was made for passive radiators and heat pipe radiators for the configuration shown in figure IV-C-33, rather than the circular radiator configuration shown in figure IV-C-34, which has been used in previous klystron thermal evaluations. For the klystron, it was assumed that half of the waste heat is dissipated in the klystron tube, with the remaining half dissipated in the collector. The radiator base temperature used to establish size and weight was 573K for the klystron tube and 973K for the collector. The results of the klystron parametric analysis are shown in figures IV-C-35. Figure IV-C-35 shows klystron tube passive radiator weight as a function of klystron output power and efficiency, and klystron tube radiator weight requirements for comparable configuration and waste heat dissipation using heat pipe radiators. Figure IV-C-36 presents a comparison of amplitron radiator weight requirements with required klystron radiator weights for comparable output power, using passive radiators in both cases. The passive radiator weight requirements for amplitrons are those calculated by the Raytheon Company for their microwave power transmission system studies. Amplitron and klystron efficiency used for this comparison was 85 percent. The amplitron configuration used in the Raytheon analysis is shown in figure IV-C-37. As can be seen from figure IV-C-35, the potential weight saving that can be realized using heat pipe radiators is quite significant except in the case of low-power, high-efficiency klystrons. With the 50 KW, 85 percent efficiency klystron, the radiator weight for a passive configuration is about 15 times that of the heat pipe radiator. However, the total radiator area required is comparable. The 2 power densities using this size and efficiency klystron are 32 KW/m for the heat pipe radiator and 26 KW/m2 for the passive radiator. The comparison of passive radiator weights depicted in figure IVC-36 shows a significant weight difference between the amplitron and klystron radiators. However, it should be pointed out that this is a preliminary assessment of the klystron radiator requirements. The weights shown for the klystron may be larger because of structural stiffness requirements. Additionally, the klystron weights do not include the weight necessary for structural attachments, which will IV-C-54

further increase the total weight. However, the results of this analysis indicate that the weight of a rectangular radiator will be less than that of a circular radiator at the same temperature. For example, the 50 KW, 85 percent efficiency klystron requires passive radiator weight of 1.0 Kg/KW with the rectangular configuration and 1.6 Kg/KW with the circular configuration. The amplitron radiator weight shown can probably be reduced by using heat pipe radiators, at least for amplitrons with an output of 10 KW or higher. A further effort is planned to assess klystron radiator weights more accurately and to determine if heat pipe radiators for amplitrons would be advantageous over passive radiators. A more detailed assessment of heat pipe requirements is also planned, including a review of heat pipe materials and fluids. Although this analysis has shown significant potential weight savings using heat pipe radiators, it should be noted that there are many potential problems with heat pipes which have not been addressed. Among these are potential re-start problems following eclipse periods and the lifetime of 30 years which would be required of the heat pipes. Therefore, much evaluation of the use of heat pipes in this application is required prior to incorporating the heat pipe radiator in the design.

IV-C-55

Fiaurp IV-C-33 Klystron in rectanqular radiator confiduration

c

ro. ircic?ncn i
f-HS lit *

HIICLO \ COLLCCTOa

CATI'OOC

IIC*T urt

TOILS ._ _v

m CMBOOY hA.Dl^ 171 CW DIA

Figure IV-C-34 Klystron in circular radiator configuration IV-C-56

100

"

Passive radiator Heat pipe radiator

Klystron Efficiency 60%

10

Radiator Weight Kg KW Output

1.0
60% 70% 0.1

85%

.01

20

40

60

80

100

Klystron output power (KW)

Figure IV-C-35. Radiator weight required for dissipation of klystron tube waste heat as a function of output power and efficiency. IV-C-57

1.0
Amplitron

.3

Weight Kg/KW

.1
Klystron

.03

.01
10 15 20

Output (KW)

Figure IV-C-36.

Comparison of klystron and amplitron radiator weight for 85 percent efficiency.

IV-C- 58

MOVABLE MAGNETIC SHUNT FOR REGULATION

RF INPUT CONNECTION PURE METAL SECCi-iDMn T trviiTTiiNG CATHODE PYROLYTIC GRAPHITE 'MODE ^'JD CAT!!O3E RADIATORS

Figure IV-C-37.

Amplitron radiator configuration.

IV-C-59

IV. POWER STATION IV-D. MICROWAVE RECEPTION AND CONVERSION SYSTEM

The study of the mlcrowaie reception and conversion system (rectenna) has been divided Into three areas: 1,) Rectenna Power Collection 2.) Grid Interface, and 3.) Structural Support and Ground Preparation. A summary of the activities to-date are presented in the following subsections.
IV-D-1. Rectenna Power Collection INTRODUCTION k. G. Monford Systems Evaluation Bff.

The Rectenna Power Collection of the Component "Rectenna" tbethat portion of the Microwave Power Transmission System, located on the earth, which collects microwave energy and converts it into power. This system may be subdivided into three areas: 1.) Microwave Conversion Systems 2.) Sixty Hertz Components 3.) Wiring. This section deals with current activity in this area as it effects rectenna size and costs. PURPOSE The purpose of this effort is to Investigate variations of rectenna size and design; to quickly determine the cost impact of these variations and possible critical material reduction. A computer routine for Rectenna Power Collection (RPC) was written to aid in this analysis because of the complexity involved in hand computations with the large number of variables involved. The "Cost of Power from Satellites" (COPS), program was modified slightly to utilize the output data from the RPC routine for costing analysis. Specific goals of this initial effort were: a short term investigation of the overall cost impact of changing rectenfia area and incident power per row. APPROACH Briefly, the RPC program calculates the amount of power incident on a row by row basis and the total incident power for a given specific system design. Then, for the same design, the COPS program computes the cost of electricity in $/KW based on incident power and average values for efficiency in three general area os the rectenna: 1.) collection 2.) conversion 3.) interface. So, by using these two routines, general cost trends for rectenna variations may be established. The values used for efficiencies were generally established from dipole and diode parameters, series and parallel interconnection losses, inverter and transformer efficiencies and distribution losses. They were not subjected to a rigorous computational effort to define exact relationships or exact average values as this leve? of detail was not initially required.

IV-D-1

The RFC program analyzes the rectenna area as though it was in a plane perpendicular to the incident microwave beam. The projected ground area is eliptical in shape, however, the electrical groundplane "face" of each row is normal to the incident beam and arranged so that there is no "shaded area" overlap from one row to the next. Because of this, the incident energy is analyzed on a row-by-row basis as though the rectenna was a continous circular surface normal to the beam. Inputs into the program include the truncated radius of the microwave beam, the beam taper constant, peak energy density, size of elemental area, and the number of rows. The microwave beam has peak intensity at the rectenna center and tapers exponentially to a minimum value near the edge. In a plane perpendicular to the beam, the power level at a given distance from the beam center may be expressed mathematically in terms of the peak intensity, and a constant, derived from desired beam taper.
PROGRAM DETAILS

The program first computes the distance from beam center to the centroid of the first elemental area (defined as row width times element length). The average power intensity for the unit area is then computed using this distance as the basis. The average intensity times the element size provides the power incident on that unit area. This process is repeated for all elements in a row, then results are summed. Elements with centroids exceeding the truncated beam radius are dropped. Power incident results are printed on a per-row basis, and for the whole rectenna. For on-going evaluations, the rectenna has been divided into 1,000 rows, with an element length of 10 meters, a peak intensity of 23 mw/crrr and a 10 db beam taper. The routine actually computes incident power of only one quarter of the beam because of the symmetrical nature of the rectenna. The expression used for computing the power incident on the j'th element in the i'th row is: 2

P!J = P0(x) (yje'^lj)

where P x y K r. J * = = = = = peak intensity element width row width (.125) beam taper constant centroid of elemental area
RESULTS

Figure IV-D-1 presents the incident power results of successive program runs. In these cases, the rectenna radius was changed, but all other parameters were fixed. The incident power is actually the portion of the beam which could be collected by a 100 percent efficient rectenna of a given radius. Figure IV-D-2 is a plot of the current-per-row output IV-D-2

for a single case. The radius of this desian case is 5 KM and for onehalf the rectenna there are 500 rows, so the current-per-row for a rectenna of ellptical shape could be found from this same chart by counting the row number from rectenna centroid and using this as the distance (scale factor times one hundred). Percent total power incident versus percent total area where the 5 KM radius case is 100 percent is plotted in figure IV-D-3. It is interesting to note that a twenty percent area increase is required to capture only four percent more power for the design case. Figure IV-D-4 presents results of several runs of the COPS routine; it shows the result on the overall SPS power cost in Mills/KWH for various rectenna areas (expressed in percent total area). The design case appears to be at the knee of the curve, where power produced cost is the least. This cunze knee will shift as a functional rectenna cost and efficiency of operation. As the cost goes up and the actual efficiency of various components goes down -- a function of distance from the center, the optimum cost knee should move towards 90 percent of the present design case. It should be noted that rectenna costs do not affect the overall SPS costs a great deal until the area is greatly reduced or until the rectenna efficiency drops off1 significantly. A rectenna with only 60 percent total area still receives 84 percent of the total possible power (96% at design case area). CONCLUSION The Rectenna Power Collection Program may be used to support SPS costing efforts and to assist in rectenna design. This program should be refined to include all elements which effect the operating efficiency of the rectenna. The program could then be used to generate power produced by the rectenna (as delivered to the grid), conductor weights and refined cost evaluation.

IV-D-3

o
I

s
o
LU Qi

l/J ^

M9 - 1N3QIDNI 3MOd 1V101 IV-D-4

3000

2000 _

o: LU a.

o
Of.

o
oc.

ac 01 o

1000,

200.

1 2 3 4 DISTANCE OF ROW FROM RECTENNA CENTER - KM *

*Assum1ng rectenna is circular with 5KM dia. and 2000 V distribution Fig. IV-D-2 IV-D-5

o <?
LO

'o I * o

CO

CM

LO

.0 CO

.o
CVJ

o o

o
CO

O CO

O CM

cJ3MOd TV101 JO*

IV-D-6

SPS COST - MILLS/KWH VS. % TOTAL RECTENNA AREA

90

80

70

60
Fig. IV-D-4

% TOTAL AREA IV-D-7

IV-D-2 Grid Interface INTRODUCTION

V, Shields Systems Evaluation Off.

The ground system/grid interface report published in the "Greenbook" identified methods of collecting power at the rectenna and converting it into electrical energy for transmission to the electrical utility grids. Since that time, we have addressed the issues and problems associated with defining a compatible interface between the rectenna and the infra-structure of the utility grid system. In order to achieve a workable interface, the dominant parameters affecting the rectenna/utility grid were identified and evaluated. Stating the groundrule: "The rectenna/ utility interface does not change the reliability of electrical service to its customers;" the following parameters are considered to be the primary technical factors for operating 5.0 GW rectenna systems with the grids. o The daily and seasonal demand profiles of the grid. o The throttling range of the generating machines on the grid, o Eclipses of the solar collectors by the earth at the vernal and autumnal equinoxes. o Eclipses of the solar collectors by other SPS's at the vernal and the autumnal equinoxes. Effect of Daily and Seasonal Demand of Utility Grid Under normal conditions, the consumer demand for electrical power varies over a wide range on a daily, as well as a seasonal, basis. On a daily basis, the peak demand for a weekday is twice the minimum for a typical regional grid (see fig. IV-D-5). In addition, the daily peak may vary by a factor of two from minimum seasonal demand to maximum (see fig. IV-D-6). Therefore, the annual demand spread may be from 25 percent of maximum to maximum annual demand. These factors affect the type, size, and number of machines used to meet the varying grid loads. Depending on size and throttle range, grid machines are selected to serve base load, intermediate load, and peaking load roles. Generally, the larger machines serve base load requirements. The smaller machines are used for peaking and the intermediate size falling somewhere in between. Structures of Installed Generating Capacity of U. S. The vast majority (over 99 percent) of the installed generation capacity in the continental United States is interconnected in a maize of discrete transmission and distribution networks, referred to as regional grids. There are nine of these regions which collectively makeup the "National Electric Reliability Council (NERC)." This body was founded in 1968 with the stated purpose of augmenting the reliability and adeaquacy of bulk power in the electric utility systems of North America. In order to meet the stated purpose, the Council is primarily concerned wi th: IV-D-8

LT>

aNvnaa
IV-D-9

%) aNviAtaa ^v^IHJ,^3^a

o
cr

CD Q.

OH O

UJ Q

Q I

cn
LU 00

C_> ii O.

Oei

o
VO

QNW3U

dU

IV-D-10

o o o o o o o o

Annual residential and commercial load growth trends. Load forecasts. Timely installation of new generating capacity. Properly coordinating transmission networks. Fuels availability. Financial constraints. Licensing and siting procedures. Government policies and restrictions.

The grid operators or power companies actually own and operate the equipment. In its July 1976 annual report, the NERC presented its projection of load growth, new capacity requirements, etc., through the year 1985. These data and others have been used to show the U.S. generating capacity for 1985 and the year 2025, for the purpose of evaluating the grids for compatibility with solar power satellite rectenna systems in the 2000-2025 time frame. These projections are given in Table IV-D-1. Utilization of Rectenna Systems on Utility Grids Initial studies of the SPS indicate that the rectenna be sized near 5.0 GW output for optimum economic return. Using that assumption, this study is aimed at determining the impact modular power sources of that size have on the operation of the regional grids. Due to its size (5.0 GW) the rectenna would serve as a base load generator. The method of operation would be to collect the DC power along busses within the rectenna, convert it to AC through thyristor or SCR inverters using grid power to fire the inverter elements, thus achieving and maintaining synchronous operation with the grid. In the case of the SPS, the rectenna would be shutdown daily for short periods of time near 12:00 a.m., for 45-days around each equinox. This is brought about due to an eclipse of the SPS collector with the earth at the vernal and autumnal equinoxes for a geosynchronous orbit. Also, 1f Scenario "B" of the Greenbook were carried out, with 112 satellites in geosynchronous orbit in the year 2025, the solar collectors of each satellite would eclipse each other on a daily basis at 6:00 p.m. and 6:00 a.m. for a 45-day period around each equinox. Outages of this types are unknown in the existing grid operating structure, requiring new methods of power management. The variables that primarily affect the total number of rectenna that may operate on a single grid are: o Installed capacity. o Conventional machinery. o Rectenna systems. o Reserve margin requirements, o Peak demand, o Throttle range of conventional machines. IV-D-11 r:

1
I' LL. O

CNJ

LT\ un CNI i_n r-^ . . . . . i co i.n N~\ >i

CO
CNJ

i i i

CD CD r-H

=c

Q
CD 1

0
1 >

_J
CO
i-H

cc/
i1 CNJ

CNJ Li->
CD -X.

CD r^
LT\

t~-^
CD

LU
U-i CD

LU CD

C_> (I t ) Csl

CD Hf)

1 r 1

CD 1 i 1 LU

CD

CD 1 1 1 1

LU h:
/ r-.

CD ^ 1

CNI CD CNJ

01 <r

1 ~\

ii co

LT\

crv c~ r^. Csi I-H

i )

CO

CT

1 1

i i

1 LU CD LU CD <
CNJ

UJ

P^
={;.

B.
CD

Er:
O CrC CD |

<^
CU = CD it

CO

UJ
r-H

LZJ

CD

1
UJ LU

> ^-J *"" 1

~ 1

~2
CO
>

UJ PQ <C
r

^ tO -^
<

00

cr,

o'l

if\ C~J

CD CC

i1

LJ> CO cb"

UJ

cn

LO CO

r-H

LT> t si CD CNI

1^

CD

CD UJ CD

CD

<C

>T3 I

GO _._

rr
CD

CD

a-

CD

(.0 CD

IV-D-12

The installed capacity represents the rated output (KW) of the combined generators connected on the grid. Generally, grid capacity equals to the annual peak demand plus 20 percent, denoted as reserve capacity. From figure IV-D-5, baseload units make-up about 50 percent of grid capacity with the remainder consisting of intermediate load and peaking machines. Usually, baseload machines are large and more efficient than other generators and the grid operator's strategy is to use them as much as possible. This results in a high load factor for this equipment, normally in excess of 0.7. If SPS rectenna systems replaced existing base-load machines on the utility grids, their load-factor could exceed 90 percent. However, due to the discontinuity of the SPS output around the equinoxes, the management of power on the grid must be changed. In one case, the outage occurs around mid-night for a 45-day period around each equinox. An outage at this time of day has a minimum impact on grid power management. The reason being, when this outage occurs the grid demand is only about 50 percent of its peak demand. For the period of the outage (fifteen minutes maximum), the demand could be handled by other capacity on the grid. It should be pointed out that the throttling characteristics of the other machines is an important consideration. Just prior to the outage, the rotating equipment will be lightly loaded until a transfer of load from the rectenna system to this equipment can be made. The design of some systems, for economic reasons have very narrow throttling ranges. For example, a nuclear plant may have a range of 90 percent of full-load to full-load, where as a fossil-fired plant may have a range of 30 percent of full-load to full-load. When considering the throttling range of the grid, the throttling characteristic of the combined rotating machines must be determined. This is based on the percentage mix of fossil-fired, nuclear, and hydro-electric powered generators on the grid. Once the grid throttle range, installed capacity, and reserve margin requirement are determined, the following equiation may be used to determine the maximum number of rectenna possible on each regional grid.

no .of rectenna = IC(1-RM)(1-TR 5 GW Rectenna

1C - installed capacity RM - reserve margin TR - throttle position

m1n> )GM

For the example shown in Table IV-D-2, the reserve margin was given as 10 percent, and the minimum throttle rage of 64.2%, based on the nuclear, fossil-fired, hydro generation mix projected for the year 2025.

IV-D-13

1 1

LU 1 <_> LU

s ^T

CD 00 H- Q UJ UJ 1

oo Q_ LU OO

1 '

OO

CT1 r!

LT\

LO

LTi

CM

t>r~> ij

tx;

i| i\

cj-

cr> to

a LU
CD

CD

i_n
U_ CD

UJ 00

Q-

CD 1 I <_>
III ' ' '

<r

LU LU

N^cnc~>cnu
LT\

CM

K>

hO

i .

c'ltOLnuD
f--.

t^~

tC

C^)

-^J

CD ZD CD LJ_ 2: H- CD LU CD dUJ 1 H1 CD cc'

1 1 1 1 Z3 _J ii

u_

CD CD 1

I
CD H-

UJ 0 Ui 0 CD CJ UJ UJ UJ hOO I O >PQ I <t OO 0 0 IS UJ LU CD Z^ X LU

C-J C" CM
N^

oo

H1

C3- CD CD U- J 1

- <c <c

CD

3T-

CD

LU
r-H

CD LO

CD I LU OO

. 5T

<r
LU ^ 1

cr

LU 00 LU

u_ ^;
CD O CD UI

=r

CD

LU cer

yN

- eo

I~<

LPl
h

CL. <X

<c

LH r^
CM CM N~ LO

o-> u_- ^-'

CT CD r^. x .TtCX, Of

cv'
LO, C^i

cri
LO U">

LC
CD CM C" >C~>
1

II =n
u
_) Jj : JL:D

UJ

1 1

cocrcrc

'!cr-CNiLoc~
r 1

i 1

^r

<C Q_

'Z'.

<_>

<a: CD
<c
rv
1

OO CD

oo
1

C3

El

'

1
>

>

UJ

oo oo sr LU

UJ

CD

"^
CD
LU

1
ZZ O^

C r C _ > 2 ? - C _ ) C _ 3 C _ > Q _ C _ > C D 1

i
t_>

i
SC Cs-

nr hi
C.

t->

SI

=c ct

S^I

S^

=. c_

u"

OO

rs

S:

oo

LU

ct:

IV-D-14

For the case given 1n scenario B, 112 satellites are in geosynchronous orbit, eclipsing each other at 6;00 a.m. and 6;00 p.m. Utilizing the same technique the number of possible rectenna is reduced because the outage occurs near the daily demand peak, thus reducing the throttling range of the grid. The idea of spreading rectenna power over several grid networks minimizes the effects of losing power at any site. Also, since it is possible to distribute the rectenna power in the form of DC, the direction of flow of power to the grids maybe controlled, with the AC stability of the network being virtually unaffected. If indeed, widespread use of DC blocks of power come into use as^a means of interconnecting regional grids, then by the year 2025 we should observe a relative small variation in the hourly demand for electricity on a national scale. Such a power management scheme would virtually eliminate the effects of SPS outages based on the assumptions given in scenario B of the JSC-11568.

IV-D-15

IV-D-3 Structural Support and Ground Preparation

H. Roberts Systems Evaluation Off.

The support structure for the rectenna concept defined in sections IV-D-1 and IV-D-2 has been investigated through study contract No. NAS9-15280 with Bovay Engineers, Inc. The objective of the study was to study various approaches to the structural design/arrangement of the rectenna and investigate relative merits of the approaches. Each approach to the structural design/arrangement was limited to a design level consistant with determining gross material quantities and projected costs. Included in the designs were considerations of geometry, loadings, cost, maintenance, and materials of construction. The contractor was given study requirements which were to be used as design criteria: (1) The rectenna is to be located 31 latitude which dictates that the 10 kM diameter microwave beam has a 54 angle with the horizontal and the projected ground area covered is eliptical in shape with a major axis of 12.36 kM and minor axis of 10 kM. Also, cost effects will be determined for location at 40 latitude. The rectenna must intercept all of the 10 kM diameter beam. (2) For the initial investigation and analysis, the terrain will be assumed to be flat. However, the effects on costs will be investigated for rolling terrain. (3) Ground surface area covered by the rectenna is required to be usable for other purposes such as crop production. (4) The groundplane will have a pattern of diamondshaped openings 1 cm by 2 cm and must be electrically conductive. If found to be advantageous, the groundplane may be utilized as part of the structure. (5) The groundplane and the structure must be designed to provide maintainability of the receiving elements. (6) The primary structure must be insulated to 2000 volts, both from the ground and the groundplane. One of the first tasks in the study was to determine and analyze the environmental loads which would size the structure. After searching through the Uniform Building Code and the Southern Building Code, it was determined that there is no direct guidance in the building codes for developing design loads for a structure similar to the rectenna. However, the principles used in the codes were used to rationalize realistic loadings. Thus, a live load of 12 PSF (pounds per square foot), wind loads from 20 PSF at ground level to 30 PSF at 50 feet elevation, and snow loads of 5 PSF were selected for design and analysis. It was concluded that the wind load could be used as the design load without combining with the live and snow loads. Other loading effects such as seismic and thermal loads were also considered. The contractor evaluated the 11 structural systems shown in figure IV-D-7. Systems 1 through 6 and 11 have the groundplane segmented into rows with the surface perpendicular to the incoming microwave beam. Systems 1 through 4 and 11 have one edge of each segment on or near the ground, while systems 5 and 6 are elevated to provide clearance below the structure. Systems 7 through 9 are elevated to provide clearance for vehicles or machinery to operate below the structure. Systems 7 and 8 IV-D-16

SYSTEM M0.1O

-SYSTEM NO.G IV-D-17

Figure IV-D-7 STRUCTURAL SYSTEMS

have the groundplane perpendicular to the microwave beam, but the width of each segment is small compared to the other systems. System 9 has wide segments, but still provides the greater clearance. System 10 is a series of towers with the groundplane segmented as shown in figure IV-D-7. Each of the systems will have concrete footings poured in place to distribute the loads into the soil and to resist any uplift forces which will occur. Several materials, including aluminum, steel, concrete, plastics and wood were investigated for their applicability. It was concluded that either galvanized or weathering steel would be the most advantageous material considering all the requirements. Each system will require a portion of the structure to be made from aluminum for power conduction. Estimates of the materials quantities and costs were made for each system. A summary of these is shown in Tables IV-D-3 and IV-D-4. Also, an estimate was made on the cost of site preparation and is shown in Table IV-D-5. The results of the study show that within a limited space between columns, little cost difference exists between the different configurations. As the usability of the land increases (larger column spacing), the structural cost increases significantly. The geographical location of the rectenna site will have a major impact on both construction and structural costs. At 40 latitude the cost increase would be between 20 percent and 45 percent for the different configurations due to the increased loads at the latitude. The effect on cost for rolling terrain depends on many factors including the magnitude of the elevationvariations. The net cost effect can be between zero and 24 percent. The cost reported in JSC-11568 was $0.60/ft with a range from $0.48/ft* to $2.35/ft2. The contractor concludes that several areas of further study are needed to refine the numbers they have estimated. These recommendations can be reviewed in the contractors final report.

IV-D-18

TABLE IV-D-3: SYSTEM MATERIALS SYSTEM # ALUMINUM8 (KG X 10 ) STEEL (KG X 109)

QUANTITIES CONCRETE (KG X 109)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 11

1.50 *(6.10) 1.50 *(6.68) 1.01 0.69 1.50 1.01 1.45 1.56 1.61 2.79

1.46 1.50 1.58 1.79 1.49 1.62 1.89 2.82 1.78

1.29 *(1.72) 1.29 *(1.72) 1.91 2.31 1.43 1.91 1.03 1.50 1.16 1.20 1.26

13.53
0.82

*Note: These numbers represent an all aluminum structure, while all other numbers represent steel structures.

IV-D-19

t^. ^~^

i .
0)
O CM O CM O C M O C M O C M O C M O C M C O M C O M C O M C O M
4-1

CD ^5

0 1 UJ CJ>

uj oo o: o

^_

^ cu
CD

J^

GO O

fccSi i r^^ ^^ i
CQ O U_

LO

cu
-t_>

(J~>

CsL GO

II

o:
C Q_ CD

-l->

i-

_l *~^

c
r~

oo

c2^~' UJ I

UO

f oo

co

^i~

^j~

^~

^j~

*d~

^d~

^J*

co

co

^~

i CU 3

3 co

<C 0 21 0

1
CO

(J

1
UJ :U

T3 CO
i CO

uj jj -=r
f

U_ ^1 UJ

uj ^C ec :c ^*
C L^
^

c r > C M O a - c n o o
1

OCT>

IO

o > c o o c M c o < 3

CM

CO

OO

LO

4-> i
<1) CO

c cu
CU 4->

i CO

CMOO

C M C M

CM

OO

C^

CO

*~*

O) co

UJ

_l

CD rv UJ jj s

cu c
CO S_ SCU 0. J3 CU

CX-M

<c

03

a. a: __l I x =a:
OO Q UJ

"*

-*

o z cc: c_) 3 <i o o;

CD

tO LO OO CD

CO CM ^" OO

VO CO

CTl ^J"

r**.

^i"

CO ^"

1 1

I
1

1 1
1

1 1
1

CM OO
^-i

CT* P^

E SC~

^J

CO

C M s J - C M 3 - C M C M C M C M

s_

*^

J= 3 1 C

CO CU CO -Q CU E

UJ UJ 1 CQ 00 21

2: o:

1 11
1
< CM 0 0 ^ L D l o r ^ C O C P . O
r"

>- ra 00 ^

o
JV

i~~

IV-D-20

TABLE IV-D-5: SITE PREPARATION COSTS

Location and Site Condition Semi - Desert Area; Western States Land - Generally flat, sandy; little or no rock Gulf Coast or Midwest States; Medium tree cover; Clay or Loam type soil; basically flat area, Rainfall 25" or more per year Mountainous Location; Rock & Timber; Moderate rain and snow Cost/ Ac re* $1,500 Cost/ ft2
$.03

$2,700

$.06

$4,000

$.09

*COSTS INCLUDE:

- Clearing and Grubbing: Heavy to light (depending on area) - Grading and Drainage - Roads: Perimeter and 3 cross roads; 50 miles 24 ft. wide asphalt. - Culverts: 24" diameter C.M.P. - Culverts: 60" diameter C.M.P. - Bridges: 30 ft x 70 ft or 2100 ft2 - Service Roads: 70 miles, 20' wide, gravel surface - Service Roads: Drainage Low water type crossing - Fence around perimeter: 8 ft high, chain link. - Seeding & Fertilizing
NOTE: Cost does not include utilitites, site survey, operations and

maintenance facilities.

IV-D-21

W. L. 6111 Systems Evaluation Off.

APPENDIX Section IV. RECTENNA. POWER COLLECTION REQUIREMENTS INTRODUCTION The collection of microwave energy and conversion to electrical power and the conditioning of this electrical power to a form suitable for connection into an electrical power distribution system is addressed in this appendix. This power collection system has much in common with the conversion of sunlight to electrical power by solar cells and the conditioning of power for transmission to the microwave antenna system. Both systems involve combining a very large number of low voltage, lower power sources to provide a single or at best, a few high voltage, high power outputs. They differ in that the solar cells have nearly uniform characteristics, while the microwave conversion involves combining conversion devices with continuously varying input characteristics. The solar cell collection system is optimized for weight associated with interconnecting conductors, while the rectenna land area and structural requirements may be more dominant than the mass of conductors. Rectenna Systems Flow The rectenna systems flow and efficiency is described in the figure
i r&^'fj*
p__

below.

fV)
/'-': .^'J' // if -'./-.-

D /o /. s

c / ^_7-.r *
?
f rl

1 1*. 1 1

f^y*.**.*. tV-

J>*.".T, ?*(<->

(r)

&>(-}

IV-APP-1

As the distance from the center of the array Increases, the efficiency of the chain decreases, while the equipment to collect this power Increases. At some distance the collection of power 1s no longer economically feasible. To establish this cutoff point, some cost per Kw will have to be established for the rectenna, together with the cost increase per Kw output for the balance of the SPS system. Microwave Beam Considerations The intensity of microwave radiation in the plane at right angles to the direction of propagation of the microwave beam is given by:
o ) is the intensity in Mw/Cm at the center of the beam r is the distance from the center of the beam in kilometers _2 k is a proportionality constant in kilometers , depending upon the taper from center to edge of the beam

(r)

is the intensity at distance r from the center of the beam

I*p2

The integration overall area of the rectenna gives the power collected:
P - 7T go (1-e R )

Where R is the radius of the microwave beam at the outside edge of the rectenna. P = Power collected in Mw The voltage output and power conversion efficiency from individual diode varies with the incident intensity. Equal blocks of power from various segments of the antenna at fixed currents and voltages will be collected. An example of collection and power management of low voltage sources are designs based on solar cells in space. Skylab I. was the largest solar array flown to date, and its arrays provided from 6 to 10 Kw. It would appear reasonable that larger amounts of power could be handled by a rectenna on the ground, and for initial studies, 500 Kw per panel, with an output of 1000 V DC might be a reasonable set of input data. For a 5 Gw rectenna, this would result 1n about 10^ power blocks. Each power block would, on the average, occupy 0.1 percent of the total recetnna area. Land Area Considerations Since the microwave receivers are mounted above a ground 'plane which is normal to the incident beam each power block will be mounted on columns so IV-APP-2

as to be normal to the beam and not Interfere with Its adjacent neighbors. Four angles determine the orientation of the ground plane, the land area requirements and the structural support requirements. The first angle 1s determined by the latitude of the rectenna Installation, assuming that the satellite 1s In an equatorial plane, as seen 1n Figure IV-APP-1. The area of a flat horizontal plane required to Intercept the Incoming microwave beam 1s:
= Agp

SAT TEX're

&"= Latitude FIGURE IV-APP-1 WheresAm = The area of the microwave beam at right angles to the direction of travel
Aga

Latitude W- G Ground area

The second angle 1s established as follows: In the north, south direction, the land area 1n any practical case will not be absolutely horizontal, so that the radius 1n the north, south direction 1s Increased or decreased depending on Us angle with respect to the horizontal, as shown 1n Figure IV-APP-2.

IV-APP-3

FIGURE IV-APP-2 The ground area requirement then becomes:

Aga

l = Cos (

Where $-| = Angle of line between end points of beam in N-S direction and the horizontal A similar treatment must be made in the east-west direction, resulting in the third angle

FIGURE IV-App-3 7]Then Aga6 = Cos (i) 2

Am Cos

Cos

The satellite may not be located directly over the meridian as shown in fig. 4, resulting in the fourth angle Satellite
a (fj ii.

FIGURE IV-APP-4 IV-APP-4

The satellite may not remain directly over same point on the ground, and this motion will result in some power transmission loss depending upon the angles with respect to center of the rectenna. Finally, the amount of structural support will depend upon the end points 1n a rectenna row as seen 1n Figures IV-APP-2 and IV-APP-3. Power Collection The Rectenna Element: The rectenna element which 1s used to convert microwave energy Into DC power is considered to have a cell area of 53 cm* at 2.45 GHZ. The power incident on the rectenna element:

P(r) = f(r) Ac = 53 ?(r)

Where: P(r) = Power received by diode at distance r from the center of the incoming beam in mw 2 (r) = Incident intensity at radius r in mw/cm 2 Ac = Cell area occupied by a rectenna element in cm Then: P(r) = 53 ^r) = 53 oe"
Kr

2
= P(0)e

kr2

The rectification of this incident power involves a number of losses, as shown in Figure IV-APP-5.

FIGURE IV-APP-5

IV-APP-5

Note that depolarization and other microwave transmission losses are considered to have already occurred and are taken care of in the incident power term. The overall conversion efficiency assumed in earlier studies is shown in Figure IV-APP-6. For purposes of preliminary studies, the conversion efficiency is reasonably described by the equation: V - CP1nc" Where: TJC = Conversion efficiency C = Constant F*inc=
Incl

'dent microwave power mw

n = Constant The constants C and n are easily obtained from log-log plot of PC vs. P. Then: PC = nc
P. = Po6 inc

P.nc
-kr

The last expression is exactly the same form as the expression for the incident beam; hence, conversion losses appear as an increase in the incident beam taper. Subarray Power Collection Considerations The output of a rectenna element as a function of its position in the rectenna has been described. This power is now collected in parallel and series in a subarray unit a given amount of the power at a given DC level is achieved. The voltage and current outputs from a rectenna element are determined as follows:

>

FIGURE IV-APP-6

IV-APP-6

Let the forward voltage drop of the diode be a constant V0 . Then:

Having established the current and voltage from each rectenna element, the next question to be considered is how to collect in series and parallel. Connecting the current from a number of rectenna elements in parallel is shown in figure IV-APP-7.

FIGURE IV-APP-7 The equivalent DC circuit is shown in figure IV-APP-8

The output current should be set at a value sufficiently high to burn clear a shorted diode. It is assumed that r^ja is a constant and that no can be obtained from values previously published for Shottsky diodes by IV-APP-7

Ratheon. The I2R losses experienced in collecting in parallel are:

Where: ptf>t* produce I -^ P

is the power lost in the string of diodes paralled to

is the resistance of one rectenna element filter section. /v

<c

* ^ - ^r7
^-/

A//

Where >7 sp is the efficiency factor for collection of the subarray parallel elements. Note that there is no additional wire used to collect in parallel, and that the length of this parallel string is /V

IV-APP-8

The next step 1s to collect 1n series up to the output voltage of the subsection.

Figure IV-APP-8

From figure IV-A_P-8

To minimize the overall I R loss due to connecting 1n series the value of Vb should be made as high as possible. However, high voltage across the standoff of the diodes and the ground plane is small, a breakdown to ground could occur, which will limit the value of Vb. The question of Corona discharge and leakage due to dust and moisture require further study.

IV-APP-9

The I R loss due to series connections as found as follows:

0 ~- -/* 50 1

and the overall collection efficiency for a subarray becomes:

It should be noted that A/-/2f represents additional wire for connections within the array. The area of the rectenna required to collect this power is /V/tfrfk or ^* *

Protective devices (crow bars) will be required at the output from a subarray to protect from a load interruption which would produce high voltage breakdown of the diodes. Transmission from Subarray to Collection Point Considerations The output from the subarray is limited in the voltage which can be developed by the geometry of the rectenna element; however, high voltage should be used to minimize transmission losses from the subarray to the central collection point. At this point, the interaction of connecting many subarrays 1n parallel is not defined. It is assumed that Inversion 1s performed on the output of each subarray and that the Inverters can be paralleled. The output AC voltage should be made as high as possible. The exact design of the transmission line 1s considered beyond the scope of this Initial study, but will markedly affect the cost of rectenna construction. IV-APP-10

The power delivered to the inverter is:

Po = P< ?+ ?c fcr

The inverter efficiency is a constant Pac (The power to be delivered to the central collection point) = The final power collected is:
Prc ~ It is assumed that power is first laterally transmitted to the Y axis and then to the center of the rectenna along the X axis. The details of the transmission line not having been completely worked out the impedance and losses due to power factor will be ignored.

The value of Rt has two components: Rnj . - The resistance in the east, west direction of the transmission line from the Jth subarray in the center line of the rectenna. Rmj . - The resistance in the north , south direction from the center line above to the center of the rectenna. The subarrays are arranged along the ground plane of the rectenna. The N dimension in the east, west direction and the M dimension in the ^rth. south direction. The M dimension is limited in any rectenna row by H. the length of the ground plane. A typical arrangement is shown in Figure IV-APP-9.
-Jfts
2

"'<+'*<,',
ju~

xz^^v*^ s i

T Jvff

' .

/ &e><a

7 <+**+

Co<.t*cT,0^-^/ />^ JL_f

&*^r

i *2Z-

FIGURE IV-APP-9 IV-APP-11

Then the length of Rej on a section of several subarrays Is:

Where:

Nj 1s the number of rectenna elements in the Jth array J and since the power take-off is in the lower left corner of the array, the length is determined by the collection subarrays which have preceded it.

Since the rectenna must be split up into finite areas to take care of terrain, the length of the transmission line leaving the segmented portion of the rectenna will not necessarily lie in the horizontal plane so that the length of Rej- has two components, one on the array and one over the terrain and the length on the section of several subarrays described above. The total length of /vW' CosQ
r *?' f

With the constraint that Where:

& C 6 A & T M

C 7 F

" "*

V/W
FIGURE IV-APP-10

IV-APP-12

In the north, south direction there are two dimensions to be considered; the position on the ground plane and the location of the ground plane with respect to the rectenna center line as shown in figure 11.

Subject to the constraint that the value of the second term is always less than H. Assuming some value of resistance per unit length of transmission line the resistance of the transmission line from the j+HSubarray in the section is:
p.(

Next to find the efficiency of transmission the power delivered neglecting impedance effedts
Prc

^ &T/
Computer Program Outputs Along each row determine: (1) Total length of series connections vs./ direction in row. (2) Total number crow bars, inverters and step-up transformers vs. X radrjs (3) Total length of east.west transmission wire vs. X distance from center. (4) Tptal length of north, south transmission wire vs. Y distance from center line. (5) Total power vs. x at various y.

IV-APP-13

Input: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5.

Unit costs for wire/unit length Weight of wire/unit length Unit costs for crow bar, inverter and transformer Weight breakdown on items in 3 above Cost per KW for balance of SSPS

Output: 1. Total dollar cost vs. power along X direction in each row (i.e. %$ vs. % power??) 2. Masses of material vs. power along X for each Y. Next a subroutine should be developed to determine the items described in the next section. In Figure IV-APP-11 is shown the accumulated dollar cost of capital equipment vs. the accumulated power output for various rows of the rectenna. The curves are arbitrary except that the general shape is correct. The slope of this curve Acost/^power is determined at each step and A cost/^ power^ C the calculation is terminated when efficiency due to cost. This process if repeated for each row. Then: The average collection efficiency P available = P.
*"

At this point determine PC/P^ for the row which istic limiting collection

ti.

IV-APP-14

J
\

*
/GO

FIGURE IV-APP-11
IV-APP-14-A

Distribution Is 50 percent of capital cost of utilities. Future Work Collection for rectenna is an inverse distribution operation. Reliability must be established. The computer program described 1n the preceding section provides individual wires, but in practice, the transmission line might be tapered, as more subarrays are added to the line. The mass of conductor should be about the same for either case. There is a question of whether alternate paths to the central collection point should be provided. In the event that a-line fault should develop between the subarray and the central collection point, some provision must be made to isolate that section of line without interrupting the supply from that subarray. Any system which provides alternate paths between the subarray and the cetnral collection point will require more wiring, hence have a higher cost. The cost of this collection system, based upon extrapolation of Electrical Transmission and Distribution Reference Book by Central Station Engineers of the Westinghouse Electric Corporation, copyright 1950, East Pittsburgh, Pa., (figure 4, page 695), is about $100 per KVA in 1950 dollars, or around $300/ KVA and may be as high as $500/KVA in 1985 dollars. Note also that is voltage control is required in the solar collection system, so that the structure is not used for collection, a similar cost will be incurred 1n that system, but should be lower since the power output density 1s lower. Voltage drop limits need to be established; "The Standard Handbook for Electrical Engineers." Permissible Voltage Drop, Section 16-88 states: "Permissible drop in voltage between the supply and substation and first transformer should not exceed 10 percent on transmission lines."

4 The scheme described in this report involves the paralleling of 10 subarrays, which on the average contain around 10$ diodes. The AC output from these subarrays must be in parallel if they are to be combined for transmission. The control system for controlling relationships and paraleling control has not been considered in this preliminary look at collection, but is the equivalent of paralleling 10^ generators. Collection and isolation at some intermediate power level around 50,000 Kw will probably be required. Here again, the question of the amount of interconnect redundancy vs. reliability requires further study along with operating voltage.
Grounding Considerations There are a number of grounding requirements inposed by the rectenna. a. The ground plane reflectors from each subatatlon of the rectenna must be adequately grounded during normal operation. IV-APP-15

b. The crow bar from each subarray must dissipate 500 Kw whenever the load is interrupted and during startup of the rectenna; 104 such sources will be operating if there exists a complete load interruption. c. Lightning grounds will be required for the ground plane and overhead transmission lines. d. Transfer neutrals must be grounded. e. Fences and other equipment in the vicinity of high voltage are normally grounded. The exact type of ground system will depend upon the electrical characteristics of the earth in the region it is installed. In moist ground, iron pipes may be sufficient, while in desert or rocky areas, a grid work' buried in the ground may be required. Specifications for power to be dissipated and allowable voltage drops and the changes in ground conductivity under protracted dumping of the output while the load is interrupted need further study. Microwave Reception Changes in the intensity of the incident microwave beam due to failures or errors in the antenna system atmospheric effects, together with equipment failures and load changes on the ground will produce transients in the rectenna collection system. This may show two types of effects, surges in peak voltages and frequency which are harmonics of the collection systems. Line protection and possible interference with microwave reception can result and need investigation. Corona discharge from overhead lines may also affect microwave reception and hence, needs further investigation. Alignment Considerations The periodic motion of the earth due to tidal action, and long term changes in the earth's surface will produce misalignments of the rectenna ground plane arrays with the incoming microwave beam. Temperature variations from day-to-night can be expected to produce similar effects. These effects can be expected to produce changes in reception efficiency. Provisions for periodic alignment of the rectenna subarrays and designs which take into account temperature changes are required to maximize rectenna conversion efficiency. Summary and Conclusion An outline of the calculations required to make a first approximation of the mass and cost of a rectenna collection system have been made. The effects en rectenna efficiency have been described and an approach to a cost IV-APP-16

trade-off between rectenna materials and efficiency has been outlined. The computer program will provide additional refinement to the estimate of rectenna efficiency and some Initial cost comparisons. The results of this initial modeling shows that there are a number of safety features and reliability considerationswhich will require incorporation into the rectenna design. Recommendations (1) It is recommended that detailed programming of the rectenna collection system be carried out as quickly as possible; some preliminary estimates are possible using hand calculations. The effects of the rectenna efficiency changes on the cost and performance of the balance of the SPS system need to be investigated parametrically for rectenna optimization studies. (2) The operating voltages, paralleling controls, redundancy isolation requirements, grounding requirements, and structural alignment need performance specifications and it is recommended that an RFP be issued to study these area when funds become available.

IV-APP-17

V. SPACE CONSTRUCTION AND MAINTENANCE SYSTEM A. SYSTEM DEFINITION STUDY CONSTRUCTION RESULTS

L. M. Jenkins Spacecraft Design Division The Boeing SPS Systems Study, Part I, included an analysis of the construction requirements and construction concepts for three SPS configurations - a thermal engine and photovoltalcs at concentration ratios of 1 and 2 (CR1 and CR2). Requirements for construction at LEO and GEO were analyzed and compared for each configuration. Since the objectives of Part I of the study concerned power conversion alternative evaluation and the development of data related to space construction location, this initial construction analysis was not directed toward developing absolute mass and cost numbers, but was oriented toward construction differences in satellite types and construction sites. Toward this end, the construction analysis developed the following data for each alternative energy conversion concept and construction location: definition of definition of definition of definition of definition of construction concepts type of facility to be used construction sequences time allocations for each major construction task functional requirements for the construction

machinery

- definition of requirements for the number of each type of construction machine and their operating rates - number of construction personnel required For simplification, the assumption was made that each satellite would be constructed in one year, machines were given a fixed operating rate, and the number of machines varied to meet the overall one year limit. Antenna construction was not analyzed since antennas were common to all alternatives, but time was allocated for attaching antennas to the array structure, and estimates were made for antenna construction crew size. As the various satellite types were analyzed, a set of underlying principles (objectives, goals, guidelines) evolved that were incorporated into all of the various construction concepts. The philosophy which evolved from the assembly of these principles could not always be satisfied, but they do represent an initial set of criteria for space construction which has some engineering or operational basis for existence. This "construction philosophy" is summarized in the following:

V-A- 1

CONCEPT

RATIONALE

Facilitized Construction - Do not have to build in extra strength (mass) into every satellite in order to support construction equipment. Construction operations can be decoupled. Decoupled Operations Construction operations should be independent as possible so that a slow down or stoppage in one operation has minimum impact on others. J^bricate major subassernbJJ_es_in_para.l.1 el_in_ separate facility locations so that maximum time can be allotted to each subassembly fabrication. Simplifies Simplifies Simplifies Simplifies facility. machine resupply logistics. personnel access. facility. removing completed satellite from

Major Subassemblies in 'Parallel

Work From One Side

Continuous Beams

Continuous beams, whether curved or straight, minimize the number of joints, and eliminates the need for some joint plug assemblies. Using tracks for construction machine is preferred to the use of "overhead crane" technique for getting the machines to the desired location: machine located closer to work (long booms not required) provides surface to attach temporary beam supports allows independent activity of multiple number of machines (not constrained by number of overhead cranes) Placing beam machines on tracks such that the machine backs away from "extruded" beam is preferred over fixed beam machines: continuous longitudinal beams can be made (no longitudinal butt joints required) cross frames can be started as soon as longitudinal beam machines pass the joint area

Construction Machine Tracks

Moving Beam Machines

V-A-2

CONCEPT

RATIONALE

Support the Beams

- The beams must be supported as they are fabricated to eliminate undesired stress and unguided end positions.

Avoid Use of Free Flyers - Machines that free fly are not desired. The satellite components are too frangible to tolerate accidental collisions. Functional requirements for types of construction equipment, quantity and operating rate were defined and estimates made of the number of direct construction and supporting personnel (see figures V-A-1 and V-A-2). Figure V-A-3 compares sizes of facilities. In the Part I study, a preliminary constructability rating was derived for the six combinations of configuration and construction location. Figure V-A-4 graphically represents the relative values of this rating technique. The parameters used in the rating were given weighting factors to reflect their importance. For instance, assembly complexity was judged to be of the greatest importance. The photovoltaic, CR1, satellite is about 50 percent better from the constructability aspect than the thermal engine satellite. The photovoltaic CR2 satellite falls in between the other two in constructability rating. The truss configuration satellites were conceived as a way to simplify construction. Boeing has applied a similar approach to the thermal engine reflector support structure by changing from a parabolic support for the reflector facets to a cylindrical support. This improved construction operations, but increased the facet area requirement by four percent. Eliminating the reflectors in changing the photovoltaic to a CR1 improved the constructability by placing the solar cell blankets on a flat side of the truss structure. The rating technique indicates very little difference between the LEO and GEO construction location; therefore, constructability is not considered a strong discriminator in that trade. Collisions with objects in LEO is a concern during construction. Approximately thirty collisions are predicted during LEO construction and transit to GEO. For thirty years operation in GEO about 10 collisions are predicted. The probability of significant damage from a collision is considered to be very low. Of greater influence on the LEO/GEO decision is the requirement for berthing the large sections after transport from LEO. A concept for accomplishing the berthing is illustrated in figure V-A-5.

V-A-3

0 w

U ^

I
UJ|_

CO

z. o
oc
< Z > ^ 5

* 5
5
LO CO 0> T Z II m m

OVOLTAIC CR -

o
^

^ ^

L \ \
I\ \

ii < o
0

UJ

"J ^ -1 X

h< 0
UJ

o u
(O CO

i" 5 f- oc oc
r.

o
i

oc po > T-

a u cc a w<
LU Z 08

U. o CC

O a.

t-

r-

\\\ \\\"
\\\

\ r

<o o o2 55 ui
-1
3 M
V *

l-l

>
O

^2

^ z cc >. -J

5 < o
^E ^^ ^3

2^

a. 5
^j

5 m oc -> u. a.
_1 < LL. Z y rf LU LU Q <

^y

oo

^y

to
Lu at ^ o
LU i

^*"

O O Z Z

o u

7 5
Ul

o ^.

I\\

. Q uj

o
*

5 cc
Ul

T H

PO

r-

0.

|\\\y

A\v

O ..
-J

z
HH 0

z. o
H 3
IS
p
Ul (J

<r^ < 3 z c
Z hf-

P
ftO
/>

oc ? C
kO
M

CO O

ui

u
1 1 1
LU

s
CO 1 0

Ul CO

z o < O
X

< 03
1

(1

<o|

VOLTAI

ri

\v \V

J O L ui

01 1

<

a:

C3 >i Lu

00 CO

o LU

U H O Z a.

f^

o oc

A\^J \\\I \\\l

O
U l

?
S3NIHOVW

cI > c>

00

0
10

o o

o p

.3ZISM3UD

V-A-4

0)

c u2
0

S ^ s

"^

S5!5S;5S

'~

I1

*^

S~<~00

S^S2""~
NNN

o
.rt
{N

(9

1! S I 3 5
*

!!!!!!
tn(Nfom<oe>4

! . * 2 a s - a--"
^ ^* eooo^enocnoo

I
o

O <D

^moojjoeMNCM

O)

cn 3 o
(.1

in
rO

g 0| o 0 3 s LJ

(OCOCONCOtN

<Stfl(M-TOeO

^r^^'ffCINMC^

15

e i

SJ I
0 0

S s s s s s 1 S-SM- I-sas"

I ! ) ! ,
1

S
o

e>
r*.
UJ S -1 J3

o
00

S0
"3 C

1
e
C

^2Si?

ILON^OMCXM

o o
^. oJ^tooom

0 C 0 oj

*? S o o ^ e n o w c o

^woocMco*NCNeM

a5 o 3^
O 0

LU *^

en N
o *

a: o
o o: oo o c_>

S C

coojrrfOi3r 2

eo

ror- ^ O J S T C

- N r*

CO (O

c UJ S e U J S 2 "3 0 | uj U S
UJ S -J Ja
O 0

SSSSigS
*~

S N U ) M 0 1 3 ' i i - * ~

(M

o
o
00

aic idt

(M

|o9^o*e

ginN^cofMNc.

5
0 0 O.

i >
LU

cc:
o
u
*

aJ
O

0 v J

|12SS

Soxr-Soojo

gtoxc^oN^N

1
fV

o
^i

<T> CO

c u

SI 31

SS2?38
c 1 S |

I^^Qf^?"
w ?! g

f^^SC^^^
5 ITS

c> in

CO

"S

-3

1 Hilii !i i ililr ll
5 5 | s a
V-A-5

LU CO

CO

o
As CO

g o
cc
CO

TT
CO

-IQ. O rII

z o u

'T
CO

V
C3

cc o

o oo

o o
C3 H <O I- Q-

CO UJ

0 g
CO LU

Z C3

to cc

UJ

*-

o
cc tco Z O u

o o

!*
O O
CO

o LU
cc
LU

UI

O Z O I-

< o

CO

o
O > O O
Q.

z o to
CO

g P o
Ico
D CC

h- a. CO UJ

<o

o LU
O

oo i co

=c

UJ

a:

o u

z o u

o LU

X to in

JL

oc u

V-A-6

is 15
ta Z

U4

>
"> X
Ul

Z X

ig

11
Ul _.

I 5 * 3 cc u.

>

5 O O
Ul

m ,

o u
m

z
I U

z
ui cc

<

<

Ul

s
55 grf
a. co is

o txi

a: >
CO

cc \<s> o o
U l

= O

II

<c

33 OC iu
UJ _

x<
o: CL.

w o ,\ y
-J IU

<c
CXL

=3

cu
uj

o a. M S

in

V-A-7

z
oc

ul

o z o o a.

5 Z u

o z ^ c c

V-A-8

Other conclusions from the construction analysis are that one year for construction appears reasonable in terms of machine operating rates, number of machines and crew size.

V-A-9

V. __^___^.^___^____^__-^ SPACE CONSTRUCTION AND MAINTENANCE SYSTEMS B. ORBITAL CONSTRUCTION SUPPORT EQUIPMENT (OCSE) STUDY

S. H. Nasslff Spacecraft Design Division One of the key areas identified in the "study task structure" of the JSC in-house study report (JSC-11568) for solar power systems in space was equipment required to support automated fabrication/assembly of large space structures. This equipment has been designated as orbital construction support equipment (OCSE). To further define the OCSE required in constructing large space systems, a study contract was awarded to the Martin Marietta Corporation Denver Division under NASA Contract NAS 9-15120. The contract span was for nine months (October 1, 1976 through June 30, 1977). The objective of the study was to produce a conceptual design and system definition of the OCSE required for orbital construction of large space systems, typified by various configurations of solar power satellite systems, and to derive supporting OCSE development and cost data. The primary emphasis for this study was directed toward OCSE needed for support of construction of a large solar power satellite (SPS) having an operational location in geosynchronous orbit, although the results are applicable to the construction of any large space system. Three SPS baseline configurations were given to the contractor for this study effort. These were the JSC photovoltaic column/cable, JSC photovoltaic truss, and the Boeing thermal cycle concepts. These concepts represent a typical spectrum of present SPS configurations and are shown in figure V-B-1. OCSE is defined as that equipment required to support automated fabrication/assembly equipment which will have to be assembled, postioned, set up, controlled, checked out, monitored, serviced, and maintained with specially trained personnel located at the space construction site. It also considers both man and machine in the construction role. The study was divided into three parts. Part I covered OCSE requirements, Part II was concept definition, and Part III'included OCSE evaluation and selection. Based on the construction tasks identified in the functional analysis of the three SPS concepts investigated, requirements were identified for performing the SPS construction tasks on each SPS element. These requirements are summarized in generic processes requirements and encompasses all functions required during SPS construction/assembly. The processes were defined as follows: transport, handle, align, fasten, adjust, monitor, and checkout.

V-B-1

-CO-

o
I/)

00

c E

Requirements were identified for each process applicable to each SPS element, for every recognized task involved in the baseline construction methods. The degree of automated vs. direct control of SPS elements, in qualitative terms, is shown as frequency of occurrence vs. unit mass in figure V-B-2. Figures V-B-3 and V-B-4 show frequency of occurrence vs. transport distance and handling distance, respectively. Although there is a high degree of scatter evident in the data, due to the diversity of elements involved in SPS construction, the data tends to suggest which group of high frequency elements miqht be accommodated by automated systems and the group of less frequently occurring items be more directly controlled. An OCSE category tree was generated to ensure that an orderly approach was used in evaluating the applicability of different candidate concepts. This structured grouping, as shown in figure V-B-5, provided a quick visual reference of candidate similarities by systems characteristics such as operational utility, functional capability, and hardware utilization. The OCSE lists generated for each SPS configuration contain items which are common to all the configurations, or to two of the three configurations. The following summarizes the types of OCSE required in the three SPS configurations:
Transporter, Free Flying

t t t

Transporter, Structure Attached Manipulator, Mobile Base Manipulator, Fixed Base Long Boom, Attached Base Universal Docking Device Aligner (EVA, TV, Laser)
Fastener (EVA, Manipulator, Latch)

Cherry Picker Universal Storage Panel

Modular Systems (GN&C/Comm/ACS) EVA Hand Tools

Monitoring, Direct Viewing

Servicing Module

Checkout System Figure V-B-6 shows some of the major concept alternatives as they apply to the OCSE inventory tree established earlier.
V-B-3

T|

L 2
1
1 l

' i i

, !

-! ~~
7_ i

r 3
i

! '

! . ! I i! MI _i. i : i 'i i i l i , .i * ' i

i j i

i i i 1 1 1 t '

1 . 1 i , I

i I i i -j , i_ i | 1 i
i

Automated

, i

4 ; j
i i

, i : i i i i > i i _,_i_ ~rr_r. :r _-;_;} 1 !

:: i

. i ,i
I

! !
L~l ! ---

5 i <3 i

C 1 !
' 11

'

r~ * i i ' ' ^ " m 8 i i i i

i '

' rr , 1

Automated or Remote Manned

rrn, ~
== " -

, ' r-

-~
ti.

[nia.: ,
-*rr;
or ws

^*Tiaj

r*

3 i__-

1 f1'-= . *~-*-< n r1o 00

.

Remote or Direct Manned

Figure V-B-2

Flement Frequency Vs Unit Mass

KEY FOR NUMBERED EXAMPLES:

1 Reflector Facets (Boeing Thermal) 2 Subarrays, MPTS 3 Column Beams (Column/Cable) 4 SECS Support Trusses (Truss Type) 5 Rotary Joint Structure Beams (Truss Type) 6 Cable Reels (Column/Cable) 7 Concentrator Material (Column/Cable) 8 Extension Structure Beams (Column/Cable, Truss Type) 9 Solar Concentrator Support Structure (Boeing Thermal) 10 Busbar Harness (Boeing Thermal) NOTE: Several SPS elements exist with masses >10 kg and frequencies of occurrence <10.

Boeing Thermal

Column/ Cable.

1 5 --,'.

' '

~-=r5" - _ - i _ i MM'-; :=*. - ,?=pi' u-t i. gC- =-

'

"

Trus

Figure

V-B-3 Element Frequency Va Transport Distance

KEY FOR NUMBERED EXAMPLES:

1 Reflector Facets (Boeing Thermal) 2 Subarrays, MPTS (Boeing Thermal) 3 Subarrays, MPTS (Truss Type) 4 Subarrays, MPTS (Column/Cable) 5 Cavity Absorber Shell Panels (Boeing Thermal) 6 Solar Cell Rolls (Column/Cable) 7 Column Beams (Column/Cable) 8 Facility Beams (Column/Cable) 9 Switch Sears, MPTS (Truss Type) 10 Switch Gears, MPTS (Column/Cable)

V-B-5

Automated

Automated or Manned Remote

1 r

- T1T!|M

LDM (nuaunM) tinw 00

Figure

V-B-4

Element Frequency Vs Handling Distance

KEY FOR NUMBERED EXAMPLES:

1 Electrical Conductors, MPTS Subarrays 2 SECS Support Trusses (Truss Type) 3 Secondary Tape Ends (Column/Cable) 4 Tension Rods (Truss Type) 5 Turbogenerator Sets (Boeing Thermal) 6 MPTS Frames 7 Main/Prime Cable Reels (Column/Cable) 8 Secondary Structure, MPTS 9 Radiator Segments (Boeing Thermal) 10, Radiator Frame Structure (Boeing Thermal)

V-B-6

co
QC
UJ

4~> O*

1. o-o

o
C O <_>

1
L.

J=

1x
*j

*J
O)

0)

ce uj
UJ t

t 3 0. i-

o i

c c <TJ o

rO i_ -M

a: ^: is c -J
U4

C 3 OJ 4-> S- O O) 3

i_

LU _J LU Z3 CO Q C 0

co

o o
OJ
CJ 1

2:

<_>

i< CO

case

o 3 O ^ 3^ i- 3 QJ c w> e- T3 O "0 c in > <o c +-> o LU <_> co z: t 2: <0 1 i I I

4-> ct:
QJ O>

(0 <Q C CL

0) 0 iC t-

/ OJ rM
t- QJ T3 Ol Ql O <O r
4->

ut CT>
"5 >> QJ i 3

OJ CD

tai o
OJ

-3 J_

o
O

a: o
to
to OJ
i

>
C

co cc.
C3

Q. I

o- z

Q en
i-

01

co
"U

XOJ

-a
QJ

> iO

N
J- to

c to a.
QJ

<O

to

<C

Lu

OJ

**"*

co :D o cr o LU

u o a

CJ L_

-a to o >> Si co

io
i
co

O)

to to QJ ^~ </> C o
I- O 3 OJ Q. "Si to C5 1-Q QJ C *

C7>

o
4->-

CO C

<o

3O

a. a

ac co O LU t cj
GO
CD LU

4J
O 1fT3 C

> !-> O 0) i-r-

O)
3 t4-> to C

LO

A|

C3 V

ai

C3

s: o

c o

QJ

<a O)

-4-> Q.
CO

CO

cc

in at
O) O)

r- O

O
O) 10 4J i SO)
1

u c
O) CJ

J- O
O QJ CJ Z

ID LU O O CJ CO

CM

I t- a: co <c i

QC I <t

o to

ta

i- Q. J- Irt QJ C

OJ

C O to

c o
oj
fO

10 JO 10
4-> r

I
> o
o
C

o.

O) to U. S_
O

QJ

33

OJ C Q- <O

2: I

io i_

Q-

a. E c -ii CO

-> c <a o
Q CO

<t to

r- to Q. 4J O CL tO O-cf

c a fl

I
LO I

co a:
Z LU

CO

*~~* h^

>- (X.

u- a.
1 CO
LU Z

1 O

to <a i il OJ OJ c -u c <o
r-M

J=
to -M i S(O O
i

*x u a>
to
QJ <L 3
4_>

0)

ti OJ C C

Lu 1

LU <r or: or

to

o s:
s- -o

t. QJ -U J0 Q-

1 s: co
KLU LU CO CJ 3 ^> LU Q **

t^ 4^ r t/>

^
-u c 0) s_
QJ
J~

LU Q. OJ CO

QJ C O

Q) C
QJ 1

en
o
OJ -M T3

CO

QJ CZ f^ ^3

*-> to
21 H-

QJ C

to

o
r" c ro QJ CJ h-rtO

O tO 10 C S- 03

QJ i0- 1

to QJ O ca -

U 3 i_
4->

01
I CO

^-^ CO

C.

V-B-"

I? *f i] I
* &
M & ** W> > *>

* i i
** )

c rs o g t ? - E s
C w > O W v* 3

I ? T~ -r- * f * z 1 Y

? 5
c 5 v> M

~il
$2

w c

t. r u O > <*-

** -a * * i * *~ OT x

* c
S *

k u O > **-**- o~

a. * <~* i -o ^ * t- * jc * .2 * a.

! 1 1 ii i *
f
o^* ^. E C >^

C o

5 (

u B *-

2I-^-f i
if

T
* ^9

t
M ** **

1
*- o<
Cl

1 11
Je
* k O V O

y* L, u
v^ o <-* f
-

M
M

o
j;

* *~ X ** X.

l|uj?

| 8 . NTf&RATEO

f la ^^ ^^ j!
-*^ T" ^^
TSIEHS

C
01 yj

^? v

**
t . o ^ * c

e ^

"* * > * *

"c ^ * t. a. ac

!! i ! f f * 5.1 ? i ?
? C ^ J l w ? ? 5 *i. b W 3 nu * *- W f ** * CC

1
2
A

1
- J ^ C
_

I 1 1 1 si;*!*
S
J

'

* ' _f

& w o

*. v|

o C

"a *K -5
^
* a. a)

*
?c 03
K V

2, o
^- k.
^ W O * 3

k *oa> O * a l e

w * 9 3w*aaat

t|g
f

- **
X 5

U O> *- a.

-1 i i
U

-J s M
0
W

* j -a -i

T> T
MO O

T"^
K > g

k.

Q,

^-

i
S

M U -^ O

< C X U <fl ^

a. z

T3 t. * CVftr

*-

m k . a t u -^

>*

L. x
3

a. ? 5
* f l " " *

* _ Q

kU

k.*fc

t
.8
e k.

1
5
t
v
M(

T
5
^ e * *

|.
6

i
J 1 .

s
3 & 7
k, b - * C

r 5
3 S 7
* ^k.

t
.3
UWM

g
S2S c iS

? i. . 'i
*

"I ! i. =. I
- 3 * 3 ^ C - k . - f c . - o O 5 -* 3 ** i
W

fl

JS
**

"2 C O

* *

"*

** * O &

15
-^ k. v h. * O 3u 3 <J X ^ i i

MHli

>>
^ y

f
*

M t f M M M t / 7 w

1
w

^ f ^ i W l | M ^ W

i
V

* O * h . * - * u C M - t f C o o & * i 5 * * - > k. -9 t *
w

i w ?

f 5 . = lil
o ** ^

>*

is

^ P i

k. cj < x c
l l

w a t - ^ J o * - ^ T l * * l l l J

w -^-

k. 4 o *^

^^

r\

T
S .
* 3 ?O

1
,,
^>

!
>- a:

"8
a
S

>
8

r ?
u

& S
2

8.
^
S

*
a
S

S I

-3
S

> k.

Ii f . i -1 * 5
W y C O -*

i5 ill I 5 ^ f ? f ! !? Y ^. -j ^ j > ^ t T ' T ' T " i i |

W w- fc. 3 * * 3 * * Q. C O 3 k, 3 *> O

i/l

b.

* C k l A 9 O V * > ^ * fe *

|
3 X ^ w ^ . * C 3 u l 4 '

- ' ' i i ^ i iJ - ' i i

O.

V-B-8

A relatively large number of OCSE candidates were identified during the study. Many of the potential candidates were obviously "significant to the study and required further detailed evaluation, while others were less significant in both functional and design terms. Therefore, it was necessary to "filter out" less attractive solutions. The OCSE identified was screened and ranked using screening parameters such as task cycles, performance flexibility, performance redundancy, size, interfaces, stateof-the-art, SRT time phasing, potential obsolescence, etc. The screened candidates resulted in the following: t t t t Manipulator, Fixed or Mobile Base, or Dual ^5 degrees of freedom Docking device for joining large systems Manned Cherry Picker, detached to booms on structure Base Core Module Fixed-base Boom, long/extendable, <C4 degrees of freedom Maintenance Repair Module Commodities Storage Module Personnel/Material Transporter, structure attached OCSE Storage Panels Personnel/Material Transporter, free flying EVA Module

More detailed results of this study are available in the final report for Contract NAS 9-15120, published by Martin Marietta in July 1977. A follow-on effort is planned for design of selected OCSE during FY77 and FY78. The next phase would include manufacturing of the OCSE with development testing conducted in facilities at JSC in FY79.

V-B-9

V. SPACE CONSTRUCTION AND MAINTENANCE SYSTEMS C. AUTOMATED CONSTRUCTION J. C. Jones

Spacecraft Design Division The solar power satellite (SPS) must be constructed in space; therefore, special automated construction equipment must be designed and developed. In-house and contractor studies have concluded that the primary structure of the SPS will be a truss arrangement with one or two sublevels or tiers of truss members (i.e., small truss members making up -larger-truss-members^-etc-^)-.The-bas-ie--structural~mater-ia-l-,-re-lati-ve -tocurrent technology, will be composites of plastic resin (thermoplastic or thermosetting plastic) and reinforcing fibers (such as graphite). Required structural properties include low coefficient of thermal expansion and high modulus of elasticity. High tensile strength will be of lesser significance. A generally accepted construction concept is to use a "beam builder", an automated machine, to fabricate the first sublevel truss structural members from strip stock material that is stored on reels. Thus, all structural material can be transported to orbit as high density payload. An assembly jig would then be used to position a number of beam builders in the proper location, and support the beams as they are produced to allow joining of the beams to form the final SPS structure. The assembly jig would also provide for installation of all other components of the SPS, including solar blankets, etc. Construction would be automated to that level which is cost effective (i.e., automate unless a manual operation is lower in overall system cost), or to that point where automation is not technologically feasible. Besides the beam builder and assembly jig, construction equipment will include manipulators (or cranes, positioning mechanisms, etc.), beam joining mechanisms, subsystems installation mechanisms, etc. A detailed description of a space construction experiment to develop a beam builder and the processes and techniques associated with automated space construction can be found in Section IX-B-3-b.

V-C-1

VI. SPACE TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM A. SPS TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM DEFINITION E. M. Crum

Future Programs Office The SPS Systems Definition Study (NAS 9-15196), was contracted to the Boeing Aerospace Company under the technical management of Mr. Clarke Covington of the Spacecraft Design Division. It was augmented shortly after initiation with additional tasks related to 'SPS transportation and transportation system operations and the contracted effort increased by approximately one-third. The 5 month Phase I effort was completed in May 1977, and Phase II is to be completed in December 1977. The objective for the transportation tasks added to the original study was to: a. Increase the scope and depth of understanding of the space transportation systems necessary to support an SPS program. b. Provide a set of transportation system requirements and reference transportation system element descriptions appropriate to the conduct of an SPS program as represented by JSC Scenario "B." c. Identify and define analyses and tests necessary to advance the confidence level in projected SPS transportation systems performance and cost sufficient to recommended initiation of an SPS technology advancement program. The ground rules and approach prescribed were: a. Use existing data base. b. Use existing OTS models and modify only as required to provide cost driver summary. c. Define transportation systems for the different satellite power generation and construction location options. d. Provide sufficient data on OTS options to determine weight, cost, and technical risk. A summary of the tasks which were specified to meet the study objectives is as follows: a. Define reference transportation system. b. Develop SPS transportation system requirements. c. Conduct collision analysis VI-A-1

d. Prepare OTV system definition. e. Prepare LV system definition. f. Prepare an integrated operations description. g. Perform a cost/risk assessment. h. Prepare an advanced technology development plan. i. Estimate exhaust product insertion into atmosphere. j. Analyze consumption of critical commodities. k. Prepare briefing data. 1. Prepare separate transportation system documentation. The results of this study activity are planned to support and complement a comprehensive SPS transportation system study to be contracted in late 1977 and which, in turn, will support the' preferred concepts selection milestone in October 1978. The preliminary results presented at the Phase I review on May 5, 1977, may be summarized as follows: a. Either a two stage ballistic or two stage winged HLLV can be developed to deploy the commercial network of SPS for a development cost of less than $10B, not including costs of the launch and recovery facilities. b. Theoretical first unit costs for either type of vehicle is about $1B. c. Costs per flight for either vehicle, providing about 400 tons payload in LEO, are slightly less than $8 million, or about $20/kg specific launch cost. d. The two stage cryogenic COTV remains the best of the presentlyknown candidates for GEO construction of the SPS, utilizing 830 tons of propellent per flight for delivery of 400 tons of payload from LEO to GEO. e. For LEO construction of the SPS, a ."self-powered" propulsion system was characterized based upon ion thrusters utilizing argon propellent. f. Increased understanding was attained of acceptable flight mechanics and attitude control concepts for the long-duration "selfpowered" LEO to GEO transfer, including management of the satellite attitude during occulted portions of the orbits. VI-A-2

g. LEO construction and electric "self-power" transit to 6EO provides total transportation costs of about $65Q/kW. compared to about $8QO/kK for GEO construction. Both numbers are based on SPS specific mass of 8.9 kg/kW and launch costs of approximately $20/kg. h. GEO construction requires nearly twice the daily launch rate as LEO construction (14 versus 7 for 4 SPS's per year) and is thus more sensitive to potential launch cost changes.

VI-A-3

VI.

SPACE TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM B. HEAVY LIFT LAUNCH VEHICLE

VI-B-1. Booster Engine Concept Selection M. Lausten Propulsion and Power Division a. Rationale The rationale and selection of the baseline booster engine included such factors as thrust level, engine cycle, and propellent combination. Some studies have indicated that maximum engine thrust to weight and performance is obtained with engines in the 500K to 1 mil Ibf thrust class. However, a high thrust engine (approx. 2 mil Ibf) was selected so as to minimize the number of engines required for the large vehicles being considered. It is felt that minimizing the number of engines should, based upon internal combustion and jet engine history, minimize overall vehicle operational complexity. A gas generator engine cycle was selected as having the greatest potential of satisfying the major desirable characteristics of a reusable booster engine. This includes high engine thrust to weight, simplicity, minimum cost (including development, unit, and operational), high chamber pressure capability, and scalability to very high thrust levels. In the selection of the propel 1 ants for the engine, factors such as cost, availability, toxicity, and corrosivity make liquid oxygen (LOX) the most logical oxidizer. Selection of the fuel is another matter. Liquid hydrogen (LH2), for example, possesses many desirable characteristics; high performance, excellent cooling capability, maximum performance at a high mixture ratio, non-corrosive, and non-toxic. However, studies have shown that its high cost and low density present major drawbacks for very large and highly reusable boosters. While RP-1 (CH]_94) has been used extensively as a booster engine fuel, it has some major drawbacks for a highly reusable booster. The thermal decomposition and subsequent coking of thrust chamber coolant channels has been shown to occur at coolant wall temperatures as low as 400F. While the amount of coking at temperatures as high as 600 to 700F appears to be acceptable for a reusable engine, these maximum wall temperatures limit the practical engine chamber pressure to something between 1500 and 2000 psia. This problem is accentuated by the fact that the typical LOX/RP-1 gas side carbon layer build-up that significantly reduces heat flux and wall temperatures at lower chamber pressures (e.g., H-l (700 psia) and F-l [980 psia] engines) does not maintain itself for chamber pressures above approximately 1500 psia. VI-B-1

In order to circumvent the problems associated with RP-1 cooling without acquiring the potential problems associated with using LOX as the chamber coolant, other potential fuels were considered. After a limited survey, propane (03^) was selected as having the potential to satisfy the major desirable characteristics of a reusable booster fuel while specifically overcoming the major drawbacks of RP-1 and LHo. In particular, propane does not experience any thermal decomposition below 860F, thus potentially allowing maximum engine chamber pressjjres_on_the_order of 3000 psia. Propane possesses several other potentially desirable characteristics: (1) It is a gas at standard temperatures and pressures and postflight purges could be minimized as compared with RP-1 with its very low vapor pressure. (2) Heated propane could provide autogenous pressunzation (not possible with RP-1). (3) It has an unusually wide subcooling range (normal boiling point = -43.7F and freezing point = -305.9F). (4) Its freezing point is below the normal boiling point of LOX thus potentially eliminating the requirement for insulation on common bulkhead tankage. (5) The low freezing point of propane should eliminate injector design problems associated with LOX freezing of RP-1 in the injector manifolds and combustion chamber. b. Engine Characteristics A detailed regenerative cooling analysis was not conducted for LOX/propane. However, the results from RP-1 and methane (CH4) analyses indicate that a chamber pressure of approximately 3000 psia could be achieved within an acceptable maximum chamber wall temperature and coolant pressure drop. The prediction of actual maximum engine heat flux is very difficult at best. However, a simplified analysis was conducted to obtain relative heat flux data. The analysis showed that the heat flux for LOX/propane and LOX/RP-1 were essentially equal (propane 5% higher than RP-1) and that the heat flux for LOX/propane was 20 percent less than for LOX/LH2 for the same thrust and chamber pressure. The analysis also showed that the high thrust (large throat diameter) of the LOX/propane engine reduced its heat flux relative to the SSME . (Space Shuttle Main Engine, LOX/LH2, 3000 psia, and 470 KLBF thrust) by some 40 percent. In particular, the maximum chamber heat flux for the LOX/propane engine should be less than 50 percent of that experienced by the SSME. The LOX/propane engine cycle was assumed to consist of individually powered oxidizer and fuel pumps, thus permitting operation VI-B-2

at speeds corresponding to maximum efficiency without requiring life limiting and complex gearing. The pumps were assumed to be powered by two stage turbines operating at temperatures consistent with long life (1660F). The turbin exhaust gases were assumed to be injected into the main 40:1 expansion ratio nozzle so as to maximize performance. The flows for the single stage main pumps were increased by 10 percent to account for hydraulic powering of low speed oxidizer and fuel boost pumps (e.g., SSME LOX pumps). The propane was assumed to be loaded at LOX temperatures (-297F) so as to minimize propellant tank weight, to maximize regenerative cooling capability, and to minimize turbopump weight and power. The nominal engine mixture ratio was selected so as to maximize engine performance. However, being that the oxidizer is much cheaper than the fuel, engine performance at high mixture ratios was generated to support studies to determine vehicle operating characteristics corresponding to minimum overall cost. The major engine predicted characteristics at nominal operating conditions are summarized in Table VI-B-1.

VI-B-3

TABLE VI-B-1 LOX/PROPANE ENGINE CHARACTERISTICS ENGINE

Thrust, vacuum (mil Ibf) Thrust, sea level (mil Ibf) Specific impulse, vacuum (Ibf-sec/lbm) -Speci f i c-impul sey-sea1 eve-1(-1 bf-sec/-! bm) Mixture ratio (wo/wf) Flow rate, oxidizer (Ibm/sec) Flow rate, fuel (Ibm/sec) Nozzle expansion area ration (AE/AT Nozzle diameter (in) Power head diameter (in) Engine length (in) Weight, dry (K Ibm) Thrust/weight dry (Ibm)
MAIN CHAMBER

2.00 1.79 340.0 304^12.68 4284.0 1598.0 40.0:1 135.0 125.0 230.0 20.0 100.0 3000 3.07 97.5 50.0 20.8
3000 0.30 1660 5.0 71.4 46.3 29.62 17.04 4000 5000 81.8

Chamber pressure (psia) Mixture ratio (wo/wf) Combustion efficiency C* (PCT) Maximum heat flux (PCT of SSME) Throat diameter (in)
GAS GENERATOR

Chamber pressure (psia) Mixture ratio (wo/wf) Temperature (R) Total flow rate (PCT of engine total) MAIN TURBOPUMPS Density, oxidizer (lbm/ft 3 ) Density, fuel (lbm/ft ) Flow rate, oxidizer (KGPM) Flow rate, fuel (KGPM) Pressure rise, oxidizer (psid) Pressure rise, fuel (psid) Horsepower, oxidizer (KHP)
3

Horsepower, fuel (KHP) VI-B-4

60.7

VI.

SPACE. TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM B. HEAVY LIFT LAUNCH VEHICLE VI-B-2. J. Hondros Launch Vehicle Design Analysis - Engineering Analysis Division

The purpose of this section of the report is to present new results and data that are improved from the 1976 SPS documentation. The major differences in the designs are reduced weights for the winged 1-million pound payload systems. The major weight reductions were brought about by removal of air-breathing engine systems, much improved weight estimating techniques, and reduction of the 20% contingency to a 10% contingency. An evaluation of 16 conceptual configuration designs was conducted and documented as shown in Table VI-B-2. The matrix of configurations contains various combinations of payloads, payload density, winged and ballistic, composite materials, booster engines and second stage engine changes as well as variations in series and parallel burn of the stages. The design document numbers are identified on Table VI-B-2 and can be obtained on request. The gross results of this analysis are as follows: a. Payload density variations of 30 lbs/ft3 to 10 lbs/ft3 cost 210K in stage inerts, 1.4M pounds in propellant, and 120K dollars per flight. b. Design for a reusable or foldup interstage. A weight margin of 177,000 pounds is available for this task. The margin consists of a 44K nose, a 58K interstage and 75K lead ballast for aerodynamic trim. In excess of 45,000 tons of aluminum is saved for a 1500 flight profile. c. Series burn vehicles provide more performance per pound of gross weight. The performance is obtained by engine expansion ratio increases available for series burn. Series systems save 1.8M pounds of gross weight and about 730K dollars in propellant cost per flight. d. Tri-propellant booster engines give a reduction of almost 1M pounds in gross weight; however, they cost between TOOK and 270K dollars more in propellant cost per flight. e. Complex LOX/hydrogen vehicles have a 3.5M pound reduction in vehicle gross weight as compared to a LOX/propane system but, LOX/ hydrogen systems cost 2 million dollars per flight more in propel!ant cost. VI-B-5

f. A 20% weight reduction for composite materials application in the vehicle saves almost 2 million pounds in gross weight and about TOOK dollars per flight. This is an area considered for technology advancement with a weight and cost payoff. g. Payloads should be designed large. Large vehicles in the current study are more efficient per pound of payload delivered. h. A short cost analysis of propellants for delivery of a 1M ..po.und. payJ_oad__wjs_jrade^^n_J-OX/propane_ajid LOX/hydrogejn^booster systems. Assuming 2 cents/pound for LOX and 5^3 cents/pound T6r~propane7^hydrOgen~ must be delivered for 45 cents/pound. If propane costs escalate to 15 cents/pound, hydrogen must be delivered at 85 cents/pound. Current cost of hydrogen for Shuttle is $1.85/pound and probably will be prohibitive in cost unless some technology can reduce the product cost. The baseline JSC in-house study launch vehicle size and performance is presented in document EDIN EX 338-76, Appendix VI-APP-A.

VI-B-6

I 1 :

t
7-) <_) co

I D

1
1 ^L

If
1 in CO i
X LU

i?
1 i 1

1 0 1
1

r-~ 1
ro

r--

1
CD 1 X LU

r--. 1
*<^s

1
LJ

,2r
0

^
z

ro
i
X LU

CD LU

co

CO 1 X
LU

ro 1 X
LU

o
1 X
LU

co
X LU

in
\ X
LU

LO

1 X
LU

ro 1
X LJ

co 1 X
LU

CO CO

o
1 X
LU

1 X

o
1 X
LU

S
UJ
-J

LU

z.
CD -U

z.
CD

z.

z.
LJ CD LU
ULl

z.

z.
CD LU

z.
CD CD U-,

z.

z.
CD LU Q LU

z.
CD LU

JCU
CO

~
5

t- o
COMMENTS

V-

c <c

CD

I D

o
0

Tripropellants

en

CD

CU

c:

Composite Material

7:1 Mixture

a) c
UJ

LOX Crcssfeed

o-

Tripropellants

1
CO

1
CO '

ai
X

to o
C_5

' --" CM

-=-

co

"QJ
CO

oo
00 OJ

~ ul 1 i y

~O C

s:
to

X r

CM X CU O QJ

ca '

LU

to 0) c r~ cn c

<u en to <j 4-1 ito 4-> s_ to

CU r-

z
0

^
<

CM

LU

2.

K.

CD

>

D:
CU

CM

CM (U

<U C i CJ> i( fO n5 CO
4-> OO

CU

CU

ai

(D

O)

CU

ai

(U

CU

CU

0} JO

^-. U r-

B-LOX/Propar

B-LOX/Propar

B-LOX/Propar

B-LOX/Propar

C-.OX/Propar

3,-LOX/Propar

B-.OX/Propar

B-.OX/Propar

CL O

cx
X

p cx
X

(O CL

B-.OX/Propa

ra

to o.
0

C C CO CM V -r-

CM DT X

CM X

CM X

cx
X CD
1

o 1
ca
LU

o
ca
LU

1 1 ca
LU CO CO

o ca
_ J 1

o
1

cu cu ta z oi ca I 11
LU I CO CM LJ \

S 4J r-

ta i

ca
LU

1
LU OO CO LU CO 00 LU 00 CO LU

LU

LU

LU

co
CO

oo

ZL CO

oo oo

co

CO

co
CO

co oo

Co co

s:
co
CO

LU

LU CO CO

^
LU CO

CO LU
CO'

00 LU 00
C

oo

oo

o
i cx
t-4 CO LU CD
Q

z.
=J

LU CM

>,
r-

CO 4->

s- -a u->
QJ C

cx
X LU

CL X
LU

cx
X LU

Q. X LU

Ou X LU

cx
X
LU

ex
X LJ

cx
X LU

cx
X LU

X LL!

n.

1
cz

cx
X

LU

CL X LJ

cx
X LU

CL X

ca 4-> a)

LU

fO CD S- _

r rD <a o
CD
Q

a
CX co

Q
CX,

a
cx oo

X
t<

a.
CO

a:
LU

cx co
4->

a cx co

o
ex.
CO

CD

a
CL,

o
CL.

CD

CD

CD

CD
CL,

' ">,
t s: i
oo
LU

CO

cx co

CO M-

CO
4-1

cx co

CL.

cx
CO

cx
CO M

o.
CO

ex.-

cx,

CO

CO

l*O

If=*fc
0 CO CD CO

sg jj-j c5
<
i 0 tJ

ca

co

0 CM

O CO

=*=
CO

o oo

CD CO

=fe o co

=fc
0 CO

o co

CD CO

O co

0 CO

o
CO

ca CD. CL, ;D cx

10

.,
-a
cx a cx -a
CL,
T3

.*
a
CL.

-o
ex.

T3

o
0

ex ==

-a cx

-o
cx

s:

i
ca
00 CO CO

s:

-o cx =tfc

o cx

1 3

-a
Q.

<u to
CU TD
)-l

2:

cx =t1-

rx,

s
CO CO
r-

ai c en i- cu
CO -Q

ea oo

CO

ca
CO

ca
00

ca oo

ca
CO

ca oo

CO CO

CO

oo

oo

oo

oo

ca cx

co cx

cx

c.

3
^-^

t(

o cu c en 4- cx
rOO LU

CO TD

<
LU CO 0

3 3

^
CO

1
CO

3 3

1
^

CO CO CM

3 3
CO

3:

3 IO

CM

^
in ,

en

2:

in

3 ca a. -~- x
3

OO LU

VI-B-7

VI.

SPACE TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM B. HEAVY LIFT LAUNCH VEHICLE

3. Modified Single Stage to Ortit Concept

Jack Funk Technology Dev. Office-MPAD

SUMMARY The modified single stage to orbit heavy lift launch vehicle configuration (MSSTO) was evaluated for 1 000 000 pounds of payload delivered to a 270 n.mi. circular orbit using two main propulsion engine types one fueled with hydrogen and the other fueled with propane. The system was evaluated for the engine combination which provided the lowest cost for launch expendables using $20, $1, 18<, and 10.2 per pound, respectively, for expendable tank, liquid hydrogen, propane, and liquid oxygen. The results indicate that the minimum expendable cost occurs with 25 percent of the lift-off thrust being fueled with hydrogen and 75 percent being fueled with propane. The expendable cost per 1 000 000 pound payload is about $6 000 000 or $6 per pound of payload. The MSSTO had a gross lift-off weight of 26 795 000 pounds. The lifting body orbiter measured 315 feet in length and 194 feet in width. The external hydrogen tank was one and one half times the dimensions of the Space Shuttle external propellent tank and measured 242.6 feet in length and 41.6 feet in diameter. A comparison between the sizes of the modified single stage to orbit and the two stage heavy lift launch vehicles is shown in figure VI-B-1.
1 GENERAL DESCRIPTION

The modified single stage to orbit heavy lift launch vehicle (figure VI-B2) consists of a reusable orbiter vehicle and expendable fuel tank. The orbiter vehicle includes all of the engines, subsystems, payload bay hydrocarbon fuel tank and oxidizer tank. The drop tank contains only the liquid hydrogen fuel and is carried to orbit where it is staged for disposal using the same technique developed for disposal of the Shuttle external tank. The single propellent drop tank is simpler than multi-propellent tanks and is designed for light weight and low cost. To aid in the light weight design, the launch trajectory is restricted to low dynamic pressures and accelerations. The nominal trajectory angle of attack is restricted to zero through the maximum dynamic pressure region. The modified single stage to orbit vehicle can deliver more payload to orbit for a given gross lift-off weight by expending the fuel tank than can a full VI-B-8

reusable SSTO. This technique for payload improvement was studied during the phase B Shuttle studies and resulted in significant payload gains over the fully reusable system. The expected advantages of the modified single stage to orbit launch vehicle over the two stage vehicle are: 1. Reduced development cost by elimination of the booster. ' 2. Reduced first unit cost by the purchases of one vehicle instead of

two.
3. Reduced facilities cost by elimination of the downrange landing site and transportation system required to return the booster to the launch site. 4. Simplified launch operations by elimination of the booster staging, downrange landing, booster transportation to launch site, and elimination of inflight start of the orbiter engines. 5. Launch site flexibility: because of the downrange landing requirement of the booster the choice of launch sites for the baseline system is very limited, whereas the MMSTO can be launched from almost any location by changing the main engine cutoff conditions for tank disposal. The major disadvantage of the MSSTO is the cost of the external hydrogen tank. The development of a low cost hydrogen tank is essential to low cost operation of the MSSTO.

VI-B-9

Figurem-B-1

- Comparison of modified single stage to orbit launch vehicle and two stage launch vehicle.
VT V A
I.

rI i p V

Payload Glow

1 000 000 Ib 26 789 000 Ib

242.6 ft

315.4ft

193.9 ft
77.5 ft

Figure2I-B- 2

-Modified heavy lift launch vehicle mixed mode.

vi-B-n

II

MODIFIED SINGLE STAGE TO ORBIT SYSTEM CHARACTERISTICS

Propulsion - Main Rocket engines using oxygen as the oxidizer and both hydrogen and propane as fuels were considered for the main propulsion. The propane engine uses hydrogen as an engine coolant. The characteristics of these engines as supplied by the Power and Propulsion division are given in table VI-B-3. One third of the engines are gimbaled. The characteristics of the propellents are given in table VI-B-4. ~Tankage"and~Propenant~System The propel!ants for ascent are carried in a single tank system. The oxygen and propane tanks are integral to the entry vehicle and act as the primary airframe and load carry structure for launch and entry. The hydrogen fuel tank is mounted external to the entry vehicle and is staged for disposal at the end of the main engine burn. Orbit insertion is accomplished with the orbit maneuvering system (OMS). The oxygen tank and its entry heat protection are aerodynamically shaped to the lifting body configuration (reference 1) using the multilobe tank design from reference 2. The external hydrogen tank shape is scaled from the shuttle external tank profile and shuttle-tank aerodynamics are used in drag calculations for the launch trajectory. The expendable hydrogen tank is designed for low cost and light weight. The tank has a monocoque structure of 2219-T87 aluminum sheet. External hydrogen drop tank structural analysis performed during the phase B shuttle studies concluded that if the tank walls are designed for internal pressure, the tank is capable of sustaining all ascent load conditions without the requirement of additional stiffening. Also, the drop tank can be subject to handling from its extremities without damage through all stages of assembly if the tank is internally pressurized to 2 psi. A significant weight penalty results, however, if the tank is required to be handled unpressurized. It is expected that these results will hold true for the much larger drop tank of the modified single stage to orbit configuration. The ullage pressure required for engine start of 25 psia is at sea level where the ambient pressure is about 15 psia. At the time of maximum dynamic pressure the internal pressure should be down to 20 psia with an ambient pressure of about 3.5 psia. The critical design condition, therefore, is expected to be at 3.0 g with an ullage pressure of 20 psia and a 50% full tank. The pressure on the aft dome will be about 33 psia. To simplify the weight analysis, the structural weight was based on an average wall pressure of 25 psia with a factor of safety of 1.5 on the ultimate strength of 2219T87 aluminum at room temperature of 63000 PSI. The density of this material is 0.102 Ibs/in3.

VI-B-12

TABLE VI-B-3 MAIN PROPULSION SYSTEM ENGINE CHARACTERISTICS SSME PROPELLANTS ENGINE CYCLE COOLANT C-2/H2 STAGE COMBUSTION
H2

H2 COOLED PROPANE 02/C3 H8

GAS GEN.
H2

DUAL EXPANSION 02/H2

GAS GEN.
H2

SINGLE EXPANSION 02/H2

GAS GEN.
H2

CHAMBER PRESSURE MIXTURE'RATIO NOZZLE AREA RATIO THRUST VACUUM SPECIFIC IMPULSE VACUUM THRUST AREA RATIO ENGINE THRUST/WEIGHT*

3250
6
77.5 512K

6000
3.29
70

6000
7

6000
7
60

60/270 VARIABLE 437/463 .007061/ .02473

70.8

VARIABLE 357.4 .005674

100.0

VARIABLE
437

455.2 .01261 80.76

.007061
90.0

*VACUUM THRUST/DRY WEIGHT TABLE VI-B-'4 PROPELLANT CHARACTERISTICS

02 H2

C3H8

LIQUID DENSITY (Ib/ft3) STORAGE TEMPERATURE (deg F) COST ($/lb)

71.3
-297.0

4.42
-420.0

-45.0

.102

1.00

.180

VI-B-13,

An equation developed for the weight to volume ratio of a cylindrical tank with spherical domes is given below. W V Where: P d S K F . (3+6K)/S 2+3K

= rrd

is tank pressure is material density is~maten"al~sTrefrgth is tank length to diameter ratio is design safety factor

The tank pressure, material density and ultimate strength are given above. The tank length to diameter ratio is 3.82 and the factor of safety is 1.5. In addition, a 10% weight factor was added for sheet gage tolerance. The weight to volume ratio for the tank structure is
W 3+6*3 8? - = 1728*1.10*1.50*0.5*0.10*( ---) /63000 = 0.222 lb/ft3 V 2+3*3.82

The entire tank is covered with 0.75 inch thick polyurethane foam (2.0 PCF) with 0.125 inch added for coating errors. An additional 0.104 PCF was added for waterproofing and flame retardant. In the area of interference heating between the orbiter and tank and on the aft cone, 0.25 inch of 30 PCF ablator was added. The area of interference heating was estimated as 30% of the barrel surface. The orbiter-tank attachment structure weight was estimated as 8% of the tank weight and includes stiffening of the tank wall in the vicinity of the attach points. Sizing and loading of the propel!ant tanks is biased so that oxygen depletion occurs prior to hydrogen depletion. The 3 flow rate error is 1% for each engine. The total flow rate error is the root sum square of the flow rate errors of the operating engines. This is integrated along the trajectory to obtain the hydrogen bias. The main propulsion propellent system is pressurized by gaseous oxygen and hydrogen bled from the main engine. Pressurization for engine start is provided through vent lines from ground supply. The integral liquid oxygen tank weight was estimated using the multilobe propellant tank weight projections from reference 2. The value used is 0.52 Ibs/ft3. Thermal Protection System The aerodynamic shape for the entry vehicle is a scaled version of the lifting body entry vehicle of reference 1. The thermal protection system VI-B-14

given in reference 1 averaged 2.28 Ibs/ft2 of surface area. The thermal protection for the body of the baseline single stage to orbit vehicle of reference 2 averages 2.247 lbs/ft2. Both heat protection systems were similar in concept consisting of RSI mounted subpanels mounted on aluminum standoff rails. They differ primarily in the type of RSI titles and subpanel material used. The difference in weight, however, is only 1.5%. The heat protection system weight estimates are therefore based on the 2.28 lbs/ft2 value from reference 1. (The shuttle TPS averages 1.675 lbs/ft2.) The heat protection from reference 1 was sized for 1100 n.mi. crossrange on entry. The entry trajectory was shaped to minimize the TPS weight. Peak temperatures were estimated to be 2610 deg F on the nose cap, 1980 deg F on the body leading edge, 2080 deg F on the fin leading edge, and 2050 deg F on the lower surface. The TPS limits the structural temperature to 300 deg for aluminum structure and 600 deg F for titanium structure. The only nonreusable TPS is the flexible flame curtain used to seal the base area aound the gimbaled engines. Landing Gear The landing gear is an advanced design by Boeing Aerospace from reference 3. The tri-cycle gear weight savings have been accomplished in three main areas, lowered requirements, improved structural materials, and a simplified design. The activation system is designed for extension only with gravity and air loads aiding. Maximum advantage is taken of composite and 350 ksi steels. The weight estimate for this landing gear is 2'.8% of the landed weight. Tail Groups^ The tail groups consist of the fin, rudder, upper flap, lower flap and auxiliary control surfaces. The primary structure material is titanium. The weight of the tail group is estimated as 6.13% of the vehicle dry weight (reference 1). Thrust Structure The weight estimating relation for the thrust structure is W = 3.0 x 10-4 (pVAC)1.15 Weights from the above equation agree with the thrust structure weights for the Saturn SIVB stage, the shuttle orbiter, the Saturn SIC stage and calculation in reference 1. The above equation results in weights that are higher than the Titan III stage 1 and lower than the Saturn SII stage. The above equation is an excellent representation of the current technology in thrust structure design. The equation is used to estimate the thrust structure for the engines and for the payload mounting on top of the propellant tanks.

VI-B-15

Payload Compartment Structure The payload compartment is in the nose of the airframe, figure VI-B-1. The prime function of the payload compartment is to act as an aerodynamic shroud on launch which is recoverable. Launch loads from the payload are carried by a thrust structure mounted on top of the propane tank and not by the bay structure. The payload thrust structure weight is estimated according to the weight equation given in the section on thrust structure. The vacuum thrust in the above equation is replaced by the maximum launch acceleration times the payload weight. Package requirements for mounting the "payload on~tfTe~thFuTt~Ttructure~ are charged~tb payVoacH The payload bay structure weight was estimated as a linear function of bay volume using the average airframe structural weight of the lifting body design from reference 1 of 0.362 lbs/ft3. The payload bay volume was based on an average payload density of 10 Ibs/ft^. Orbit Maneuvering System The propellant for the orbit maneuvering system is liquid oxygen and liquid hydrogen. The engine system and propellant weights estimates are based on performance and weight data for the RL-10 rocket engine. The propellent tank weights are estimated at 2.0 Ibs per cubic foot. The initial engine thrust to vehicle weight ratio for engine weight estimates is O.lg. The RL-10 engine thrust was 41.67 times the engine weight, and the specific impulse was 444.0 sec. The propel!ant requirements and tank volume were based on the delta V required to maneuver from main engine cutoff to 270 n.mi. circular orbit "and deorbit with a 10% fuel reserve. The propellant mixture ratio for OMS engine is 7:1. Reaction Control and Other Systems The reaction control, prime power, electrical, hydraulic, surface control, and avionics system weights were estimated as a percentage of the dry weight as follows. Reaction Control System Reaction Control Propellent Prime Power Electrical Hydraulic Surface Controls Avionics Growth Uncertainty The growth uncertainty is calculated at 10% of the dry weight. VI-B-16 1.5 1.6 1.1 1.1 1.1 6.13 1.4

Residual and Unusable Fluids The oxygen tank residuals are calculated as 0.219% of the liquid oxygen weight and the hydrogen tank residuals as 0.559% of the liquid hydrogen weight. These values were obtained from the shuttle external tank weight statement. The unusable fluid in the engine lines is 0.1% of the engine thrust. The unusable fluids at main engine cutoff (MECO) was calculated according to the number of engines operating at MECO. The remainder of the engine line fluids are dumped as the engines are shut down during launch and are included in the inflight losses. Reserve Fluids Ten percent of the QMS propel 1 ant is reserve. The RCS propellent is expected to exceed the nominal mission requirements. Based on shutle data, it is estimated that the RCS reserve propel 1 ant is about 50% of the total. These reserves are listed in the propel 1 ant budgets of their respective systems. Entry Vehicle and External Tank Geometry The aerodynamic entry vehicle is based on the lifting body configuration from the phase B shuttle studies, reference 1. The geometric characteristics of the configuration are given in table VI-B- 5. The external hydrogen tank is based on the shuttle external propel!ant tank configuration. The geometric characteristics of the external hydrogen tank are given in table VI-B-'6. Volume Allotments The volume allotments for the various systems are given in table VI-B- 7.

VI-B-17

TABLE VI-B-5 ORBITER GEOMETRY LENGTH (ft) SPAN (ft) HEIGHT (ft) - GEAR UP GEAR~DOWN PLAN FORM AREA (ft2) BASE AREA (ft2) WETTED AREA, INCLUDING BASE (ft2) MOLD LINE VOLUME (ft3) 149.6 * SF 92.0 * SF 36.8 * SF 49"."0~* ~SF 6846 * SF ** 2 1229 * SF ** 2 18944 * SF ** 2 97600 * SF ** 3

SF = Orbiter scale factor

VI-B-18

TABLE VI-B-6 TANK GEOMETRY LENGTH (ft) DIAMETER (ft) SURFACE AREA TOTAL (ft?) OGIVE (ft2) BARREL (ft2) AFT DOME (ft2) VOLUME TOTAL (ft3) CROSS SECTION, AREA (ft2) SFET = TANK SCALE FACTOR 157.09 26.96 10524. *SFET *SFET *SFET**2 *SFET**2 *SFET**2 *SFET**2 *SFET**3 *SFET**2

2091.
9475.

958.
78431. 570.86

THERMAL PROTECTION 3/4 inch poly-urethane foam (2 PCF) over entire tank; 0.125 inch thickness uncertainty; 0.104 PCF waterproofing and flame retardant; 1/4 inch 30 PCF ablation on 30% of barrel surface for orbiter tank interference and aft dome for base flame impingement.

VI-B-19

TABLE VI-B-7 ORBITER SYSTEMS VOLUME ALLOTMENTS

Fraction of total Air Frame Structure, Tank Walls and TPS Wheel Wells Equipment and ACS Prop Lines and Tank Support Thrust Structure Main Engines and OMS Engines Base Between Engines Lower Flap Fin Rudder and Aux Surfaces .09867 .01865 .01025 .01393 .04734 .06045 .04908 .01363 .04436 .04375 .48970 .11019 ' 1.0000

Flap Stowage
Internal Propel 1 ants & Payload

Unoccupied
Total

VI-B-20

Ill

AERODYNAMICS

Drag Characteristics

The drag coefficient as a function of Mach number is given in table VI-B-8 for the lifting body and the external tank. The forebody drag coefficient is given for the lifting body and this is combined with the power on base pressure to obtain the total drag. The drag coefficient for the external tank is power off total drag. It was assumed that there is no power on effect on the base of the external tank. The drag calculations are based on a reference platform area for the lifting body of 453.2 square meters (4878 feet squared) and is varied according to the square of the scale. The vehicle scale is determined by the LOX volume and the system volume requirements given in table VI-B-8. The lifting body scale factor is the cube root of the ratio of the total volume to the reference volume of 2738.2 cubic meters (96 700 cubic feet). In a similar manner the external hydrogen tank drag is based on the shuttle external tank shape scaled to contain the required volume of liquid hydrogen. The reference area for the external tank is 55.56 square meters (598 square feet) and the reference volume is 2220.9 cubic meters (78 431 cubic feet). The power on base force was calculated from the power on base pressure using the total area of the base of the lifting body minus the area of the engine bells. As engines were turned off, the force was reduced by the percentage of engines not operating. The power on based pressure data given in table VI-B-8 were calculated from the shuttle base force calculations Rockwell 'International Space Division report SD74-SH0206-2H.

VI-B-21

TABLE VI-B-8 LAUNCH VEHICLE DRAG CHARACTERISTICS

Lifting Body
M

External Tank

Lifting Body Power on Base Pressure

ALT(ft)

0.0
c O.0

AF .055
ncc. . UOD

CA
.409 AfiQ Huy .430 .454 .475 .663 .774 .819 .850 .846 .808 .772 .707 .608 .500 .464 .464

PSI

0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 2.4 3.0 4.0 5.0 25.0

.056 .063 .080 .111 .134 .147 .155 .157 .153 .148 .140 .130 .122 .117 .117

9 7 15 20 27 35 45 55 60 70 80 90 100 120 140 160 500

c OUU

0 cnn 500 000 000 500 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000

0 .criQ ouo -.831 -1.154 -1.039 -.669 .046 .716 .970 1.016 .970 .808 .646 .462 .254 .185 .185 .185

VI-B-22

IV

REFERENCE MISSION

The sizing analysis and trade studies are based on delivery of a payload to a 270 n.mi. circular orbit and return to a launch site at 5.5 degrees latitude as indicated in figure VI-B-3. The 5.5 degrees latitude launch site was chosen to agree with the other launch vehicle studies. The lift-off thrust to weight ratio is 1.30. This value was chosen in order to keep the maximum dynamic pressure low. The maximum acceleration on launch is restricted to 25 g. The main engines are shut down sequentially as the vehicle exceeds the maximum acceleration. The propane engines were shut down first and then the hydrogen engines. A preliminary analysis indicated that 2.5 g value would provide more payload for a given gross lift-off weight than 3.0 g. The main engines cutoff is at an altitude of 364 508 feet, flightpath angle of 0.5 degrees, and a velocity of 25 665 feet per second. This results in a tank impact roughly 180 degrees down range from the launch site for a ballistic trajectory. The orbit maneuvering system is used to transfer from MECO to a 270 n.mi. circular orbit and for deorbit.

VI-B-23

o
0.

c o

O) ^*
CD

ANALYSIS

Trajectories and vehicle size were evaluated for combinations of LOX/LH2 and LOX/C3H8 engines. Twenty-one (21) engines all having equal vacuum thrust at lift-off were used in the analysis. These engines were then scaled in size to provide 1 000 000 pounds of payload. In the case of the dual expansion engine the vacuum thrust for the lower expansion ratio was the same as the vacuum thrust of the hydrocarbon engines. In addition, vehicle sizes were evaluated for a LOX/C3H8 engine with a thrust to engine weight of 150. There are considerable differences between the engine technology projections given in table VI-B-3 and those being projected by the Langley Research studies, reference 2. These data show the advantages of engine technology improvements which reduce weight. Cost of the major launch expendables were calculated based on $20 per pound for the expendable hydrogen tank, $1 per pound for hydrogen, $.102 per pound for LOX and $.18 per pound for propane. The results of the analysis are summarized in figures VI-B-4, 5, 6, and 7. In figVIJB4 the gross lift-off weight and dry weights are shown as functions of the number of hydrocarbon engines. For the heavier hydrocarbon engine, thrust to engine weight of 100, the minimum GLOW and minimum dry weight are for the all hydrogen vehicle. However, the minimum expendable cost, fig. VI-B4, occurs when 2/3 of the thrust is from the hydrocarbon engines, that is, 7 LOX/LH2 and 14 LOX/C3H8 engines. The lighter propane engine shows a minimum in both dry weight and cost. The minimum dry weight occurs with about 17 hydrogen fueled engines. The minimum cost of expendables is with 5 hydrogen fueled engines. The most economical system for expendables appears to be about 25% of the thrust from hydrogen and 75% from propane. The baseline system has 5 hydrogen fueled engines and 16 propane fueled engines.

VI-B-25

40 -o

30

*! ^ o

c
CD

20

_E Q

10

Single position nozzle Dual position nozzle Single position nozzle Light weight propane engine

I 0

10

15

20

25

Number of hydrocarbon engines

Figure3ZI-B-4.- Mixed mode parametric data.

l-B-26

15
Single position nozzle Dual position nozzle Single position nozzle and light weight propane engine

~o -a
M

tn

10

o
sz o

in

in o

I 0 10

I 15

20

25

Number of hydrocarbon engines Figure EI-B-5.- Mixed mode expendables cost data.

VI-B-27

350

300

Length

250

c:
1 Q

200
Span

150

100

Single position nozzle Dual position nozzle Light weight propane engine and SPI\I

50 0

l 8

12

16

20

Number of hydrocarbon engines

Figure3ZI-B-6.- Orbiter dimensions.

vi-B-28

300
Length (ft)

250
Single position nozzle Dual position nozzle Light weight propane engine and SPN

200

Weight (1000 Ib)

c o c
E Q Zo

150

100

50

Diameter (ft)

I 0 8 12
Number of hydrocarbon engines

I 16

20

Figure 33-B-7.- External hydrogen tank characteristics. VI-B-29

.VI

BASELINE SYSTEM

The baseline modified single stage to orbit heavy lift launch vehicle has a main propulsion system with 5 hydrogen fueled dual expansion ratio engines and 16 propane fueled fixed expansion ratio engines. The vacuum thrust of each engine is 1 806 000 pounds. The launch configuration is shown in figure VI-B-1. The orbiter and external hydrogen tank dimensions are summarized in table VI-B-9. The launch vehicle weight summary is given in table VI-B-10. The-externa-1-hydrogen- tank-weight-summary-is-given -in~table~V1=B--M-; The launch trajectory is given in table VI-B-12.

VI-B-30

TABLE VI-B-9 SUMMARY OF BASELINE MSSTO DIMENSIONS

ORBITER (Scale Factor 2.180) Length Span (ft) Height (ft) - Gear Up Gear Down Platform Area (ft2) "Base Area (ft2) Wetted Area Including Base Mold Line Volume (ft3) 329.9 193.9 77.5 103.3 30 421.3 5 451.3 84 180.8 914 243.0

EXTERNAL HYDROGEN TANK (Scale Factor 1.544) Length (ft) Diameter (ft) Volume (ft3) Ogive Surface (ft2) Barrel Surface (ft2) Dome Surface (ft2) 242.6 41.6 288 688.6 4 984.8 22 587.8 2 283.8

VI-B-31

TABLE VI-B-10 BASELINE MSSTO WEIGHT SUMMARY (POUNDS)

Tail Structure Heat Shield Landing and Auxiliary Systems Propulsion - Main Thrust Structure OjHDjjtej^ Oxygejl Tank^ Orbiter"Propane Tank " " Propulsion - OMS & RCS Electrical & Hydraulic Surface Controls Avionics Cargo Compartment Margin Orbiter Dry Weight External Hydrogen Tank Residual & Unusable Fluids Inflight Losses Flight Performance Reserve Propel!ant OMS Propel!ant RCS Payload Propane Fuel Oxygen GLOW

92 507 158 790 42 254 548 570 155 452 138 733 4~8 975 46 777 49 800 18 864 21 127 36 211 130 909 1 508 969 102 306 102 306 19 184 32 871 231 323 24 145 1 000 000 3 565 373 19 022 490 26 795 689

VI-B-32

TABLE VI-B-11 EXTERNAL HYDROGEN TANK WEIGHT SUMMARY (POUNDS) TANK STRUCTURE POLY-URETHANE FOAM INSULATION (0.75 in.) CORK ABLATOR ORBITER-TANK ATTACHMENT STRUCTURE PROPULSION SYSTEM CONTINGENCY 10% TOTAL 64 490 3 659 14 117 8 184 1 625 10 231 102 306

VI-B- 33

TABLE IV-B-12 ASCENT TRAJECTORY AND WEIGHT SUMMARY

t INPUT -Gai1-T.= 8'=' -13,-NEflI -0-, NEB I =5, N E C I = 1-6,SF-E=L. 8 056,-TWO = 3-4:END RLP FN TIME RLT TKP NE VEL 0 " DRMO TRNG W E I GcH T 1 f LBS ) (DQ(r, 'SCC s FT .. FT/SEC " L.EVFT <f DEC ' f DEC f { R . i 2 .0 .0 0. 0. 0. 0. 90.0 90. 0 2670921 3 . 1 .7300 21 r -.0 49:-,. 10.0 -424. . 101 . 12. 90. 0 90. 0 2 q 7 7 H- 2 '=" 5 1 .. 3 21 .0 20 0 0. 2084. 219. 54. 88. 1 88. 1 24759378 . 1 ! 41621 .0 30. 0 0. 4931. 355. 130. 84. 7 84. 7 23744460 . 1 . 488 21 ""' ~* !~! .0 40. 0 0. 514. 7^ 3 79. 3 22729543 . 1 572 21 9214. .0 50.0 0. 15089. 705. 376! 72'! 3 72. 3 21714625 . 1 h 6 6 21 3 ~\c, .0 0. 60.0 . 226.;.5. 506. 64. 4 64. 4 206 9 708 1 . 770 21 .0 0. 70. 0 3 I* 1 6 . 1206! 56. 3 56. 3 19684790 . 1 . 8 8 321 603. .0 0. SO. 0 42660. 1531 . hQh 48.3 48. 3 18669873 -. .004 21 90. 0 5L!7 38. 1933. .0 0. 542. 41.0 41. 0 17654955 -t . 1 32 21 100. 0 67961 . 2417. 0. .0 34. 6 34. 6 1664 no 38 -. . 270 21 449. -i .0 0. 1 10. 0 02090 2984. 345. 29. 0 29. 0 15626120 -i 422 21 0. 120. 0 96s;o. .0 361 3. 251 . 24. 3 24. 3 14634838 . 465 20 ,_' .417 0. 123.0 101291. 19 .0 3.I.CS. *J *J I* 23.0 23.0 14 347419 C H R N d E TO INEP TIRL 123. 0 1 0 1 7 ? 1 . 5254. 68992. -i .i-,5 23.6 14:4741'=' 227. 2 . 417 19 16.5 "" T "' 15 1 1 30. 0 111730 1 3 7 1 4 6 5 fi> ^|QQ 1 ft 5 i3 3 17^ 2710I-.R 140. 0 126589. 6421 '. lib! 1 3. 3 21.6 12 86x359 -i .418 17 255947. 4. 1 -. 7Q 150. 0 141 350. 7121. 11.9 20.5 12077633 -, . 427 16 2195-.8. 5.4 S 175. 0 177238. S9C6. 6. 117713. 34 ! 9. 0 17.7 10322156 . 491 14 200. 0 210994. 10714. 8852120 >_! . 497 12 56517. 7.4 15. 7.0 15.5 2; LJ. ^ q ? LJ. 1 " 5 2 6 225. 0 7627108 *J . 424 10 6 . 5.4 13.8 24345. 7 . 7 L : ' 250. 0 269534! 14 370. A * . 259 y 9023. 8. 1 4. 1 12. 7 h -,:-:i ,4'=i6 275. 0 2".-' 3M 57. 16195. 2577. 6.8 i ! 3. 1 10. 3 5725856 jj 2ft3 -? 300. 0 31 3621. 18028. 820. 0. 2. 3 5.5 8. 1 4999096 2! 254 6 325. 0 330125. 19794. 4 6. 3 469. 0. 1.7 8. 2 4406205 '. 1 .718 7 4 350. 0 343348. 21225 150. 0. 1. 3 4. 8 "-iM?025 . 1 . 8 9 6 4 -i . 9 2. 0 3579845 375. 0 353545. 2 2ft2 6 .114 4 3 3 . 1 .0 0. - q 400. 0 361097. 24632! -2 ^ 0. . 6 - ? 3163664 -, . 390 4 . 5 -2!6 414.5 3 64 5 S 5 25o65. 0. 2c'51hOc, ! T '-*2 3 3 -60 ! -2.5 Q vr 2 8 SCO. PERIGEE flLT RFOGEE RLT 4ft5 R q 84 t' i -i DV1 412. PERIGEE RLT 336 6! RPOGEE RLT 164032 i-i DV2 375. DEOPBIT V E L O C I T Y 440. C I R C OP BIT 270 NM i i . , , , . ; : ; ; M SSTO Lfluw. H VEHI C LE PJEI GUT S T H T E n h N 1 ' Lb i> > : : : : , ; i ; : i : SF 2.108 SFET 1.544 VLRND 195. S F E 1.806 OPSCOST
A

TRIL STRUCTURE 1-507. HERT SHIELD L R N D I M D RND RUi: SYST 422r.4 548570. P R O P U L S I O N - M R IN P P 0 P LJ L S I 0 N - f i M S \1 P C S 467' INEPT I"EI GHT 1508969. PESIDURLylii'J'JSflBLE FL 45C45. RESERVE FLiJIDS 0. I N F L I G H T LOSSES 1 9 1 S4 .
O P B I T HYDPDGEN TFiW 102306. u o q -, cr RP-1 TflNf LO:: TfiNF INPUT DUHL P O S I T I O N NO LE 60/270, NOZZLE EXTENDED

PflLORD

999991.

ELECS'HYDPU CflPGO COMPRPTMENT SUPFHLE CONTruLS HVONICS MPPGIN P R O P E L I RNT nns PPOPCLLRNF PCS F L I G H T PL'FFUM f ' E S H Y D R O G E N FUEL RP-1

49800. 36211. 18864. 21127. 1 50909. 31323 24145 1. 12 43983 19022490-

O::YGEN

RT 100000 FT.

RIPRODUClBILlTy OF THE ORIGINAL PAO IS POOR

VI-B-34

REFERENCES

1. Study of Alternate Space Shuttle Concepts, Final Report, Lockheed

Missiles and Space Co., Report LMSC - A989142, ACS-124A.

2. Research Study to Identify Technology Requirements for Advanced EarthOrbital Transportation Systems, Final Review, Martin Marietta Co., MCR-75-325 (Issue 3).

3. Technology Requirements for Advanced Earth Orbital Transportation Systems, Mid-term Briefing, Boeing Aerospace Co., D180-19168-1.

VI-B- 35

VI.

SPACE TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM B. HEAVY LlfT LAUNCH VEHCLE

VI-B-4. Launch Vehicle Cost Analysis J. Akkerman Future Programs Office The costs for payload delivery to l_ov^ E_arth_orbit^^aji jbe^ divided into four categories.
1. 2. 3. 4. Booster Propel!ant Operations Facilities

Each of these categories is discussed in detail below and the totals are summarized in Table VI-B-13. Booster Costs: Vehicle costs have been estimated by several groups in recent months. The results have been similar with about a factor of two (between 3 and 6 dollars per pound of payload delivered to low-Earth orbit including spares). One of the estimates, made by Boeing, was on the order of $3 and was based upon a grass roots investigation. The contractor considers the number conservative as it includes the cost of facilities, tooling, profit and all the other items they include in estimating any conmercial venture in aircraft production. Of all the studies done to date, this one has by far the most credibility. The only factor to keep in mind is that the cost is based upon conventional contemporary design, overlooking many potential cost reduction concepts. The 6 dollar estimate was made by extrapolation of in-house historical cost models for hardware and maintenance. As mentioned above, most of the experience to date has been with programs which put most emphasis on minimizing the cost of development, with little consideration of hardware production costs or operations costs. As a result, the models are understandably very likely to be high, especially on the maintenance/ repair factors. Most of the hardware we have dealt with in the past has been for one time only use. In many cases the items were "worn out" by excessive testing before they were flown. The HLLV hardware designs will very likely show a much better track record in this respect. A third approach to reflect reasonable costs tended to validate the contractor data. This costing approach involved the use of "unit cost per pound" as reflected by similar hardware items. By plotting the mass fraction of various rocket systems as a function of size, as shown on Figure VI-B-8, the dry hardware weight of the HLLV can be established to a reasonable degree of certainty. Note that the lower large stages are more efficient from a mass fraction standpoint, indicating that as we go VI-B-36

to larger vehicles, we can expect better mass fractions. The EDIN 338-76 vehicle used as a cost base design is shown at the top of the graph at a relatively low mass fraction, especially considering the size of the two stages. This results because of two reasons: p) a relatively conservative design including reserve factors, and (2) it is a reusable, winged vehicle which may indeed involve more hardware. Using the EDIN hardware weight, which should represent the upper limit for HLLV type boosters, Figure VI-B-9 can be used to estimate the cost of the vehicle. Note the consistency of costs for various types of vehicles. Road vehicles consistently cost very near to $2 per pound, whether they are cars, trucks, or trains. Light planes with piston engines all cost between $10 and $20 per pound, business jets between $130 and $180 per pound. Probably the most significant group is the heavy aircraft transports. These vehicles are almost as large as the HLLV. They fall into a range of $120 to $200 per pound, an amazingly narrow band considering the variations in design; number of engines, navigation gear, range capability, payload, etc. All this lends confidence to choosing a number for cost per pound for large rockets although we have not built very many large rockets. The only really good data point is the SIC at $200/pound; the first stage of the Saturn rocket which flew the Apollo missions. This is indeed a mammoth vehicle in terms of rocket experience. It was built with five engines of about the size required for the HLLV. Only twenty units were produced. The dollar cost reflects the cost of tooling, development, etc. By all standards, this should be a conservative example of dollar cost per pound; especially considering that the HLLV will amortize its development and tooling costs over a production run of hundreds of vehicles. The Shuttle number is nearing reality and even with some growth in the final stages of development, it should fall into the $200 to $300 per pound range. The contractor estimates for the HLLV as discussed above fall at about $200 per pound and with a lifetime worth of spares it comes up to about $300/pound. The only notable exceptions on Figure VI-B-9 are some of the recent high performance military aircraft, Bl, Fill, F15. The vehicles are very special and push a large frontier of technology in engines, /guidance and controls, weapons, aerodynamics and many others. The HLLV is a simple extension of well established technology. No new guidance is required, no different aerodynamic environments are involved; now new things are involved in engines or structures. The HLLV lift-off weight will simply be about four times that of the Saturn, and it will put about four times as much payload into orbit. Thus, the costs to be expected for the HLLV can be somewhat confidently predicted to be somewhere in the $200 per pound range, VI-B-37

based upon existing experience, technology and designs. As outlined in the Booster Cost Breakdown sheet, Table VI-B-14, this price (assuming 50% replacement in each 5-year - 300 flights - period) is $2.39 per pound to LEO. This represents a conservative estimate. A nominal cost would be about 90% of this number ($2.15/pound to LEO) and perhaps an optimistic (but probably achievable) number would be 80% of this number ($1.91/pound to LEO). Development cost for the booster is assumed to be four equivalent .vehicles., _twg_pf_whicJi_are_ refurbished and used in this flight P_rog_ram. The development cost is then amortized over the flights in 10 years and results in a cost of less than 10< per pound delivered to LEO. Propellant Costs: The costs reflected in Table VI-B-15 are based upon propel 1 ant loading requirements established for the EDIN 338-76 booster (a conservatively sized unit as discussed above) plus 10% for spillage. The prices are those described in Section D for propellent costs. These numbers are very much in line with all estimates that have been made to date. (See the Propellant Cost Breakdown in Section D.) These prices are for commodities produced from coal by the Lergy process. This process tends to make hydrocarbons on the light end, particularly methane. This makes hydrogen particularly cheap, and propane unproportionately expensive. Even though the individual costs of fluids are very different from what is typical of fluids produced in a normal petroleum industry (like today's), the total costs per flight are about the same. It is expected that a rocket using methane entirely will show a marked decrease in propellent cost, perhaps to a little as half the number shown. (See the Section VI-B-5 on HLLV cost effectiveness designs.) Operations Cost: By far the most abstract item in the HLLV cost picture is the operations cost. There has never been an activity that is comparable. The costs of wartime efforts are far too diversified to be applicable. Airline operations approach the magnitude involved, but direct application of airline data produces costs so low as to be hardly believable (5</pound to LEO). The Shuttle operation is somewhat akin to that planned for the HLLV, but is not in practice as yet. There is a great temptation to simply use planned Shuttle operations cost per flight data to estimate HLLV costs. There are hazards in this, however, in two areas: (1) flight rates, 1 per 6 days for Shuttle, 6 per day on HLLV, and (2) Shuttle funding for operations is directed to include all personnel from all sectors to what ever extent they are involved. This results from the management directive that all NASA budgets be "program based." It would be a financial catastrophy to operate the HLLV as an entirely government activity in the same sense as the initial Shuttle flights are planned. In any event, the "scale-up" factor of 36 times as many flights would certainly allow some considerable reduction in government "monitoring" activity on a per flight basis. VI-B-38

The present Shuttle operations cost is expected to be about $9.5 million per flight. This is shown in Table VI-B-16, Operations Cost. If the government costs in all areas except the launch facility are assumed to be constant beyond the Shuttle program and Into the SPS program, and if the Shuttle projected costs per flight are used for the launch facility operations only, including vehicle repair, stage retrieval, etc. the result is $5.46/pound to LEO as shown in Table VI-B-16. This should represent an early phase cost to which some degree of learning would result in a reduction. The HLLV operation should not be nearly so complex on a per flight bases as the Shuttle, since the payload is essentially the same in all cases. There should be little attention required for the SPS parts as compared to the items normally delivered by Shuttle. The profusion of flights (6 per day) would certainly motivate a streamlining of operations over a period of time. The dollars involved would certainly fund automation in reviewing flight data, servicing operations, stage retrieval, checkout and even in repair. It is reasonable that these costs could be reduced by 20 percent as a nominal (4.33), and possibly 40 percent to represent an objective minimum (3.25). These numbers are extracted from a current program, concentrating on reducing front end costs (DDT&E) and paying relatively little attention to design alternatives which cost a little more in development but would greatly reduce operating cost in the future. This financial environment of minimizing front end costs altered the initial all up reusable Shuttle design concept (which had payload costs to LEO for about $20/pound) to what we have now ($300/pound to LEO). Any program to support the HLLV must be planned with the benefits of operationally cost effective designs in mind and must willingly support the costs of the development required. Facilities/DDT&E: Original plans to estimate costs of HLLV put primary emphasis on defining early funding costs for facilities and development. However, in every case, these items have been found to be negligible considering the other costs. As an example, for facilities, if the land based vehicle (EDIN 338-76) is flown from a southwest United States area (Chinati Peak, Texas) as outlined by the WSTF study documented in Section VI-B-6, and the costs are amortized over 10 years of the program, the result is about 18< per pound in LEO. A portion of the costs are somewhat fixed, while some are used on a per flight basis. For example, the administration building will be essentially the same no matter how many flights are involved. This along with the tow path, the land, etc., if amortized over the total flights in 10 years (21,900 flights) amounts to about $.095 per pound into LEO. The other facility items (the ones more directly associated with launch rate), pads, tractors, etc. add up to about $.06/pound to LEO. These numbers are practically insignificant compared to other costs ($.16 out of $10 = 1.6%) means that we can spend about $61.50 on improved facilities to save one dollar per pound launched into Earth orbit, i.e., booster operation/product!on/propellant, etc. This practically quarantees efficiency in the latter areas with little extra cost. These numbers are shown in the calculations described in Table VI-B-17. VI-B-39

Total Costs: The HLLV costs outlined in Table VI-B- 13, 10.89 high, 8.44,nominal 6.0 low, represent achievable levels using the existing technology. The spread is representative of that to be expected in any such new program. With development of new booster designs (using today's technology, but emphasizing cost effectiveness instead of minimizing DDT&E) these costs can be expected to reduce substantially. Section VI-B-5 on HLLV cost effectiveness design considerations discusses this in some detail.

VI-B-40

TABLE VI-B- 13

HLLV Costs (Dollars/PoundLEO)

Faci 1 i ty *Nonrecurring (Amortized) Booster Propellant Operations Recurring Booster DDT&E Facility
Hi
2.39 2.15 1.91 2.57 1.58 1.59 5.46 4.33 3.25
.12 .09 .06

Total

.20 .15 .10

.19 .14 .09

10.89
8.44 6.00

Norn
Mm

*For six flights per day on 10 year program = 21,900 flights

Booster
4.31B 21,900 fits
3.23B 21,900 fits 2.157B 21,900 fits $196,803.65/flt

Facility

4.190B 21,900 fits

3.14B 21,900 fits

$191,324.20/flt

$147,488.58/flt

$143,378.99/flt

$98,493.15/flt

2.095B 21,900 fits

$95,662.10/flt

VI-B-41

TABLE VI-B-14 Booster Cost Breakdown (Dollars per Pound to LEO) Five years reuse w/300 fit, i.e., 1 flt/6 days 6.08 Days Turnaround

5 years X 365 days/yr 300

Assume the booster is 50% replaced during its lifetime i.e., $200/lb X 1.5 = $300/lb total useful life cost. Weight Breakdown (EDIN 338-76) 21,331,885 Ibs gross weight Lift off wt. Booster Stg wt. Propel 1 ant 21,095,563 14,094,797 12.557.911 1,536,886 Ibs first stage dry wt. Interstage + 59.313

1,596,199
Second stage inert dry wt. contg.

+ 736,425 64.758 2,397,382 Ibs total dry wt.

X 300.00/1b (including 50% replacement during 5 yr life) $719,214,600 7300 flights = $2,397,382/flight for 5 years use (with spares in)

DDT&E = 2 X CPU + 2 ( . 5 ) (CPU) = 3 X CPU 3(719,214,600) = 2.157 Billion 2.157B 21,900 fits/10 years ,493.15/flt

For 1,000,000 pound payload, this results in $.098493/lb to LEO (10*)

VI-B-42

TABLE VI-B-15
Propel 1 ant Cost Breakdown (Cost per Flight; EDIN EX 338-76

STAGE I

Oxygen Propane STAGE II

Oxygen Hydrogen BEST

9,438,991 3,517,454

4,421,258 748,451

5%

Propane Oxygen Hydrogen

.08/lb .016/lb ,05/lb

Stage I Stage II

Oxygen Proparre Oxygen Hydrogen

151,023.85 281,396.32 70,740 37.422.55 540,582.85 X 1.1 = $594,640.20

N
7-1/2% Propane Oxygen Hydrogen

.25 .021 .36

Stage I Stage II

Oxygen Propane Oxygen Hydrogen

198,218.81 879,363.50 92,846.41 269,442.26 1,439.871.08 X 1.1 =

$1,583.858.19

WORST
10%

Propane Oxygen Hydrogen

.42
.026 .67

Stage I Stage II

Oxygen Propane Oxygen Hydrogen

245,413.76 1,477,330.68 114,952.70 501,462.17

2,339,159.32 X 1.1 = $ 2,573.075.25

VI-B-43

TABLE VI-B-16 Operations Cost (9.6 million $/flt 6 fits/day) Shuttle HLLV

JSC
JSC Contractor

.704

.0195
.0307

1.107
.381 .041

MSFC MSFC Contractor

.0105 .0011 1.287 1.380

2.303 .0045

KSC
KSC Contractor KSC Ground Operations OTDA

1.287 1.380
2.303

.165 .328

HQ
Program Support Other SSME Ohaul

.0091
.0300

1.080
.115 .368 .016 .269
9.543

.0031
.368 .016

Sys
Crew GSE

no fit crew 5.462

VI-B-44

TABLE VI-B-17

Facilities Cost Chinati Peak, TX (See Sec. VI-B-5)

NONRECURRING

Tow-way Costs - $1.65M/mi. X 253.1 mi. (pp 21 & 13, respectively) (6 Lane Divided Highway) $ 414.64M Range Control 90.0 M Utilities on Tow Path & Launch Area 30.0 M Parking Pad 1.0 M Land Costs (pg 13) 1,490.0 M Landing Area 70.0 M
RECURRING
Pad:

$2.095.64M 21,900 fits/10 yrs

$2,095.64M = $95,691/flt

Lasts 10 yrs, one flight/day - (May continue to be used, but refurbishment costs = cost of new one past 10 yrs. i.e., 3,650 fits/pad Cost new = $120M/3650 fits = $32,876.00/flt $10,958.90/flt
$l,369.86/flt $398,000.00/flt $5,479.00/flt

Industrial Area: Admi n. Building:

GSE:

(6 bays/6 veh (1 fit/day)) 40M/3650 fits =

5M/3650 fits =

(Equal to 1 booster but services 6 same life) (10 Yr) (20M/3650 fits) =

Pay load Building: Tractors:

For return (3M ea.) (3 required)

QM 5 year life !r \ ,^r\ = 4931.50/flt (5) (3o5) + 1QQ%for f
maintenace & service TOTAL

$9.862.00/flt $6Q,545.76/flt

VI-B-45

1.. K-

T..H

-rj Titan "istr

10 .8 .9 MASS FRACTION - USABLE PROP!LI ANT/IGNITION WT.

Figure VI-B-8.

Vehicle Lift-off Weight VS. Vehicle Mass Fraction VI-B-46 REPRODUClBJLJ'i Y OF THJjJ PAGE IS POOR

REPRQDUSZBIUTYi OF THE PAGI IS POOR

,i

o
I

- -

i
i i' 1 1i,

-- -- __; ^. . 11 1 1
j

j
,

- -

f <u~
C7I

o o

1
1 1 _,, 11 !
'

"
'1

0
, i

' j

'

, -

i '
(

;u It ,i
|ft
:
'

o "
'
1

,1

'.

:! !
'

1
,

-'
'1 " "I

-, ,- 1
a >

Q.

o
S-

I-'

o
CO

"
> .'

CQ

ij

R ,
i/

ft ; I
ir. i ;'.

Q.

<u

'r Tpt
[ij :

' 1

r
>"
1
(

'r 1

.' o

en
o esi

'

33

i'lr
' '!

'

entaur

1 '- :?: .
r

f -"'
''-

rl-

"' 0

O O

-_ r
- ,"

c ..
o

2!
<d
t.

t_>

~t ~ ~ < i

' 1 '

'

,'".

<
"
.

i^

;.:
.
(t
'

ii
^ i

i ~~ t

?
1
1

-'<
1

"

-'_

r
'ij '
L

i
'.
i

LJ_ 0

R?
ex.

CT> ^ Ol

_'

t
11

I \]
J I

i
!

'
.
D U t
0

i 0 , j '
*sOJ -

I 1

.;'

0
O O 4)

o o vr

(O T3

, ,

iiL

i
1

; j,;
1

(O

J 1 . -O l

-_
-

1
| _

.
,! i

JL

rj O

^~

j 1
1

__

- .

'i

j[<
1 !

- ' >_: I

o 1 ^

i
in u>
Lt

ra

1 0

c VI I/I

i
1 n u
o r<1

O O OJ

CTi I CO

!
i

O 1* >

l_>

b
1 |

..
"*cn

o
a i o +j
3 <

3_

J- C -.
T

01

,-

jo
-T
1
t,'

o
csj

!!l :ii
l! ,
UD J ,

'1 j - i
\
1 I,

4J C U CO

it

i \ -

S IjD Ui

I| |

<T 1U.L .
,

MM
tf>

**

"o

-t , J

q
ow r~

ca i

i
*J

ft J

i. -J

SONflOd - 1H9I3H AMQ

VI-B-47

VI.

SPACE TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM B. HEAVY LIFT LAUNCH VEHICLE

VI-B-5. Design Considerations

J. Akkerman Future Programs Office

The following items will be discussed in detail below:

1. Water transportation 2. Launch site location 3. Booster reserves and conservatism 4^Development and-hardware-utrltzatton 5. Hardware designs and maintainability Water Transportation: Two factors drive the SPS program toward maximum utilization of water transportation. 1. 2. Cost per ton mile Size of the items involved

The existence of world trade is documentary to the low cost of water transportation. Land transportationeven the largest scale imaginable the railroadsis prohibitively costly on anything but finished goods. The high prices paid for common items like gasoline in areas remote from gasoline production are documentary to high land transportation costs. Delivery of a Japanese car to the U. S. is less in many cases than subsequent delivery a few hundred miles inland. The second itemthe size of the SPS items involvedis also a major factor to consider. Probably the largest single item ever transported across land is the Apollo stack. It weighed about 1,000,000 poundsabout the weight of a 20 car freight train. This was a small load by comparison to the first stage of the HLLV. Present concepts of the second stage are almost as big and heavy. Transporting these items several hundred miles on land represents a significant challenge. On the other hand, water transportation of such large items is a daily occurrence in the ocean ports of the world. The total weight of the finished SPS is hardly as much as a large ship, and it will be delivered in several hundred flights of the HLLV. Indeed, the SPS items are relatively small by comparison to many things carried by water transportation. It is very likely that any cost effective HLLV will maximize the use of water transportation. Launch Site Location: The use of water transportation can provide a lot of flexibility in choice of launch site. However, there is one major factor over-shadowing all other considerations in this VI-B-48

choicethe fact that booster payload to Earth orbit is significantly increased by launch near the equator (about 20% over launches from the southern U. S.). At $10 per pound for delivery of payload to low Earth orbit, this amounts to $2,000,000 per flight for typical HLLV concepts. This differential, plus the almost unlimited launch window, makes the equatorial launch very attractive. This combines with a fundamentally water type booster operation to promote a site south of the west coast out in the Pacific Ocean. A few shallow places are available several hundred miles off the coast of South America. Such a site should be very cost effective if properly utilized. Floating, but anchor-stabilized launch facilities can be built competitively in any of the large shipyards. Booster Reserves and Conservatism: Most booster programs have used sizable reserves to guarantee a given payload. The HLLV as an operational vehicle should avoid this inefficiency. This can be done if each booster is fully loaded but capable of unloading a portion of the payload in flight if the performance is less than expected. About half of the payload delivered to Earth orbit will be liquid for propulsion and other uses, and can easily be dumped in flight or used in the second stage propulsion. The SPS should plan on this efficiency improvement early in the design phase. Statistically, very little payload would ever be lost, providing significantly increased payload. Development and Hardware Utilization: The development costs supporting the SPS will no doubt be a factor in the overall cost of delivered electricity because the development cost occurs on the front end, and is paid for after the program succeeds. The key to minimizing development is to develop only those items which will be used throughout the program, i.e., to develop building blocks or modules upon which the total operational concept can be constructed. This improves reliability also since a lot of operating experience is gained with each element. The Shuttle is a good basic step in that direction. Any cost effective program will utilize the Shuttle vehicle to its fullest capability. There is no doubt that it can be used for guidance or flight control system development. Also, its down payload capacity can likely be utilized to recoup the valuable part of the second stage of the booster, i.e., the engines. The tank for the second stage will not be retrieved on a cost effective basis as discussed below. About half the payload for the HLLV can be carried in the Shuttle payload bay, and about half in a tank mounted between the Shuttle and the booster tank or in the second stage tank. The engines for the second stage must (in this case) be small enough to fit into the Shuttle cargo bay. Engines of the spike nozzle type are small enough, light enough, and yet will deliver the necessary 6 to 9 million pounds thrust. Actually, the second stage of the ultimate HLLV vehicle, can be used as a booster to replace the SRB for the Shuttle. The thrust and VI-B-49

weight are about the same for both applications. Figure VI-B-10 shows two boostersthe smaller is a shuttle derivative and the larger a possible HLLV. In the early phases, the Shuttle would fly with its external tank and the main propulsion system/QMS, etc. all in place. The first stagethe liquid rocket replacement of the solid unitswould be retrieved ballistically like the SRB and as ultimately would be the case for the HLLV first stage. A lot of valuable experience can be gained with this hardware during the early parts of the program. When the need for the all-up HLLV finally matures, the external tank and main engines would be removed from the Shuttle and the old first stage would become a second stage. A new first stage would then be added. --The-new-1-arge-f-i-rst- s-tage-(-28-to-32-million pound-thrus-t-)--would-be

ballistically retrieved with a water landing and shipboard return. The second stage engines would be returned via the Shuttle, leaving the tank in orbit. The Shuttle would land in the vicinity of the payload production facility, or at least near the site where the payload is assembled, near a sea port. The second stage would very likely be stacked during the voyage to the launch site. The engines would be removed from the Shuttle payload bay and placed for assembly. The new second stage tank would be stacked over the engines. The tank for the expendable part of the payload (returned with the Shuttle in the area where the main engines are located presently) and the Orbiter would then be stacked into place. About half the payload for the HLLV would then be placed into the cargo bay of the Orbiter (SPS structure, solar cells, etc.). The entire dry second stage stack would weight just about 1,000,000 pounds. The necessary control wires, etc. for the engines would be connected and the entire assembly would be ready for stacking onto the first stage. After connecting still more control wires from the orbiter to the first stage and servicing, the system would be ready to fly. Possibly,the propellent part of the payload would be carried in the second stage tank. This hardware evolution would require the development of two new engines and two new stage tanks to complete the HLLV. The first engines would be about 13 feet in diameter, about 7 feet long and would produce about 2 million pounds thrust running on hydrogen and oxygen. It should be of the spike nozzle type for the sake of size and also to accommodate early use as a low altitude engine and later use as an upper stage engine. An appropriate compromise must be reached for the selection of the spike configuration. Five of these engines would power the vehicle. The second engine would very likely be a segmented aerospike type16 of which would power the HLLV first stage. It would likewise have a thrust in the range of 2 million pounds and would use the very similar pumping machinery as the first engine but would run on methane. The only really new part would be the liquid cooled segment to fit under the stage. The first of the two new stage tanks would be a unit to hold about 5 million pounds of propel 1 ants. It would be about 42 feet in diameter and about 200 feet long. It would have a simple interface for easy attachment VI-B-50

of the engines on one end, and the payload/orblter on the other. It should have a tunnel through the center for connection of the necessary control wires for the engines. Simple clamps would be used to connect the engines and the plumbing. The second tank to be developed would be very similar to the first, but would hold about 16 million pounds of propellent. It would be about the same diameter as the upper stage (46 feet), and would stand almost as tall150 to 200 feet. Steering for the stages would be provided by differential throttling of .main.engines, with_roll_control_beirLq provided by the orbiter systems. (Very little roll control would be required in an equatorial launch since there would be virtually no propellant vortexing. The two new stages would be simple mechanically compared to today's rockets. Gimbals and the necessary power systems to drive actuators would be eliminated. The opening at the base of the spike nozzle (which would be used in flight to dump the turbopump exhaust) could be closed during sea landing to keep the machinery dry. Some mechanical device might also be devised to plug the nozzle throat also to keep the inside of the pumping machinery and the injectors dry. Beyond the normal Shuttle type operation, the only new operation would be the ballistic recovery of water-landed first stages. This would not be greatly different from the recovery of the solid rocket motors presently scheduled in the Shuttle operation of water recovery of the liquid booster for the interim vehicle. The major difference would be in size of the elements involved. The operational plan would evolve from SRB's to the 9M thrust booster (future second stage) to the 32M thrust all-up HLLV first stage. Hardware Designs and Maintainability: Every effort should be made to keep the entire hardware program simple enough for every one involved to fully understand. The elimination of the gimbal system is a great stride in that direction. Modularization of hardware elements and commonality between the first and second stage engine pumping hardware should greatly reduce maintenance operations. These innovations and design features will no doubt impose upon engine performance and the ultimate in optimized specific impulse, but the money saved will easily pay for any extra propellant required. The use of the expended upper stage tank should receive careful consideration, especially for use as a one-way OTV. It is not worth recovering out of Earth orbit even if it is not used effectively in LEO. However, something must be done with it. The construction of one SPS will leave 500 to 700 of these tanks in LEO and that amounts to about 18 to 26 miles of tank in orbit. These units will have walls about 3/16 to 5/16 inch thick and a pressure capability on the order of 30 to 50 psi. They could be used to form the columns of a cable/column design SPS. Also, all VI-B-51

the propellant necessary for the GEO trip could be stored in these tanks. The tanks in this case might be specially insulated to minimize reliquefication energy requirements. In any case, the tanks will be excess baggage unless something can be planned for their use. One set of second stage engines can provide the GEO transfer in 4 to 20 hours depending on how many are burned at one time and the final SPS weight. The fact that the second stage tanks are not worth retrieving is based upon the assumption that the production costs at the required production rate (six tanks per day typically) will allow production at a cost of about twice the material cost. This is typical for high production items like automobiles, hamburgers, etc. Since the tank weighs about 80,000 pounds and the aluminum costs about $1.00 per pound, the tank will cost about $160,000 each. The cost to get it into orbit is about $800,000 ($10/pound). If this tank is deorbited along with the engines, the Shuttle can be left off, but the assembly would then need wings, wheels, thermal protection and grow to something akin to a Shuttle orbiter only larger much like EDIN 338. Assuming the down payload is about 50% of the retro weight, a 160,000 pound unit would have tn be put into orbit; an extra 80,000 pounds (or $800,000 worth). This would have to be deorbited at a cost of about 8,000 pounds of propellant (Isp = 400--delta V = 500 ft/sec). This costs about $80,000 at $10/pound. These numbers make the cost of a new tank look attractive by any standards whether the tank is used in orbit or not. The same logic applied to engines shows a marginal cost effectiveness, but since the cargo bay of the orbiter will be returning empty anyway, the engines actually can come home free. The orbiter serves as a cargo shroud and guidance on the way up as a primary function (rather inefficiently of course) but since it can serve the function of engine return, its inefficiency is somewhat alleviated. The system will likely prove to be most cost effective when flown manned anyway as the crew can do the docking, unloading, loading, retro and landing operations with simpler systems than automatic systems might. The reliability required for man rating will be inherent in the design because of the high cost of losing a vehicle. Also, as discussed in costs, the DDT&E for the vehicle is insignificant. Although the details will no doubt change the mode of utilization of the above cost effectiveness items, they should prove to be sound baseline objectives for each new concept considered. To summarize, several areas of detail study for cost effectiveness that need to be considered are: a. Booster design emphasizing evolution of Shuttle to HLLV with minimum new hardware. b. Water landing system design for the first stage and water transportation back to the pad. VI-B-52

c. Crane and/or hoist design for water operations (possibly a floating unit). d. Launch pad designs. e. Propellant supply system optimization all the way from source to loading. f. Payload/second stage transportation and operations details. g. Possibility of using the second stage tank for SPS structure and/or orbit transfer fuel storage. (Possibly a one way OTV using second stage HLLV engines.) h. Spike type engine/pump details with simplified controls and fast throttle response. i. Payload dumping parametric studies and/or payload in second stage tanks. j. Booster steering with differential throttling. k. Booster tank pressurization systems parametric studies. 1. Overall booster/propellant design trade-off studies for cost effectiveness emphasizing the results of e.

VI-B-53

fC
C75

-o

IO

o
CD <U

co
O)

O Q-

QQ I

(1)

cn

REPRODUCIBILJTY OK THE ORIGINAL PAG IS POOR

Vl-B-54

VI. SPACE TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM B. HEAVY LIFT LAUNCH VEHICLE

VIrB-6. Western U. S,-Launch Sites for the Heavy Lift Launch V e h i c l e R o b e r t Munson White Sands Test Facility White Sands Test Facility personnel examined the feasibility of launching the two stage winged launch vehicle described in Section VI-B-2 from the southwestern United States at launch rates required by the SPS. Six typical launch sites were examined and cost drivers for future site selection and design were identified. Preliminary cost estimates of launch site construction and operations were made to test some of the site selection criteria. The complete report is included as Appendix VI-APP-B. The advantages of a western U. S. launch site include weather, since there are no hurricanes or large scale tropical storms, and a minimum corrosion problem. The savings in corrosion related maintenance over seacoast sites were estimated to be 80 to 90% for facilities and ground equipment and the savings in corrosion control requirements for the launch vehicle were estimated to be on the order of 1 to 2% of the vehicle weight for equivalent vehicle lifetimes. Disadvantages with respect to equatorial launch sites include restricted launch windows and a payload penalty of approximately 7.3 metric tons or 16,000 Ibs because of the latitude. Seven launch site areas were selected for study. One was eliminated early because of high population density and other reasons. One of the remaining six, located near Animus, New Mexico, was selected to examine cost and design details. The launch and recovery zone is a key shaped area, approximately 200 miles long and includes a debris corridor. It is diagrammed in Figure 1 of VI-APP-B. The tow back road or track is not restricted to the zone limits. f The report indicates that launch sites located in the southwestern U. S. could support the two stage winged launch vehicle at SPS launch rates and that they offer some advantages over coastal, oceanic or foreign sites. No specific site recommendation was made, however, because of sensitivity to changes in vehicle design, launch-to-landing site distance requirements, and launch azimuth optimization.

VI-B-55

VI.

SPACE TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM C. ORBIT TRANSFER SYSTEMS

VI-C-1. Orbital Propel!ant Handling for OTV C. M. Jones Future Programs Office For the SPS space transportation scenario, all OTV's are based at LEO for fueling and flight vehicle turnaround activities. It was assumed that all OTV propel 1 ants are delivered by HLLV to a LEO depot "tank farm" or staging base for propel 1 ant storage before OTV fueling. There will be pre-flight propel!ant losses associated with this storage/ transfer activity in terms of daily boiloff, transfer residuals, and chilldown losses. In the FY 76 study these LEO propellent losses were estimated at 30% such that for every kilogram of OTV propellant required at LEO, 1.3 kilograms must be delivered to LEO by the HLLV. In the case of the POTV, the crew rotation mission requires that the second stage be refueled at GEO. This total GEO propellant loss was estimated in FY 76 at 50% such that for every kilogram of propellent required at GEO for the POTV second stage refueling. 1.5 kilograms must be delivered to LEO by the HLLV, and subsequently, the COTV must eeliver 1.2 kilograms to the GEO depot tank farm. A funded study was awarded in April 1977 to General Dynamics Convair Division to expand the data base in the area of orbital propellant handling. The primary objective of the 10 month study, titled "Orbital Propellant Handling and Storage Systems for Large Space Programs," (Contract NAS 9-15305), is to conduct a system analysis and comparative evaluation to establish requirements and conceptually define candidate methods for orbital propellant delivery, transfer, storage, and operations to support large space programs, in particular the SPS, contemplated for 1985-2010. In a preliminary exercise of the study task flow, the contractor has developed working layouts of delivery and storage tanks for "first cut" estimating of OTV orbital propellant handling losses associated with two SPS scenarios, LEO assembly and GEO assembly. The difference in the two scenarios for orbital propellant handling is the addition of the task of handling argon (LEO assembly) to that of handling L02/LH2 and the long flight time (180 days) associated with the COTV[_. Propellant loss mass percentages for various mission phases were provided by the contractor in the First Monthly Progress Report of NAS 9-15305, dated May 25, 1977. These data have been organized according to vehicle type and mission and tabulated to obtain total propellant mass loss percentages for input to the SPS space transportation scenario synthesis section of the FY 77 study (refer to Section VI.F). Total propellant loss percentage estimations include a 25% contingency to represent the level of detail in these "first cut" estimations.

VI-C-1

The COTV|_ is described as an ion electric propulsion system utilizing argon combined with a LC^/LHo occultation attitude control system. As an operating system, the COTVi_ is separated into four parts and mounted at each corner of a one-sixteenth SPS module for the low thrust, long term transfer to GEO. A description of the COTV[_ may be found in Section VI-C-4. The option of propellent reliquefaction was not assumed for conservatism. The "Subtotal" data were operated on with propel 1 ant mass ratios to obtain the "Bulk Mass Subtotal" line items. The total pre-flight and flight propellent loss of 7.0 represents the additional propellant mass percentage that must be delivered to LEO --to_derJ-ve_the-OTV-mamjmpulse-prope1-lant-required-for-the- LEO-to-GEO

transfer. (See Table VI-C-1.) The POTV is described as a common stage L02/LH2 utilizing a high-thrust transfer to GEO of approximately five hours for personnel versus the low thrust transfer time of 6 months for the COTVi_. As an operating system, the POTV performs the crew rotation function for the SPS space transportation scenario at a rate of 75 personnel per flight. As stated previously, the second stage is refueled at GEO for the return to LEO. Total POTVr pre-flight propellant loss percentage is seen in Table VI-C-2 as 5.4% and 10.8%, respectively, for LEO fueling and GEO fueling. Total POTVL pre-flight propellant loss percentages are seen in Table VI-C-3 as 5.4% and 19.0%, respectively for LEO fueling and GEO fueling. The COTVQ is similar in system concept to the POTV but has a larger propellant loading of 621,500 pounds per common stage compared to approximately 117,000 pounds per common stage of the POTV. As an operating system, the COTVg delivers cargo to GEO for the GEO assembly of SPS and returns with no payload to LEO for stage reuse. The total pre-flight propellent loss percentage is seen in Table VI-C-4 as 6.1% for LEO fueling of the COTVG. The options of propellant reliquefaction in LEO or during the low-thrust transfer and on-orbit processing of water into L02/LH2 in LEO will be traded in the course of the contractor study. Both may reduce the long term storage losses to less than 1% but would increase systems and operations complexity. Additionally, liquid transfer versus modular tank transfer will be traded in the study for losses and systems complexity. For these estimations, modular tank transfer was assumed in propellant delivery by the HLLV tanker to the LEO depot. Complete written results with several recommended logistic concepts and their system propellant losses, cost analyses, and implementation plans will be available from the contractor in final form in February 1978.

VI-C-2

VI-C-2.

Personnel Orbit Transfer Vehicle Definition C. M. Jones Future Programs Office

During the period of the FY77 study,.the FY 76 POTV^ reference configuration, monolithic common stage, was examined further along with other LO^/L^ configuration options including modular common stage, and monolithic and modular single stage for comparison. A parametric stage sizing analysis was completed for the options using the ground rules of the previous study. (Refer to Section VI-E of JSC-11568.) The geosynchronous satellite maintenance sortie mission (GSMS) was baselined with a mission delta-velocity budget of 30,132 feet per second based from 150 NM circular as compared to a crew rotation/resupply mission delta velocity of 28,366 feet per second based from 270 NM circular. The primary difference in the budgets is the GSMS requirement to visit three additional GEO sites (satellites) as seen in Table VI-C-5. The mission delta velocity budget for a LEO "repeating" orbit as described by Boeing in the SPS Systems Definition Study (NAS 9-15916) is also given for comparison. Thus, a vehicle with the initial GSMS payload sizing for early program applications will accommodate a heavier payload in the round trip crew rotation mode, especially when the second stage is refueled at GEO as was baselined for the POTVL. The particular advantage of the modular options may be also seen on Figure VI-C-1 with stage propellant loadings approaching 200,000 pounds with Shuttle compatible elements as compared to approximately 130,000 pounds limit in the monolithic (integral tanks) options. Data were generated on a 150,000 pounds propellent per stage modular common stage configuration sized for the GSMS mission. Vehicle configuration and data are presented in Figure VI-C-2. If supported by Shuttle delivery and on-orbit fueling, seven baseline Shuttle flights (payload = 65,000 pounds) will be required to establish the initial mission as depicted in Figure VI-C-3. On-orbit space basing and refueling will require only six Shuttle flights. Although modularization of stage element does "build-in" growth potential by allowing stretch of the modular tanks, the baseline requirements of the POTV in support of SPS crew rotation do not dictate the necessity for the additional performance. Therefore, the FY 76 POTV|_ reference configuration of monolithic L02/LH2 common stage elements (Figure VI-C-4) remains unchanged for FY 77. Table VI-C-6 presents a preliminary weight statement for the POTV reference configuration. To accommodate the 75-passenger crew rotation module and two man crew control compartment (Figure VI-C-5, -6) round trip to GEO, the second stage is refueled at GEO for the return trip to the LEO staging base as baselined in the FY 76 report. For the FY 77 study, the reference configuration for the POTVL and POTVG are baselined as the same vehicle. Synopsis of MDAC SSAS OTV Analysis In their performance of the Space Station Systems Analysis Study (NAS 9-14958), MDAC has produced a significant body of data on VI-C-3

personnel OTV. (Refer to Part 2, Final Report, Volume 3 Appendixes, Bood 2 Supporting Data, Section 11 OTV Concept Definition, dated February 28, 1977.) Similar to the JSC studies, a parametric vehicle sizing analysis was performed to obtain the optimum configuration to support GEO crew operations. The goal of the MDAC OTV design was a lightweight or high mass fraction vehicle configuration. To minimize design loads, an empty OTV launch was baselined for the space-based concept. As in the JSC studies, the L02/LH2 common stage configuration was selected by with the maximum propellant volumetric size that could be launched on a single Shuttle flight. The resulting stage is 56 feet jjjlJ.engih _w_i_th_.englne_nozzles_ retracted-and carries-a-propel-lant Joad^ ing of 129,081 pounds on-orbit. The configuration is compared to the JSC FY 76 POTV| and Boeing FSTSA manned OTV configuration in Table VI-C-7. Excellent subsystem descriptions for the MDAC common stage OTV are contained in Section 4 of Part II of the referenced report. VI-C-3. COTVG Reference Configuration Trade Analysis C. M. Jones Future Programs Office

A parametric vehicle sizing and cost analysis was performed to compare the advantages of utilizing the 2-1/2 stage COTVg versus common stage COTVg. During the FY 76 study, the 2-1/2 stage configuration was selected as the COTVQ reference configuration on the basis of lower ignition weight at LEO for a given payload as compared to single stage, 1-1/2 stage, 2 stage and common stage (refer to page VI-D-2-5 of JSC11568). For the FY 77 analysis, the total cost per flight was considered to account for the effect of buying and launching the expendable drop tank (DT) used in each 2-1/2 stage flight mission. The 2-1/2 stage payload delivery mission is performed similarly to the common stage except that the stage 2 outbound propellant tank is expended at GEO and only the stage 2 core returns to LEO for reuse along with the complete stage 1. The stage 2 core would be mated with a new expendable drop tank and then with stage 1 during the space based vehicle turnaround in LEO. Both complete stages of the common stage configuration are reused at LEO. Therefore, the primary advantage of the 2-1/2 stage is the lower per mission propellant mass required to deliver the additional down propel!ant to GEO. Preliminary mass estimates were derived for a common stage and 2-1/2 stage each with a payload delivery to GEO of 250 tons (551,250 Ibs). Table VI-C-8 presents the main propulsion delta velocity budget as associated with a payload delivery mission by the COTVg. Tables VI-C-9, -10 present the mass properties of the common stage and 2-1/2 stage, respectively. The propellant penalty of the common stage is seen in comparing the respective stage propellant loadings of 1.24M Ibs (common stage) and 1.18M Ibs (2-1/2 stage). Ignition weights without payload in LEO for the respective vehicles are 1.35M Ibs (common stage) and 1.29M Ibs (2-1/2 stage). Preliminary cost estimates of DDT&E and TFU were derived for both configurations and are presented in Tables VI-C-11, -12. Cost per flight VI-C-4

estimates with groundrules are presented in Tables VI-C-13, -14 for the common stage and 2-1/2 stage, respectively. A learning curve of .88 was assumed for the reusable stages and .85 for the expendable drop tank of the 2-1/2 stage. Referring to Section V I . F , 15,152 COTVQ flights are required to support the construction of 46 GEO truss SPS. Resulting average costs per flight were $13.8M and $16.1M for the common stage and 2-1/2 stage, respectively. Referring to Tables VI-C-13, -14, HLLV launch costs for the propellant for both vehicles and the DT unit cost for the 2-1/2 stage are seen as drivers in the average cost per f l i g h t . Figure VI-C-7 presents the effect of learning on the DT average unit production cost The DT unit costs range from $3.8M for the predicted .85 LC down to $1.0M for a very optimistic .75 LC. These costs are factored into the average cost per f l i g h t of the 2-1/2 stage, and the HLLV $ per pound to LEO is varied from $5/lb to $25/lb to test the sensitivity versus the common stage in Figure VI-C-8. The common stage is seen as more cost effective when compared to the 2-1/2 stage with DT LC of .85 over the range of HLLV $ per pound to LEO. Based on the above trade analysis, the all-reusable common stage COTVQ is recommended as the COTVg reference configuration. The reference COTVG combination is seen on Figure VI-C-9. VI-C-4. Cargo Orbit Transfer Vehicle - Low Earth H. P. Davis Orbit Construction C. M. Jones Future Programs Office

New work on the COTVi since last year was performed by the Boeing Company as a part of the SPS Systems Definition Study, Part I (NAS 9-15916). They selected the ion engine as the best-characterized of the electric propulsion thrusters for their analysis. With some consultation by Lewis Research Center and Hughes, Boeing "scaled up" the current 30 cm ion bombardment engine being developed for the Solar Electric Propulsion Stage (SEPS) to 120 cm diameter. Operating and mass characteristics were defined for this thruster based upon the size change, modest technology advancement (readiness date of 1987) and a change of propellant from mercury to argon (Figure VI-C-lO). Boeing elected to construct modules of the solar array in low Earth orbit which have a maximum array output of 1 GW. Sixteen such modules w i l l be b u i l t in LEO and transported to GEO to comprise a 10 GW ground output SPS. They pro-rated the microwave transmitter and other elements of the 10 GWe SPS equally among these 16 modules (Figure VI-C-11) This "nominal" mass estimate for the SPS module was 5,560 tons. An additional 18% mass was considered to be added to the SPS module to provide 13% oversizing of the array to compensate for loss of output of the exposed array (22% of the total) during transit through the trapped radiation belt, to provide for electrical power distribution of the array VI-C-5

output to the four electric propulsion modules at 3600 volts and structural support of the COTV propulsion system at each of the four corners of the module. Utilization of 5000 seconds specific impulse of the ion engine at 65% efficiency, 22% exposure of the array and voltage of array power distribution were derived by an optimization analysis which considered array degradation due to radiation, array power loss to the plasma, I 2 R losses, thruster electrical efficiency and other factors (Figures VI-C-12, -13). Thus, a trip time of 180 days and the consequent thrust level of 5600 Newtons (approx. 1250 Ibf) were selected from stability and control analyses and cost considerations. Cryogenic (02/H2) propulsion systems were provided to maintain attitude -contro-l-during-those-port-ions-of-the-orbitthat the^satel lite'passed through the Earth's shadow (about 18% of the total mission time). The dry mass of the propulsion systems for the transfer and attitude control were estimated to be 950 tons (17% of module mass). One thousand five hundred thirty tons of argon propellent and 400 tons of 02/H2 attitude control propel!ants were consumed by the mission. Total start-burn mass was thus 9440 tons, or 1.70 times the mass of the SPS module. For the purposes of this JSC report, the Boeing concept and its parameters were accepted without change for the "nominal" SPS transportation case, but the mass requirements were normalized to the JSC "nominal" 10 GWe SPS mass estimated at 78,000 metric tons. This resulted in the following SPS module mass at start of the transfer mission. Basic SPS module mass 13% oversizing for array degradation 5% "scar" weight for the EPOS, etc. 17% propulsive system mass 27.5% argon propel!ant 7% 02/H2 ACS propellant OBF = 1 . 6 9 start burn mass Cost per flight, "normalized" from Boeing, is $88M, including SPS resize costs. To define the "best case" COTV,, these data were modified to capitalize upon a more optimistic set or possibilities. Foremost among the possibilities is that SPS module solar arrays may avoid any degradation during transit either by rerroval of the "Van Allen" belt as prooosed by Dr. Owen Garriott, by the use of radiation-resistant array materials, 4875 tons

VI-C-6

or by restoration of output after delivery to GEO by an annealing process. With three separate approaches under consideration, elimination of the solar array radiation degradation concerns appears to be credible for the 1990 and beyond time frame. The following simplistic approach is utilized to obtain the best case COTVi_ characteristics: Nominal Case
Basic SPS module mass, tons 4875

Change
per EY

Minimum Case
2813

Oversizing for array degradation, tons "Scar" for EPOS & Structure Propulsion system mass Argon propel 1 ant @ 5000 sec
02/H2 ACS prope11 ant

634 244 829 1291

341

0% re 13% 4% re 5% 15% re 17%

n

0 113 422 610

= 70% re 65%
169

6% re 7%

Start-burn mass
COTV OBF

8214
1.69

4127
'1.47

Similarly, cost per flight is scaled with start-burn mass and all COTV hardware assumed to be expended on the single mission. Cost per flight = 88 (S?i)
8214

(1 - -si)
88

= 41M (no satellite resize penalty)

Cost per SPS = $.65xl0 9 for COTV purchase For the "worst case" self-powered transfer from LEO to GEO a simplistic approach is utilized again for characterization. Nominal Case Basic SPS module mass, tons Oversizing for array degradation, tons "Scar" for EPOS & Structure 4875 634 244 829 Change per EY 18% re 13% 7% re 5% 20% re 17% "Maximum" Case 7060 1271 494 1413

Propulsion system mass

VI-C-7

Nominal Case Argon propel 1 ant @ 5000 sec 0 2 /H 2 ACS propel! ant Start-burn mass COTV OBF

Change

"Maximum" Case 2334 1059 133634 1.93

1291 n = 55% re 65% 341 8214 1.69 15% re 7%

.S.imilar_ly_,_cost_per__f_light_is^scaled_wlth-star-t^burn-mass-and-a1-l- COT-V hardware assumed to be expended on the single mission.

Cost p e r flight = 8 8 ( )

= $146M

Cost per SPS = $2.3x10 9 for COTV purchase All three cases are planned to be refined by subsequent analysis, including the expected thruster characterization data to be provided by Lewis Research Center on the ion engine and Princeton University data on the MPD. Numberous other concepts for the COTVi may emerge as attractive candidates, including "mixed mode" thermal/MPD arc jet as suggested by M. Lausten of JSC or perhaps "mass drivers" as suggested by Dr. O'Neill of Princeton. In order to derive the effects upon SPS transportation costs for a constant mass SPS, this preliminary analysis was repeated for a constant 78,000 ton mass 10 GW SPS. Results of this analysis are tabulated below:
Minimum Basic SPS Module, tons Oversize for Array Degradation "Scar" for EPDA & Structure 1/16 0% 4% 15% n=70% 6% 4875 0 195 731 1091 293 7185 1.47 $72M Nominal 1/16 13% 5% 17% n=65% 7% 4875 634 244 829 1291 341 8214 1.69 $88M Maximum 1/16 18% 7% 20% 4875 878 341 975

Propulsion System Mass Argon Propellant @ 5000 sec 0 2 /H 2 ACS Propellant Total Start-Burn Mass Orbit Burden Factor Cost Per Flight

n=55% 1667 15% 731 9467 1.94 $101M

VI-C-8

The assumption of no solar array degradation for the "minimum" case opens up the possibility of a dedicated solar array as an integral part of the COTV for return of the COTV utilizing the high specific impulse argon ion system rather than chemical propulsion. Additionally, this assumption may permit-electric propulsion of inert payloads for geosynchronous orbit construction. Future analyses will treat these possibilities.

VI-C-9

LT*
CO

< <
CO

-Oixsai -ovoiAVd

SWSD

ELING) REQUIRES 6 SHUTTLE

CO

ES AND 1 SHUTTLE LAUNCH

0

CO !

iu ^3- m
O

-H

o
4J

CO i-H

< II II to -i -9-

CM O

CM

ro

CO LU

s_

cr>

o z
VE CONCEPT
LU _J hI =3 X CO

ZD <

<_)

t c o

>. o
Q. Ol
(O
-!->

o>
t/)

CO

CO
CM

B S
CM

CJJ

S i
Q
0
CO CO

CO

Q;

LBS

)
CREW MODULE

CO

LBS

1-

m fE en - o; n ii ^ -

* o2

B < 2 5 co _

CQ = Q; O

? i

CD

sst
a: co h- Q- 2
Q U.

3 5 -i 5 O ^^ =1 QO > O

z o iVI-C-ll
=30

a: rH 55

CM g

Q UJ

o ^ o
Q UJ

CM i I LU UJ O O <t -< I
I- <* CO CM

u_
LU _J I I

CO
CO

o i

S-

o
D-

<D O)

+J oo
CM O

o
I o 5 o
CM

o; < Q_
* ^

o: o o
CM LU C5 < ( CO

LU

<r,

o>
I CO
CO

LU LU

X CO

VI-C-12
CO

o ro
(D

_. in c/) J in w <u d) c c CO t o o B .E .E sO n1 01 CM CM

c e

o
M SO) 4-> O (d

rH in vO C Ol CM O j.,

O)

3- 1-1 r-i

"ro <d- CM

01 .E

'aj

Ol

<U

<L en

5.2

i- a.

2 - ro n. c jj o co

o
Q-

(U

u
-C 0)

tO)

m c
&-

+ So
X
J
s

0 E CNJ 5 0

*^^

O)
M

OJ J_

CM in O

cu 01
CO
O-l

o '(75
V)

in

'E
o

m LO c\j f* ^
1

4-1 in ro re in Q. Q. o

1 11 LLJ OJ <D C3 Ol Ol E O) (LI <L> Ol t/) 03

c c o in

O)

o
O)

I I

o E E

m ,.
,_

..
n3

"ro _o o >,
Q.

Ol

_J

VI-C-13

a o sO) Ol

c
O) to t/>

"3 Q.

OL

o
0)

Lf)

O I

a; a>

VI-C-14

Crew quarters

< < ^
0

x X

~^*^
3

m m
c o
QJ (/)

f.

\ ( f

&\

r ^^ t -t

| 1

ts

_ nu ^ f
C3

in
.-=-=-

t_

>

r U-=-I

-"^^

*"" ?t
T
E
r^ 00 co in

E 2

i i ^ ^
--.\ ^ '>
--N

cvi

^ M ^//\ r , \i.>

-X *"

L__ |_ /*

r v
.-.-

'
\

^21

<rCi

Q. O> O

^ -^oJ^

01

E ro O ra

A K\
h ;

k\ *-

rH
4->

; a.

n
oE^3TT *** ^r':-t

oJ

n^i g-g

-a o
o

o g 0 o

-B ra a o -

Q < 3:

5
CD

I CJ

OJ
CD

VI-C-15

1977 $

o o

o 3
+J o

o
S-

CD 03 SO)

.75

.8

.85

.9

Drop Tank Learning Curve Figure VI-C-7. 2-1/2 Stage DT Average U n i t Production Cost versus Learning Curve VI-C-16

40

35

30

25

u_
s_ CL l-> O

20

~~cb

15

10

2-1/2 Stage DT LC = .85

DT LC = .75

Common Stage

10

15

20

25

30

HLLV $ per pound to LEO, $/lb Figure VI-F-8. COTVg Cost per Flight versus HLLV $/LB to LEO
VI-C-17

V)

c:
sO

U)

to

UJ

OJ CD TO

in

4O)

1 *o en
o3

U
rtJ S(O

00

s
<M

"~> .. .E1
J=

31

CT) E "re Q.
C TO *J o

"S

ol <" QJ >

o o
CD
i

_l Q f- Q.

o> o

O)

O)

CM

JD

, tn CM
O

O O

S -i o i

O>

s_

O)

(U Dl

'I? O

<0

rti ^-*
04

E eg O .. in ~2 to .. o

I o I s_

o O

3 CTI

VI-C-18

GROUNDED SHIELD ELECTROMAGNET MOUNTING RING ACCELERATOR GRID CATHODE

CATHODE HEATERS

DISTRIBUTION MANIFOLD

IONIZATION CHAMBER

PERMANENT MAGNET NOTE: FLOW CONTROL VALVE, ISOLATOR AND NEUTRALIZER(S) NOT SHOWN

Figure VI-C-10. 120 CM Argon Ion Thruster (Boeing)

VI-C-19

c o
03 C S_ r13 O)

C C3 O __

1/1 cB
3O

o to o>
4^) U r-

Q.I

U -4-> <D 03
r 00

LU

c O ro

(J

i O rt3 > U O - +J O. O

>^J= I o.

O)

en

VI-C-20

O)

CO

v>

cu o
c to
4-

j_ o

CU

8
Ul 119

fc

o IZ o
O

I o
CM

CM I O I

CSJ.1OA 0001) 39V110A WV38

1 1

8
t o

8 w UN30H3d) AON3IOUJ3
i i
i

uS

l
N

i
O

eo a (SNO1M3N) ISnUHl

3MOdindNi

VI-C-21

a <*>
O

10
o o o~
OJ O OJ OJ
<1)

-C Q-

0
(O N

o
C4 CO

a. o
1U
I Q)

O.

O a. co

I 0) !-> TD -i(O i (1)

O ui
CO

ii oo

to ra

ro

o 01

(Mjj/$) Q3D OX 1SOD NOI1V1UCWSNVHX

VI-C-22

TABLE VI-C-1

OTV Propel 1 ant Handling Losses SPS LEO Assembly, COTVL

Mission Phase Ground hold ascent to LEO Dock with depot Transfer to LEO storage

Duration 3 Win. 1 hr. 3 hr.

Remarks

Propellant Loss % Argon Hydrogen Oxygen

.5

1 2

.5

1
Modular tanks; no liquid transfer

LEO storage

6 days

No reliquefaction Modular tanks; no liquid transfer

Transfer to OTV

OTV Flight to GEO

6 Mon.

No reliquefaction, propulsion uses gas

5.5

Subtotal Bulk Mass Subtotal Contingency Total (25%)

10.0
5.6 1.4 7.0

5.5

VI-C-23

TABLE VI-C-2

OTV Propellant Handling Losses SPS GEO Assembly, PGTVr

Mission Phase Ground hold, ascent to LEO Dock with depot Transfer to LEO storage

Duration 3 Min. 1 Hr. 3 Hr.

Remarks

Propellant" Loss % LEO "Fuel ing GEO " Fuel i rfg Hydrogen Oxygen Hydrogen Oxygen

.5

.5

Modular tanks; no liquid transfer 6 days No reliquef action

LEO storage

Transfer to OTV: Chi 11 down Residuals GEO storage GEO refuel stage 2: residuals Subtotal Bulk Mass Subtotal Contingency (25%) Total

1 Hr.
2 .3 1 .3 2 1

.3 5

.3 3 1

3 Mon. 1 Hr. No chill down

7.3 4.3 1.1 5.4

3.8

13.3
8.6 2.2

7.8

10.8

VI-C-24

TABLE VI-C-3

OTV Propel!ant Handling Losses SPS LEO Assembly, POTVL

Mission Phase Ground Hold, ascent to LEO Dock with depot Transfer to LEO storage

Duration

Remarks

Propel lant Loss % LEO Fueling GEO Fueling Hydrogen Oxygen Hydrogen Oxygen

3 Win. 1 Hr.
3 Hr.

.5

.5

2
Modular tanks; no liquid transfer

1 0

2 0

1 0

LEO storage

6 days

No reliquefaction

Transfer to OTV: Chi 11 down Residuals COTV Flight to GEO with prop, cargo GEO Storage GEO refuel stage 2: residuals Subtotal Bulk Mass Subtotal Contingency (25%) Total

1 Hr.

2 .3 6 Mon,

1 ,3

2 .3
10

1 ,3

3 Mon. 1 Hr.
No chill down

5 1

3 1

7.3 4.3 1.1 5.4

VI-C-25

3.8

23.8 15.2

13.8

3.8

19.0

TABLE VI-C-4

OTV Propellant Handling Losses SPS GEO Assembly, COTVr

Mission Phase "Ground hold, ascent to LEO Dock with depot Transfer to LEO storage LEO storage Transfer to OTV: Chi 11 down Residuals Subtotal Bulk Mass Subtotal Contingency Total (25%)

Duration 3"Mfn." 1 Hr

Remarks

Propellant Loss % Hydrogen Oxygen

.5

3 Hr.
Modular tanks; no liquid transfer 6 days No reliquefaction

2 0

1 0

2 1
8
4.9 1.2 6.1

1 1
4.5

VI-C-26

TABLE VI-C-5 POTV Main Propulsion Mission Delta Velocity Budgets GSMS (FPS) LEO Parking Orbit (NM, degrees) 1. 2. LEO first injection burn LEO second injection burn Estimated gravity losses 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. GEO circularization burn (19,323x19,323 NM, 00) GEO rendezvous and docking 45 longitude shift, rendezvous GEO deorbit burn Return orbit LEO circularization burn Estimated gravity losses 8. 9. LEO rendezvous and docking Flight performance reserves 2% total delta-velocity TOTAL DELTA-VELOCITY 150x150, 28.5 4270 3786 190 5851 131 1278 5840 (175x19323 NM) 8014 50 131 591 30,132 5798 (270x19323 NM) 7856 50 131 556 28,366 5979 (258x19323 NM) 7885 50 131 564 28,784 Crew Rotation/Resupply (FPS) 270x270, 28.5 4270 3586 190 5798 131 258x258, 31 4270 3615 190 5979 131

VI-C-27

TABLE VI-C-6

Preliminary Weight Statement POTV Reference Configuration - Common Stage 02/H2 GEO Crew Rotation/Resupply

Stage 1, Ibs Dry Mass Structures and Mechanisms Main Propulsion Thermal Control Auxiliary Propulsion Avionics
EPS

Stage 2, Ibs (15,210) .. _ .4., 850 2,270

1,180

(13,210) 4,650

3,190 1,070
480 560
620

2,630
560 680

Contingency (25%) Unusable Fluids

L02
LH2 APS

2,640
(860)
370 390 100

3,040 (1,340)
360 380 600

Stage Burnout Inflight Expendables EPS Reactant Boil Off Start/Stop Losses APS Impulse Propel lant Main Impulse Propel lant Stage Ignition Ibs (metric tons) Vehicle Ignition Ibs (metric tons)

(14,070) (117,460)
90
110 110 950

(16,550) (119,430)
420 440 120

2,570 115,880 135,980 (61.67)

116,200 131,530 (59.66)

267,510 (121.32)

VI-C-28

CO

UJ

z
rUJ CO CO UJ C) hi"- z co CM i-H co

0O O

z r-

o o o o o o
CO" C>

co o po oo co < z CL co o O
N
0 CM
CM <fr

m i-H
CM

in f*-" CM

o o o o" CO

o
6"
CO ,3CM
*

o ^ vO ro
CO CO
*" "

^ LL 1-^ s^

ON- '
LTS/YR) NITS/YR

sO

i-H

*&

%< 1" ^CO

%D ^ rH CO i-H O sO ON CM CM
rH

Q HCM 0 O rH <3- Z co s CM i-H 0 ON

rH vO 0 0 t rCO co O

O O O O

CM

r*>

CO

rH i-H CM ON CO

^" 0 i-H

CO

i-H

< Z Z " O O r- rH CM < O

co" r^~ CM

ON ON O CM i-H

O O fv

o" o fv.

S: ID u. ^ CO 00 CO @

sT

r>. &
^
r-1

@
in ^ CM
CO

o <_> > o
Q-

CO

rH CM" rH CM

** ON

o o o in co in o co o <a- z co o co CM ^ CM 1 1 co co co CO z r> oo h- CM <a0

CM co CO xO 0 r-

CM O ^

o
O O 00 O CM
. . *

oC
i-H i-H CO"

_^

00

O 1^
CM

> CO sO rH

0 )

a to

CO

CO

>
i__
r^
I
^ ^

h^. o o o 0o
UJ
OL.

>< <0 o
r_J

USABLE

< r-

UJ 0

~ xN

;^

o
CO

co o; UJ CL
CL 2

_l => Q_
0 C CL

OQ < ^ D_ 0 < UJ O Z Q ^ < O O _1 1 >

ROUND!

0 O i 1
i-H

^ z c-t- CM XT z ^ i-H < ^

Q UJ UJ

UJ

UJ otf Q r- O rCO

a ce: o: CL o

O O

VI-C-29

PERA!IONS/

> K

LOADED

DELIVER

co" 5 co" > >< UJ _l Q Q =) O

U_

rations
^3 mi \j

l
fO CL

TABLE VI-C-8 Main Propulsion Delta-Velocity Budget Payload Delivery by COTV Q

Mission Delta-V (FPS) LEO parking orbit -(-4-77-.-5-x4-77-.5--KM-.31-0-)1. 2. LEO first injection burn LEO second injection burn Injection & circularization burns gravity losses 3. 4. 5. 6. GEO circularization burn (19,323x19,323 NM, 0) GEO rendezvous and docking GEO deorbit burn (270x19,323 NM, 26.30) LEO circularization burn (270x270 NM, 28.5) Deorbit and circularization burns gravity losses 7. 8. LEO rendezvous and docking Flight performance reserces (2% total Delta-V) TOTAL DELTA-VELOCITY (FPS) (Meters/Sec) 4270 3615 190 5979 131 5979 7885 50 131 565 28,795 8,776

Stage 1 Delta-V (FPS)

Stage 2 Delta-V (FPS)

4270 1730 - -6000 50 131 244 12,425 3,787 1885 190 5979 131 5979 7885 50 131 445 22,675 6,911

VI-C-30

TABLE VI-C-9

Preliminary Mass Properties Common Stage L02/LH2 COTVG

Stage 1 (Ibs)

Stage 2 (Ibs) (38,920)

20,400 7,300 2,750 1,160 1,600
630

Dry Mass
Structure and Mechanisms Main Propulsion Thermal Control Electrical Power Auxiliary Propulsion Avionics Contingency (15%) Unusable Fluids L02 LH2 APS Stage Burnout Inflight Expendables Boil-off Start/Stop Losses APS Impulse Propellent Main Impulse Propel!ant Stage Ignition Weight Stage Mass Fraction

(41,000) 19,800 10,200

2,300 1,020 1,700
630

5,350 (3,930) 1,600 1,930

400

5,080 (4,360) 1,600 1,930

830

(44,930) (626,750)
330

(43,280) (631,170) 1,300

870

920 4,000
621,500 (671,680)
.925

7,500 621,500 (674,450)

.921

Varametrically derived from FSTSA Vol. Ill, (NAS 9-14323), dated December 31, 1976.

Sect. 3.1

VI-C-31

TABLE VI-C-10

Preliminary Mass Properties* 2-1/2 Stage L02/LH2 COTVG Stage 1 (Ibs) Dry Mass Structure and Mechanisms^ Main Propulsion Thermal Control Electrical Power Auxiliary Propulsion Avionics Contingency (15%) Unusable Fluids L02 LH2 APS Stage Burnout Inflight Expendables Boil-off Start/Stop Losses APS Impulse Propellant Main Impulse Propel!ant Stage Ignition Weight Stage Mass Fraction
(38,380) 18,500 9,200 2,570 950 1,530 620 5,010 (3,610) 1,450 1,780 380 (41,990) (573,560) 320 640 3,600 569,000 (615,550)

Stage 2 Core (Ibs)

(23,950) 10,200 6,400 1,020 1,100 1,510 600 3,120 (1,030) 110 140 780 (24,980) (49,950) 250 700 7,100 41 ,900 (74,930)

Stage 2 DT (Ibs) (23,790) 16,200 1,840 2,200 300 -150 3,100 (3,230) 1,450 1,780 -(27,020) (569,320) 320

569,000
(596,340)

.924

.559

.954

Parametrically derived from FSTSA Vol. Ill, Sect. 3.1 (NAS 9-14323), dated December 31, 1976.

VI-C-32

TABLE VI-C-11

Preliminary Cost Estimate* Common Stage L02/LH2 COTVg

1977 $M
DDT&E TFU

Flight Hardware Structures & Mechanisms Main Propulsion (less engines) Auxiliary Propulsion Avionics Electrical Power Thermal Control Assembly and Checkout Engines System Engineering and Integration Software Engineering Test Hardware Ground Test Hardware (2-1/2 sets) Flight Test Hardware (1-1/2 sets) Systems Test Labor and GSE Initial Tooling Program Management (6%) Subtotal

(184.7/16.6) 18.2/3.0 14.4/4.6 12.9/3.4 12.6/3.5 4.2/1.1 7.9/1.0 -114.5/~ 9.3/2.5 7.2/1.9 (178.9/136.0) 111.8/85.0 67.1/51.0 15.1/4.2 2.0/1.5 23.9/9.8 (421.1/172.5)

(44.7/34.0) 5.7/4.6 1.4/.8 5.7/3.9 12.6/10.5 3.2/2.6 4.2/2.9 1.5/1.3 10.4/7.4

2.7/2.0 (47.4/36.0)

Cost Contingency (11%) Total

46,3/19.0 (467.4/191.5)

5.2/4.0 (52.6/40.0)

*Parametically derived from FSTSA Vol. Ill, Sect. 6.3 (NAS 9-14323), dated December 31, 1976.

VI-C-33

TABLE VI-C-12 Preliminary Cost Estimate* 2-1/2 Stage L02/LH2 COTVQ Stage 1 DDT&E Stage 2 Core/Stage 2 DT

1977 $M
TFU

Flight Hardware Structures and Mechanisms Main Propulsion (less engines) Auxiliary Propulsion Avionics Electrical Power Thermal Control Assembly and Checkout Engines System Engineering & Integration Software Engineering Test Hardware Ground Test Hardware (2-1/2 sets) Flight Test Hardware (1-1/2 sets) Systems Test Labor and GSE Initial Tooling Program Management (6%) Subtotal Cost Contingency (11%) Total

(182.6/13.9/12.1) 16.9/1.7/5.7 12.6/4.0/3.7 13.8/3.4/~ 12.7/3.4/.4 4.2/.9/.B 7.9/.5/1.8 114.5/--/ 8.9/2.1/1.9 6.7/1.6/1.4 (169.6/112.8/42.1 106.0/70.5/26.3 63.6/42.3/15.8 15.4/3.5/2.9 2.0/1.3/.2 23.1/8.1/3.6 (408.3/143.3/64.2) 44.9/15.8/7.1 (453.2/159.1/71.3)

(42.4/28.2/10.5) 5.3/2.4/4.2 1.3/.8/.5 5.4/S.7/ 11.6/10.2/.5 2.9/2.5/.7 4.6/1.8/4.2 1.7/.4/.4

2.5/1.7/.6 (44.9/29.9/11.1) 4.9/3.3/1.2 (49.8/33.2/12.3)

*Parametically derived from FSTSA Vol. Ill, Sect. 6.3 (NAS 9-14323), dated December 31, 1976.

VI-C-34

TABLE VI-C-13 Cost per Flight Common Stage ASSUMPTIONS: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 15,152 COTVQ Flights support construction of 46 SPS 50 missions life 30% of max fleet size spare units (ground-based) LH2 = $.36/lb, L02 = $.021/lb Learning curve = .88 6.1% pre-flight propellent losses HLLV cost/fit = $9.0M

8.

1977 $

TOTAL DDT&E

= $658. 9M

from Table VI-C-11 TOTAL TFU = 92. 6M

15 52 5*Q

TOTAL UNIT BUY =

+ 7 = 310 units

AVERAGE UNIT PRODUCTION COST AVERAGE UNIT/FLT PROPELLANT $/FLT = 4-^|= =

92.6 (310 ) -88"1

=$46.5M/unit

$.9M/f1t

( 1 > 3 2 ^' 9 4 2 ) .36 + ( 1 > 3 2 9 > 9 4 2 ) 6 X .021 = $.!M/flt =

31 >>

PROPELLANT LAUNCH COSTS

X
3 8

= $12.8M/flt

HARDWARE LAUNCH COSTS

'

9 2 0

9 -r 15,152 + $.02M/fTt

TOTAL COST PER FLIGHT .9 + .1 + 12.8 + .02 = $13.8M/f1t (includes propellant launch)

VI-C-35

TABLE VI-C-14

Cost per Flight 2-1/2 Stage L02/LH2 ASSUMPTIONS: 1. 2. 3.

4.

15,152 COTVG flights support placement of 46 SPS 50 missions life for stage 1, stage 2 core; 1 mission life for stage 2 DT 10% of max fleet size spare units for stage 1, stage 2 core; 5% of max fleet size spare units for j5tage_2_DT
LH2 = $.36/lb, L02 = $.021/lb

5. 6. 7.
8.

Stage learning curve = .88, DT learning curve = .85 7.3% pre-f light propel! ant losses HLLV cost/fit = $9.0M
1977 $

STAGE DDT&E = $612.3M DT DDT&E STAGE TFU = $71. 3M = $83. OM

DT TFU

= $12. 3M
] 5

TOTAL UNIT BUY:

^ 52 + 7 = 310 stages +1318 (.05) = 15,218 DT

83 (sin)' 8 8 " 1 = $41.7M/stage 12.3 (15.218)- 8 5 " 1 = $ 2 . 9 M D T

^^

AVERAGE UNIT PRODUCTION COST:

AVERAGE UNIT/FLT

^ bu

$.8M/flt (stage) + $2.9M/flt (DT) $3.7K/f1t'

PROPELLANT $/FLT:

(1>26^>359)
1 > 2

.36 '

+ X

( 1 > 2 6 ^ > 3 5 9 ) 6 X .021 = $.l/flt 9 = $12.1M/f1t

PROPELLANT LAUNCH COSTS:

VI-C-36

TABLE Vl-C-14 (CONT'D)

HARDWARE LAUNCH COSTS:

310 (38,380^23,950)

9>0

-M5.152

934]92Q

X 9.0

= $.2M/f1t

TOTAL COST PER FLIGHT

3.7 + .1 + 12.1 + .2 = $16.1M/flt

VI-C-37

VI.

SPACE TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM D. ORBITAL TRANSFER MISSION ANALYSIS 6. R. Babb

Mission Planning and Analysis Division Occultation Effects and Impact on Self-powered Vehicle Because the transfer starts from a low Earth orbit (LEO) at a relatively low inclination, the vehicle spends a portion of each of at least the low altitude orbits in the Earth's shadow (night). This occultation of the sun every few hours creates a special problem for the self-powered electric vehicles. For these cases at least part of the SPS is generating power for use by the thrusters. Thus, the entry into Earth's shadow results in a loss of system thrust. For these self-powered vehicles the electric thrusters will provide both translational acceleration and also attitude control. Temporary loss of translational acceleration has minimal significance. Primarily it increases the total flight time by the length of time the system is in shadow (i.e., the time the thrusters are not operating). Additude control loss is a different matter. The system cannot be gravity stabilized for attitude control because it must be oriented toward the sun to provide power. Consequently, considering the dimensions and mass of the power station combined with a quite limited thrust capability, it becomes apparent that active thrusting attitude control will have to be maintained more or less continuously. There are two potential approaches to this problem. Either find low thrust transfer orbits with no shadow entry, or provide a backup attitude control system (ACS). If the angle between the sun and the plane of the orbit is high enough, and the orbit is oriented correctly, the satellite will be totally in sunlight at a very low altitude. For instance, at winter (or summer) solstice when the sun makes an angle of 23.5 with the equator, an orbit with an inclination of only 45 can be oriented to be entirely in the sun at an altitude of only 250 n.mi. However, orbital nodal precession and the motion of the Earth around the sun both combine to rotate the orbit to where it intersects the shadow again within just a few days. This precession effect means that the shadow intersection problem not only depends on initial date and orbit configuration but also on thrust level and flight time. Figure VI-D-1 shows the percentage of total flight time (up to geosynchronous altitude) spent in darkness as a function of thrust level (and/or trip time). These are for several different inclinations all starting at the best possible time (winter solstice). The initial orbit orientation is same for all the orbits and is near optimum for the range of inclination examined. VI-D-1

The benefits of the high inclination winter departure are maintained as long as the thrust levels are more than about 10~4 g 4 (flight time approx. 50 days). As the thrust levels fall below 10' g; however, it suddenly becomes impossible to avoid precession rotating the orbit in the Earth's shadow and the total time spent in orbit suddenly increases to around 10-15%. Ion type engines have thrust to weight ratios on the order of 2 or 3 X 10-4 for Isp of around 5000 sec. That is for the engines alone. Total thrust to weight of the system should be about an order of magnitude less. expect with a flight of the What this means is that the thrust to weight (T/W) we can from the high Isp systems will probably be around 5 x 10~5 g flight time approaching 6 months. At this thrust level and time, avoiding the shadow is impossible and approximately 10% transfer time will be in shadow.

With transfer times then, of 100 days and upwards, the primary advantages of starting at the solstice points or from a high inclination has been essentially lost. The vehicle should have a backup chemical thruster system to provide attitude control when the SPS in in shadow. This system should not be used to provide delta-V thrusting. To do so would nearly double the total propel 1 ant usage while only decreasing the flight time by around 10%. Departure should then take place whenever the SPS element is completed without trying to wait for the solstice. Inclinations should be as low as possible to minimize low orbit delivery costs and to minimize outbound delta-V and flight time. High Thrust Orbital Mechanics in Comparison to Low Thrust High thrust transfer equate to conventional chemical propulsion stages and synchronous orbit construction of the SPS. This should be a very standard conventional type operation using at least two propulsion stages from LEO both of which are returned and reused. For LOX/H2 propel!ants (Isp approx. 450 sec) the propellent used each flight is around twice the weight of the payload delivered to synchronous orbit. This means that approximately 3 pounds of mass must be delivered to LEO for every pound that reaches GEO. Launch of this material to LEO would make up the bulk of the transportation costs for high-thrust operations. Low-thrust transfer implies some sort of self-powered high Isp flight. This allows at least partial construction in low orbit. The total material in low Earth orbit is only about 1/2 as much as in the high thrust case. Operational complexity and the number of engineering
VI-D-2

problems that must be solved are vastly greater than for the conventional high-thrust case. However, the tremendous reduction in lauch requirements plus the advantage of keeping most the manned construction in low orbit implies the possibility of significantly reduced total transportation costs.

VI-D-3

S S 3 N > I H V a Nl 3WI1 dO lN30H3d

VI-D-4

VI . SPACE TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM E. PROPELLANT COSTS

VI-E-1. Summary and Conclusions

R. K, Allgeier and Hoyt McBryar Propulsion and Power Division

A literature search, and subsequent study of an integrated space vehicle fleet provisioning system was conducted to scope the national impact and buildup commodity costs for the SPS. A detailed cross-check study was conducted to verify the technique used, and showed close correlation for the example fluid (t^J checked. The basic study determined the costs for LH2, L02t liquid argon, propane, and RP-1 using coal, air, and water as the only raw materials. Plant investment was also found. Study results indicated the need for a current-technology plant design to be optimized for the production of the propane (or butane) and RP-1. Specifically, it was found that; The amount of coal to be mined and processed in order to support SPS in the peak year will amount to about 10 percent of the national output at that time. New plant investments for SPS propellant production are about $1-1/2 B/yr throughout the SPS program. The amount of coal required will not impact national reserves. No new technology is required to produce the subject fluids. Detail cost data as a function of interest rate and coal price is presented and supports a small reduction in propellant costs compared to the FY-76 report for interest rates of 9 percent or less. A major benefit of the study was to earmark those several areas where synergistic and regenerative benefits exist but require in-depth studies in themselves. For example, one area not treated at all in this study is the byproduct benefits to be derived from coal ash and slag. Among these are building blocks, gallium, arsenic, and so forth. It is probable that other areas have been overlooked in areas such as thermodynamic heat recovery, since an older gasification process was baselined. VI-E-2. Purpose and Requirements This effort provided propellent cost data as a function of raw material cost, interest rate on 100 percent debt fraction, and byproduct VI-E-1

sales. Its purpose was to resolve discrepancies in existing cost projections by building the final cost up from basic element costs. In this way, management visibility was extended to the "study assumptions" level and bottom line costs could be redefined as parameters such as interest rate or coal cost changed or underwent redefinition. Eight cases were provided as a baseline. These cases are given in table VI-E-1 and when taken in conjunction with table VI-E-2, provide the basis for the "snapshot-year" propellent summaries shown in -t-able-VI-E-3-r- For-re fere nee, -vehicle- conf-igurat ions-are- given -in
table VI-E-4.

VI-E-3. Proposed Provisioning System Rationale - The nation's natural gas and oil resources are projected to increase dramatically in cost, forcing a turn to coal, originally the second most economical and plentiful fossil fuel. Economic pressures will also increase the use of the lighter hydrocarbons from the "basic" methane to propane and butane. Thus, the only raw material which could rationally be considered was coal. Likewise, the large quantities of cryogens and fuels required at the launch site more than justified the complexity and initial expense of moving the fluids by pipeline. In the quantities contemplated, even for the nominal (minimum) case, transportation by pipeline overshadows other methods, including rail, in efficiency by a large margin. Integration of the entire provisioning system allows several synergistic and regenerative benefits which translates as a cost savings, Among these are a gasification plant which provides hydrogen (a) to be liquefied for space vehicle use, (b) to provide prime-mover power for oxygen, argon, and nitrogen liquefaction, and (c) to provide pipeline pumping power. The liquid nitrogen thus produced is used in hydrogen and propane liquefaction with residuals as a byproduct. The oxygen, produced to feed gasification of coal as well as space vehicle oxidizer, is not needed as a liquid by the coal gasification plant. Thus, its heat of vaporization is reclaimed to prechill the inlet air at the beginning of the air separation process (low temperature distillation). Description - Figures VI-E-1 and VI-E-2 depict the proposed integrated provisioning system, both schematically and geoaraphically. The mining, gasification, and refining of coal is taken to be in the vicinity of Casper, Wyoming due to its overall excellent quality and to large, mostly undeveloped coal fields in that region. However, bottom line costs would not be drastically affected if older, developed mines were baselined. As usual, the launch facility is assumed to remain at KSC. VI-E-2

Coal Gasification and RefiningThe plant design for the synthesis of propel!ants from coal was derived from the process incorporated into a coal refinery for the production of motor gasoline in South Africa. This plant has been in operation since the mid-50's by the South African Coal, Oil, and Gas Corporation. Basically, the process involves complete gasification of coal into a mixture which is essentially composed of hydrogen and carbon monoxide. This mixture is generally referred to as synthesis gas. The synthesis gas is then converted to liquid hydrocarbons by reaction under appropriate conditions of pressure and temperature over a suitable catalyst. As in most complex chemical reactions, selectivity of the catalysts is not complete. Therefore, a variety of products are produced. Catalysts and operating conditions are thus selected to maximize the yield of the desired products. Figure VI-E-3 presents a flow diagram for the manufacture of hydrocarbons from coal. The coal preparation step includes the normal process of crushing, drying, and removing undesirable constituents required of any gasification concept. The gasification step utilizes the Lurgi process which is the best developed and most widely used. Newer concepts now in the development stage show promise and may become favored. Some of these are the U-Gas, Hy-Gas, and CONSOL processes. In the gasification step a distillate is obtained consisting of aromatic gasoline and oils. The primary product of gasification (Hg/CO) is "shifted" as necessary with steam which increases the hydrogen content of the synthesis gas with hydrogen derived from catalytically decomposed water. The liquefication step is a Pullman-Kellogg process labeled "SYNTHOL" which was developed from the work of Franz Fischer and Hans Tropsch of the Kaiser Wilhelm Institute dating back to 1923. This process utilizes, principally, an iron-based catalyst in powder form circulating in counterflow to the synthesis gas to produce a variety of products, largely, motor gasoline. In order to maximize the output of light hydrocarbon compounds (C]_^), severe hydrocracking over suitable catalysts of the heavier gasoline molecules is required. This reaction requires a source of hydrogen which is derived from the shift conversion or from steam reforming of methane, a product of the plant. During 1975 and 1976, the Institute of Gas Technology (IGT) conducted a study for Langley Research Center to produce aircraft fuels from coal. Also in this time period, Pullman-Kellogg (the designer of the SASOL-Synthol plant) prepared a report for the Senate Committee on Aeronautical and Space Sciences showing how the SASOL-Synthol plant could be modified to produce aviation jet fuel. These reports and telephone communication with the authors of both reports were used to establish estimates of product yields, plant size, raw materials requirements, plant costs, and product distribution of a coal refinery. Table VI-E-5 presents a summary of these estimates. Approximately 20 products

VI-E-3;

are routinely produced with the primary emphasis of the plant being upon propane. If a mix of low molecular weight hydrocarbon fuels were acceptable, the plant yield could be improved since re-refining and separation losses would be reduced. In order to provide a basis for comparison, a column of the 1975 national production of the various products is given. It is felt that the market could absorb most of the products. Ethanol would, however, be produced at four times the 1975 production capacity for the maximum case, and unless converted to gasoline (a process is under development and showing promise to do this), the ethanol market could be -glutted. Sulphur-may-also-present-a marketing problem^Annual coal requirements are 27.5 x 106and 203 x 106 metric tons for the minimum and maximum cases, respectively. Overall efficiency is 49 percent (Btu value of the products out/Btu value of the coal in). These estimates were derived conservatively. A more indepth treatment of the various plant processes will likely show a considerable improvement in efficiency through better selectivity and recycling, and through a relaxing of the propane purity requirement which would improve the power output. Cost Analysis TechniqueSome idea of the fluids pricing technique can be obtained using table VI-E-6. Part I traces the required pound of LH2 loaded aboard the vehicle backwards through the system to build up the required H2 production at the plant. Hydrogen is taken as the example here because the analysis is the most complex due to the choice of hydrogen as a "catchall" prime-mover fuel. The byproduct stream could also supply prime-mover power but the bottom line on the propel 1 ant cost is not much affected by this choice. This is true if all the byproducts are treated as salable at the fair market price. Part II of table VI-E-6 reverses the flow and begins with the coal mine, since part I provided the amount of coal which must be mined to ultimately load a pound of LH2 aboard the vehicle. The left-hand column details the recurring costs, in 1976 dollars, for coal and the SNG (synthetic natural gas) credit allowable in the byproduct stream. No credit is taken for the C02 byproduct since the future market for large quantities of C02 is uncertain. To balance this uncertainty, no charge is admitted for the water required in the process. These assumptions are, and should remain, very conservative since at today's market value, 1.85 pounds of C02 is worth nearly 700 times as much as 2.24 gallons of water cost, even at a rather high figure for water of 7< per ton. The column letter labels refer to the steps in part I and, as may be seen, no recurring charges are applicable for steps G through B since they are powered by the hydrogen already produced and capitalized in the right-hand column. The right-hand column reflects that amount of

VI-E- 4

capital needed per pound of product stream in the nominal full year of production. Part II analysis then accounts for financing that entire amount for the 30-year plant (and SPS program) life to arrive at fluid costs per pound as a function of interest rate. Cost CurvesPart IV of table VI-E-6 results in the data plotted in figures VI-E-4 through VI-E-11. In each case, three coal costs were taken. Coal at $5.50/metric ton would reflect a situation where the coal fields were already owned by the government and captive to the SPS (or other government program) and therefore insulated from the market. That is, charges are for labor only since plant capitalization has already been accounted. The $17/metric ton is a good current average cost for coal purchased from a private operator while ISO/metric ton is a projected next-decade cost and not in 1976 dollars. These amounts are conservative by, at least, the plant capitalization penalty. Each curve on each cost data figure is a double curve and represents a 5 percent spread to account for operating labor in the plants and on the pipelines. It is seen that the interest rate is the dominant parameter over coal and labor cost and even over whether a credit is allowed for the byproduct stream. Figures VI-E-5, VI-E-9, and VI-E-11 depict a situation where no credits are allowed. This variation is provided in lieu of a lengthy and uncertain market forecast in order to bracket the best and worst case for propel 1 ant cost. In all cases, 100 percent debt fraction and no profit operations were assumed. The oxygen and argon curves are of a unique nature in that, as a benefit of baselining an integrated provisioning system, they are insensitive to coal costs and do not have a significant byproduct stream credit possibility. This situation arises from the fact that the hydrogen cost includes the cost of liquid nitrogen production to support its liquefaction for use on the spacecraft. As a "byproduct," enough liquid oxygen and liquid argon are distilled (for the maximum case) to meet the spacecraft needs. No credits are allowed for liquid nitrogen residuals since its optimum use should be the subject of another lengthy study. It would be used to liquefy propane in Wyoming and prechill inlet air to the KSC separation plant. Additional large quantities are available due to its high mass fraction in the atmosphere, and are shown schematically on figure VI-E-3 as a byproduct. It could, however, be used to aircondition the blockhouses at KSC. VI-E-4. National Impact
\ ^

The quantities of coal required to support the SPS program in a peak year would, if needed now, constitute a large percentage of the 1976 production (about 2/3 of it). However, even conservative projections of coal production during the rest of this century indicate a minimal impact. This is certainly evident when 63 percent will be used in 1980 for the production of electricity in conventional plants. Figure VI-E-12 shows the SPS impact in 1995-2000 A.D. very dramatically. VI-E-5

Table VI-E-7 gives some actual past values of coal production in the U.S. as well as some estimates of future production. In conclusion, table VI-E-8 is presented to bracket the investment to be made to provide the physical plant for the SPS provisioning system. It is apparent throughout, and here especially, that the three additional SPS constructed per year for the maximum case represent significant additional expenditures. It should, however, be a straightforward exercise to design a modern coal gasification plant and refinery that is optimum for SPS needs. The size (and byproduct stream) of the coal-refinery would' thus be~reduced~and "bring the capital "in Ves'tment'bT" 4 to 29 billion dollars into line.

VI-E-6

- ALL CONFIGURATIONS ARE TRUSS-TYPE CONFIGURATIONS -

CASE I

GEO ASSEMBLY. CONSTRUCT 4 SPS AND REPAIR 112 SPS IN ONE YEAR. USE NOMINAL VALUES. CIRCA 2010-2025. GEO ASSEMBLY AS ABOVE, CASE I. USE MAXIMUM VALUES. GEO ASSEMBLY. CONSTRUCT 7 SPS AND REPAIR 112 SPS IN ONE YEAR. USE NOMINAL VALUES. CIRCA 2022-2025. GEO ASSEMBLY AS ABOVE, CASE III. USE MAXIMUM VALUES. LEO ASSEMBLY. CONSTRUCT 4 SPS AND REPAIR 112 SPS IN ONE YEAR. USE NOMINAL VALUES. CIRCA 2010-2025. LEO ASSEMBLY AS ABOVE, CASE V. USE MAXIMUM VALUES. LEO ASSEMBLY. CONSTRUCT 7 SPS AND REPAIR 112 SPS IN ONE YEAR. USE NOMINAL VALUES. CIRCA 2022-2025. LEO ASSEMBLY AS ABOVE, CASE VII. USE MAXIMUM VALUES.

CASE II CASE III

CASE IV CASE V

CASE VI CASE VII

CASE VIII

Table VI-E-1, SPS IMPLEMENTATION CASES

VI-E-7

PI
^^^1

*^ r-

1 1

to O

or o

|
i

ro p

vn rr
IT

CO

*:

'

co rlO

in f\
^^t

-3 1

=r

1 i

00

^ O

s
is<
_j u_

x
^^"^

H
iu
$
H

1 1
3O or CO

rar

o N

1 '

rm

__

u^
UJ
O

ro

S
^9

^
r-

1
I

d ^
CM
1 11

LU

s
1
1

Id

X
UJ

m o m

CO

1 1 1
H

H
H

3 10
oo

>9

3
-3

S
H

10

o1vD *j U.
^^^

c
H
*
^5

1
so -T tf

Vvg
.

3 u.

vD

5.

s
VI-E-8

2*

5 C

5 *"*

2 "^ ^5 . S a.

"i \0

>

Vs
(O
^ lO -i CO*

>
CO

x.

<3

oo

** ^J

o H

m x

OQ

O U^ O ^
^ 0-4

T IO <? r4
^O^
X X

o o
X ye. fO
C>

*0*o

o -*-. o
x x

"b

O O > x

^ x

'"o'b
oo 0

^.

5
H
rr. oo o o
3 .3 O O
X X

IP od
x oo

<r ^9
X o4

O
00

uj ce.

10* fO

oo o:
oo

co g"

O O
X
X

fC ro cs( to

3T-

I O

oo

7 ~T o~ **}
-3 ^
oo

tstt
oo ^r*
^^_

O C)
X X
O- CNl

CO CO

55
ro
.3

w
H

o o
X x

tf\
O

tn x

O O

o o
^**w

*
^ M P

^^4

-i CO * O 0

^3 O

^^^\

pa 2J

*
m O

* * o o
rvl CM O

22
X *

1DR

jsgz r O o

S 'fi 5 2 2 s'is

SS

x oo
VNt

ro

O
VI-E-9

UJ Z 2

GLOSSARY AND PROPELLANT APPLICATIONS HLLV - HEAVY LIFT LAUNCH VEHICLE NOMINAL - 2 STAGE BALLISTIC "o~ 1ST STA6F-T02 WPROPANE o 2ND STAGE - L02 AND LH2 MAXIMUM - 2 STAGE WINGED o 1ST STAGE - L02 AND PROPANE o 2ND STAGE - L02 AND LH2 COTVg - CARGO ORBITAL TRANSFER VEHICLE, GEOSYNCHRONOUS EARTH ORBIT CGEO) ASSEMBLY OF THE SOLAR POWER SATELLITE

(SPS)
o 2-1/2 STAGE - L02 AND LH2 ALL STAGES COTVL - CARGO ORBITAL TRANSFER VEHICLE, LOW EARTH ORBIT (LEO) ASSEMBLY OF THE SOLAR POWER SATELLITE o COMBINED ELECTRIC AND CHEMICAL L02, LH2, AND ARGON
Table VI-E-4. GLOSSARY AND PROPELLANT APPLICATIONS

VI-E-10

GLOSSARY AND PROPELLANT APPLICATIONS (CONTINUED)

PLV

- PERSONNEL LAUNCH VEHICLE - SAME FOR GEO AND LEO ASSEMBLY TASKS o .EXTERNAL TANK - L02 AND LH2 ' o BOOSTER - L02 AND RP-1

POTVG - PERSONNEL ORBITAL TRANSFER VEHICLE - GEO ASSEMBLY TASKS o COMBINED ELECTRIC AND CHEMICAL L02, LH2, AND ARGON POTVL - PERSONNEL ORBITAL TRANSFER VEHICLE - LEO ASSEMBLY TASKS o COMMON STAGE L02 AND LH2 GEO LEO - GEOSYNCHRONOUS EARTH ORBIT - LOW EARTH ORBIT
:

Table VI-E-4

VI-E-11

PRODUCT
CHEMICALS

.CASE

PRODUCT isoo.oo
130.15 ZlO.HO S O M O . 10

NAt

32. OO
8.SO

ACETONE
METHNU ETHANOL KEToME

56^0,00 lot S.oo

UZO.OO

. 5M
108(*.50

ALCOHOLS ACETIC. ACID PROPIONIC ACID H I Q V 4 E R ACIDS

80.20 l i (P. 55 430.50

Ml, OS

3. MS

551.00

2.2.^5.00
2VO.HC*

2S.M4

13,500.00

BUTENE/BDTANE
5UUFOR BTX, GASOLINE % 100.00

5131.10

14,745.00

1,0.0 3000
.00

C8TX)

RP-I
PROPAME

HI. SO

SI, I55.g3

TOTAL PLANT OUTPUT

COAL PLOW (M.T./>fR.)

\S,30<J.35 21.HSXIO"

NA

Table VI-E-5. COAL REFINERY PRODUCT DISTRIBUTION -LBS./YR. X 106VI-E-12

-HVDR06EN-

PART I - TRACE 1 IB. OF Hz BACKWARDS THROUGH THE SUPPLY SYSTEM

A. B.
C

PUMP 1 LB. OF LHX ABOARD THE MEW6LE. STOBE L05 LBS, IN A DEWAR FOR 2 DASS.

LIOUEF1 IjQS LBS. OF GHZ -USE 0.25? UBS.fcHt- POVMER,

D. uauer^ nm UBS. OF GNZ - USBO.I^HS ts* 6HZ-

a POMP i. 050
. OF <iH ON-SITE AT F. PUT !CmZ5 UBS. OF 6HZ INTO PIPELINE IN 0.1^11 LBS. OF GHj. TO PROM1DE PUMPING POWER. CRACK 8-lOfe UBS. OF Oj, OOT OF THE USE 0.1105 UB5* OF 6Hz FOR ATI^OSPHERH.

H. PRODUCE l
O.T105 Z,Htt I. A I, CONSUME W.8^9 LBS. OF Hj, IN GASIF|ER PLANT. LB. OF COAL, PRODUCE BYPRODUCTS.
LBS

MINE 20.9 LBS. OF COAL, USE l.OOl COAL FOR PCV*6R. Table VI-E-6. COST ANALYSIS TECHNIQUE
VI-E-13

OF

EXAMPLE

Table VI-E-6 Concluded

PART IX - COST BACH STEP IN THE TRACE

PART II - COST EACH STEP IN THE TRACE RECURRING CAPITALIZATION RATIO

CT ?A^ FOR ZO.^ LBS OF AT: * 4.

30.00/M.T. O.

1.85 LBS. tt^- NO CREblT

2.M2
Z.ZH

*0.000<I/LB. x S. = $ 0.00135

, Oj.

F.

0.0111 * l
85

LBS. OF

** 0.032.
jt

D.
4-

ML - o.o815
0.

c.

I.05 UBS ,

PART HI-FlNAMtE R6HT-HAMt> COLVJ^N FO^ 30 HR5. To OBTAIN CA?ITAUIZATION ELEMENT OF COST OF UHt LOADED. ADD O?ERATIM6 AHD ttATERtALS ^BR tB.

-PLOT COST AS F(IMTEREST RATE) ^CORRECT FOR LABOR

Table VI-E-6 Concluded

VI-E-14

COAL PRODUCTION IN THE U.S.

IS (P!

OMER 6,30 MILLION TOMS LESS THAN HOO MILLION TONS

OVER 5SO MILLION TONS

(UTILITIES USED zio MILLION TONS)

1180 ^-

OVER 5fc8 MILLION TONS

llg MILLION TONS

MEDicTEb Zooo

(UTILITIES TO USE AS M\*H AS

HBO MILLION TONS)
AS

^VCH

As

^-^ BILLION TONS

ESTIMATED RESERVES IN THE U.S.- RECOVERABLE

3210 BILLION TONS*- HALF ARE. KNOWN

SPS PROTECTED REQUIREMENTS NOMINAL NEAR: 53.3 MILLION TONS SEE CASC s:

MAXIMUM ^EAR: 47Z5

MILLION TONS sec CASE

COLORADO

SCHOOL OF MIMES

Table VI-E-7. COAL REQUIREMENTS COMPARISON

-U. S. TOHS-VI _ _ 15

VI-E-16

CVJ

VI-E-17

S
o to

UJ

CO

5S

ID a

2fl O

<o o

VI-E-18

UJ
VO

*tE
of tc 1*1 ujoio *. I. VI

uJ

O
UJ

e:
OJ

r- 2

8* n * 5 ^ tf>

i |il

i
O

^ * o - c ^

3. t*

**! o

O VI-E-19

6
01

U)

ex: iu

o
o w o
o o

o
VI-E-20

JO

til

ttl
a: ul

o O VI-E-21

Ul

r-. i
LU I

4-> C
i Q. CM

<a

SOJ 3 Q.

Ul
01

01

u
rl

3 i O> (O iO UO

Ol

" /-N V O

sT3 O)
4->

Q.

U)
O

I/)

(U

S 0, T3 3 O i i- K3 Q- >
^ (O
0)

<u o
SD-

o o
VI-E-22

co i

o o
O <

n r:

O
1) 1

OF PROpANE vi ,0 A SPACE VE1 INTEREST RATI ) INCOME TAXPLANT PROFH JCUUP65 CREW

<$

VI-E-23
(ft

s
U)

ec tu

Ul

IE

SO

o o

a =2
O
o %o

r; O

in

VI-E-24

CC

i i /> jx -S
-

Sfc *
u.

i lit
z o

Ift

o I

5
<.

O)

u o>

g O flC
U)

o
VI-E-25

w *- S 3L H Ul z cc

I Z I

uJ

oV- O " \/> ^"^ ui

cc
Ui

I
O
O
VI-E-26

o *? o

'

UJ

\
\
V

\ ^f ^ V h 0

^>
UJ

ZD
0

\n

\ -

\ x

r \

t <n
I 0.
H

UJ

>r )f1 Q x]

0
V CM
LLJ 1

ID 5 ui

'

\ \;

< 0

P
"^ O

0 *

u< 2
0

6 *

\ \ \ \ b \
l
'
1

C7>
U_

: \\
t
T

j a
* (D U ^b^r ^1^

V-

o
oc
1

O j

<;[ t
W **

o
^^L

VJ

r S , i-ii 3 i |P /^ I 2 y
U.g

CO

< <

z i
^J ^^

2
vt

2* Q

/ /

O
s

'"
^

VI-E-27

VI.

SPACE TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM

F. SPS Transportation Scenario Synthesis Introduction

C. M. Jones Future Programs Office

To understand the space transportation fleet traffic and implications thereof, a space transportation scenario was developded as associated with the SPS implementation scenario 1 the1 FY 76 study. for For FY 77, two SPS placement schedules (Scenario A and C ) are utilized to evaluate the effects of increasing the annual maximum SPS implementation rate from two to five over a 16-year period. Figure VI-F-1 presents these SPS placement schedules. In addition, annual repair of the on-orbit operational SPS units represents a space transportation requirement above the construction-related requirement. The annual repair payload mass has been estimated at 1% of the on-orbit operational SPS mass. For the FY 77 study, the space transportation fleet design was assumed to have a useful life of 16 years through the year 2010 (as compared to the FY 76 study groundrule of 30 year fleet design life). This assumption is based on the hypothesis that advancement in technology and operations will dictate a cost effective redesign of the fleet for the last half of the SPS program. The operational requirements of the transportation system were considered for two SPS construction options (truss/GEO and truss/LEO) in order to scope the transportation costs and other parameters for the baseline scenario. Maximum, nominal and minimum estimates of characteristics were made for each option by using all worst case estimates of characteristics for maximum, characteristics judged "most likely" for nominal, and optimistic estimates of characteristics for minimum. The space transportation fleet is characterized by four vehicles: a. Heavy Lift Launch Vehicle (HLLV) - unmanned launches of all cargo to LEO. b. Cargo Orbital Transfer Vehicle (COTV) - LEO to GEO transfer of all cargo. c. Personnel Orbital Transfer Vehicle (POTV) - LEO to GEO and return transfer of all personnel and optional high priority cargo to LEO. d. Personnel and Priority Cargo Launch Vehicle (PLV) manned launches of all personnel and optional high priority cargo to LEO. The space transportation scenario logic involving operational aspects of the SPS and characteristics of the space transportation fleet

VI-F-1

was developed by the Future Programs Office for the FY 76 study and updated for FY 77. The effort involved a HP-9810A computer program with typewriter output so that yearly and total SPS program space transportation traffic models and sensitivities with associated costs could be derived efficiently as corresponding scenario data inputs evolved. Launch Site Considerations As in FY 76, a 28.5 latitude due east launch was assumed for the HLLV's, requiring the OTV's to make the plane change for the equatorial orbit. This is a conservative assumption for performance, since an equatorial launch site offers the advantages of increased Earth rate, a slight increase in altitude because of the Earth's oblatness and, most importantly, the elimination of the plane change requirement which saves approximately 1500 fps of delta V. An additional operational benefit of an equatorial launch site is the opening of the launch window to almost "at will" launch instead of the total of about 3 hours daily available at 28.5 KSC launch site. Future studies will investigate more thoroughly the technical and other trade-offs for various launch sites combined with low Earth staging orbits. Western U.S. launch sites are discussed in Section VI-B-6 of this report. Transportation Fleet Description Vehicle characteristics for the space transportation fleet were synthesized for input to the scenario computer program. In-house and contractor studies served as background and reference data for developing the detailed vehicle data. Projected ranges of technology (performance, weights, and costs) were used in sizing the minimum cost (MIN), nominal cost (MOM), and maximum cost (MAX) vehicle derivatives. Cost per flight estimations include production with learning, propellant, and operations/ manpower costs. Heavy Lift Launch Vehicle (HLLV) - The HLLV will be utilired for transport of all SPS hardware, OTV hardware and propellents, construction and support bases and consumables, and personnel consumables from Earth to LEO. Three candidate launch vehicles were identified in the FY 76 study and remain under consideration: complete winged entry/ recovery, complete ballistic entry/recovery, winged entry/recovery with large external hydrogen tank expended. HLLV detail data may be found in Section VI-B of this report. The range of HLLV input data presented below represents a selection of characteristics judged to be typical of the final HLLV configuration design for a one million pound payload (gross) vehicle. The extremes of the HLLV cost per flight - $7 to $14M - reflect the range of uncertainty in defining the manpower and operations cost per flight.

VI-F-2

Min Pay^load/flt, tons (net) , Fit cost, $M/flt F i t turnaround, days Mission life 400 445 7

Norn 424 9

Max 382 14 5 6 7

300

200

Cargo Orbital Transfer Vehicle (COTV) - The COTV will be utilized for transport of all SPS hardware, GEO bases and consumables, and GEO personnel consumables from LEO to GEO. Several configurations have been identified in two basic categories of independent power (high thrust chemical) and dependent power (combined chemical/low thrust electrical propulsion). For SPS geosynchronous construction, independent power is required of the COTV and based on studies to date, conventional l^/LHg high thrust propulsion is selected with a common stage option. "Mm" and "Max" estimates were obtained by operating on the nominal values of payload. The range of COTV G (subscript "G" denoting SPS GEO construction) is described as follows: Min Payload, MT Stages
Isp, sec
460

Norn 250 2
460

Max 200 2 2
460

300

Total inert weight, MT Prop weight, MT Fit cost, $M/flt F i t turnaround, days Mission life

36 574 1.7

36 574 2.6

36 574 3.9 5 6 7

100

50

25

For SPS LEO construction, a dependent power vehicle utilizing electrical propulsion for the transfer from LEO to GEO has been selected. Conventional 02/H2 chemical propulsion is required for attitude control during occultation periods. The SPS truss concept may be separated into 16 modules, each of which can provide electrical power to the electrical propulsion stages. Propulsion units are assumed to be mounted at each of four corners of each module. During the low thrust transfer to GEO, the SPS module makes several passes through the Van Allen Belt which causes degradation of

VI-F-3

exposed solar array. Sizing of the COTV|_ accounts for the penalty of this satellite resizing as well as the electrical power distriubtion system (EPOS) added to the SPS array to provide power to the electric propulsion system. The COTVL mission life is limited to one mission; i.e., the system is expended or remains with the SPS module at GEO. The range of COTVL derived is described in Section VI-C-4 and is given as follows: Min Payload, MT Electric Propulsion Isp, sec n, % Inert weight, MT Prop weight, MT Chemical Propulsion Isp, sec Inert weight, MT Prop weight, MT Total Vehicle Inert weight, MT Prop weight, MT
Fit cost, $M/flt

Norn 5753 ... 5000 65 791 1291

460 38 341

Max 8828 5000 55 1269 2334

460 144 1059

2926 5000 70 403 610

460 19 169

422 779
41

829 1632
88

1413 3393
146

Mission life

Personnel Orbital Transfer Vehicle (POTV) - The POTV will be utilized to transport all personnel from LEO to GEO and return. To minimize passenger exposure to the Van Allen belt radiation, a trip time of less than 1 day is required. Therefore, conventional high thrust L02/LH? cehmical propulsion is utilized. The common stage POTV is assumed utilized for both LEO and GEO assembly. The mission mode of the POTV takes advantage of the economies of the COTV by having its down propellent delivered to GEO by the COTV. Nominal vehicle chracteristies are unchanged from the FY 76 POTVi_ configuration. New cost data were derived with attendant flight and production unit buy numbers.

VI-F-4

Min Passengers
Isp, sec

Norn 75
462

Max 50
462

100
462

Inert weight, MT Prop up, MT Prop down, MT Fit cost $M/flt F i t turnaround, days Mission life

21 108 54 2.4

21 108 54 3.0

21 108 54 3.8 5 6 7

100

50

25

Personnel and Priority Cargo Launch Vehicle (PLV) - The PLV will be utilized for transport of all personnel from Earth to LEO and return. The PLV will be available for small loads of priority cargo, but this capability is not considered in this scenario exercise. Basically, the PLV is an upgraded Shuttle with the two baseline SRB's replaced by a "liquid replacement booster" (LRB) that operates in a series burn mode with the Orbiter/resized ET. The LRB is reusable following a ballistic entry and parachute/landing rockets water splashdown. The range of PLV characteristics is given as follows: Min Norn Max

Passengers/fit
Fit cost, $M/flt

100

75

50
16.2

10.2 13.5

Fit turnaround, days Mission life

9 150

11 100

13 50

Orbital Propel 1 ant Storage/Transfer Losses For the SPS space transportation scenario, all OTV's are based at LEO for fueling, and flight vehicle turnaround activities. It was assumed that all OTV propel 1 ants are delivered to HLLV to a LEO depot "tank farm" or staging depot for propellant storage before OTV fueling. There will be propellant losses associated with this storage/transfer activity in terms of daily boil off, transfer resideuals, and chill down losses. Estimates for FY 76 have been refined and are presented in Section VI-C-1 per vehicle/mission type, i.e., COTV|_ POTV, or COTVG. Due to the storage register limit with the HP-9810A scenario program,

VI-F-5

COTV[_ and POTV|_ propel 1 ant mass loss percentage estimates of 7.0% and 5.4%, respectively, for LEO assembly have been combined by propellant mass usage ratioing into a single loss percentage of 6.9%. Similarly the COTVQ and POTV propellant mass loss percentage of 6.1% and 5.4%, respectively, have been combined to obtain a single loss percentage of 6.1%. The special case of the POTV second stage return propellant was also treated and a propellant mass loss percentage of 10.8% and 19.0% determined for the GEO propellant handling mode for the POTVg and POTV|_, respectively. Thus, these data were input to the scenario program to account for the OTV preflight and flight (COTVL only) propellant losses .and_cons_eguent_a_dditipnaj launch costs. SPS Construction/Personnel/Logistics Data Input The range of satellite mass inputs were provided by Mr. Lou Livingston of the Spacecraft Design Division and were sized upward for the LEO assembly case to account for solar cell degradation during the low thrust LEO to GEO transfer. These data were 45,000; 78,000; and 113,000 metric tons for the range of GEO assembly satellite masses. Resulting data for LEO assembly with satellite resize penalty were 46,816; 92,048; and 141,248 metric tons, respectively. Construction and staging bases consumables were estimated at 1000 metric tons per year per SPS distributed between LEO and GEO. Personnel consumables were estimated at 200 kg per man-month (Boeing NAS 9-15196 estimate). Personnel count at LEO and GEO for both LEO and GEO assembly options is contained in the following table: Min GEO assembly: GEO personnel LEO personnel 507 77 235 508 Norn 724 110 335 726 Max 941 143 436 944

LEO assembly: GEO personnel LEO personnel Program Output Results

Annual and total 16 year (half program life) scenario runs have been completed for the two SPS assembly options for the two implementation schedules (Figure VI-F-1): Concept 1: Truss SPS constructed at GEO Concept 2: Truss SPS constructed at LEO Man-trips, cargo mass, number of vehicle flights, fleet and replacement unit requirements are computed. Costs are computed for each vehicle as well as the specific costs expressed in $/KWe buss and $/kg SPS.

VI-F-6

Table VI-F-1 presents the Scenario A1 16-year computer printouts for annual activity for construction plus repair. Nominal fleet size build up over the 16-year period is presented on Figure VI-F-2 (Concept 1) and Figure VI-F-3 (Concept 2). Table VI-F-2 presents the Scenario C1 16 year computer printouts for annual activity for construction plus repair. Nominal fleet size build up over the 16-year period is presented on Figure VI-F-4 (Concept 1) and Figure VI-F-5 (Concept 2). The maximum fleet size (nominal) is compared in Table VI-F-3 for Scenarios A1 and C1. Tables VI-F-4 and -5 present the total 16 year computer printout for construction only/Scenarios A1 and C', respectively. The runs sum all flight numbers and cost data for the entire period. Tables VI-F-6 and -7 present the total 16 year computer printout for repair only, Scenarios A1 and C1, respectively. The runs sum all flight numbers and cost data for the entire period. Tables VI-F-8 and -9 present the total 16 year computer printout for construction plus repair Scenarios A1 and C1, respectively. The runs sum all flight numbers and cost data for the entire period. Percentage costs expressed in $/KWe are shown for SPS mass and construction/repair logistics, OTV propellant launch costs, COTV flight costs, and manned support in Figures VI-F-6 and1 -7 for 1 the nominal results of both GEO and LEO construction, Scenarios A and C , respectively. COTV[_ Performance Variance Sensitivity The sensitivity to COTVL performance variance has been developed by running the scenario program over the nominal SPS mass, personnel, bases, and consumables, POTV, PLV, and HLLV values for Scenario C1. Table VI-F-10 presents the total 16 year computer printout for construction plus repair. This run sums all flight numbers and cost data for the entire period. Table VI-F-11 minimizes the COTVL spread and consequent $/kg SPS and $/KWe buss spread. The defined range of COTV|_ characteristics produced a range in $/KWe buss about the nominal value ($482) of -13% to +14% and a range in $/kg SPS about the nominal value ($52.35) of -1% to +7%. HLLV Cost Per Flight Variance Sensitivity The sensitivity to HLLV cost per flight variance has been developed by running the scenario program over the nominal SPS mass, personnel, bases, and consumables, POTV, PLV, COTV, and HLLV payload values for Scenario C1. Table VI-F-12 presents the total 16 year computer printout for construction plus repair for HLLV costs per flight VI-F-7

of ($M, 1977) 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 14, 16, 18, and 20. The effect of varying this cost is seen on Figure VI-F-8 in a plot of $/KWe buss versus HLLV cost per flight. The GEO construction case is seen as twice as sensitive to HLLV cost per Alight -ith a * l^cost/flt of 71 as comPared to a A $MKcost/f1t Of 35 for LEO construction- Figure VI-F-9 is a plot of $/kg SPS versus HLLV cost per flight. Again, the GEO construction case is seen as more sensitive to HLLV cost per flight. The FY 77 "Nominal" HLLV cost per flight estimate is $9M/flight for reference. Transportation Cost Sensitivity for Nominal SPS Inputs of nominal SPS mass, personnel, bases, and consumables were used over the range of inputs for the space transportation vehicles for the construction plus repair case (Scenario C'). Table VI-F-13 presents the computer printout for tris case. Table VI-F-14 summarizes the results in terms of contributing component vehicle flight costs (HLLV, PLV, COTV, POTV) to the total specific transportation cost of $/kg SPS. Table VI-F-15 summarizes the results in terms of contributing component vehicle flight costs (HLLV, PLV, COTV, POTV) to the total specific transportation cost of $/KWe buss. The HLLV component vehicle flight cost is seen to comprise 83% and 62% of the total transportation cost in the nominal column for SPS GEO and LEO construction locations, respectively. The COTV component vehicle flight cost is seen to comprise 12% and 30% of the costs similarly. The manned support PLV and POTV combined component flight cost is 5% and 9% of the costs for GEO and LEO construction options, respectively. Concluding Remarks As in the FY 76 results, the HLLV dominates the SPS transportation cost and operations picture. The accuracy of the HLLV cost per flight estimation is critical; thus, the complexities of operating the large fleet of HLLV in multiple daily flights need thorough study to evolve more realistic operations/manpower cost estimates for each HLLV flight. This area is now estimated to comprise 1/3 to 1/2 of the cost per flight which represents approximately 35% and 26% of the total SPS transportation costs for GEO and LEO construction, respectively. For the LEO construction case, the cost advantages of the with its lower propel 1 ant requirement are obvious in comparison to the conventional COTVG. With consequent lower HLLV flights required, the option of self-powered transfer by COTVi_ is 1/3 less costly as the option of chemical propulsion high thrust transfer for SPS GEO construction. However, in terms of technical risk involved, the COTVg vehicle and operations are better understood than the COTV|_ at this time.

VI-F-8

The area of OTV orbital propel!ant handling losses was reduced in impact on the total transportation cost from the FY 76 to the FY 77 studies. Mass loss percentages and consequent HLLV tanker launch costs dropped as a result of the funded study effort developing new data in this area. More accurate loss estimates and concepts of the LEO OTV staging operations are expected as results from the funded effort in early CY 1978. Manned support cost percentages remain less than 10% of the total transportation costs. Doubling the manpower or reducing the crew rotation period of 180 days to 90 days, for instance, would not greatly effect the total transportation costs.

VI-F-9

CM

CM CM

O CM

0 1

LO

LO *

i <d-

en o

CM

O CM

CO i

en
CD

LO

3"

VO CO

CO

o
r-^ o

CM

CO

<O

co

LO

WD CO

i CO

CM

^O

^~

r--. o

LO

i CO

<X3 CM

10 o

CM

3"

CM

* CD

VO CM

CM CM

CO
LCI

CM

CM

LO

^3-

CD

CM CM

CO r-

cu

T3 ^ CU

CM

CO CD

CO

CO

LO

O CO

sre
CM CO IO CO 0 CO LO CM

CO

cu a:

Q.

CM

i ICM

10

ICM
=!-

CM

CM

CM

CD
"

-a c re c
0) 0
r Q_

, o
0

r |CM ^"

r |CM CO

,
CD

CM

O
1

CO

i ICM
CO

r |CM
CM

0 0

0 CM

o
CM

CM

CO

VO

a.
CO

CO

en en

i |CM
CM

r ICM
r

en en

CVJ

VO

^d"

T 1t

CO

en

i ICM

r- |CM

CO

en

CO

0) 3
LU

en

i ICM

r ICM

t en

CO

CM

en

1 0

r- |*

ICM

I l-Sf

to en

CM

in en

i 1*

!=*

CD

LT>

en
CJ

r-

r-

=c
0 1t

rv ^f ^^

CO O)

LU

^^ o

CL. c: CO i_i

CO O_ CO CU

co

eu c 2: o

21

re

i -i-

o c i o

4-> 1

c _i

S*i~ (O Q-

sCO

C *->

Q. re co 2:

CO r-

cu c

a: ~^
UJ CO

CO QJ

a_ re

>C_}

a. c CO -r_i SI cu c z o

CO OJ

-r-

c i 4-> 1 o c i o

re O. cu Q; !-> c CO !CL, re co 2:

!-

VI-F-10

CO
CO
!-

O)
4J

C
3

<U

O CD

v>

u>

^-

co

CM

(H3V3 9M90l) 039 NI Q33Vld SdS M3N

O

csj

T..I

3ZIS
CO

o CM
A10D

3ZIS 1331J 3ZIS

I o t o

I o

3ZIS 1331J

Aid

VI-F-11

o
Q .

o
<->

oo
QCM

_i
3C
CVJ i

:>
' cM

10 CO 1

_i i_

o ~o

\ \ I 1
1

~
1

I 1 1 1 1 \ \ \ \
1

Q. 3

\ \ \ ] 1

ca

O - O CvJ

ftj "ef fsl - O

OO
-4->

i-

03 OJ C O) O) r O Ll_ OO

s ic
_
** 9

x*

^V

in
->

!
~
5 L.
1 3

\ \ x

0 3 Q. J-

tn *->

^<

fO C

(O

J3
Lj_l

\\
\
NS
x

1 ")

I \
\
k

"~

OO O D_ UJ

^ ->

"~

1 LL. I
4

CO

\ \
X

\\ N.
1 1
V

>

c
f

(O

2! ^
O"

*
i

C3

I
1

\ \ \\ \\
V

u_

VO

LO

i,

CO

CVJ

*
i

'

M | i

in crv
" CT>

(H3V3 9M90L) 039 NI Q33V1d SdS M3N

i
O *J-

i
CD CO

i
o r^

O CVJ

1 c> c)

3ZIS 1331J-A11H

-i

'

3ZIS 1331J 3ZIS 1331d A103

2
o

AiOd

"~
o

1
c)

3ZIS 1331J Aid VI-F-12

(H3V3 9M90L) 039 NI 030V1d SdS M3N

PO

o
o oo
1

I o

3ZIS
JT
O O CO

3ZIS 1331J A100

i o

3ZIS 1331J AiOd

1 o

3ZIS 1331J Aid VI-F-13

CO

CVJ

3M90L) 039 NI Q33V1d SdS M3N

o i1

o
3ZIS JL331J'AT1H i
0

o i
0

CD

1 O

o J-

1
O 0

3ZIS 1331J

A103
!
CD

I
CD

3ZIS 1331d

AlOd
1 O 1
CD

3ZIS 1331J Aid VI-F-14

CM

O O

:s o: ico o o o
UJ

CO

Ho LU o o

CO

\co o o
X

1TJ

to co o o co oo
LlJ CO

E O
3 CO
il (O

w o o to o

+J OJ

CO

CO Q_ CO

4J fO -l-> iO Q.

C O C O i-

ID

\
CO

CO C. Q. O CO O

O O

ro
tf) LU "re

i-v-\

c*

ff\

/*-*

0 UJ

sO)

o o
00

o o

o o

o o
IT)

O O CO

o o
C\J

o o

a/\A>]/$

VI-F-15

in

If)

CO CM

o :D a: HCO

z o o
o uu o

CO

co hco CO o oo
CO

hco o o IE o

to E O 3 E
00 (O

(/J O O GO

o o
UJ CO CO CO

o >,
I r

->

<
CO

a.
O

c 03 O 4->

a_-i10 4J c o
to c^> c
Q- O tO 3 S- SI - !->

S- C O O

o Z) cc: i CO z o o
00
CO

oo o
f--. u_ I
0)
Dl

00

to UJ

"ro

O O CO

o o r-

o o

o o in

o o
ssng

CO

o o

o o

o o

VI-F-16

1600

Nominal Estimates of SPS Mass, Personnel >

Consumables, POTV.PLV.COTV, HLLV Payload r 1 Average Year Construction + 1 Repair

(16 Year Model - Scenario

c)

1400

/ /

/
/

1200

/ / J
^
<<^

1000

/
r

800
O)

600

400

/ XX /X ^ X

/ / ,V*/ ^ f / ^1f\ /

/ \

200

10

12

14

16

18

20

HLLV Cost/Fit, $M (1977)

Figure VI-F-8. $/KWe Buss versus HLLV Cost/Fit VI-F-17

C.\J\J

i i i i i i i Nominal Estimates of SPS Mass, Personnel, Consumables, POTV.PLV.COTV, HLLV Payload ^ on 1 1 1 1 1 loll Average Year Construction + 1Repa ir (16 Year Model - Scenario C )

/
/

160

/
140 120
1/1 Q_ oo CT;

100
80 60 40

% / / /
/ /

A y

^ + *^ >^ ^

*<& r .--8 10

^*H ^

^-^
12 14 16 18 20

'20

HLLV Cost/Fit, $M (1977)

Figure VI-F-9.

$/Kg SPS versus HLLV Cost/Fit VI-F-18

 ^-j- j<^ yp \f\ ^~ ^~ ^~ ^^ CO ^4 Q C\l xt" t*"N ^J ^^" CT^ ON CD CO

^^N

lOCOvooOf-Tj-inocTi
TV

o T- co -^ co r- m nc\j o in CM
O T- o to

O CM

vo

fc

co too
CO TO

CO ^i~ O

cn vo tovo to
tOT-

CMO

CO

^8
OJ

ra cJ>OrH MCM -P

T- T- O

C\J ON O

odd

ooT-^d

T"~

cd*v. w

cn ^KNOO-r-cvj^oco cosoo^cootoc--r~-o^o
O
H

>H

tOCOlTv^-O^OvOCMO^

inT-co "*o vo O C--CM o m in

OT- O tO

in in T - O C- T - O to

Pi VO P3 M 0) 03

OJ ON

O-*-O T-V.OO

odd

to cno CM o inTmcv o to .^o t-co o VO CO to . CO mo O

^^" ^3 ' ^J * ^J- CTN

"z

o cd o

cd

"
tovoinmOT-cotoocn T-tocnincMoinOt ^^ f*^ QQ ^\j f^ ^ CM tr^ co ^3 ^^ vo ooo Oioocno ^vo en OT
T- T

T- OT-

O T- co ** -J- in o o CM o in o
O CM
T-

O CM
T-O

cno

VO CM O cno in CM CM O C-- VO CM O O

T-

""

cn^o t~^T- to
0

mo -8 ^- *^t* * c

ddd

ae RE?
Ov^

E
O
fe CO < OJ

to o T vo o en to vo o *
XOOCTvCnOT-T-tl-CMris to
T

. O ^~ to O CM ^- ^- in r~
CM CTi*OrO

PN-^
^ 1

O T- co -^-co p-in O CM too in CM o in CM in T lf\ OT-O to vo odd

Ovo O

O too
CM O O

^ cn i in CM r~ . CM CO into

c^- y
O'

odd 0

o"~

.T^

T-

o2 -P EH nj
E
>-i CO

"

fc-H 1 M m M EHW t* ^
(i, 5-P

to O *d- CO O CO O * O CM O CM tOO VO T- VO O tO

m<r- co-j-ovo o r-c\j O in in

O T- O IO

c T ^ O to

O VO O ^-vo VO O

*g
t-n O cd PH PH C
<3 CO -H

S5
pj

CO

T-VOO

OT-O

odd

in too r- CM OO in CM ddo d

in

VD

<i-cn o

CM

/ J y O ?<^

C5

*%$ ^C rt
rH
lf\ f\t

li r^

*j5

cn*-' en

toor~cMOcof-cnocM oomovor^-cMincn Ssoomcoovo T- r- O S in otoo O O O T - C O

!-

CO ^t* "^~ 8 T T- tr\ CM inT- o CM O O T- O O

o c\j cno
O
T- O

O VO O -* r- mo
to o O

o too r- . o
mTddo d

inO

in

T-

vo O
T- T

ddd

T-

OT .

" i
E-l
K\

^ -P -p
tO

0 O

o
PH
T

o aa
<H <H

0 0

^ to
O
T
>H rH
Pi

T-

EH co ro
co

T-

co P h
co VH <H

PH O 4)

co p<

a 3
O

co p-i
CO

^v O) W

B g c 3 co a

co o
co Pd
M E-f

EH to

O EH

ra >>
ci
IO
0 M
4> rH EH CO 4^ <H r-H rH\
1 3 ~

T-fO

to

6-1

rt*
4.

T-

3 t* 3 o u) <u to cM to .y to bfl X PH oo -<H P^ oo -H M fn ocoooacooopioo

CO C EH PCO c! E< Pi n) td
(Ur-lr-l 0)OJW

CO

03

a *-* c; -p -p M 4'
fi O ^^*^

M M m

o +>
EH -P
.T^-H

0 1 3

a >>

co
CO

0
El

to rto O j 0 p 1 j

EH O EH
^~ H->

to

gH

>>
^

n n

0 M EH
ft ^

oo

CO

<n -O

W EH O M 3
O

r0 rH ~^ C <H O "iH -(-> ^ 3 O) ~^* T *^*v r1 ^ / O *H C-:

d tI *(^ 0) P5 * 3
O lH

a -*j -P -4-^f 1 * **-4 *5 PH ri******

<u
<M E

rt , ^
*t-H

^i

CO C r-HI

* tJ

C
3 0

C^
--1

4J VH

f_,

**^.{^

O13

COOrHr-l

PH

O O

cocomtncucucocoaiiupup,
<Hrt<i)iDrtrta)O(fl<Tt!-ifH
O S Pi Qi P^ pr> p^l f^!pn pr| fv /-^
(

C C

C C

bO U I-H ? C c
C (U

EJ Cj d o co
M 3 O 3 O O

Olt^t^olOlC^^QlCOOO

tooooooooooo
JaCOCjOtSCSr-^l-Hr-^Hlr-^CJ

!> 01 EH a! O Ai PH

C B r-H rH r o 3 0 r-l T3 O 3 O -p ft) O -P H c, o -P H 0 0 r-l PI O W t-< p. p, co o CO ^H ri a) p. ^ 01 + HJ ft) O O -P 4= 01 >>4-> a. O C ft i p r-t . r-r . ^* > CO r-l rH -H EH Ct O >< rH fn fH r-l r-l H i i J_^ PH PH P^ E O P-i EH W
Ctf r-H

o t^

EH 01

. 0) -P
IJ CO 1

fi H

EH 4^ -*J C \<.^ O rH r-l H 4->

VH 5 T)

o VH f-4

5 JrU 5 4-> *-*

"^*

J_( r-4 CJ r-\

o H P ^

3
>

H a>

-P W O O
r-l

(3 rH : - *^. -^ r C " t^ c M C 3 O r_ c; c -P H e c u -r-> -H CO rH 03 J> >- -r-3 J-3 C3 4-> 4J C1

r-J -H (J rt r~* H; P-t H ^^^

*i*

PH
W

^u M

a;

VI-F-19

oco CM
CM CM to
CM

LA-^T-

O -

co * *- r- CM o CM T- tTCM * o

VO

O' O\T- CM
CM

IAO <* o *
CM T- tA

O CM
O CM tCM

-o o

croo

<H O
>H CO

K.O
P-IVO

"5

inTj-T-

O CO CM

CM o o O CM (A cncvj

CD CM VD t- CM O TVO IA

C IA CM O

in

cn

O CO O O tA O O CM

o
VO O O
O

-o o

ovo *
fcs
M
in-rO CM CO C^

s
O

O VO T-

co T- <r> tA CM o o T~ o

CM t (A

CM

LAVO O O CM f-0-i-

o CM^
O T- CM

OO O

s
o
^-^

1H;

LAO LA CM O CM

O OO

r- CT CM VO CM O t^. LA tA ^ ^

"*

CM ^- VO CM O
*>- C~-

O CO tA O VO
OCMf-LACM

LA 'i- - -<dCM O T-

LA

T-

Pt

r^^"^
r^4 CO

O IACO*

cro o

T- O O

^ cu
6H J

V- CM

g
O

B
O 00
CM O LA O CO CTi C-11CM IA CO -<J- CM O CM VO C-^ tA . 0
C V O L A C M O
Tr4~ C-

O
^~

^^ >H H CO CO

OCMtAC--VO
O CM
-5j-

O tA C tA

CH PH i 5C *aj *^ O
&j ^> Q 55

CM T-

O O0

M ^"

PH 1 o trt ^
CO-H

VO

OO

t- 0 O

A . f^ CJ

i
^4 E_J

K -H

EH 0)

O 00
rZ? ^"| ^

M LA "
CTv"*"^

LA O IA CM O CM
O
IAT-

"4- tA i- VO CM C *LA 'dCM . O

cMtAOcMO
CTl CM

tA

O - CM T...
tAO O

or T- T- co

LA C\! ^ CM

ro o occ

CO

o w e>
o
H
EH IA 0)
> M
CO CO ^, > O "^ O 4-> CO O. cu +> O +> 0)
rH (H

o w
r. o>
CO

-> H
EH EH tA tA 00

CO

CO -P

tH (H EH EH
fAfA

O O

rt

A o o . co .c ro o d ci a co <u
Pn CO CO 03 P4

(=;CO g
CO

O !>5 EH^^
O -H rH P ^

W a

CO

cu C - ti co
-P H 0

EH
C5S

H 3 E
>! CO 3 H ^ C CT_ - >>

o
W

+
oo o rt
CO

b -M \

CO CO CU >> O O
CO

s e P . c n >>
> c-2 3
O O

<H (8
C

m co
A

^ 5 p +- a> O E

O 4^> OJ 0> r-l

"\ o 6
O

E3 E-i O C"^ CIA O O CO

o.

CJ

;4 r- =y
CO

pi

-!->

rH rH rH OJ <H <M <fH ^

CT O

i O EH EH E-i

o a^
CO +> O PW O

; w o oo
I Ci> PH Fh Pn

I O ,-H

< P-i W

is

pq o -- co > >
CO 3 IH EH i-^ rt C- O O -H

rH <t-l <H - O. c 1

r-J H

pq c, i o >

<

- CL C

> >

p . p.. f\. r\.

9 _

w 3 f- -5 rt

J? ,- _ ^

oo o to

VI-F-20

aj ^^
CM Vl E

to in

cr>

cn * CM vo * o vo vo 10 1in
CM

to i o to o O CO to
VO

C*-

**^
T-

>VO

^~ in cr> CM

- CM - in to
CM VD CO in CM

r-ii-vo vo o

vo to to

O i

in cn

^o" blSv.
Jvo P<

CO

' CM^-l-

co S < o

^a o 3

, TO to
CM

in

j^K^^OVO

<*
* CM VD

.to

tOOVO CM O CM O CJN .1-00 CM

^^

r in'*vo vo cnr r~cn

CM

to

to

. cn
in

P5

t* V

CM

a\ * co co * o CM r- toe-- TVO

cnc^o CM o
. to
1

to oo 00 co o
i- CM IO

CM

to

*T-

CO in in

5
t

CM

j P 0
S
O i~ ** O
r"^

in ^^ c*~

$4
2l

co ^j-in C-- ^" ^ o cncntoin *C t-

^J- 00 ^

P=< CO

co

CM T

T~
T-

IO

c *- in 1

CO O

VO VO C CO *

00

CM

to

i-

in

cn

^t CO

in

toe mvo m ^~ t** cn co in

CM CM

CO
VO

ir\ ^

*
CM CM

x *1 ^ 2-P

8 o -P ci *% >H
,_ 1

ft ^g

cL 1 d S
*"^

M CO EH W <

rrt **n Uj _u_i i

EH t-> crj H O 0 d W PH C C5

CO CO S < O

in en

O CO VO O C*- ^J"

rl-T.CM 0 VO VO CM

j- vo r in CM o CM CM ovo r~ in
-t-

mi vo CM cn
CM

^inm^*-^T- c r vo vo CM tocn
r

cn CM to
CM

cn

i-

cn

j
PP ^J

S; S
2 r-t t,
LT\ ^ t__ ^"j

oco m in to CM
CM

to cnc -^-CM o rC ^i~ CM 00 C*" * VO

E"f

^^

cn T~

o^*1""*'

^^

<i-

CM

co

cn to c-j cj c .1- fin <*

CO 0 C\,

VO O ^ O CM tOCO CM CM T- C-

^: 00

^" f^.

rl

t*

>>
EH

ra-p

put

EH

fH >>

CO O -P

^ O

o
0 M

CO

p
H

EH to OO

CJ*~
O to EH co
g ^ to PM -P -P
p4 CO tO tO

ct)

to ^ >,g 3 2 t*f^s ^^ EH - m Ta) c

tO -P
.-P

t>> rl "H C

EH to
O r)*^

S-i -H C >, c 3
3
*^^ *^x,4rv

<2 ^
O
*SZ -P

P
4*

j-t
E
*

to S^ S
O *^ S <F?

EH
1 ^

p4
co

-.NO)
-H B

EH to o fi E to -P N o
O" W rH -P

EH

(5
4. T
rf

Of W rH

5A> T^

fc CO H rH

"S 0 n 0 >, > O -P flj'-v* > > OEH P. d) rH tQ > O t-P EH bOO O -P 0) P.-P H? UH 0

Q rt <H co to a>

HE

SB

o -Pod a
CO iH

M O tO O EH O O O

o to -p co

H-> 4^>

cn

to
^^

m
O O

01

-P o a,

EH -P
Cri O PH M t;

-P t-H -P

O ctf
I-H

P,C <H fn C
t> rH

O O

EH S t> t> CO OO (^ PH EHO 3 CO

. W

i1

0 rH * {= J*

>
O rH EH JT EH S3

r-H-> rH rf rH EH <H rH *H -P *H 1-3 H O > > -P > EH > EH & t-q EH

3 I-P

S
O EH

^ ^
a
o
0 0 -H 0 O

+> rt co a oo
O CO

0'rl

EHfJ O O O O O n l OOEHOOOOK 6H

< O rH O EH .

C5 FM Pi o co W
W

. P<

a. to

VI-F-21

co
5 O rH C--P r-C CO " .
^

O ^~ CO 'd- CO P- ITV ITv CM O IA CM Or- O KN

in "r- in
VO

O CM tf\Q

CO to o to o in T- c\ioc~-2
CM T O CTi VO CO ^ O to VO to
CO* to ^

?rt

CM O O

OOO

CO i- O to*-

>H

IO 00 in -rf- O VO VO CO O <*

co
Rj

COSOOtOCOOtOt~-r-OVO

* to o o T- CM -3- o co
cr\
CM OOO

ir\ T- co * o VD o cM o in in
Or-

T- O
r- O

< o
o
S5

. . .

pq

r- O O

. .

000

to en o CM o in T- ^jin CM o to vo CM r-co o vo co to co mo o To

g
to vo m in o i- eo too. en -i-tocnocMOinOc
VO

H o 3 o

o T- oo ^- * in o
i- O T- O CM

o CM o in
0*0*0* .

.r-

T- O

o in
-

o CM c~*o *~

VO CM O O\O inrCM CM O r~ VO

- r- *- to

000

ooocno
Or

CM O O O

Os

o
CM O

O CM

O C O T

o 0*0*

in CM o in O i- O ro
000

O T- CO ** CO

CM

in T- in
VO

O CM

O vo o <* en c m

O O O in K\ CM tno r- CM
oo o o

CM O tA

C~ CM

EH rt
fe--H fe .O -P M co

EH

rA O * CO O CO O * O <M O CM rAO VD - VO O t^
CO ^OOO

m T- co ** o v o C~CM o in in
O T- O KN

mini- o r- T- o

OVO O -<*-vO vo O

in *o o c~ CM o O in CM
O O OO

in

OOO

HOrt

>

PH C CO H

oo
CTi

o CM oo O in
T- O T-

ov
Pi
?-<

OOO

O O O T- CO VD O

o oo

O t> o r o KNO o mi- T

O O OO

O vo o -3- r- m c in O in O

o *-

EH to O

O O EH -P +* N CJ O

O rt rt
(P <^(
fH

to

EH
O

co to
co
CO

EH

co
PH

rt A CD
H

PH

TCO

co'

EH
(O O

co PH co

g-

C EH PL, <y\ rH PH O"^ (H ) V) O O 0 CT O O 3

P.CO

-co c ^

o 0 cy

e 3 co

o 0 <U OJ b bo fcfl O rt nl
I

CD CO C C rt 3 CO H M H-> -p

co >> o O EH rt *-K"N I-H EH O co i -a M -PEH

I
fc^

EH 0

CO

co o
EH co

rt. o
CO O

CO >>

EH to EH O EH
CO
\
TtO

13
-

rt

CO O MEH

tn >> rt

-r-l

CO O

i <H -p E 3 o d <H ;
o co
H <u to
C O>

O Vn EH -p"-P C"
5-lH OrH - r t r H -<<H

OT

e -p
CO

o o
-H fH

C C

0) rH rH C C

^ n 00 +J +J co tn

' -P

CQ
rt

>

r-) T3 fl)
O O

ex ex,

CO <

rt

O E p, O,pq pq PXd,pq pq p, ex,

CO O CO

CQ

d 0)

C <u oo o co

CO

Pi
OOOOOOOOOO

VI-F-22

CM CM CM VO

o rj-T- C--CM o CM
CM

CM
Of-

^ *

O *- m
"

O\T- CM vo CM

CVJ O

OO Or-

O e\j c-

000

o oo

OJCM
Q, r*i

i^cS-x

CO
CO
*^^ J&tl

K>CDCM
_.

m ^- ^~
OJ O CM

ON CM

VO
T-

r
SB
S

VO KN IT*

CM O

O CD O O OO CM

O CM ro

o oo

o o o oo

inr- CM CM 00 00

CTVT^

oo

C\J O

*-

O VO *-

OVO O O O O O i 000

O C\JCM TO - CM

o oo

o ?J
CJ

K\O K\

UNO

c--*- (--CM o

CM O UN

^^~

*-*-r-

O CTl ^ ITN K>

o CM r* o oo

O-^-r-O

O O T-

"

&TION TME Estimates ASSY

EU

O t^ 03
i- CM

oo o

O >ta-'

1
pi1,
1

OM

mo O> CM ovo
OCO ON

(<^ O LTV

VO UN VO

T- VO VD CM O CM C~-

O CM O CM

p
w n ^ -i

ho s 3S| PS C
tt

o oo

o oo o oo

CO ^

S r-1
EH 0)
fH

K\ O ^N UNO VO

CM O KN

VO CN UN CM

VO CM O T-

u\ t<-\ O cv O <Tv rA
CM

O O

CM CM

O CM

o oo

ooo o oo

O H
EH KN O CO

P -H
>> Vt H

to to 4->

o w
Hi

P -H >, C
00*

to -p

CO

00

a p.

>>
CO

N 0)

03 C

CO

go o
pl-H

fi w
CO to PH toco
CO 0) PH CO

CO

o a)
S B

-P M p. 0) i-H tO I -P -P O) P.-P O
CrH CO <H 0

> o o

p.
I

. o>

O) C

EH Pu >> to 3 fn fn P^^x C M >-. >> t=> -> O C ^.-^ C/KN O O to to O O -P -P CO rH SH Vi < -P.C pq 0) -H 0 is- fc to 3 ^ E-it-3

o P3 S
PH
>>

^ o -P ca
CO 0) r-t

h COOTOJ >> O O

C -P -P O) O.
CO r-l r-l r-( OJ

CD EH O C/KN O o to ,- O . O -P CO P5 O) -H

w >.

< .p, C

to J

S fn
P Cfl

W O O O 00 hH-

to C pj O)

S!

OrtcriuoS ro pr> rj P) rji 2S

O
PP

O r t c r 0) p*^ (^ fii >

1-3

O CO

o o

-co -P O PH O feCOEH

VI-F-23

3 ^5 55

in^i- to vo en
VO

i n to

c~to
VO

CTiTfcD CM *- O <*

cnO vo to
T-

in

in-i-OMOo vo in ^sj~
*T- T-

1-CM O ** CM VOCO T-

Q"^

00

to

in

CM

co

^^ CNJ

to
CO

en

JH

CO

co S

-* i-l

^i
S5

cj -d-in * in

to
CO

CO

T- * >- CM rf O in VO f-VO C\J VO .tO VO

tO tOvO <M O T- CO -3-

r-vo cj mvo

to
CM

in

c-

CTiVO VO -sjI0-l- p-

o
TT

in

CM

*- ^fCO CO

CM

CO Thr- <T>-i- O CM tfCJVO tO

a
o s

CM

to

T-

VO ^" C* CO

cr>o co CM o

to co en o co

IOVO i- ft- CM CM

O to

c
to in

!-

CON!TD RTATION TRAFFIC ry Estimates)

tuJ

?3 ^5 s

K\ KMf\ t^-^J-c^
LT\ <r~
co

vO O CO C to to O CT"v ir^ tO CO "*^-

^- to t vO O
CO CM T-

*vo^0^
^^>

o T- in

VO

cj

to
CJ

. tOLPv

to f-CO O -

T- in co in

in to
VO CO *"

CJ

to

CO

"
CM O^ O KN O VD \O CM

^
*vJ ^t

mcnvo
O\ ^~

Z-J ^?
^^ *"^ ^^^ ^5

VjO

CTi to VO in CM O CTv CM CO (OrTVO CM -

M >

re

CO -H !S B

a PH C

o*\

CM

=*

r-

T- in
T

T-

in vo in in o co to in
C~T-

O CM

CM

in
*sO

CO

T~

^~

C--

C\J O

-^ ^^

N% CO ^ v) f*"\ C\J f<"\

t- O in r co o ^ crc* r~-vo in
CO
T-

. CJ
CJ

cn cd

^~

VO to

*oo r-

O <M N> CM O

in

VO O C" ^* to tovo O C~-

vo
C vO
LTN

^* in

**
L"

S P|
Pl

Pi

*x^
6H

^^
K

>>

Pi

-P H
C

w -p

CO

Pi >>
fO

EH

> Pi -H

\ EH

O O
W T-

Pi EH^- 3

o Pi ^^ 3
- w

^>j C 3

O P H pj (H -1 C S
* 4O

CO CO +3

4^

EH CO O
_}

>2 P) )
r*^"^^-

PI

PI

Pi
^

^j

&
O M EH EH Crf
CO

CO CO

EH *"^

*^*

PH bO
v^

^i

o n
EH W

EH E O" CO >

A o
p o o

CM ^^^^ (H CO co co CO P-i -P -P 65 CO rH rH
S rH

rt a
o

*^x ^5 ^.^ * 4^ - C1 iCU C CO P -MO) CO H -P -^t R It) <H -P W W 0) Pi 3

*"" r*>^^ ^^^,"j

CQ E ^*^ *~" 0 V>

EH

co c!
. f3 <U

O ^"* 1 *^>

^"^

S CO P

O" W ,H -P H G

EH bOO 0 -P a> P.H-

O EH Pi

>

? o

o + a) ^.

o >

ca nJ H co co co
KB O

<D rH 5CO

> o p rt fc- O l-g CU rH -3 WM -P CD p.

[-3

S -P *-P O w -P co
M

rt
0 rH

PiC VH PI CH

EC nJ

M !Xi rH pH 0)

H IH PI
J

EH P -P rH -P Cr; rH -P rH n) -H 3
CO >

<

EH O o O

O CO O

-P co
O

j3 *Q
^H

^ p
k

CO

EH rt co od H PM EHug
CO

k_3

O rH

(tj ^fc ^ ^

O VH rH VH + H PM *H o
> HJ >

EH

<^ O P EH EH EH EH h^ EnW O O O O O h 3 OOEHOOOUK

-=; o P 1-3 1-5 t-3 t; EH > EH XJ i-3 E~*

E-( CO O 1-3 3

^^

J-5 c> oo o co

m PJ 03 2

.
P=3

EH .

EH .

"^

=: O i-3 O 3 i-3 c3 p4 p^ o co W
EH . K

o
EH

H H -H O CO

o u o

PH

tt

p<

VI-F-24

ir>oo o O *
CM Vt O {M CO

O CT> K> rTN C\J O

-QQ CM CM O "CM lf\

OT-CT\OCM
O CMvO OO O

o o
OOT-

bflCM

WT-

o mo

IACO

rA

KS

o CM

CM

O vo - O O
T-^J-

Oi O i
* o oo

O OO

I CM OT--*

CD VO CM O C\J

O 00 f-CM O

income

in

t^

O T - O OTO T- CM

ovo to

000

O * to CM O CM *

O OO

E C5

o
/

H (ijX-N
ft, CO c! 0 +

< u

p-

mo in OO vo tno O otor- in ^~

o en co CM CM o en inr- o ren to

in CM in CM o en CM in O 10

OO

Or- CO O in om
^K

o o CM * ooo

tOT-

E-l

''fc^

g o
1

EH c

B BSi-H O4* >H M CD CO EHf=?

25 ^ 5 PH 1 g& M O rt & PnC C5

o*

B
Si

ino O oo en ino to

i- o co en CM o ** to - m CM c

CM T- CM CM O
Tj-T-

co

in

O-* CO O-*

CO in to

o o
' O

oco en t to

00

&

oo

oo

s rf
EH

co-H

a
SrH EHg H rt .

ino in o o CM ino r~Tj- CM

CM in to CM CM o CM CO Tin
T-

g*> vO in

0 CM O

o * to tO o to <J

CM

o in oo

>,'

OO O

sc

O CO

co -p
O W
rH-

CO

CO 03 HJ +> -H

rH M >>>> -^^v.

O EH
& &

H -H CJ *> C 3
rH r>>
">3 ' S * -4^

EH EH toto
00 T- TEH

NKN

E-i EH

00

to

O 0)

to ft, P, CO -H

EH^^ to

o> p! cr; a NOJ O H P E 3

PH>,tOp>HrH

EH
Cri
3 CO E-t O C to > O O O O 4* -< .- rH H CO < .0. C

o
PM

Sco ct C a> o a o to

2 -H h p rt

O O

Ctf CO 0) PH CO <n I

to o ri

, * o o p.
O 4->
rH rH (
P,H '

W 0)

C^ H fc CO tO OJ PU|>^ C W S*, >, S5rH>>0 O t ^ E H O C ~V.->N.

KO.

4JHQ

to
O W

d -P O PH o S5co EH

co i <H etf o Ei

EH EH OO PnPn

0 t PH

tlllO flJrH O O+>4 rHCHJ^OP, WT-o8 fHrH oJrHr-(rHO> CO rHS-|H OE^HSMVlp tt P,C! pp ftl PP 0) -^ M > > fe O toafnEHt-q O gMuq^H),^ OrtrTdJOi-q ^ K^ PH PH PH PH W W fd PH O Kpq

fca 4-> \

o 4 nj

c/o

o o n

01

3
cr

VI-F--25

O CO ttO CO

to
CM

co co vo 10 co o cn in cno o r CM tCM CM *~

en c cn vo o CM o en
tO CM

to CM to co cn toir\o co cn
<J- CM VO CM

CD

to

--*

cn

<H OI

f=
co S s;o
CO

to CO

0) CM

rtvo PH

fcT>x

**t~ co o
CO i-

vo "*

to co CM * co o o CM ** CM in to .c . to c v-

VO VO T- tO O

CM vo cn T- *O
p*-

i- cncM tocn

t-

^~ c** cn ^^~
<r-

CM CM
^J-

CM

CVJ
lT^

CM CO tO ** \f\ VO

en O *
CM

t CO CM CO CO O

* to to

CM

10

cno c CM o toco in

VO C--CO O c C--tOCM LA

t-

to 5

to
CM

to

R O O
P=H

inincn vo co **
CO

O CM T-

^ To. ln ,chvovo _ en c co
T- tO ,4-

^r ^- to T vo 0
*

m into CM o

CM m * i- to c in t-- o to
t^ T- VD O

0 VD

CM iCi-

r- i- cn

vo

to

VO

to
CO

LO

CM

^ 0)

S-P
EH rt

"
cncM cn o o o
CM in CM i- -dT Trf- VO O

o S o aH

o -P M n
EHW

O CO to
CO

<0

co S

en LT\ en
en to
IO T~

invo C^-CM CM T- . ^

to CM

o rt PH C
CO H

o Cil o

T^

en

^-

to

to CO O vo O CM tO'3 too

vo
CM

to

to

vo

to

"
T- "*=! LO CV O CO VO *
T- TCM Tl^_

^-

cn

pq 1$

Ir^ EH O
r<

CM c in

cCM CM

CM en o m cv o en co r m to o r<i in to *
CM

CM o m c in
r- VO to C ^*TCV T-

CM

^-

in to ^-

in cn
LT>

fH

14

CO

fn

CQ SH H C
r*> rl\

PH

EH CO 0
O 5

^ EH
00

>> ^

W -P -P H

W i-

EH >, fn -H R to \ >, C 3 O fn EH"^ ^

V
^f\ ^i.*

^
K^

t>>

EH
O

-p -1
C ^ 3

O -P

cq
^_^

>, P >,
CO H ^^ J^
vO < 'J *~ <?>

>,
^~^
< "\

o
EH

CO PH

ci
0)

O CO

EH

EH 0 a Mh
PM CO to M CO (^ -P -P S; CO rH rH
elr-^^ EH rt

Ej w -p
rt E2

^H C' ^ ^ co r-

CT w IH >-p ri e
f-U rt *M "P

M a)

" ~P <pc

^ ^a^C

EH

CO

^^t^ .-p*
0 C

co

--?
-P CQ O

W -P N O O1 W t-H -P H E

EH erf
O

^5*

to
t^J

+
o-

? o

W CO Cl V<

o >,

> O -P 0)^^ fc> O EH Pi 0) rH CO EH WO 0 -P ' 0,-P

t=- O ,3 h-3 t O t ^ -P

w cs <M f to m K P O 0 > o -P rt
QJ rH (IJ CO,

ZZ 4^ -P O W -P OJ rH O CO O

o ti)
^

O fn O
O rH

o.vi <n f-4 *H

f-i rH rH Q) H

EH -P +-> rH -P rH -P rH rt rH

EH 0 O O < 0 5n

S o

<^
CO

1
EH

m c rt Q) O O O CO

2 *"* p rt

o o

Cti t1" t^* t5" t1* r^

*i
EH

O rH

<O-Pf-'EHEHEHi-^

<i O -*^ t-P ^"7 t-^

a t*

PH
CO >

0
> -P >

o o
0 H <-H -H O

CO O O >-3 PH EH O W CO

EHPC

OOOOOrH1

OOEHOOOOK

^ co ot^ 3 ^ r
O i^ E"^ ~ " r^ *^^

^ S EH > EH j=> i-q EH

EH
Ct,

^ O j1 ^D ^i *-^ S PH p, o CO S EH

O EH

C5

0, CO

VT-F-26

in CTv * * CM O *

,incM o
CM O O T- CM

VO CM O i n

o T- cno CM
OCJVO

$ 8 mo in i

000

00*-

PHIO

t- S--Jino cri
O CM VO

O CO-*

CM in ** CM O CM * t-i10 .

OVD T- OTO*O O*

O toco

oo o

O vovo
T- T- C-

OCM cnvo CM o T-

in oo oo

>*
CM

OVD to

. O

to

in t-

00 00 t-CM

r-

Oi- O O TO i- CM

o"o o*

o oo

g
CQ

i- O to

o oo
- in

O O> r- to CM O CT\ to

VO CM 00 CM O

inOM3

o CM in - to

o oo o o O in mr-,
O
O-r-

O CTitOO O CM

o oo

s^x

^_ 1
pTj

H 0} *^" EH &3 ^^ ^J ^* ^3

o +* ^

EH ^ ^i S5

g g*
w
g
^4

mo c o co cr\ r- to

0 0O T- O CO

00 O O O CM O * fOiVD to t"^* ^_

T-,-tocMO

inico

in i-

o -<t CO ...
0 O 0

o-^cnmto

o t-t^ O o ^3 ^"
' OO 0

& S EH a) h ODPn
O^^-' CTi
KrH

EH

3 M
S

T- o in mo <r> c m CM
*!- CM

0 0 O

C-- in -d- CM CM o CM
TLT^

00 i-

VO^OT-CMO C\ vo in

O'cj-tor'^CM O to ** ...

o m r- c occ
o
/^ f*

o oo

Bi

O O M H 0)
N

to -p
-P -H H C

CQ

co to -p

EH

to

o l-q

P H

EH EH to to OO EH

EH EH to to OC

to O O

>>
"^-.

T-

(ua

ti o
S

co co
rt

N 0) CO -P -H 1 P h -P CO 01 4) fH O >j CO H >> ^ O

a> c

10.
I

CO

tg fn""-^ <j P W cri I P

o -P

nj^

P CO rH 10 O -P 0) P< -P
O.H H f ( 'H

H fn co to <u , M >> o o p\ o -P rt

+^ H e

N CD

g
W

h 3 a >i w 3 JH fn
O

C6

O ^i f^ >> M 3 Vi
C/|O

tz> EH o c3 ^*^^^^

PM\ t: n >i
JU EH O C"^ O O CO

c/o

o o co to

i c; 4-' -p o) n,
d rH rH rH 0) K *H VH <n f-l O r -^ iJ3

CO

Q) rH

M T- cy

O -P -P

.H ,-H

O
M *- <*}

O -P
(H

CO PH CO

P W

p rt

03 G

C <u o o
O CO

n> CO p O PM o S5CO E-t

O ErH

i . p3 o w > > . i . n .O rt i

a, c "H to ^* t* 3 fn EH i-q cr (U O t-3

ffi

rH H <H

c,i <

PQ CO ""H Ci ^^

^H v^ - o. c

C=3 CQ P=3 P-t O

pc pq H -1 z:

to 3 -1 -^ O rt cr o -5

VI-F-27

^
CM

vo co en to co

* tO

to co to in co o en
CM T CM
COT-

vo en o vo o
T- 0 to

*-VD in ^*- O T---*

5
*

*"
CM

*
.

T-

to m ^~ CD to

in vo
to O

^- CM p- IO

CO p

^
P-

r-

CM

co

**

to CO

tr\ CO in - CO O O
%
CO

$*Z
^^

r-

in to
1

^ in i en to
CO VO O
O

CM CM

to
O
CM

P-l^0

<o o "^
rH

. ^ ^

(*-.

^_

^
C-

to ""
-r-

T- in
-r-

,-p-cnin

in

6,
S
H?

voco-*

p CM

in

vO CO CD - CO O to CM 'Sf ^ CM CM VD

p-O

T- CM O

vo P-T- "*-^
p- *S" CM VO

in

in
CM

VO CO VO

to1

in to

in

to^i- m

cn

CO

Q O *-

LJ^_^
*f^ f^-^rn

~\

2 ^5 """

i,

oco 'toco in vo CM T Pin

CO "* VD in vo VD VD co o ^-.co co r- to T** ^- ^

0
VO

f<^ CM tO CM O

PT-

co
CM

.VO i-

to co in c to CTi p~ in co * CM to
tO T- VO T-

*^r

en

T~ *r- cn

in to
VO

CO
^

fe Is
^J ^

o & -i C, o -P
M CO
*^ Ci t? T 1 tH 1^1

_E

ft.

jy _. ^ ?*\ i,
H

'1
^

co m en r ^~

O CTl-^-

vo p- vo fO to T o
VD 1-

fcj g g

. T"*

in en

<(-

CM

0 C. to O

in <- O vo O
^*~~

C -0 to vo O

T- -3-VO O
f/-v

o s

P~ VO
C.

c*-

w a s
Hi pq

00 -H O P- CM

< H K rH

EH

'H

co^.
en

,_ "^ [~j
=

me in en
CM

co c mo o. o o goocnjp ^_

CM

*
CM

in *

o in p~ cj o LTNVO m ^ ^*
p-

c^j -r- VD cr> r

i- C-, ^
^

VD
VE
T~.

r L

* er

~_T

^ EH
14 J>j *v^
l-t

*^_

>j

(-4

4-3 f~\

n -P

CO

EH to 0O
t.
fc3 *""

EH to
O
T~
tf(^

>i t-i -H C -^ >, c S

(H EH*^ 3
7~^

>> ^^

fn

EH

^i H C
^"^f^ H-*

CO -P H-> H

to

<
o
f-^
^ ^

H 0)
I-M

C5

O w
(T) C*i

EH . W >r0C E CO -P * N C Of W rH --P H E
M ^^ rH ^i

^ C" ? -P
EH

O fn*--. 3 T t>>2*
. M

^ *^,* s>1^^. ""-^ CO ^ '^ *1- !^ XH

K"^ fn >>

fc

t-

to
'

r^

C-.

'Z. n +* N o 1

0 C

o-^e:<.> o *-.-*

<'

I L 1 "

<^ g_, ^ p 1 r,*; < -j

+
oT^ ^^

(5 E
EH tCO

> o

a t->
OJ r- ' W

Cti CO CO W

J^OE-fd.

O ta rH -P H E K rfl <H CO n O O CO -P CO CO t-l O CO O C erf E o o EH O O O O s- o -P rt

t>

^ f-

O -P aj CX-P

CO rH rH

!^:,_- 4-> oj o.
M "

O -3

(11 rH
O

<
P-l

E-i -P

*j
c o o
.H

-P r-H -P
0

O^OVvrHrHOrH O rt CXVn VH t-i V-(

I-H

o o
A* TO ^^ rrt

EH rt S> > P EH f-5

C.O O O r-^
PH EH O ^ CO

5 r-l

O r-H
<O-PE-E-'E-1E->1-^ EHt: O O O O C i - ^ OOEHCJOOOS

_3

CJ r-l

rt rt

VH VH (H

11 r(

EH

> > t>

J

<S O -P rJ

^C >
EH
--

<M

?" "^ ^

^
EH C

EH H 0 ^ 3 ^ O r-H E-i S ~

^50 H^ q 3 ^

=M O

en pj C o> o o

EH (=<

EH

O CO

C5

O Cu

*-~

VI-F-26

in oo r~ c CM o to
O CM K\ CM
<M O ^ ^x T V*

CO t- COVO CO CVJ

VD CO CM O

Oir
00--

oo

a
IT* CM CO

O CnCr>

OO CM

T"" f^.

c--

C^

PHVO

<1> T llOCM S)>v^

"^

!M

CO CO a S

o Ss

^0

- "d-C\J OO *

ir co cn

o cnf~.r-CM O-*
CO VO

^ CM

CM jp\ 8 CMQQ O I

CM

T- CM t^

ooo

o vo c-

cncn

ir\vp co

O f-int - CM CM

T~ ^~ T"*

t- t~-T-

CO lT>"d-CM O

O CM O O O CM -<j-

o cnt^ f
Orl-CO

3
o
O
&J^^

O CO i^

ooo
*

OOO

*"<* *

p
H
><J ? V

mo in - o en o o vo . ..
T* ^- T

^~ fp\ T~ ^~ cn TTVO

o co cnLn CMO CO
T

T- -<i-1^ CM O
O
*!-

Lf\ CO T- T-

o T- cncM T-

O
O

CVJ CM

C--

O T- CM

ooo

P=J 03

O O
T-

B *^5 '^

M ra co
EHP3
W

mO O
S

c CM T- ir\

O O c cncviO CO
CHCM O VD IO

C o ^

1*4 1

EH >>OK _* rvi
,g
CO-H

T- co cn c~c--

O CO vD ^- VO O CO C^ O Oi-

O T- CM

OOO

w
2 EH

58
ir\o LT\
T- 0 C-O OMD
i ITMTN -

EH <DM S3 cn
OS

cn o t-~ LT> cvo -^

CMr- VO CM 0
^ ^^

VO CM iOD T- CM

CM O

Ov3 CO

cn*^

ooo

C O

i-^-

O W

o
p
H

\ >,q 3
EH-^. 3
O<*
.-P

03 CO 4J f-t 4^ -H >> h -M C

CO

-p
H
P ^
V,

cu
fl>
^y* ^*H

K% O OT-

EH e^ -to

EH M
>>

KN S
T-

^4 H

-4^
O) J3
-rH EJ

^3
^1 f^

^0 O <>
T
T""

EH EH
K>N~\

00
EH OS
T ^ ,

PS^v
W 01

- N <U

EH

>> o ^
03

<^k ^

4pj

o.^ ^^

^3 w o n)

pt, P, fn -^ W C Q O V l CO -H >>> 0 0 >> te ^ o -P 03"^

p.

4_3

tJ J^ CJ ,~4 g

<u

.+5

fH

C-S O f-(

CO 4) ^ CO

i a

K 1 -P O -fj 4) a-t-> 6HCiHfHrHr-(tt)rH S V-t CX,IH <(-< f-i H

*d 4J to p,

a) r-t m

<
p^
1"-^

O O
M tj

CO 03 PH

p a pq

3 3-^
5S
c*

i O o ^ ""^ 4J ^5 O -P nJ 1 03 <1J rH -(-> <D CD rH ,-H rH 0)

E H J> ^ t-5 ) ^ ^ ~^ PH PM P-,

0) CO

PH >5

e , CA 3
C CO

tn ^
r*3

O fH

PH

>. co 3

3 E

e ^ C ci >,

^i

EH 0 C "**s^^
0 0 C3 W O -l-> -IJ rl r-4 <M 0- C PQ O H CO ^ ^ CO 3 fn EH i-q rt O i-H K P-, O S
^^

O EH O C"^ O O CO C/f\

co ^

C>
y CT <

o -*->
r-H
CO >

rH H

vt a)

03 CO

+> rt

OEM
(15

SSOEHEHEHEHEH^ Swoooooi-q
<

D- C
^
1

o > ^>.

<OPn^PHeHP4

<i 1-3 P-i

oto

0 0 C 4) O O ^^

0*8S
KWEH

o rt CJ CJ l-^ sc n PH ~ t-^

CO 3 ^H ^

VI-F-29

vo T- c
JH<

p-vo in
tO tO

vo c-~ T- co p- O cn
vo
CM
.-^VO CM

ii-r O CM O

P- CO 00

tOO

CM

J
T

in

in to
CM

VO VO

oo

cn-^i- tovo
CM IO 00

to to o
CM

to cn

to
00

>H
O

tO CO S <! O

<cj- CM

CM T- CM

cnvo o

* p- co m r o o *- T- cnm* o
in CM cn
VO T-

T- tor mo CM tocn tocn

T"* CM

p-oo mo pCM co mp~ cn to ^j- oo cn

T- T- CM

&

o
in
CM

to cn

00 vo C-

TABLE YI-F-1 (CCNT'D) 6/21 /77f YKAR 1999 TRANSPORTATION TRAFFIC MODEL (Preliminary Estimates)

T- T- O

in

T-

tO T~ CO p-~ *-" ^ VO CM ~ 00 T-

CM r cn cn c o p-

^"

CM O CTlCM O
T-VOf T- T

i- in p- <* TT-VO 00 T-

VO

cn

c-

^~

<*

T- in CM (Tv CM to p^^ 5 O^ C*~ C? ^Q LT\ t^~\ ^"

T-

CO O CM in T- *- vo
CM

p-CM

^itO

ini-co cn *-

. CM T-

'i- 1- in*- in
T- p- tO CM T-

in
CM

CM tO CD

vo CO

>-t

CO CO S
<! 0

c*- T- 00 ^- K>-r~

O r^-t*-

to c\j cn CM in T- pCM to to vo p~ cn to co "^"

CM' CO

coc^T^ 0
VO

T-

cnincM vo Tm o vo CM Tto 03 CM Tv-vO

vo
C-w

r cn

g*
O

in CM to

g T-

pCO CM

VO

C LA * pCO T CM
M

o cn vo T- cv o co

rCJ

to CM O VO
'Si-

T- VO CM LA,CM CM r- T~ O CM

CO

T- CM -^ to

tCM

in

c
*sh

cn

CJ

in er in

S *
f-i

>-.
EH to O O eq Tair
M* <D PH

to -p
>-. tn -H C -^ >, c 2
fH EH \ S

f-l

EH to
0

^^ EH

>,

-P H In H C

n -P

C3

PH O

EH

o o
M EH

CO

CO PH CO
1"^ -^^

0 CO EH w flj PH M
p-^ CrJ
p | L

EH

<y co r-i

r; ci -p
r-J c; >-i C^ EJ >

-Mr-H->

<lT C
. N C-'
H

EH
^ O"
rt

to " ' cT G
O -P
CO r-H
^*H

H^

W CO

+
H *! -P 0 0
c& rH

E >> >>
M

t> fn
O >i
(Tj "-^

5= O

o-

a LO rH
Q* r-l

CO

to w to p t ^j ^j
VH VH

o cd O f-H H^ EH rt Ct t*
P EH HH*

t>- O EH (^ EH t'O O O -t C_J (H

0 -P

a>

r-l CO

-P QJ P-4J ( 1 rH C^ rH P,V( <M fn ^M

to to QJ ci E o o > O -P CJ > O ^ a> rH 5 tj) i ~^ -p a> o. j_^ j_j i^** r- r-H O VH t, P tC rt

1

-p H E

> r^ -P * H"3
EH O 0 O
EH Ci O PH CT

O n -p w i_i o co o

to o
O

-p

EH

o
co
PH
*-n

^^

<

O r-l
J ^ 1

H M -P flj 03 A 0) O O O CO

CO O O (-^ P^ EH O K CO Cd

!> *^r J> <^ o ^ E^ E~^ &~* -* *5 ^t cO O 0 0 0 i-3

>

-P -P (H 4-> rH -P rH fj .H H H *H -P W <M O > > -P >

EH
[ "]

^3

O O ~*c^

EH

o o c^ r*^

EC EH

R ""

h-3

| ~tr-^ (H
|'*

^ p"

I5
"-{

S E-i > EH > i-3 EH -i O tJ 0 3 J o

<^

-p n o o o
rH

C^f

r i ErH

c2 PHPH o co S
EH

EH

PH

H O O f"i, CO

VI-F-30

moo en CJ^J-t-PCJCCJ

Ol- CTvvO CO CJ

o co CM o CD

cj in<
8

O CJ ONO I

en

o *<* to
00-^

- CM o crvOTOOio

Vl

JM CO
CO

mco cr

JEJ
S5

o <
T^CJ-*

VO

co

ir*mcj co o cC\JCT
iCJ K>

O CJ CJ O O

O O (T\VO O
00*-

oo o

i invovo
65
CM<- 00 OOO OS

CJ tT CO CJ CJ O CJ 00 C-T-

KMTVinCJ O

CM -lf\

O too O
O CJ **

o oo

O OO

O O

p
EH

&ra
S

mo ir\ CM o cj O O 00

CM to CM xtcrv ^- vo

crOMr\r-cj o CO

T-

CJ CJ CJ CJ

CJ O

1JO ^-

T-

Oi-

O CM

O - to

O CO <-O CJ O T- "* O OO

*
inO O CM o ir\ O O CTi
TCO '

<J-O T- CTi CJ O 00

CO CJ CJ if\

o toco cj o
i- CJ O fK\

O CTiCO O CO C-

o o *-

O T- Co O OO

O '*[-

S5 S

O " CM

*!
Bl g

S M
S

tno LT\ CJ C CM oo^ . . .

p- (/> \^ ^J- ^~

(Ti O CO LT> CJ O ^~ t AT- CO CM O

r-CJCMCJO

cr\ m~ CM J- *~

o ^*o oo 0*0 o

OCOt-LO'd-

O CTsr-^ O O T-

0 O C

co -p
O W -P -H H C

CO

m
EH EH to to 00
tOfO

rt

0)

to O OT-

e*o

EH

O to EH fn >> i^ CO

o w
o
EH'

EH EH

00
E; * ^
"^^^

N CU -P -H p

co C o
O

oo o

a w a> a
%H aj

-m fi ro O (6

CO

+> M p,
EH CSrH
3 <H

o
w
rH

W p.

CO

f-> (-1

CU N -P sH 0} (0 O O -P

I -P O P

p <l)
I-H l

0) r-l
O. O)

o ctJ

cu 0 0)

EH

Pi

>> 03 ^C EH o o
O

o >> CO e ^ 3^ PM
t} p | Q

r^l*^ C CO >>
f*

r-t rH

to to p -p

c/>o
<

o o to

O -P

PM CO CO B) (X, TOCO

< Q) o, -M pq
co 3 O rt cr pq (a
O I-H OB3

CO ^~

rnCl

pq cu -H tn > co 3 fn ^
rf

P< C

p rt

O BiH
OP< O

O C O 0)

o o

<d co -P

fl,

O fl5 CT* CO ^ ~

CJ CO

S3 co EH

VI-F-31

CM <H 0

>< . *

r-T- pp- to * ^~ *

f-e vo CM p~o i\O*~ Tf-'~ VO CM CM

vo to in CM o
O CM CM T-

in

oo
CM

vO p-

co

i>- m T- -J-CM 2 c CM^~ CM cn ^~ p^CM tOCD

CM

in
T

CM
^

to cn to
CO

r-

UCM
PVVO

crJ^'Sfc

CO CO "S.

>H

-Kl-T- CM 10 CM

envo to

p
r 1 H

en

T- p- in en o o in*- CM vo To o * T* CM vO ?7'~

O VO P vo O
VO tO<M

p-cM cnco pCM cnvo co CM

to ^* CO CD
1-T-

CM
T-

10

tO

in cn "*

CM

en

in .

vO VO 00 * W
8TS e

en p CM in p- o p
CD T-

CM ^ O CM O CO VO IO
^ ^^

CM in in CM o ^* m co in to
T- vo CO *-

CM CO

cn

0 to
*i-

p-

Q 0

s:
o
x"^

tt p^l ^~X

P / EH

5 0

PH CO ^^ GJ -P EH rt

^ &

incnto CM P-O CO into in

"

^ VD to CM

tO T- ^J- CM CM to VO f*- ^~ VD CO T~ *~ t"

cn

cn o in m o CM ^- to CM
to to
O v CO

O CM

in

p o CM cnin ^j** CM co ^ to co T p~ tO CVJ to in ^ CM tOCO

CM

in to
vo CO

CM

tO

in

S3 H
0 -P

v-x

l-HrM

P*
I

EH >>
C^ tn

<

>H to co s

<: o
o o s

o o en incM co cn toT

O in r- *- in T- CM
C--CO C^i-

cnco - co ^~ in o p- fo t toco CM T^ vo

VD
CM

H > &q HH
pq

O ri Pj C
*; E <-H
<3rH

en p.
in ^d~ ^~ CM m O

to 00

CM

cn -

cn
CM

VD

r-

cn

g
O
CM 3
>H

1- T- T-

UD

CO ^j-

T- T- vD -*d- CM O O r VO to Is CM CM T CM CM . CM

p- oj in in o
r~ [OCNj " to to

m CM rj- T in
CM CM p- CM CM i- CM -^ tO CM

in
CM

T_

L^

cn

p-

e^'

cr

^_

EH
_4 r*^
* ^ N

H
>1 ^ EH

CO
03 -P fH -P H >. rH H C

PH
rH

CO

>-,
^^

n -p
-P H

CO

0 S3 O EH
^^

O
K

EH
P_j ,_(

00 C5
O W C-H 0

to

>, C 3
* "P

O ^H EH ^^. ^ ^^ >O ^
^>. C ' ' ~r

EH ^ HG t'>5 C 3 O fn-^*'^- 0
T
>}

EH "^^ ^>^^

>, fn >>

^4

fa

^^x

>,

CO
P-*

**^>.- ^

*+*

ri
QJ +

EH
^=~*
C1

. CO rtl +'
CO rH
+->

4) C
t-3
H

CJ
C

EH

- 0

0 C

CO ^ ^^ E O " E t O =1*
S O M EH

E *>

CO

EH 1
^^

to
V<^

o o o -p at co C JH Q) o o
O CO

05 C >- N CO *\~*-^ (JH co w n co p, -P -P

53 CO rH rH S rH

a f-> !-(

TJ rf <H -p o n c rH e: E ? o o :^
> > 0 -P 03^ O EH P< 4) r ( M

S CO -P M 4) C" M r-> -P HE

cc a: VH ci ci fi o
>
1-^ '-Or^l -P

FH (_' O

O P

<L> P. -P
C) rH

> 0 -P CJ O -i 4) rH
4! D<

no o

<

-p --P -p 03 -P C3 CO o CO O O O O O O

<$" *

cj

f-H O

PA < VH t< VH

r< r-f H

t3 ^ '"' ^ P*
*~ O rH

EH rt > >
CO O O >-3 00

rp

O rH C^ t> t*

EH -P -P rH -P d rH -P rH rf .-( O <H H H -P *H PH M 0

S EH
EH O EH
. ^

o o
0
r(

C]

t7* I> ^*

<^ O ~P E~* EH EH EH t-^1 EH C=: O O O O O i - H OOEnOOOOS EH &<

<: o -P J M ^
EH H 0 ~ iJ r3

C,o >

> -P >

*r^ EH r*

EH O h1

o (-H EH ^z cr, r^
EH Ci

<i O rp O 3 H-3 2 PHrH 0 CO K

EH

o o a,
CO

VNF-32

REPRODUCLB[LJTY OF THfc ORIGINAL PAGE IS POOR

CM *H O

inoo CM to^)-cr> Q CM T T-T-VQ

to 03 CM CTv CM O CT\ Q - (TWO CM

in in CM

c>-f-vo CM o

O (O- O

00 CM

cr>

O CM ir>o O cr>o T-

0> TbOCM

in CO O to *-[-OO CM
i-cMir\

VD

O\

tOCTvO CD CM

VO OMnCM O CTCM CTI

O to too (
o toco

O^O'

*-

CM

10

O c--co
OO-r-

000

' in IOT- in O CO Th E -<

mO\CM CM O CM

00

^
o
co crn- co O 00 CM
^i-totodCTi *t VO T-

to t- in in

O I0r- O O CM ^J

to
000

oo o

ION TRAFFIC MO! atimates)

ino in

MAX

toOir\ O O CTi
T- tOViJ

-i-inc~-CMO -l-^-CM CM C CM

o r -"3-f- *O T- O CMT-

O - to

O CO vD CM O T- -*

o oo

X-N

P /

^ T

EH

ISY

o
Vs

B
T" 1 P* 1

moo

EH ^S
CJ CSS Pt 0

EH >._Sa!

<0

o o t

to O to

-^
T-

CTi CM CM V>

cno -^- oCM O CO

VOtOT-CMO CM CM T-

cT~

to

O O O T-VO o cr\co T-

82J^

IO

OO'-

o oo

^-00 0

H 0ra" t> PH C ^

c~-co

CO-H

rH PQ 3

as
<C -H

8 CM

EH Pi i- PH >-^

2rH

inO in

CTiO o m CMO-i-

B M S

toO[

o o in r- mvo
***

o
r-

'd-t-t^CM
r

CTvCMfOCMC O T- CM CM TT-

O CTv CO in ^iOMD 35
O OO

O O *OTO T- r-

ooc

-p

03

CO

w
03 PL, CU EH > O

03
4^ .

Pi Pi
EH EH (O to

Pi Pi
EH EH to to 00 EH OS O P-, PH^~. C

o
EH

I
co P. Pi - tsl
Pi O >>

00

to

O HJ

& o
CO CU
r) CO

n) ccl B

CO CO . = P CO P. CO

o >>
rH W
P.-P

W o.
O H P ^

EH^ CO

. N O)

CU

t-i-4

n5"^

EH

-p o o
03 fl (- O O O CO

Ba -p S

PM CO co n P4 co CO
co o PH O tz; co EH

O 0. M

I -p o ^

CJ-P03

CO C1 CD ,0 U

PH S w
CIO

o PI 3
o

1=1

Pi Pi C co >,>,
o *+

O rH Pl<H

O P'

s;
w

rH P. 0) <H

ro EH O C ^-~^

O O CO CO

C3 E-i O . .

Pi >

o orH -P r-
CO

' O CO

Pi

CO

" rH *n' <H - P.C

CU H CO > > CO 3 rl EHrH Cj CT1 0) O 1-3

PQ CO -H 03 >
rH

rH Vl P. C

>>

rH PH

0
0

P-C o a ta pq w PH a

O rf cr o i-3

CO 3 Pi 1-3

VI-F-33

CM r--co
tOVO r-

CM CM

t<-\

CM <H

VO

i CMO 10 CM t- vo CO O CO CM

O>VO VO O O VO CM VO VO CO CM tO CO

pCM CM
T-

CO

en to

to

CO

C - CM
CM

o r-in
CM

CO T- inCOr-

28 w

en r T- * [-. o CM O en ^r T

in en

VO

en

CM *~

cno vo vo o cn^ in too to to

en co O in to-^j-cno
T- T- tO

to
VO

en *

CM m

inp-cn inT- o
CD

r-r-in CM p-o co
CD T- T- Cn-r-

CM tO T- CM O

to

vo

rj-

invo *
CM
-

CM p- CM T- t-'

T- in cnvo *} t-vo co -

O O

i-

O to

o
<3 <u
P=H co

ininvo in co O
vo

in p-vo vo CM to vo vo T- o o t- T- co en in
CM

to in in,- co

CM T- CM

i pvo *~ *} in in CM o co i- <TI CM in pCM toco t- vo

^CM

CO

2-p
o
O O -P M 01 EHW
O f~\ CM

r co -^- cr1 vo T- vo
ITvKS T- C~-

VO CM T- T-

<

o cs
PH

.CO

-*i-

CO

0 CO

"*
CO

en
T-

m en to T .vo CM to vo en
CM

o T- cno TVO T- f in t"N

ro CO CM CM
1- VO

ex en

PH C 'd & S

EH 01
CM

in in in p-in o tn-<- Tvo

C\i CM VO VO CM O C-J CM rCM CM CM

en

CM to r in c CM in <. to to en cv

in K^ vo m t~W CMr~ " L ' CM to CM

cx
<M CT LT\

02

EH

o o
rH
t>> fe5

CO

co
fH

^
S

M
EH

C.Q

ni P.
0)

o
". -P CO n o co o O O EH O O O
O W -P CO

O PH

co

>

oo o

EH O O O nJ

<
O

EH -P

-P r-l -P
r-l

C: r-H -P

O r-H

<M r-t *M

< O -P EH EH E-> EH .
EHW O O O O O r - 3

CT >

> -p >

-3d o

-P O

ti o oo o to

+> a CD rt

O O EH O O O " EH

O 1-3 O 3 i-3 g PH PH O CO K

o
EH

I
H -I O

o.
CO

VI-F-34

CM <H

^^

in co eg in CM CM
T^T-*CO*
T- CM

c c*- c CM CM o to
"tCMtOQ
(0
-

T-

VO CO CO
CM

^- m CM to o
tO

CM VD T .

m. to o O O
.

t-

T-

- O CM

o c ir\o> o tomto en *-* i

fT->^ O SJCM
Gj vo PH
QtT^^

Oc-

*H

co

CO

^ ^0 O 5

in o CM

in CO "* *&" ^~ ^~

IA ^* *^- T CM O VO tOT CM^J-

CO ^" O CM O r~-'*CT

CM

in

O CT* ^" O VO O^"CM

...

o vo er\to o o vo CM
VDr^CM

r- CM CM

fS^

n s

in co to
i-^VO CM *-e-

^^-K^

VO t CO t^ CM O to CM i it T-

vOtO-^CMO CTvCMtO CM CM CM

mrj-^ T- rf C~-tOVO ... O OO

O C to T. .

too T-

o
S3
0
"2"

o
>j
5* "" x~^ ft, CO

inO in *O co mo in .

co co CM T CM o r
O in ^^ CM C T l . C M CM

CM

CT*

JO

in VD co t O O

oc mcvo
T~

CT^ T Tj-

O c*** m. t*^* ^*

o^^*-^oo

in VD C3>VD CM CMVO

'-'o'o*

"~^?

&

EH OJ

O " SH ^-^ O -P ^;
M CO ^

mo O
^- O ^~

C^-OtOCT>CMOCM

T EH ^> 55 < "^o (*(

I-H

ino in
T-*CD O
C~- OJ

CM
CM

to to CO CO
rj-

f~~

in

f^ fO VD

r-- ^- -rf- CM O

CM

-^-

O to VD -*2- CM
VD T- OJ

O'^-C^O'd-

...

O CM -J'
T-' O C*

o o <- *

O 05 S

>

w &e

&"t

PH C ^ CO -H

*~
in O in
-*O CM

EH cu
rt
QVJ.

f-votd-cOCMOvo
VOT-intO

inCO'tf-c.'o
OT-CO
1-

O 10 c>j CO CM
OO>Oi--r-

^^ g

mo in

co ^~*

. .

C T- CV '~

t-

CM

V> T- T-

0 CM

i-in cri *d- VD

c oc

. . .

O
^ H
CtJ

p<
Ct!
0>

+ o-

EH E4O to o Ot^^ * .co

>>f-< * a ^-~>)C3 E-t^^ J to E CUC t'j co

co o -p -P -^

O W Hi
f->

-p ^ ^HCJ >> C 3 -^3

S

a CO -P

\\ E-(EH to to oo
T- T-

p p >, >>

f, J^

E H > H O ' ^ - P

>>>K *^

cy co

.-P HB

O > > * * EH "^

co

- N O )o f n S E

+ i> C

EH OZ

E >

EH E-t to to 00 *~ T" EH c^ E3 ** O ^ 3S
pt
r*i CO 3 ^H

-^\

fi<O.^4'COCO(U>H CO'H^^O O^-,

WP< -PH0 O H f H C O C Q C U

Pn>W3fHfH fi<-v^CJW>,>>

fi m

o ct)

&H M"*^* O -P ccj ^^. lj-PCOrx. fl)rHCO ai-Po-Pa>p.-p

^-^

^ ^J ^""5 O O p -P^ ~ O H-> ctt ^ i c o <OrH

*, * EH o j^ ^^.~*** jr> EH c5 E"^. C/>0 O O CO CO c/o o o co O o-P-p O O -P

P ( ^* C* ^"3 ^>

o o
-P OJ CO (j

zt

CO <V PH CO CO CO PM
0 6 r-I

eHCrHf.<f-lrH<l>rH CO <H P.V4 <^| (H <H H

M C -P -P Q> P. W - H -< cdrHr-HrHCU CO H<M<M f~^ ci (f_j <|^ (|_j 1 1 ^^ ^, o f^

M T- B

.-)

CO

W >fc>>t> S3Oe-fEHEH6HEHt^ tesWOOOOOi-^

^ OPn PH ^ P^ PH S3

cq feOta-t^^t* gfq^t^i-Pt-^

0 0 O CO

c <u

CO -P O P-i O feico EH

s
^J

< ^ p* PL, PH pi,

ppcyHco>-t W3(HEH|J? OtScrcuOt-^

*
f^\

o .
C3

CJ pq PC P-. O S3

co 3 f-t J O rt CT eo vJ

<; -a c pq o> H co >

r-J <M

1^

IP^

VI-F-35

epir^fC\l Sr!

^5

CM
V

CM CM r-

in in to CM in o in
^ CM O O CM

in

CO

rd) ^i tijj $ vo
r*i

CM

CM CM

CO to

t-vo 10 oo

to

to

CO cno m S vo to en in o> to
VO K\ ^~

CM CM CM VO tO

O CO O CO m
T- to in to v-

to
00

^r* tO r*~ T" IO

c-

CO

in CO

^H co co S
o; ^^ _ "

f- CM 10 CM tO CM

00 CM tO tOCM C-CM -^ CM

O inino mo -tfin
-*j-

in T-

OMn^- en o to CM CM in t
CM CM CM *

^r O O T- T~

<* en tovo CM in CM co c
CM CM *

CM CO

in p-

to to

in

3 &

^
CM in to -^- in o CM

n
s

CM C^

,-into IOCMVD to i-

* .
^t*

t~- CM CO ^

O criT-

CM

toinvo

to CM [- tOO

^^
V~ T*- T~

CM

^
CO *ct~

CM fCM TT_
T-

^~ CM O CM t O

to

T-

C^

o s

tntOfg
23

0
L|^_^

co r-m in co ^i
*h t-

tovo tnvo cno to

T- en c ^ to to in en in in ,-

CM tO CTi O O CO P-T- -J O O
t- CM CTv CTv CM

* invo to en CM co vo r-'CM O t O O T- to in en
CM

CM

en o

cp CM
in
CT>

^^

O fri CO , -rf 0> EH 2-P

EH rt
^

Ci

o fc "4

C^

TI ^ i_L
S S3 3
CO

EH fcq ^^ . S EJ* O cS
PH C CO -H & S < -H
rX 1 1

0 -P JM M OJ CO

co S ^^ v,^ f tq
O

O CM xjT- CO CO

in ^- CM

CM CM in C

to en co m en CM *-

0 CM ^~

CM in to . to,CM O to to
T

VO

o c en T cr in *

CO CO VO

in in T- co O

en *^" in co *~ co vo r CM vo
- T- (Ti

en CO vo
^r* *

O O

c-

cn

^
^~*

EH 0) Qj
CMC,

<

in CM VD CM to in in CM T-

en (o m en to o vo in in cncM -<df- CM . ^-

CTi to CTi f- O

O CM

en vo

<* in -i-

to

in CM LTN in \^
CM

co ^*" en T en K*\ co cx in u~\

T -^ vo vO
t^^

cr
CT ^T"

fo
c*-

*~

to

h^

^O

CM

pO

S
PH
0
,"r7

EH
CO

to
*^x^

to
>}
-^ fH

m
W -P
-P H

to
OO
f .

EH > to -H c to \ >, c O to EH\ 3

EH to
*

>> ^^

to

to H C >, c 3
r*>^ ^^O * -P

CO -P -P H

co

o
IH I^*> 1 h ^>
*** S

u
0 M EH
CO

Ct ^ ^**s ^

H i~\

T-

o5 P <D
+ O -

^^O< EH u <CO -P

O W

t] O)

P* cue

&H "^-^^ P--)*** ^ C"^ "^ *"^. r~t

C-l

EH W C$- W l-l -P H F C" CO iH 4> rH C K tj VH co co o a to to ra rt n -H w w 0! rH ^0 CJ t-, K e o o K 6 >* >> Crf fl

^^^^.

EH . W 0 C S 10 -P - M 0

o -" r: <> < -' -=;

<' .*

PH C.Q
kj^

W O O

EH

to

^ co w w en f^ -P -P
g S rH

:-

o -r rj - ^
OJ
r-t

>

O E 1 f*

01

f^ t^O CO rH rH O to 0

cj n)

(^ 4J (Ji Oi I f < , < ,H a- r <

tr--3 I--1

tO i-l

0 4J rr) 0) i-H
Cl> f~. rH O

O 4-> 10 M 0 CO O EH O 0 0

S
CO [p^
<; ' &

^
o o
H
C_4

<

* 1 C'V 3 >7r:t

P
r-'

n.vt <r-i f< <H

+^

O O
f* *f

EH rt > > 4--> H i-P

CO 0 O I-H

O rH H^ (ti > t- > > > < O -IJ EH !H E^ EH r-^

rc a
(

O -H

VH VH rH
^
rJ H5 r-5

f-l 4* 4J rH + '- r-H 4J rH rj [-^ O <>H r-i .H > IH

4-3 O'J

"^
O

^ ^-. ^.
->J

C^ >

<n

<

S2; 6 < > EH J3 HH

> 4-> >

i-q

-H rt

co a

PH EHO PS CO
W

E-. =: 0 -5 3 -3

EH
fc

*""

o M EH re re
EH
CS

c2 a, PH o co K EH

< O rH O 3 r^

EH O

EH

H O O

0 0 O CO

o<
CO

VI-F-36

vO-*f tO CMO>

VO VO CM r- CM O C O>tACO K^ T-

VO "* CM ** O

COT--1vOf-CO

O to r~-TOO C\J

O T-VO

O CD O CM

CM

CM*-O

<H O

vD ^r-

ooocri O O<J3
CM CM CT>

O CO CO IACM O CO CQ-r- O\lf\

*-

T- co

O irvvo O ir>
O VO VO

OT

tf\

CM

O <*- ITT
O T-

ON CO

VO T-

O 00

CO O t VO - Lf> CM ON

vo toiO to

T- i- CM CM O

O VO O
O OO

O to

O C CTC

O O T-

E
X

s o cCM tOCM

OOO O CO

t^co r~rco

g'~> / ^ a; co g CtJ
N^X

VOlT\CMi-vO IACT to CM CM ~

VOCTIF-tOO VO CO < ** -^T-

O to tf\ CM CM O tOO rj-CM O CM VD

o IT>CM o 0 do"

tO

g s o
[-!
1 t)

T-CM

p
EH <aj

>^

M m

O00

to
*** O

EH o

t"i SH

o O vo CM co o
C T VO

O CO

co *
CTi

to o j-criCMOvo vo *"

VOVOCOCMC

O CTiCO T- to
O r- to

CM

to

o r~ "^t* o CM ir\ d 0*0*

CM

(3

w
EH

P-t C CO H

to PH %
CM

i ^

o -' o

55 M S

O 00 O o
CM

COOCMOCO
CO CM

o orm CM ^cn

o
CM

to in
. to

VO * ITi Cv, O
TjCM

o CM <-

O CO VO O C-

CM

o to r T
O T- ^~

?5C^"
* o00

s o
H ri ft
V
EH fO O CO H .CO fe5 f-i

CO CO +> HJ -H > *H H C

O H

o
EH

\
NO)

O (O . OO

EH EH to to 00

<u c

fl O H s! 4 O O

U n)
CO 0)

ni a

tf I
^Sl

O -P d. H) O +> <1)

O H tl CO 01 O
CO

^ o. +>
I

CO

i; c

-I C

o yz ^ >j o s> -p-^. o p ri

<

M c -P -PCJ G.
d r-t r-H rH

CO

P-. >> w P-.-^. C >. >-, 3 EH O _ , C^JO O O 05 CO

O O -(-> -P

o Pa e
PH >> CO S P<\ CW

O r-l

S3 EH O C 010 O O O O
CO

0)

CO 05 PH

S.
i %^* en c^ t^

P (8 ra o rt v o o oco

gg

raco

pq CJ rH CO >
s- c^ ti

; W O O O O O i-q

p_ i-

O rt cr CD o t-3 O ri cr c K pq W PH o K t a n w f-

> CO 3 5n EH h3

o-c

=; - a. c

rH

c!
>

FQ CU ^ CO CO 3 ^i

VI-F-37

><j
CM <H O
CMf-

T- to CM f- KNVO CT fO CM

* Tf r~ 0 ^" O ^J"
VO

LT\ C\J LfN ^-

C\J U*^ 00 ^~ t*-

t^- CM co r- m to * o co to T- co cr\co in
- ^VO FT-

CM CM CM

to en to
CO

cn
CM

t~

T-

^>

tOCM PnVQ

^H

CO CO S
3j O

T- tO-"*VO *

cr to F-

O ^j- vo to xj- o *
C3

vo r*-co Tvo'^S

O VO KNv- O

in t tointo
CM tOVO

in co in en co

CO

CT* -h CM

CM

00

ren

o
CM

CO

;;-

o\
*"

K^

Lf\

a
t

in

S3
M S

-d VD

CM

vo^^F-^oin cnio*- t m CT\

CM CO

U^T-^O

en

(O vO ^* CM

^?^CM"
CM

tO CM f-tOfCM T- F- r- [~fO tO r-CM

T- T- CM

to CO en to

O to
T~

"4-

*~

s
^"^ P)
f PJ

0 M PH ^"^ C^ 03
<* QJ /*J 11

3
S

O ** Cn CO vO O

r~^vo

CO CO CTi CO ^ VD CM fO CM VD CO CM CM VO

VO CM CTO O

CM CM

-i-

in CM F"~ in*" o
C~

CTv *~

in CM vo O to
O

VO CO

in t CO O en en * CO to TJCM -3- f- in co T- ^vo vo

en to
^J-

in to
VO CO
^~

to

CM

S3 O

it PH HJ
^^

EH eq < EH >j O rt
^"H C

S5 -H O -P M CO

EH rt 6

>-*

O tO OA

IT- to T O T" CM GO

CO

CO ^ f~

<s o
O C~)

^
^O ^~

FH

S3

VD
T-

co

en t^- <* in -rCM vo rvo T-

vo en

CO CO CM tOO CM C-O CM
*- CM

en CD o CO CM O
^VD C^S i- C-J CM
T-

cr

cvo
CM CTv

CO T

oo

tO

in

C5

w a s
aj

EH <l)

O en co
3 M

CM tO CM O * O

EH

FH to Pn O eg

o,

O OO F- to CM . 1

T- CM vo in O to in

r-

in co

^~ ^i-

to

en r~ CM cnc en vo c^
VO VO

O L" O L-^ CM
C\! LO CO VO

in < in d- c~~

fin in

LTv

en
CM

in

CT>

Si

(H i>j ^^ PH t~\ CD O
C^ i
CJ3

fn
>3

CO
10 -P

r* >,
EH f^ EH
*^.

n n-p
M H C ^*5 C 3
>

P-*

"~-^

f-l

-P H

o
CJ

^-*

CO 0

EH

-P H

to

EH

>j fn -H C 3
^=r|

>> c 3

rt

FH
H

O fn EH\
r- ^^

o *j J^ 3 tn "^^^ T
- co
^^^ ^

P fn >> FH >,
i-S

FH >>
^
-^

q O
. ^

CO
P^

cd

rt + fl oH-a*

O* 0)

O W E-i M rt fn M
C^ tj C
J-*^ f-*}

^^^ O " ~^ * "P EH - 01 To C p" t") -f3 N CJ

C" CO r-(

CO ^*t **^* XI^

0
^^ J- -^ * ^-^

M EH

CO
fcyj

r-" ft "H -p co w o fn

-P -H

*^^**^

C=H ro

co P-, -P +J
a
'.7 rH rH

CO to

> O EH p, d) iI to EH t3O O -P (U P--P O fnO Mi ' rH O i1

O r-l
hH1

c^ e ^ soo -PonJ \ >,

O CO r- -P -H S K) rt <M C^ CO (U

E: n -p - M c
O -n
Ur^

o C

^-P

E^ Ci

to
^ i
4^

d E
>
(-P

O w -P n M o n o o o > 1 o -P rt EH 0 O O
4J H

K -P --P

co o
O
rf

-P

o
PH
CO
^^ f^

=:
rt

-P

O O,

EH -P

-P i-H -P
j-j

r-l -P (-1

&H

(H 0 0

~ ^
<

0 r-H

pi *H

EH r t
+J
E~^ h-P

(^ ^ J> > J> J>

P rt

H t-t

(D C

CO 0 O 1-3 P-. EH O K CO

< O *P EH EH EH EH *5 EH ^-> O O O O C r-H^

rt > O -P HH ^ K5

oos-ioooon:
EH
&H

E-1 ^J

O h^ r4

r^

O r-H EH ^" ^

(3 Q)

e-i

PH CO C < ^^ Cd EH

C 0 > > -P tg_l EH > EH .O ^ ^^ O <-3 O 3 t-H1 PH PH O CO K EH

o o o
,_(

tt_f
^ C 0>

0 CO

0 0

tP

53

f^[

CO

VI-F-38

{
H O

OOOVO 8*<^ O^ CM f-

- CM

^J- vo CO CO CM O C ^~ tA CO ^^ ^~" CO -

T - I A

ir>t-

'-lAQ'^-O **t" T~ VO t *~ 00

1AK\ O 8 co co O OC3CM

O 00 w CM

OT-VO
t

c-

I>s
t)OCM PHVO

'/3
c

o co o
CM CMr^

^- cr> T- vo CM o co
*"

^cn^cMO

O VDVO

O CM CM CM O ^t" vo ^
O T- tA

3& j t-

o o ^~

OVOC

COOcDK^CMOtJO^

^-T-lTvCMO
O RS KN

O VO CM O tA

S
O

fe

O CO K> CMVO c

o o t ^o oo c~C)T^^

o oo

*^>* if^ * Q (=< ro

OOO 8 CD **^ O O < . . . S CM KMA

v- CM

IT\ 00 CO CO CM T- vo T C^~ ^5 O^ f^ CTi CM t O C M T-

CT^O 1 " hf\O CD O^ \Q IA <*'j-T-

O IA^- CM CM O tA^- -^- CM

O CMVO

^"^ 8 vo tT ^ ^ K>
OOO

M m

O c 2_ S oCOc \ -^J[i o j ' O . . . -j!5 CM CO CM

5

OOO

CMOr-OCMOfT-^d-lACM TO i t A V O

CTivO -<J- CM O VO-^CM ^ - v o f ^

O - CM CM (A O CO VO CM TO T- IA

C~-L-S CM CM '_-\

'COO

fvj

CO-H ^3 c

DOO | *|O D. V.O. S O M

E

OOO

CTir-CM'-CvJOCO OCM^iA T CM fo,

m-^COC-JC CMCMrJTj-CM CM

C G> C*- ^ fO Ks C~- T

Op-

T-

CM
C2

CM LA N> * CTi

C*0 C

m +>

03

P M
K> K\
EH

--> -^

OJ -t->

f^. >

>>>>
OO ^- TEH S, ES O P 3 S

MM

H
0)

p
O V-

>5 3
>>
O* fl) C NO -rH 0

-H C

EH EH

EH M . . PQ OJ

O O v T-

tA K>

EH EH

EH"

no)^ to H >> ? O O >> f-t' o + J^^ +

-P 03 p, 0) I +* O -P 0)

g. 33 -<
4* OJ 03 C

o
CO 0)

03

o o

co
ClH

CH S *H

OrH M H

(=1

<H (d

03 I co

giti'
Js; o t>i

S fn to to d) So o " o rt < I n 0) 0) 3 C-P

01

P. .

OJ

0:1

. O P p B

C/K> O O 03 W O O * ' W T- c .-I r-t CO f-< <H H ^-PC^ FQQj'i-fCQt*^

t> EH O C"^-^

P-i\c:m>,>,

Pn^^ctw>,
C'> \ O O P3 O O -f > M-y rH l/J .-H <H <P.C PQCJ-^l03t>

r=> EH o C r

O (O

a <*> o o

CO +> O PH O S5C0 6H

<-t to

P-i

pjpqp^jp^fjp^ O

OrtcroOi-P

W3MEH|-^

Oc5cr<ut-5 C=3C3Ct3pHlS
i-3

OQ3f-(r-^

VI-F-39

Ix.
CM <H O

^^5 f^\ ^^ O"N t^^ ^3 C*" C"**

cn
CJ

in ^ CD VD TJ- o co VD cn -^ in^*cn *cn tCM

T- VD O CM .CM r~

eo^- r-

co o vo ^*" m (o^o in in o * CO cn cn C"~

T- -<*-vo r-

9 CO CM CM *-

*~

vD <* CM

cn in

cn

co

to

C->H O 10 CM
^J. ^. fj^ T- ^4. Q VD

CMC-

<UifS . \Q

bjCAJ crJ**^

co ^

VD toin

T- KN CM CO tO

< O

o* rH

cn *~
r-tocn

"* cn
T""

Cn

in CM in

CTi

CM

t*"*\ CO "^" T~
VO T^

VD -^-T- CM CM

in cn co to ^jC~- CTiCO CM to vD

^tf^

O^

^D

cn cn

^~ CM

S
in co t^ ^i~ O c CM en fO CM in CM ^^ T "

in

!z;
M

PN

CM

a
Q O

rcn

O -<t CM T- Tt- O VD CM to . VO <^\

to m ^ cn to CM T- cn CM cn

CM CM

0
T~ ^

tO to * CM *- *- CM

o ^-

O^

^J

S
0
x-x

P) /
EH

PH m ^ Q)
CC "P

W S

**!--

O in in
O Y-VO in

C\J O ^ ^ ^~ **Q ^~ CM ^tn CO C\J CM CO G^ CNJ 'CO O^

CM co r-T- o
CM in o in VD CM in CM r-

CO ^ -cr to t~-

cn VD to cn o CM ^ co in CM

CO

o o

in
N VD

r^I^^
^"
C^~

^~

tO CM

CM

to

CO

o a
O -P
^
1-H CO

&5 O

EH rt B

^H
CO

o cn to
CM VD to VO
*** CO

[O\

M >

PH 1

EH >, d !-<

<0
O

co s

*- o VD r^^- CM ro^ vo r* o^\

Q T~ \D T

\Q T- tO tO O

cncncM CM

cn ^

cn

O T-

to in cn*- CM
CO
T

T VD c in in
TCM CM ^_

CM Cx VD r- CM

C TT r-- ex to

in

p ^

in
T

0 rt PH C

in

~"

OJ ^

cn

0
S;
M

"~
o T- M3 to CM
to cn

O CM O

w a s
PQ < EH

1-3 <"-<

fX r-f EH O Vl ^" P^ O ^"^

CM

^- r- CM m -3- o c in CM * in - 1 ^ cn t*^ in ^j*

r en

co T

COt-' VO t~-

c ^- r~ c^ c
cn cn
*^"

- CO LT\ ^ t~-

in ^- m in *o. m co c^- in in

T-

in cn in

a: w
>H

f-t
S

p^
r-l >-. S-4

EH

^">

X*W

EH
fH

00
W T-

&H >. (-< H C to ^ >> C 3 O fn EH'^ 3

^r- >fN

W CO -P -P H

f-t >>

n n -P
>> C 3
-P H In H C

^ 0

CO

r^

^. EH

r~i pj f i

r.

t
-^

JT

H
(tf ft

C5

JC

"

O rH^ 3
"^^X.^,"^ *+*

EH -t? >,\
O
=1*

S
3

O to EH W

EH

El ti -p - N O )
C? to fi -p H E
Til f J "H H-" W W CJ fH

ra T-

^^^ O ' **"

(DC

* "P

co ^ "^^ ^

!
o o
P rt
CQ
M W

PM co to to to (< -P -P
g; 00 rH rH

B So o >> K e o o > o -P crj\ > o -P rt fc* O EH O< Q) ri W > O h^ O r-l

EH t^co O -P QJ O- -P
O PO t-3 tOi-^ -P
"^

EH - to 0 C S W P 5 H O O" " rH H- rH G tq c3 <H M co

<l) CX

o *** c * *>

0 M EH

CO PM CO ^0
<^

EH
1 00
^t

O w -p" co M o n o EH O O O
<1 O

co o O

~
+ i

fHr-lr-H OrH
O rH >

E- -P -P rH -P C2 i-H -P rH rt rH

^2

C]

EH rt n o o h^
CO

c2iH!HM

O rH Kl 1C t=> >

O <n JH H -P VH

EH
^^ EH O EH

a o>
0 CO

rt

P^ EH O p^

EH K O O O O o S OOEnOOOOS

<: p -P tJ M ^
O P^ EH tC S
EH
9

PH <M O CT > > -P > S EH != EH .O 1-^

C O r-^ O

o
H O

EH

C PH P-, 0 CO S
EH

3 t-P

0 0

CJ

CO

VI-F-40

O O
CMVO
CM <H O C^ r*^r^
pH

- r-toocM OrCO
T^

CO * O

UA

O 8 VDVO O t CO 00

O O CM

gj

O t- VO

Or-COiO 00 T- CM

CM

co
PH vo

1 $

"* ^o
0

O <1-

CM CM to

0 o to

F* O^ ^^ VO OJ OT- O in
r-

O 00

VO CTiCvJ CM O

tO

"*

inino
CO

Ovo <T>O VO OVO VO

CM
* VO T-

oo<-

O T- tO

cncn

[25

s
s n
o

o VO ^~ CO

J
to

r o O^CM co-- vo CM cr>

i- T- 00 CM O CM tOrT 1 0

O VO tOO

KN

CMVO 00

o -^-co o oo

o T- cr\vo

o o r~ . o ^ t-

s
o
x*-x
-1

J^

Q / j^
^x

fH*^^ * CO <t! <D K-P

^c

J^

Ooo Oo0 0 CM to [--

CM CTv*- O CM

inc--oo o en to
tO CM
^_

t- vo to

'T- ITltOO

O r-ttocM
O tOT- -^J-CM

o \x> ** 10
O tOCTi
OOO
*

in

"- CM
0 O0

EH oJ

8
1 1

t!
p^

*3 O-P >H M CO EHW w g <o -aj 85 EH > Pi H C^ O R)

oo o8

CM CO K^v

^ ^- in CM o <to vo

r- t- C--CM CMOf-

to t^ O

CM O

CM m CM ^ 8 CO VD CM tO

O *- tO

O CO O CM lf\ OOO

c VD

PH C CJ CO-H SE 33 EHO,
inPn O*-'

g g

M S

oo o0o ^~ o in
O
CM in >dCTl

cn^m'r- CMO 00
CM CM ^d- in CM to

to m O in CM m
^CM

O O CTv< O <*--

O
O

CM

T-T-

oo

O
CM

**

&

s
CO EH E*0 o O O
CO"

m co -p

-p tQ

>c 3
CO

co ra -P p 1-1 <* C

+
oo o

co

g PH p. FH -P CO CO a)
- -P -rH

EH'

o a! n) B co cu PH CO co co PH <H aj
coco
O B rH

& M""^ o -P nj^ ; -p co a, o I-H co cc i -P o -p co O.-P

EH C rH fH rH rH CO

CO'H>>>O

O>>

O H M 10 CO 4)

P<

-p

B -P\ I n i
1

f-t >, O

o -P
O)

q -p -p <u P,
3 r* r-\ t-l <H CM H

<= e.
r b. > b. k. u < t^
r~i

) O O O O O H3 ^ f* i r^i r*li i-~^ir^ M^ ' r~i p p Q p' i >T^

p
i ^ o i o t P-I r* i
O

R CD O O OtO

CO -P O PH O
&5CO EH

VI-F-41

vo
CM VI O

CM tOl-

VO

c*^ ^^ cn ^^~ ^j* ^j CM in to CM o to in in .o ** vo in

CM r-

r-r t CM
CVJ CO

cnco 'd-T- in vo to r~O CM c cn

^ CO 0 0 CO CO CM

ro cn
CO

R?
o to in
to *
00 <* CM O <* O CO CO tOCO T- to O C O CM

CMC t0CM PnVO

vo cn c\j T- o
T-CO O'.vo CJ CM VO

VD CM T CnCM O

in o ~ ^ o

0 & O

og ^
S5 M

to cn

vo cn

into in

CM

cn

in

CM

T- tO CM

eo

CM

CO
^^

C\J . O O

in ^- co ^* ^" O t O to Co O to cn
^VD TCM

T- lOT-

^ co "* vo in
CM T- O ^r-

*
T-

tl^CM

to-a-c--to

r- r- CM

vo 0

to

s o
O

n
O C-TO CO fM to - vo
LO CM CO T- <* VO O
to CM . CO T- CO "*
O T-

o in to co CM CM o
O CM CM

cnco vo in
vD IA ^J- CM r CM tO O

O in T- vo in O c CO invo
to "! CO ^ "^

"*" ^*"

P^

CM CM *-

in to vo CO

P"H CO

/ EH jz; O O
^_ |

< 0) K -P EH rt B
55 **H O -P

CM

Mm
EHW
p-J

>H

CO

PH
l^l P

EH >
fa

w &e

O R) PH C CO -H

<o o o

cos

O invo O in co CO vo to to vo

VO CO

invo T- Tf tcnco Tinvo . t . tOT^ cn r to

CM C

cn

go

to in to too
VO e

in T- CM cn Tin

^- vo

O ** CM

CM T- -<i-vo to CM K^> CO to -cf

T- VO

c~-invo
V

^r- CM CM

cn c in
T

VO

r.

CM C>

c2 rH EH <l)

if\ PM O*-' o
CM

5 M

O in CM SloS
t

vo o CM O mo 0~\ to CM vo co to . in
e

^-

cn

00

cn

co

in ^J-

vo O rC*J

s^ ^^-

CM CTiO

T-

in IT

O CM CM VO VO VO

CM

in co <g-j^ c-

^<rj vo in

,_
L

c~
LT

" .

to

PH

EH CO O O

to H rt

CO 0 O
*z; -^

& S
-P 4->

o M
EH

PH CO

O O -P w w CO O M
<
O

ao
-P nJ CD C fl o>
O CO

CM co to CO PH -P LO rH H EH

w -P r-l H

EH O O O

EH -P

w O

O PH CO S5

-P rH -P

\** Cj

O O

t >

O H t (-5 d

PH

PEH CO O O PH EHO CO

GjO-PEHEHEHEHl-3

E-i& O O O O O i - ^ OOEHOOOOK EH

e; o -P i EH w o K

> -p >

4^a o

-P 03 O O
H Vl H O 0> D< CO

2 O r3 O 3 r3 O K PH PH O CO K EH

o o

VI-F-42

y
CM <H O C 4) TMCM ro j S

O CO vO CM^^ T- CM *

< CT\

* CM T- en

T in

f CT* O CM O C*~ <j-tocr^iTco -

** C"~ vO ^" O in*- cr> co*-co

ocoS00O*OCM

o CO-<I-TOT^VO

O CO CM CM

in

v~

^c\?

O CO CM
O i-O1'. . CM CM in

O CT> c*^ p^ CM O CO
*'" T~ |O

CT\ O O CM O
-*-CO Tj-

o c o o^o
ovor-

Tj-VO rS LTvCTsCM

PHVO

o o ^~

O T-IO
-

25

^ 5u

O UJ O CMr-m T CO CM CMVO CT>

O O ^-.-<4- CMO^lONr-VDCM ON *

OCMi-CMO intOCM T IO tO

O ^" CO

O CM T- VO O OCO
OT^

ooo

-i-cn

s
o
f~\ P-^ {Q

^ Q [f\
T~

ooo CM O VO
... CM to CT*
tO

oototncviT-rONCOC^O ^

CTN

to

vocMOtoo ONCTvCO

^^

cr\cM to < 8 tO CM to CM

o vo mto o to ON

tO

CM *

<- T-

O CM VO

ooo

/ EH O

< CO C3 -P
S5-H . 0

T- CM

O
T-

^ M n o-* co
1
* M >

EH&5 COgj

ooo CMOvO

^^

T- o to

C VO
^

O'-iotocMoc^ C-i-VO CM T-

CM co in

tO

VD

T-

vor-r CMO tOtl-tO

IO

in

vo

O -i-CO ^ ^ O 00 VO CM ^ ...

O CO VO CM

oco in

O T- to

ooo

* O 03 S PM Cj tt

oj

g-j

EH 0>

t i

Vg^

ooo ^Oo

vo PM O ^^
O
CM OS

^~ O "^" CNJ l^\ \j^

OT-COCVJCJOCO LT\cM^m
^r OJ

tA

^^ CM

^omt>^<"JO r-cx'm
C"J

O CM T- t- C~O -d-CO r * O T- T-

o o r-io CM rj ...
0 O C

*t~ O^

EH

CO

to o

P! oo o -P oJ to c! C <u o o

- co A co

od

CO OJ

rt 8

e -H FH

PH CO CO co PH

m OT

O 6 rH

O CO

CO -P O CM O KCO EH

cd

VI-F-43

VD d- **

n-toco
cn cn

co in cn ^ in O VD K> to to in to in xj* o ^i" in

O

cncnvo mo toco * CM
CM O

CM H

TT-

O VO T- COVD ^- cninco * f COOOO f inc~cO

T-

to in
CM

1 0

to cn CO

2 ^~

\
PH^

co s <;o _ 5 O
H

SM CO

*-* in cn
f

CM i-O ^- fO vD

toinvo cnmO o
VD

<i-vO f f O

cncnvo TVD CM *dvo

00
O^

vo to in

fM

CM

cn

in-r- toovo CO o cncM totovo

vD VD O
T~*

O
T

CM

in

O < to
S5 M

CM

in to CM
CM

if\ tf\ cr^ ^~ K^ ^~ ^*

. vo f f CM

O^ IfN t^^ t** ^^ ^^ C*"~

&\

m-<j- c irso into to to to

CO ^~ f CM

^.^.^^tCM CM T- VO tO

to ^* c*~ to
T- f CM

cn

cn

m cr o ^~

O to *~
*4

ff? o
o
rH
'"^

*~
OCOCvo cncM \S\-r- VD cn^
CM
1g VO CM CM CM CMO CM . (T>

s
C=H*X

< <: QJ EH cs -P & EH rt

^(^
O

rH

PH 03

>4 s

T~ m ^1"

CM

in

CM

c*-

CM

in cn to CM o t^ o CM in r~- cn *-CM t to to

to cn c-- o to
to ^- cn r cn
to
O CO CM CM CM

CM VD ^^ ^

in to vo
^~

r- "~}-VO c~-

CM

CO

O
*"" 1
|

EH >>
fTJ

O -P M EH 3 <
J_(

S H

>H CO CO H <0

O i- O VD VD cn to VD to

cn ro vo f T- CM VD cn cnvo o T cn T- vo co cn
^__

O CO to to O to T VD CM
^h C* r- T- CM O f VO

CM to O VO VO

T- VD co me
f
T

vjCM

M > P3
<ri EH

S E

CC H

O rt Pi C

O
W

in vo
T-

CM CM

f<^ C*""

O^ t^\

in ^_

to

C VD CM

cn

EH CO M VD Hi CO *~^ O CM

o cO"*
.

CO tA Oj VD ic\ O *^O

S
M

^tf- to oj

O T-

T-

tA t^ o vo
CO N>

(J~\

^t"

ir\

in cn

vD CO C VD CO

*d- r- CO cr, O

o*\ cn

cr\ T-

in

C^' ^ o O CO in m vc c~ ^ CJ in co co

co vo
LT,

^ LT"i

cr

cs ^

S
EH
P_i f_j >j **"s^

x >i

rH

EH N"N

EH fA

*^.

>s fn -H C ^^ >,c 3
^>. C) ' ^

ra -P fn 4^ H

rH

^^

>>
rH ^^ ^^ \<.">

EH
O

fn H C
3

H-> H

n -P

CO

<j

0
f-^
rv^

Cj

f .

fj

^> _J ^5

^.j

^ H
(1)
flj

cc f5

O 0
k

* <st*r^ ?c

od e
0O O

O W EH W

EH > n T- " <u c S w -P -NO

* '**

EH ***^-* ^^"^x.
CO ^ ""^ JH^

*^*.
^
^^

o o a o
EH
^ i

CO

EH

- w

<u c

. --P

M EH

X< CQ

CO

K e >> j> rt
cq ^^^^
&H CO W W tO PH -P -P S CO rH rH

crJ M JH

Cf W rH .H-> H E M (C <H -P tQ CT O rH

S 0> -P - H O ) O* W rH -P HE

O '"^ XHI ^*^

*>

llO
r3^ *x^

is o

o t>,

W to <H n n a; od B o u > o -P rt
> hH O 1-3 Ut-H -P OJ rH OJ P,

o to -p co
M O W O EH o o O

S -P

+>

. -P

to

O "
<C K

{= O EH O.

EH too

O -P Q) cx-p

03 rH W

<

EH -P

SirH^

o fd
h-1

fl O

PVH Vi ^-i *H
t* t* t* t* t^*

k pH r-4 O rH E
0) *"* H C rH O rH

-P rH -P 1 rH -P rH rt rH

O O

C^ ^ ^3

-P at
CQ

su
Cl

EH cd> >
PEH I-H CO O O i-H1 P^HfrHO K CO

O rH

rt

EHCJ o o o b o ! 3
OCSEHOOOOS

< o -P i-P 1-5 i-^

C^ jH EH j^ jr^ ^ EH
EH W 0 t-H rH H

O <H f-, n -P IH PH <H O CO > > -P >

<. O l-H O 3 >^

EH
f^

o o
CJ

S EH > EH .O hi EH
K rH Pi O CO X

EH

O EH

EH

O 0)

ota

o o

Ft.

e>

H O 0>

p.

CM

CO

VI-F-44

i CO X
! -K T- Oj OJ

VQ KNO *

CM o ri-

CM V< O

* SU

CM i-CVJ

OM- cn

O 00 O OOJ

oo

0)itlOCM

PHVO

rt\

CO rn
'O pSS

OCO I ****-1 Oi

in

oco

1 1 f-CM O - J-VO 1-

irs

CD

ovo r^

O 00 OJ O VD

OVO O

o o*-

crcr>

O VO VO

to
M S

^52 .
CMVO O

XO O O i- VO CM O

O <*

I OJ

o o oo

8! >KNVO i CO

o
M
X-N

<

^-OOJ i- O CO

0 O O
CM K\ii- -di- OJ

c~- 1- in vo oj T- c^OJ CO O O

d-

S M 03 S ^ W
i <: <o "? S^o 55
H

8 ^^ s
i-

pt(X->

(^ to

m K> ^

K\

vo "*

O K\t^K>O "* <J\O

O OJ CO tAK>
O * CM -d-CM

in 1-

O (OCTv

o r into

O OJ vO

o oo

EHW "g

O OO ^COT-CO
*

CTi T- CTi T*- OJ O t~-

O
t<~\

CH'^-vO OJ

VD

i-

O CO t^oj o

c^ ^~ ^~ in vo
K>

O VO OJ OJ t<>
4

o co r-c\j T-

O 00 VO OJ

O OJ in
.

O T- K>i

OJ CQO r \. o L \i/

o oo

Ort
CO-M

P< C ^

pq a e m ^^ < & ^ 55 ? ^ EH
"^
f-P^

^J-C

occ
C

i- C "

o oj oj oj oj o cn f~ oj m LT\ ^
t>, t-N

O in m oj c O oj in in oj
OJ

O K\ OJ T- C

o -^-co T
O T- 1-

888ooc

0^ O
OJ

oj LP vr;
* cr

m to -J
-P -H

ri

rt +

(6 ft V

EH

S
p H oj p a to to
.NO)

to ^- h -^
***

TO -P ^
00-

O) C

*n o >>
EH^^

00

f=a M
CD

PH Pu ^ -

8. o o ^
<n c 0 v o o oca
4> OS

CO <U P-i CO CO W Pi 05 CO

s 2 O d rt E

o to H >: o -P o >, rt"^ - -t-> <n a.

(K 0> r-( tO +> I +> O O) O.-P r-t <U f-l <H ^,H

> t3 0) -P -H S C -H l-i m in CD c ^ >> o O 5 -P^ o -POJ < I n a) r-t v3 C ** +> <u P 3 .-( r-l iH ft) O E "M *- <MM

to P.

* 4J 01 C

OJ O PH >> to

e-i

<r- r~

e a. f-l M
p -t->

cn o

EH

O C O O to w
WCO

>. >>
CO

c w o o 6 01
C
<D 01 03

rT1 *H H
OJ H tn W ? to EH i-q ri cr <u Oi-^

<n a o E^-( cj

PH

o rc

a: co EH

CO ** O Pn O

VI-F-45

*~ Tj- T

oj
VI 0

2
gj

r to en CM rCM

O in o cnino CM tom cnto vo to o **

CO ?

to^- vo mo
O O T- CM tO CM
CO

to
toTj- in co tovo VO en

^~

en ^t*

t~T-

T-

CM ^- cninvo ^J-T- cr>in rT- cno - CM T- int-- CO *~

K>

in
CM

to
CO

CTN

0S

>H

WCM

PHVO

n!\

CO

< O

co ".

1*
M

t-incnc-inocM to to co vo to Tin o CM vo to O in O
CM

tO<M O CM O f- O CM T-

r- to
VO

C"^

CM

en

r-c-t-cMO tnrVO ** CM co O en to to tovo

CM VO CM

O
^

CM

in

vo ^ in co to CM
8
TCM

to in en *- tn o m T- tO i- IO tO SS T ^~
CM O CM ^~

O*

in c^ en in o en to m to to en CM
T

^j- ^j- ^ en en
to ^- c~ to
T- T- CM

CM CM to t~ in

&
T-

O <-

^
O 5 O
11

CM O to

o en to

to m VD <* * c~- co

!x| 5>

CO CMVO

R /

EH

(ii co =: <u
CX -P

*
CM

CM

o CM en T- CM ^f in fr\ in c~-

C^- f- O C-- CM CM tO

T- <- O CM O

CM

into co in
t Ovi

vo to ^f- to O

o o r~- co co to m en c~- ^
T ^*~ VO CO to

vo O

-3-

NO

in

CO

S o s-rH
^ O -P >H

SH 0

EH rt

T1
frj

EHH
<

CO

CO

CO S
<0
O tq
S

o m ^*" CM Co en cnvo to
vo VO ^

to en CM co i~ ^ vo
CO VD CO

"r T

r~cM *} ti- c en to co CM ^-co

VO T0 OJ T-

* to CO m iCM "^- T- CO CO i- vo CO in CO
T- C\i CM
^

en ^~ m
T

^*

>

1 M

EH >>

PH P!

ci JH o c3

**

c~

cr

<*

vo

CS

W
W <i

53 6

CO 1

c3 rH H CD

EH

JH
[ P-l

S3
rH

O T- VO O CM T vo

to to oj

CO to CO C

o vo f1 1 m c c
r-- to in
. OJ

-*i-

VO

O.J ro r"~ O C in cr^ m

* vo co CO <*
to

C, L^ T- CO ^

O"

o
CM

en

o o i~

en *-

LA in c-- c^ L-"^ oj m co co ^"

rt~

,_
LT CT l_~

C
L'N

cd

h
*"Sm

fH
H

EH to OO W T-

*^

M >j

to

EH

fc

O M EH^ p
*^^ O fj

-v. >, c 3

>i t-< H q

-p -i
-p
EH

CO CO -P

>>
EH
*""

f-t

n -p
tn H C

PH O f-^

^*

EH CO O

ci h
^

o h x>Sfc^ 3
r^S ^^s.^.1^

^^ JH ^i

f^

t*^
"*^x

a
o
EH EH
M

d
CO

O W
EH W

EH - co T<u C jr;1 w +j N O ) >

* +*

co <' ^ tO s > E-^-J: < O

O
^ S -P

**V^

^^"^s.

cco
^,-j
tD
*v^

C"

- to

o C

i*
k
--P

m -P

(S
+

C3 OTr-H .--P H S

c; e >. s>>
Cti CO tQ 10 CO PH -P -P S5 CO rH rH

fij rl r<

rd rt <H -P w w cj ^ cr; B > o o >,

o -P rt^^
tt)

ry w rH -P HE Ej rt v< n co <u cri e o o

>

ci

PI

oJJ

o o
g-H

rH

EH UO O OS

>

O E-l P.

O -P 0) P.-P PH>H Vt fa VI

rH

CO

i-3 t-Ti-n +> a) a,

r3 M K i1 rH O

> O 4i ffj O i-3 0) rH

O W -P CO rH O CO O EH O 0 O

<

CO O O

O PH CO S3

^^-

EH cd fc >
tT O O 1-3 PH EHO W CO

n3

0 rH

tn

a > t- t- > >

o \

rt

Vi vi >H

E-l *> -P rH -P a: rH -P rH Cj r-4 O VI [_| V| -P *H P-l VI O

2
EH

-p

to p) fl 8 O O 0 CO

H-3 (0

EHW D O O O O i - 3 OOEHOOOOK EH f<

< 0 -P.J ^ ,-q

Or3 EH K~ EH
9

S EH > E-< J3 i-3 EH < O (-3 O ^i-3 O

C3 P-l rM O CO P3 EH

co >

> -P >

.-3

O 0

EH

H O O CO

o.

VI-F-46

O COvo
Jx!
J

^J- 00 O to CM Ot00 tOT--^

- CM O
CM*- in

oo
T-

*-

vOr- to CTv- O>

o cri-"i-o o
OCOC\ O OC\J T-

OCMVO CM O

CM
^H

3?

VO

in

T-

*f-0
T- tO

ttOCM

CO CO >
^J **

VO Tj-CM

(SvS"

ooo-*T-OOO

O S5

CM CM 00

r-critoco CMO 00 a- Y- T- in <i ^

in

COM3 CM

co

00 8 vo

o o -

CD VO CM 8 5?r--O - 10

cncrv

Ovo to

$5

VOr- CM

tn o !h.'<J- CM O-*
T- t- VO CM

T- CO-rCM VO T^~

O CM f-< T- 10 CM CM 10

o co mo to

O-SFOO

OOD

to

OOO

1 o
0
X-N

P /

&u i
X
PH to

OOO VO O 00 r-O O
CM tO-*
T" ^"

inr t~ CT>CM

VO CO T- O O to <!to

^^

o^j- c too cocnTvo in

O xj--^--* KN O *- to <* C\J O CMVO

o r^vo 10
O ro CT\
OOO

o^ JJ

T- CM

s o
i

| j

EH d

SsSg
<jj
pj ^*

fe".. O -P ^~*

^! 5
^g^

OOO vo O CO T~ O '^

co CM ^ m CM OtCM "d- t-CM

ro CO

M R ii o ns r3
PH C ^ CO *

CM CO 00 C VO

to

vo

vo 10

vo

o o
to

CM

to

C\. in 8 <T\C CM OOO

m <5j
EH

SrH

CM

EH <!> t Pn ^^

S5 M S

OOO vo O O

O CM infO CMo cr>

CACM in in
Y

CM CM in

o me CM o

CM int^ *cr

T- O CM

CM

tO

in

CM

CM

O O0

03 -P

8 o
rt ft
V
H

EH
to o
0

o
EH
W

to g . O* --P

fH -P M >>r< H C "^ >> C 3 6H^> 3

ff)

CO

o1
EH

EH EH o to O O'
<D CD
rl

EH EH to to 00 EH Ctl

&-

8.
o o
P OJ m O C o> o o

co o> PH co co 01

ta w u n) rt B

P4 CO -H >>>

m p, h -P to w Q> M W p.
O O >,

HJ W P.

r(-\ o -P aj\ 0) rH 01 i -P o -p o> p4-p

o H

C rH f-t rH rH OJ rH 3 <H P,H H t-l H

g 3

03
0)

I 01

C -P 3 r-1

0) t i-H

<H

O EH EH EH EH EH i-5 W O O O OO r5 O PH PH PH PH PH W

PL,

O -P -P w T- oy [H r-H rH VH M CO < - 0- C O CJ rt (!) > fc m 3 p E-i !-5 O c! CT O O i-5 O

C tn C3 EH o c c-o o o

EH OS O P-

to

EH
C/JO

3
o n o -P

-4 ^^ 3lJ r^ CT rHH

pq o> -^ n > 01 3 t, -^

<

- O. C

O rt c* <u i-5

ow

CO O PL, o S5C0 6H

VI-F-47

OJ <H

** j?

vo men cn tocn o tm O 10

^- IA T- r^ irv O m
O f^VD ^ to VO
CM
T~ ^

co to VD in o
VO *~ CO CM
T-^T- CO O T-

.T0*\ tf\
T~ T~

- cnt- CM to T- ir\c co ^~

10 CM F-'-vD Th to-^-CM CO

r o VD in
CM

to cn to
CO

to

C CMC
0)^tOCM

nJ^. PkVO

tM CO

cos < O
*^f

*mcn CM tovo
CO *

T- in CM vo in O '< T to ^ cn to ^~
^d~

CM

- cncncM o ino C-T F~ to

O 0
1 0

co cn *"" to m c

CM

C\J

in

VO

co invo cncn in CM cnc~-c~CO O CTitO to tovo

CO

in to O
^-

o
* CM

in

co in ** in o cn
VO tO ^- ^J- tO O -ltO O

S3

CM tO CM TCM
^

CTv

s
PI
0
M
P / EH
&H CQ < 0) K -P

CM

C^ Y~

vo o - ino tO-i- CO to to TCM in *~

^-C-^VOf-

CM CM * cnoo to ^t~ c*- to

T- - CM

c^ ^~ ^-

to
^~ ^J-

s
J*

O O <T* SC\J fO CMVO

T
^f-

$
*~

C\J

t~- 1 O O in c~- Fm CO cr\ CM CM CM m O O .i- co m CM r- to in r

^!-CM

C O CO tO O

CM vo to m to

cnc o cco
O T- CM rj- tO

m
CO

in vo CD ^~

-d- CM CO

CM

in o

tomo CO vo T- invo co in to

!z;

EH rt

0 O ^ T-

Pw I

i <

EHH

M n

S 55 -H 0 -P

co

O ^~ *-

r vo r^. u> CM to in
"3~ r cO IT\Tvo o c- *-

CO S

cp c*- o*\

EH >> 5 ei JH O
CO -H

<: o

s
T*~

O -

VO -e O CM . ^-O
CM T- tO VO

in m "^ ^~ O

CM ^- KA O O t- VO CO VO O T- CM tO
^~

mcTMncn ^~

to vo in
T~

rCM

cn

^~
CM cn to vo m o ^
T- O CT O O to c vO vo C^

w a s 1-3 < H pq cs rH
<!
Cj

EH OJ
.

o **co O CM T*->

ci

r-i CO PH

*-4 M

0 CM
OS

&

C\J t<^ CM

c to m ^~ r; cn O T-

f^j to vo r

VO

^~

* c cr> T.[^CO

mm c co cr> CM '-n co co ^j-

m
CO

rin

LT*

K-

IT

<r

f_l r>j
^ ^ n

^i >-.
^s"t^. (-4

ra n -P
4-^ rH

?H
>3

n
CO -P

PH O
^:H
^

EH

o
rH tn rH

CO O
0 rH EH
CO

~\

-P H

EH

OO
_(

oJ

W T,

EH >-. fn H K. ~\ >> C 3 O (H FH\ 3 ^~ '^i' *^ * '* ( ^ f y -P

1
E-H

EH
'"'C

l-> -\
fH\

K.

^ -P

^-.

>. y~^
^\rf

EH -^ >^-^?
^0 ^,
r

\
T~*t

Pi
co
^.-j

^^

M^

(D ' O

^" *" ~r >

^^

pt

O w
(tf

+ p^ O O 0
g-r-l

EH
M rH

;'

T-

u a>
H ft CT O

EH - VI ^, CO -p
C* M r-H -P rH

O G - it V
H C

EH
k ^

to

C1 W r-H P C-T rt "tH HJ (0

tO PH -P 4>
53 CO rH rH <* <H V(

(ti co 05 to

^^*^^

r^ n
> O

v. o
t(
r

OP
{ r-l

o ^

rt ~- -,

C-J ri VH ;: to o cr H o o -> o -P rt
>

t; +' --P
Z
f

O U -p M (H O f) O

-P
W O

EH o o o

n [ 1 f V,
f-l O

11 rH 0) 4> rH

EH t"O

o P fli P +'

-3 i . , -i P a- n.
r1 ^^ U^ '' rH *U
>J
(

"!

V rH

iH -P rH rt rH

O nt
O rH

i-..Vi Vi h VH

n ^ f^ j t<
i-3

<^
4.)

(,_,

2 iH EH rt CO O O >-3 PH EH C-} r**i CO H

cC t* t-* t*- ^-* J^*1

^ o .M
~^

o o
0

(^ J^fc J> J>

I-H
CO >

VH
3
>

O
-P >

<

0 -P ^J M ^

p n) m c C S

EH W O O O O o S OOEHOOOOS EH

PH

9-, C-1 0 -- r-1 ^3 O r3 EH ^: K S EH

^ f " t - EH J3 t-^ < O v^ O 3 i-3

2
t-i PH 0

EH 0

CO K

EH 3

EH

cj
CO

H O

o to

0 0

C5

o a,

VI-F-48

R1PRODUCEBILJTY OF ORIGINAL PAGE 18 POOR

oco*CM
^J ^^

1- CM en
^^0

T- CO vO ^" CM o C~O K> T ^~ T* CTV TTVO

f-O CTiri- O - CM <* T~ CTt ^

gg^o
O O CM
*

O * CM CM
OT- VO

T-PS

T-

t-

S'T~
P-IVO

to
O O 55 fo
3

o co in
- OVO

CD "<fvo

T-cr>ir\co CM oco

VO CM KNvM O CMVO K\ VO CO

OVOt^

o cno CM
O T- tO

CM CMO

cr*o

t^

O O v-

CM

S3

o
o
o
*"' ~*

T- CO O

co *-m
CMVO CM

tr\ o vcxir> CM o *!CM T- VO CM

mcM o CM o
CM K>

O CO VD O to

O
TT-

o Efco

0*0 o

o -^-vo t oo co %
O
T--

s
H

><
g

O OO CO O -4*- O IO

r*4r ~* fc_

PM co

CM tOVO
T- Tf

^-

tACM cnCM CM T- CO O CO CM T(A ^~ K*\

VO lT\t- to O CM CTv to

to

f*

4^.

O "* -^- -d- CM O CMVO

O vo o * to

S^c?;'^"
o oo

T-

O ^

' 55 0

e$ 2a EH cfl E

^ CM

55 "H 0-P >? M CO CO

**i

O 0O CO O *T- O O

ei {H*O^

CM CO O

m ^i- co CM T" T~ to vo

C-- CM CM VO CM O

T-

f-

VO CO ITCM O
VO

O CO C^CM TO T- to

o cnoo cv
O C\! U>

to

VO

o o o*

O rt g

r c

CO -H W S5_S

P3 < EH

2 r-1 EH co fn 55

o oo
CO O O
T- O T-

cr\ ^H

o*-'
CM

**^

T- CM CO f^ CM O <Ti T- CM LfNtn CM CM to

VO UO O CM O i- CM vD

o vo VD T- r
O T^T^

in CM
CM

O 0C

CM Lf>CO

^^ CT*

OS

SM

CO CO -P

-P *

CO -P

co

ft

^ fH

3
fj H

^gS
KN S3
O ffr * 4^ t<1) CJ
* M fl>

cd P o
+

&tr\
K\

EH

E*^ M >>

>

S
EH->v

H * a > c 3
P S
0) C

-P -H

^L ^s

EH EH OO
'^.T"

EH 6H

O >> **

--P
NO)

0^ "^^Nfc

^
CO 0) PH CO CO CO PH CO CO

oo o

> o C w o cd ctt 3

CO -H >, S 0

Ss;
2

-P CO P. OJ rH W 1 -P O -P Q) P.-P

fc\

o -P ca^^

0 >

g
P W

p, +J -H p ^ t-i co co o

01

o: E o to 3 a

6H

M c; -P -P n, a

53 H >> O 0 5 -P^ O -f ) ^ 1 CO 0 rH

PH >, co 3 fn h P<\ C co >, > t= EH O C^-"~ C1O o o CO CO O 0 -P -p

W^-< rHrH

'^O *^E tt 3 E >>M S fn Pn-^. C W >, Jn EH 0 C"^

EH CU

C/>O

O CO

0-P

p 3

t 1

V-t rt

0 ErH

5? O EH EH EH EH EH KH" fe O W 3 fn EH 1-3 55 PI^ O O CO O CO KH K w K} ~q ^ t^ O rt C* co O i-5

2?C>P4P-lp4P4P4tl!

p w a
^*

CO r-( rH r-t Q) CO E <H V( <H (-1

< & C pq <u H co > > pq co ---H co >

1 "1

i-H "H <H

CO *~ rnC < -0, C

o cj
0 CO

05 CO -P 0 PH 0 S3 CO EH

^^ 1 "i r> . p i r> . ft . tq pq W PH 0 BC *g^ f 1^

%

to 3 h ^ O rt cj< e >J ta pq W PH s

<}

pq

O*

VI-F-49

T- invo

K^ vO CNJ ^~ VO O O^

<r

CM

tOQ

g>

co

S
* Jo

K*N C"** O^ rO r-

o in CM "

vD **

(0 CM in cvi
VO 5PcO

CM inM3 ir\O

* CTi 'i- CO VO

in

T-

-^- -j- cri co in ^~ in c* ^* 00

in
CO

to
to CO

in
CM

VO to [^vo *d

invD uMnvo O vo CO to CTvCM to ,CM TCM

^j-

c^- to
\r\

OMn co CM o CM T- to * r--e
tO VD

co toir\vo CO

in to CM T- to
CO t- O -<i-

in T^-

0
CM

to ^4" VO

to

in

SJR8? O CM
CM

CM VO CTi CO VO O O CMtovoinfo o O *!T-

O
1 N

^ c^--

VD to to in O to-iCM CM in

mo CO to to CM to m T- o
to ^*- CD ^f
T- i? CM

VO CM **

O o

Q O

O CM in ^- to jtOCM >X>
VD ^CM

P4 ca < co 2 -P

cri ^- c m r vo ^j- ON r vo c\j CM r CD CM . o O T- in in CM CPi ^~ in c

CM

O CO (Tun vo
T-

t -\invo to O

CM T- C O VO

VO

T- to VO - CPi

C*~ O^ ^-CM CO

to

to IA o o^ cr> CTv T- in VD CO in to

N~\

o
CO

o a

>H

CO

7 i

T^~ CO O O *-O ^3~

a

00^-

EH S>5
fH

O C3 PH C

o ci

t~-

T- CM CM C-J CM to * O T- CTMTv iCM r c CO CD CO ^~ ^~ CO 0

cv) co m-^i- o to tn CM CM -^- T CO - to vo *~

vo in c j to in CM tn m ^^ CM
T- VD CO VO Ti- CX '^

CO

_
vC

^~

rm ^~

cr

0,

(
O CM CM f- 10 CM

Ot~-0

t^ C\) t1^ C-J U> C G^ VD ^r ^r CO ^ v_o r"1 i?S T^-

C5>O <- O C

CM O -=r T-

O
CM

co

cvi

vo Q^\
r-

. c~- cn
^?"

^ C c. u",^ cc ir vc cc cn ^
"^J"

^3"
T

cc

L~

L'"

CTx

to

s ,
fn
3 "X^

rH
"^^.

>,
f-l

to -p
-P H

CO

f-i
>>

co
CO-P

PH

EH

0O
t3 T~

cd P. co PS op o o

o w

H CO nj FH F-i

EH >> P H q to \>,C;3 O M EH^~. 3 - ^T1 S ^^. O '^ * +* EH w T<u c S p - N QJ

CfCOr-H .-P-HE

EH ^ HC to ^-sCZl O fn*^v 3 Y ^J^^ '*xSl< 'J 4-3 (DC EH - CO s CO -P N tt)

O1 00 rH -P

O CJ S h
>^J^

EH M O O
IH
>>

P(
>j

a o
EH CJ CO
%z

CD *^ ** ^^ O " 4
a k -P

CO r ^r ^*^ y~^

4->

^r|

M
EH
O

C~( ^.^

fj

W
**s^

PH co to w CO PH -P -P K CO rH H

e ^^"^x. W (a H o n o >, s rt <H >> >> e -p w o h w E t3

!=OEHP<

>

o -P rt"~x

o co <u o o > o -P rt
CO rH

tt)r-lW

EH bTO
o rt
O i-H

O -P <1) P- -P
P**M **H Pi *H

t-5 t3(-1 -P CO DK rt
tH K

> O i-l

o w -p CT n o wo EH O O O < o
^J
P . f| j

-P

ra o
O

^^ k

en ss
P! o> o o
O CO

H c5 ^* * P EH t-3 CO O O (-3 PH EHU S

CO
W

<n s-i M
HM^

r-H [-1 O

EH -P -P rH -P t.' rH -P rH rt rH
^H r( ^H -4^ *^
Q

EH
h-3

H-^
E-* *

rt

t* t* t* ^* t*

-^
^

0 rH

rt > >>

<P -P hJ

OOEHOOOOK

EHWOOOOOK-3

O iH EH K

&<

-1

K^

<^ S EH> EH ^> t-q EH =: O r^ C 3 i-3 O C PH PH 0 CO K EH EH

c,o >

> -p >

H Vl I 0

-p CO o o o

W
i_ r>Dj~tr*fcI IP REPrvUUUv. nr>irrKJ Jk\.

to
/tiyt-L

0.

VI-F-50

iFBHA^r OP w
at PA(*>ir IS POOR

O ** CM CM t~CM

OCOM3

CO CO CM VO CM C^ CO r~ K* CM ^~ T~

cn

.T-

H O

2 1
S3

pr
CO CM O CM O VOVO <^VO CO

O^O

o en ^~ CM
1

CO CM

OOCM

CMT^O xf-

O COVO
CM O IT CM CM CM CJNO CM

** O CO <T\ CM O CO

tCM T- in ^~ *to

O O C O VO O C--C-O C3 T^

O O to to
omco T-

0 1- to

OVOtn

o T- cr>
CM COCTi

^^" ^5 CO L^ ^^ ^^ ^^ tf"N T ^25 cvi

\o to to
CM

OMO IO CM O

CM VD CM

to

10

O ^" GO <D O O*

CO 8 l^N CO C~~ ^^

1
O
P&4

g
0}

O OO O OO CM OVO CM to 00

i-CO ^^-

o to i- in CM T- oo
to

O in LPV to o c-m-sc in

O -3- **- CM
O CM VO

O co vo in to

^5 CO CO ^~ O f^ C^
O O CD

EH g O

g^ EH tfl
03

J^CM

*s
EH >>

O OO O OO CM OVO

VD CM CO C~- CM O CO ^- CO CM
^ T~

00 *-

O CTv ^ VD MD

C-J O

O T- CM iO ^>

o crco CM T-

o o%co ^
i O <\J LA

t*^

\^

O ^- to

0 0 C

CM 00 *-

O 05 PH C
CO-H

&e
EH 0)
M O OO O 00 CM O O CM m O\ i- CM i- *} CM O CTi tO CM VO LfN
CM

O VO f- C\. C
LT\ CM C1-

o c r-r- co
C
r^r-'

cv

to

0*0 c*

o CM

03 03 -P
03 4J

(H M

w
n) P. o>

to
to o
OT-

o w
.N U
03

JH-H C

>>C 3

EH EH to to 00 EH
^t-(

EH EH to to 00 EH

>> n
co -^
P O P. I -P O EH

o> C

10 *M

p, M
0> rH

4) C NO)
i * rH C3

oo o

CO 0) Pi CO

o d (0 B
03 CO

to p

i >>

co to PH

pe

<H

n : -P
; w -3
i .J Qj

m to a) o o o -t> J
<U

^ C W ^ EH O C 010 O O O O

s ^di
to to p -p

o
P4

OS

t>> to 3 P ^ n t>
EH O

o o n o -P
iH H

C^.

I M <H

la ra fl
rs i> o o
C5 CO

3 -H

3
S5COEH

w o o O O'

; O fc-

>

o PM o

CO -P

CO *~ i-H I<H < P. C pq <u H to > w 3 (-1 EH O rt a* a) O WPP WPM O i O

CO

< pq O

M PI r~i P-I j

P. C v H 03 > n 31 *-i t-3 ri cr GJ I

VI-F-51

VO

co
H
C-

* vo cj c\j vo o-t vo toco ^to r CJ1 CM * T- in

VO T to CM >

t--co r-vo
CM CM

vo

me *- in CM *- mc-co
T-

CM 00 O vo
CM

en
CD

in

C<

l &

CO

VO if\ 00
in

at

cnvo
vo
CD

o co i
CM

f-CM r-CM

O CM (TVTVO

I
SPORTATION TRAFFIC MODEL inary Estimates)

8
en
CM O

CM

o
KS

VO

->j- min CO - O

o o in tin . O CM Tin

inin'cntoio

CM

VD vo in T vo O r- to en r~- to O
OA

VD VO
^^
T-

inmo
CM

in to T OMn
TT- CM

^-

f* T~

* to iin

CM to C*- CM CM to ^* CD ^"

in
CM

o to
^_

* O

CM

O tOr-

S ^MA CvJ VO
CD *CM

IT\Too >- m T c\j CM 0^1

CM vo

CM tA T- CM m

CM

in c

O CM

r- T- in in
CO KN K\ CM <y\

c CM

invo

vo

CO

SA vO CO

in

>H

CO <O

-F-

CO O S VD **

O vo in

in CTi C CTv CM

CTv CM in tf O

c~-c co
en

tr\ r- VO VO r-

cnr- -^- CM
Tj- CM
TCM VO

o* P3 o
O O CM O tOCM O tO CM

T-

CM T-

> i- tr\

CM vo vo in-**T- vo co VD CM

CM

T- CM to,

o en

u>

m
M

in in ro r in o to
vo to Ln

a
E

O "3- CM CO

C-

C~- to (Ti O O
<- -r- CO 1-

^ CM r t invo oo c co

o
CM

en

CO
T-

en co in

en m

PH
P -H

to -p

EH to O
(H H 0)

3
O<">E:
-P

co L,

CO PH CO

to
> EH O O

tO T-

Sf B tr!
r O -

tQ rH

H-> H S

-NO)

0) C

M
p
(0

t* o E-I too hO nJ

> o

o -P \ P< <u rH tO O) P.-P o l-i i P.1

ID to -P 03 M o to o t-t o o o

O rH

to o o 1-3

P oJ m fl a <u oo o co

PH EHO

to

Enf=3 O O O O O i - q OOEHOOOOK EH

EH -P -P rH -P PS rH -P rH d H O H J-H H -P H PH Vt O CO > > -P > S EH > EH J3 H! < O Hi O S ^ C P^ PH O CO K EH

<t

o o

to o o

o 0> Pi
CO

VI-F-52

IT- co-* cot-in

CM o in . O T- O to
CD

CMIT

OCM r- IT* VO

eoOtoOinT- CMOr^S, T o en * vo co ~ tovo to PN

co T- o io<

O OO

CUOrH bOCM -P PMVD p|

0) CO

ctf^^v ro

CO

* tO O O T- CM * O CO
CM

^- co o vo o cM o ir\ o ^- o
* o oo

't- O r- O

cn

O T- O

T-VDO

tocr\o CM o m< mcM o to vo CCO O VO CO to co \r\o o T-

CM

at
T - m t O O-CTi

omoc~-

O -r~ CO

3 o
H
PEH

T- O *-O CM

o CM o tn

iCMcno > in O TT

vocMOcriOirv CM CM O o- vo en*o c T- to
. . ^f

O OO

cno vo en

O OO .

CM O O O

OT- CO * CO ITiCM O IO

lTN CM

O CM LT>

ITk

O f-O fO

CO O O Lf\tO

o vo o o to o c~- o ooo
....

to
CM EH g B
>H

o t- o

O OO

t ^2
pp e: Pi
2 CO H

CO

O CM f> o vo tCO -r

lAt- CO *O<~O O

C--CM o ir>
O T- O

T- O "r- O

O VO O -<J-O vo C in t"N O c u~\ CM o o m cv

! O S5

000

o ooo

j O flS W PM P!

fe e
EH 0)

OOg
fc-r*" M

en

in

T-C^O o o* o T- co

T CO * CM O t T- O T- O CM

T-

T-O

o ir>
T-

O OO

o vo o *- r- m ' o too c to o o mr0*0*0*0*

mo t.- 0

EH

EH
EH

"o
EH to O
M
r4

CO PH CO
0 CO

O
T t

O a (3 <H VH . to ^i ^i P4 a>
CO

o o

O P O

a>

d o

EH > O

CO

PM

to
CO
B 1

<H <H CO CO

1
CO

*g 1

Pi

OO -H PM OO -H Pi Pi O O ^ t O O O ^ O O

c t>0 bO pi EH P\tO C EH ft <T) cd I fttO

TD*N^ Tf ^^

M CPp o ^^
O)

a>

CO 0 M EH O P CO rH M P EH P VH Prf r-T\ iH - ,*"S^ W *(H O *H -P J^ r

EH to O EH

co
'O

rt

co

-a

t-t -p co -PH -d

f)

to CO a. o

tO

EH to EHO EH

MEH T- V T-O E-0 > 4->

o -o

TfO

a
M

>

CO

M EH -O P
C.O O H T- V-t T3
(+* ^+^ f*

r)

CO >>

CO O

I T- -P J

P S-t T3
I ^-

r/= o _ EH -P <O p*>-! EH*>>T-^-^pH4 y o VH PC\> _ . .EH . . -P _ P . -. - *n_ OW -P%H P i ^ E H C O Pi-HOiHPt-H-P Pi H O iH Pi

3a)4'gcp'G < CO P" C S CtJP*C S'^.-p'c ^bOSrI^COPipiK'tlOCOPlC^'O'HCUr-ICflP(C=:'UC3PiP! ^r] pj rH 'O O 3 O *^ C O 3 O ^ P5 *O rH O 3 O Z? ri O J3 O

<H s: 3 o a -E 3 a)

lo
+ ClJ

CJ^-P

+ o o
to C Ft <>>

COOJrHH
P. f^ f* ^

COi-lrH
fj

OJCOCO

cocococacDcucococuoftft MescocucjfiScoortrtPiPi o B ft ftp? PQ ft ftPQ R ft ft

COPlPlCOCOPiPlCOCOOO

>coeuoo-p-pco

COPtftP.

COOCQ

co-p-pco>>,-pG,o-p-pt:>>jppco

W r H C S O f t

r-t

CO

O CO

oo

cppooooooooo

<

pq

~? O

VI-F-53

CM H O
^" f_

^r ^^ g

8 0000 < <* O CM CM

T- T- T-

CM r- to vo CM O 00 r- oo vo
00 CM

O U^ ^" CM O VO IA CT> t CO CM

IAT- VO O 00 CM ^ to ...
T-O-r-

C? O^ l/^ s^t* O CO 0 * K*\

^O C\J

^-*
T- ^~

C-

C <^O MCM flJ\ P-tvo

* CO CO <! S O OS

o oo oo
O ** O O O

c-^ CM vo .
T"

o en ir\ o CM o *

CM CO CM CM O CM CM 00 CM

o toco
T-*00

O CM O O ITi

o co ^- o O v5 c^cg
VO O T-

T- CM CM

en en

OVOVO
}?^
M

o T- i
T- V O V O

O ITi VO T- CM O CM
*

O 00 CO

r-

--'

VO ir>CJ CM O
CO T- ITi ^

lACM O O to
C-CM >^...

O CO ^^ O
^D ^r * * CO ^~

OOO

too O

0
0
C|

o s
X
""
ft, CO

OOO OOO O O O

... T IO tO
T- T

CMOOOtOCMOC cOtOT-^TCO rVO

2 CM

to CM CM O Tj- O

r~

O T- O>VO to

LT\ t^lO LA CM T- f
T^ 0 0

en*- CM

'

3 <" EH 03-P

t5

o s; H ^
*
- CO CO

EH OS

CM 1 fe
M
>
1

EH W ~2 S *^J ^ vO EH S> _. 3
O CO rr
F *\ *-& \j j o
03 H r-O

ooo ooo

ooo
T-" CO CO*

-*
*~

oo en to oo CM o co -3- T- T- in

CO CM O CM O VO CM O

vo

^~

to

VD O T-

o c >* * o O oo r to CM

O tovo to
1 O <- CM .

^ C^ vO

r-c-

PH C

W
PQ

BE
2rH

a! EH

EH <u ^ i_f^ PH O'N^*""'*'

cr,
OS

S HH ***

ooc

OOO OOO

't O * -i- CM O ! ^ i- vo CM
T

CD CM cr\CM O
^*

T"~

O r- ir\ in O O vo co - ""
to O C

LT\ O *~ "-

0* C C

T- IfMT*

^"*

co w -->

to co -P
P H

^ H rt

O EH

to o
OT-

>>
x W

^oi
o n5

E- EH to to 00 EH (X
Pi

EH EH fO fO

00 EH
f~l fH

p,

f(
t-J

. N O)

o>

co

-H M -P } 0} p! C U O O O CO

-HO P O O

o o-

o oJ
cS B
CO (U

4-5 (^} fi^ I -P C)

H W

o el;
CD

P.-P

o :>> o \ o P ri
rH rH V| V<

Pi en en <u
CO

PI^-. c: oi >-. x
O

>, CO 3

> EH O C \
O

O O CO (Q
O -P

~^-

tt) rH

PH CO CO CO PH CO CO

P -p i P. rH fl) Vl M

W T- c8 ,-H r < CO i-H <(H <M

r-l CO > EH

oi o 3 B . i W 3 r< PM^ c w >> t> EH O c;*-c/>o o o co o o -P co <r- y ._(

CO rH SH < - P- C pq CD I CO > CO S ^ ^

<H rt

; O EH EH

O EJ i( CO + O PH O

; Wo O

I Ci PH PH

* g i-q
EH rH

, O

>>>>
PH PH

>

D5

q fl ,cr <u o t^

O rt cr o/ ^

VI-F-54

CM

s
^"*

op vo o CM^tn

T"

invo in^ CM in

tACM vo O vo CO Orx.xjCM incM in

VO ** CM fAf<\
CM

.vo co'"
CO

vo crvO vo crv CO -i-IOCO CM rfNCO

in m
CNJ CM

p^
VO CO

s
P-

&

** CM

^
tr\ VO VO CO vo O Cn

wg o"c\;
^^ i *

covop-

en m invo o
CM rj- O VO
^>

r- CM co p- in CM co ^ mo
r- T- tf\

CM VO

en
tn in

j-

vo ^
CM

KA

^j-

en

*"

vovoin
^^ ^~ ^- ^}

co r o en p- o vo ^r cnp-r ^j CO CM t-

^VO -d-CM O O vo VO <**" T^

T- CM CnCM *

T~ in P* "^d" vo
TVO CO T-

VO

1 *

* VO J-

"

o o
CM

in
CO

p-

CM

o
CJ

s
^ 2
^*

O invo ovo en O incM

tO ^~

tO T v- O CM N"N x^-

cn -<J- en o T- T- CM T- vo in o
CO
CM
p-CM

^^
EH
P,
CM

Pt4X~X

r^i CQ

vo

T-

<* (1)

K>

co r~~ c CM m CM in r- en CM iin

T- VO O VO O

K>CM O in O
<!- O

VO VO CM CM

^.
* o o

T- r into c\j CM t<-\ en ^~

O ^J" C

CM

O^
M CO

pi,

<! EH >
CO -H

^^

p IS
^

S3

^S * co

co t in CM vo - -3vo tn en in r~
CO

c-

CM

c~- O o CM o CM CM CO *c--* m vo O

CO O CM O O

mo t- P- co tn en CM *

^ so

in cp-

VO
*
CT^

c**

pq fe B

pq
ej

^-^
Lf^^_x

OOT-

(H PH

55

O lf\ O

en en as

o ^~ <

<*-

i<^ c in =* CM o en cnvo co co CM O T- CM CM in O en in

,_ vo frs in O O *- CM

K^ ^i"
CM

CM T- CO CM 0. - CM Td- -d-

^h en ^" P- t "

C
t

^
"*

<J-

in *-

CM

CO

ex

* *Q VC

J^l
J

CO

EH
H H

W *-

CO O
*

to"1 f-t\EH'^ 3 >LC O

"*>.
(->

>5

CO -P

M >> EH

0} 05 4* M H C

PH
U

-P H

g
O

o o
r>i

CO

r * *

^1

rt

EH

V ^ O W T-

J<f\

^^

-P 4) C

^* S ^>C
EH - W

O H *^*. 3
" *^'O

-P
(DC

EH ^^ >5*^* CO ?* *^^ y*

*^ sr*

55 O EH

CO CO

O ^^ ?" <^ <=^

i> 4^ CO O O

O CO

0)

EH CO

C(J M fH

E W -p N Q> O1 M iH -P H R 1 KB
"SO

TJ c3 VH H- co co o M
tt O tH fi

O >

+ o
r4 Cj

O -P <tf^>,
OJ r-l W

Cfcl CO W W
CO fW -P -P fc CO rH rH rH EH

EH bflO o -P 0) P<-p O MO M rH H <U H O rt P.SH <M fn IH

0 rH
1-3

O O

4^ g]

5 >>~l
fl)

nC
C3

to

CO 0 O (^ PH EHO 33
fyi

PEH hP

rf

<? O -P EH EH E ^ EH i "|
OCJEHOOOOSi EH

ttf t h- t~ f*

t*

EH +> -P HH bOh-1 -P fl> fi r-t [j M til rH rH <D erf r tC (^ *H *H ^ pH c^_( O rH Kl fj t* > fc CO > >
1

E n +> . N <u O" n H -p -H G fc 4^ s..43 K nj <H w co <u O W 4 CO as o o rH O W O > o -P rt EH 0 O O ; o

H +>

rH +

rd j-j
Q

& * 1o
CO

< e-t

^4

to

EH

t-T
~t

-P >

o o
,-f

EH W o i-q 3 ^ EH

^""

a Pk PH o co W
EH
9 I-H NM

3 Ot-^ 0 3 i-^

o o
CJ CO

u o

P<

VI-F-55

0}

lACMOLA*

o i- oo -* oo c- IA
"^

vo

lf\

co f^ o fN o i^
CM^-OCTl'VO

cMo
CO

2
rd

C 03. ** CJ 03 O M tOCM flj\ 0) PHVO03

OH tp

T- T - O O <M o o * "~

ooo

-e

aS

>H O CO U> -^- O VO VO CM O * CO ^d~ N** O O i CM ^- O CD C O S T - O K M X J O K N c - - C O VO <O . . .

rCM o IA
OOO

LTT- CO -sJ-OvO O
O T- O K"N

IA

r **- O
KN
-

LPiinr-O

CM OOO

T-OO

K^> CTiO CM O iTiCM O K> > tCO O vo CO I . CO

CM ^~ CTv

I "
o

O T- co * <* in O
O CM O LTN T- O T- O CM

O i-

OCMCT\O O* LT>

rt o

vo o'od <*

6 o~ o cr> o vo cr>
OT-

...

T-O

T-

VD CM O CT> O IA CMCMOC^'^O

OOO

CO O O O

S^
,-x P^'~^ 1 CT^ W S KN C\j o TOOO

ir\
OOO

O C
VD

O OOO

r < a) FH 2 -P EH rt

T>H o o -^co o co o *=*-o CM co - - - co g.

O

T-

S^ a

^O-P M w CM E-icq
O
"3

Lf\T- CO * O VO O

, < r^EHj^
i Ci tl

<o a

co T - O O ooo

t~-cj O m in O T- O ^ . . .
OOO

LP to o c LTN

O VO O = vo vo O

O.'

oooo

. .

PH P!
CO
-r-l

rt W
C5

-\

3 cs r-\
3 ^ ^ S ^H ^ VO PH v

o o c cvi o co t-- en o CM

C^ -^
(T>

, S

O O LT\ O VD t^- CM O CTN S T- O LTS CO O VO T-OO M ... ...

CM O LTv .
O T- O CM

O
T-

O
T-O

ITN OOO

OOOT-(Q
vo O
OT-

ooo

...

cooo

T-

EH -P -P <^v O O

o o

O rt rf

co
CO CO

<"\ O
CO PH CO

EH

co co w C o

Q) <H W

t-t

EH CO O M EH
CO

CO

Pi

THO,

EH KN O EH
O

03

fi)

CO

3
oHO P O O =J -H C fH -P Ol

CO C EH PH cv-\ O CO O O
CO 0) H M*~ PH c q -

ra o o o<co HP< 3 co

I HJ
01 !

-i- ,-).
<M "O

PH

M r-H CO -P <n t)

rt o .

03 >>

co o

EH C EH c -V Tt- ^ O -O
T- -P

O >>

rt

to o
EH>~> -P C.O O H

03 >>

rt

MEH

COO t-tT- -J 4->

t-H--v. C

-p H &

0 <H K
O w -P <M

OO 3

O 10

S QJ -P ro p -P o a) -P <i> o
W O CO 03

E< -P P C < <-i a>

--- O VH EH -P *"
-rtrH

C C

<o

m fi <a o o o co

O B P< PL.P pq P. P<pq pq P-, P.

cpopoooooooo

O O *

VI-F-56

ORIGINAL4 PAOI 18

CM <H

!*s ^5

T-^J-VO O CM VO T- T- CM *'* TT

o co o

CO T- CO VO CO CM

- co ir\ c CM o co

^ S V OO^C M O ITN O (

CNJ

O C M f O VT> O "^ ^ * * * C5 C5 ^*

O O t-O
OOCM

"< &o

f-

fcflCM \ PHVO

CO. < g O O?*

^1 co

<--d-vO O O ON . . . T- CM CM

ococo

t vo

r cy> vo F- CM o ^
^CM f

to mvo CM O ^* CM CO
TPS

O CM - o f^ O K^ CO

O cr*vo vo ovo cO'OT^

CM

OO

cr\ cS

ovorjJB H S 558 . . . T-VO C-

min f- T- CM o CM
$ ^ o

T-ir\KNCMO O T- U\

OCVJOOT O CM

O CQVO t^

o-*co

*~

000

ooo

s p o s
o
r

**

ooo
,.

T- co vo TJ- CM o rOt^T- 1 *

O^I-OICMO
v
CM

O^-C~-T-TO T- CM

fc< a
IS

?5

T- O hT\

O O T-

... T - V O

CTi

*-

<-

r^-

O ^~ ^1"

ot^moj

ooo

cr! -P EH rt

2CM 1 (. i 1 HI W r-i

^ O
EH ^^ EH
C^ CO

.^
0
^

MM W
&1
'jj ^ (^

8 O O f"** % r-

CM CTivO CO CM O CO VO T- - in . ^^.
^v

ITvCM ^f^ CM O
CO CM 0 vo S^
^_

^>

i?t

coco

fs

o COvo^-vo o 00 C^ r . O o *-

o^ ^ ^^-O *~ CM ...

ooo

!a
EH

e H
0>

s
T

&1

F~ t*~-

o 00

1
CTv

O 0-*

O LTN

-ct- O MD IfN CM O * CNJ T- VO C\J 0

O CV C CM O CO ^ CM

O vo CO

O O *~

OOO

ooo

^ OS

g
>H

co
O W C5
EH >r\ O
0) CO ^3 CO
HO -P O O

H
O

-P
W

CO

M M EH EH f^K\ 00

EH EH

O EH
>

:
EH
CO (X

'cTo
O ^ 3B
J-t -4

> ^

to
CO
EH

>-P H

8.

CO tt) PH CO CO CO PS ID CO Vl R)

o r) rt E3

O -P P M CX C) O I -P -P 0) C r~i f.< rH r-H

***
B.

> O

C)

rH CO

a-^
{!.+>

r-t

4> rH ^ <H

w o (H to >> o E -- O < I tt

o
P^-^

, tO 3

6)

C M >, >,

PM >

PH^^ C to >>
S EH O J3 v. O O CO P O . O CO
PQ CD

gl
PQ

r-l

P 4'

CX 0)

cw o o co co O o -P -P
Ur*j j-(rH CO iH *M <M

s: o
Pv( PL, PH fit

P rt

(0 0

Er

(8

OM

a cu oo

O PH O 55 CO EH

CO -P

fp OJ i- 10 > > CO 3 f-i EH i-3 O ctf CT* O CD *-3 W pq Pi) Ai O 53 ci

<; cx c

ca pq W PH 93

03 _ . . 03 CT1 CJ

to >

VI-F-57

S VO t(A *- VO tA
1

^ONO^^ LPi .xj-^" CM

IA ^

CM

CM

IA

LA CNJ

**
CM

CO * t CNJ O LA^ ON *~ .VO LA

vo Q O C*^ ON fON ^- tA LT\

(A

co

CM IACO

ON

tA

^~

CO

CO

co vo cn
VO *-

co

o\

CM

T-

VO VO lAcO VO O O ri- 1 CO ^f TO VO ^J-r VO T-

CM 1- fA

LAO

r~vo co T- KN
CM CO ^ VO CO tAxJ- CO ON 00 >-- CM
^^

0 CM
LA

LAtACO
O
^"~

CM

CM

Tfr-

CM

W
H i

ON

xj- VO ^O

CM

-^-

*-

^~ VO t*"\ U~\ VO O VO O^ ^" 00 C"*~ ^~ ^f"

C\J

vo

c-

C--ONKNCNJO ^ v o *

- (AtAO (A
LA

t-VO CO T^-*

ON ^~

O tA **

s
o S'-X fi< ra < a>
O O

o T- en
KN C*** O**

T~ tr\ c\i

^^

*~

IA CM T- 00 CM IA CM CO O tA -*tf- T t VO tAVO tA ON LA CNJ O * CM tA

c-o r>-LA o
ON ONVO CM
CM O CM T- CO ON ^~
"*

* O xj- O VO

-t- r>-tACM o
CM fACO
T

CO VO CM

LA VO CO

CM

o -P HI trj
EHW

CO

O IA VO 00 T- CO

IA O LA 00 LA T- IA r- tA -d- LTN f-

f-VO

T- T- O

<

IAtA
CM CO

PH C CO -H S 6 <; -H

O rt

c-

00

CO -

cn

CO

vo O *~ VO VO CO CM

CO ^NCO O fLA O LA CM CO tACO W 0

T~ <O

L~~ VO
CM

r-

ON

^
VO

a E

O CNJ CM LA LA O
* Tt-

x}- ON T O CV' O C~VO LA O C~VT\T CNJ

* T

T- r-T- <- c
VO CM ON . tA CM LTN CNJ
^ J

TCM

LACO^^CM CM r-T- O T- CM ^}-CNJ

CM

LA

o
CJ

LA xj-

ON

LA CJN LA

as w
>H

S
PH
rH CO

^ (A

>> \ EH
''O
T~

f-t

W -P tH -P H >j H H C
rH EH\

CO

EH
O

"~^
EH O
^

>>

-P H
rH H rH ^^^ 3 C

n +>

O
(3 P

O
P
tH
*****

W r^

00
k

, ^J

6^ "*^ r*"!**^-

frf*\ *** **v^_ Q ^^

r*^^ ^^C^

*^ P

c/5 ^* *\. *^
0
-4

O to EH to *

EH
S

to TtO -

<u C
.NO)

O* W rH
P

HO

a o-

> 0 -P cfl ^-^ > O -P rJ &4 tO 10 W > O EH Cl CO rH W i> O Hi (!) rH CO PH -P -P EH to O O -^* O D* -P Hi tiO r H" P <U D. fe5 CO H H O MO (H [H rH 0> r I Hi (H t3-j rH rH CU

S H

ryi

frj V-^ 4J

--P

? o

(0 W Ct> rH

H 6

EH to o C S to -P ti o
0" CQ rH -P H C

o^Br:^ r> * m
-P +* -P

^^

S5 O M EH oj EH
^^

co
PH CO

bO ^^ ^*^
4^ CO O O

ta rt (H co co CD o !>> H o o

O M EH a! 6H

W 4^> Cl O to O O O O O H-> P rH

tQ O O -P

3
D-4 Ei
H i

PM

On)
Hi

O O P
Pi <D oo oco

t** nJ ^ t^ -P EH Hi CO 0 O H!

S rH

n, vi <n f-( <H

t* fc^ t* r1*

cd

SH IM rH

CJ rH -P rH

ft) rH

O H pH <H > *H

O rH
03 t*

O rH

PH

VH

ra c

CO

E-HC=5 O O O O O n l OCJEnOOOOS! EH
pc<

< O -Pnl (-5 Hi

EH W 0 Hi r-J H

EH O O n1 EH K K ~ K rH PH O CO W EH
< O H) O EH P! Hi

CO >> -P > S EH > EH f i-1

O H H O

EH

a>

cb

P4

CO

VI-F-58

OCOtO cM^rCM H

O CJ O

-~> CO iCO

cnco co co CMO co
CO VO

CM CM O

Q CM <r\O ir\
00-

i if to
e

Of-O O

o cno
OO KS

CM

J2

O COCTv

"g SS
g H r-*CMV cncrv

tocnco
CO

10 <*

CM O VO CM CT i- KN CVJ

O c\j CM O to O to CO

O OO

8P
*

OO T-

OVO CM

5 n

J-

C\>T- ITS

ooor T- vo r-

cTvmco' c- c-'

I CM O '

t- i- ir\

IOOri- O CM

O OO

o cnr-to o <* to oo o

s
R
/

O OO CM O v0 O O CM

O CO CM VO CM O CO CM to CM <* t-

cn -

ivo

T--<i-VO CM O *-**-,C\J C~CM

T- CTiCM,<8 ir\cr> r- T-

O t- CM

O C LTiCM 0--a * oo o

EH

4
w

CM O MD O O iTv

o oo

t- oo en c-r-

r-o en tr\ CM o co r- CM T- ir\ *

TIO

*- IOM3 CM O

O CTNt T-VO

O CM O

O CO r-T

O tor' O T- CM

O Or-

o oo

1 EH or
OS

o oo CM S oS ooQ

tOr- VD CM O

_i co mcM o *

\-<- CM

CM CM CM O

OM3 CO
COO

O CD to
00-r

CTi

i- UMT\

o oo

to to 00*

to to 00
OS

to

o
0}

3 g Vi W H H >, S
c^o
CO

U ri
oHO P O O
CO <D PH

co cd B

^ PH'^ C CO >, >, tD E-t O C ^>"^

o ^ 3s PH >,w 3

o o tn m
nH SH H

O -P -P

,-<#

j-<rH

CO n PH m CO
Vn rt o
CO O P-l

co
(4

< - o. c pq o "H M > > CO 3 EH ,

O rt cr O O i PC pq K PH O !

tD EH O C^^ COO O O CO O O + W-^< rH CO rHH P5 0) -^ C3 > 03 3 fHt-3

^
-O. C

PH^. C W >.

33 +> li
ou o to
CO A p> (U

Pd PH pq PH SS

O a cr o> i-^

fe; co i

* O

VI-F-59

I tOvfl p^J

f- T~" p

O
-*

to

VO ( CO O t-O O ITXT- ^r to-r- CM

en

-^- CM

OO CM CM O cncM 00 i VO
CM

CD CM O O CM VO T- to*- CO

CM
0"N

to
O^

CM VI

^T

VO

r-

<* *"

VO CM ITt

00

cn^j- ^-vo
CM IOOO

O CM
T-

00

> 1^

CM^

s o
65
^rJ

CTiVO v00 -r- CM 00 CM

tO f- T- CM ^_ o TOO'T-T-^OTO

V in CM vo o
OMO v-

ITv

'<1-

r-

too *to
^"

r-- o CM cn CM to^co o
^- T- tO

CM

9
^ % 3 PI O
^H

en

cn

$f

CMVO CIT>T- O CT^

T- tVO CM [ O C

c^~ ^ cn co ^*
CM

^~

r-i-** CM o
^*-VO CM
T- T~

CM 1T\CM CO ^*^^ CM CD T~

CM

rcn

O to
T-

5 ^
OVO CM VO t-O

c-

T*

*"

^r* ^^ . CLJ CQ r~i

EH r^
^,

. . P, . j-i^
-g

]2 2i

in ^*f
T-

CM into

t~- o en c~- T- r- rm vo 10 cn
00 CM
T-

t CO to ^ CM to T-

mfovo ir\o oo O * CM

VO VO T- tOvO

.to CM
>-

^ ^ c to ^~
*

cn r^"
T~

LT\

CVJ

tO

cn

C-T-OO

T- C-- tO CM CM CM tO CO

VO

to

CM

00

^Z **H
O H-> >H

CM

M 05 EHW
PJ ^^

CO CO S
^** -j

O CO 00 VO T- CO
* en r-

CM to to r- in - en toto co * T to cn
03 T-

T- CM T- T-

^.59^:^ cn vo
CO
CM

cnvo r- CM Tin o vo ro rr toco CM tT-VO

to to

vo

r-* CM

cr\

^
r-1

S fH C 0 CO -H
?

1-3 3 _j w "JJ
C-i r*l

^t~i
O to to
Z

PH

en en a; **

o tn o cnt- rlf\

IA O T- CM CM O <Ti O - CM r-

to vo en c~~

CM

^~

op ^

en

m o '~ m o o t^ fr- CM ^u_ -

in CM CM cn to
CM CM C T-

CM N"N

rLT\

cv

cn in

s
p1
4 ^. ^^
rH

>>

ra

H->

0]

fH
EH rH -H

CO
C

o
EH!?^ 1 ? co ^* ^\ y^ j^

^4

EH CO 0
O

1 0
i rl

EH

00
W T-

EH >, M -H 'c to -^ t>> C 3 O f-i EH-^S. 3

*x^ CI? <^ 4^ EH > CO T4) C S CO H-> t3 4) CT W rH 4-> -H G Crf B

to
EH

O M\ 3
"**^C^
r^^C

>> c 3
^4^
*

o
EH EH

co PH
CO

CS O CO*

nJ

a> + lo o o

EH n

S O H-> - N O ) O* W rH 4> H B

to

0) rt

o o s **> ** o v>
O M 4^ W M O CO O EH O O O

bO

0) r4 M

PM co w to
CO Pl-r H->

63 CO rH rH SH

> EH O O

EH rt t> > H^ EH i "|

PH EH O JE CO

? 0 0 >, KB 0 0 > 0 -P d^^ > o -n nj O E-l ft 4) r- 1 W > 0_^ 4) rH MO O H-> 41 P.H- Vl O rH rH rH 05 rH fl) D.VI Vl r^< VH K rt '" "-H Cl M O rH 0 rH
<

cq rt <n o m 41

03 O O

1 oo

< 0 EH 4^ -!-> rH H-> K rH + rH Cj r-l

O Vi [-( VI H-> VI PM Vi O
CO > > 4* t-

EH g

o o
0 VI
rH

OJ

co oo t-q

"1
ota
O 0

^ 0 -*5 EH|H EHEH^ EHW O O O O O r H OOEHOOOOC!

EH C) O h^ h4 ^ EH

4 r-P (-3 r-^

^ ^ ~--

S EH > EH ^ 1-3 < OHH 0 ,3 i-q O C5 P4 PH O CO W EH EH

* W

0 4> CO

PM

0
VI-F-60

CM M O

r- in

CO CD r- CO CJ O CD CT*- <T*<0 00 CvJ

OCO

OCM K\

o er>o

**

-H 0>O

CO CO

ooo 'KNO
crvcr>

OT\ VO

co

CM

VO OMOCM O

vCM

co CM cn
t<^

o K>KN o in
OK>CO

-o o

vo O

o o cr> o' o t^

<*-VT\CO CM CM O CM

OOD C*

T-VOCO
S ft O

C T

7 -

T- Ifvvo CM O K\T- in

^r- o t<>

in

T-

ooo

CHCO O ^J-00 T K\O O

000
tr\O en

CQ

T- tnvo

O O KN .

co en co cCM o co to> KN CM**" Tcn -TTVO

OVD CM VO in O T- O VO KN
CM CM

in f- < in co vo CM
T-O O

CTiT- tn

CM fe g

6-i c3

v_^

o 3 "t ; 0-P
g^<

M 01c J

EHW Si <

DS

S O"4o O ^> ^ CO 0
t CO

00

^ O CM O CNJ O CO en CM CM VO *

1-CM O

co t^ en CM o
fTKN

tn

'. o vo

o en cntno

CO f- fNCM

o * t. ..
r-OO

H OflJ ta J t PM d '

CO"H

H
"

1
^

* s
S

aoo 0 in o KN
,- ITiVO

en in 52 vo oo CM o Th o

fO,CM K> CM O

c^-^

o en co m c o vo 5 T- t

OO

lncr^^n> C-O i
O OC

g
EH

to .p

CO CO -P P -H

EHE-I

OJ

a P<

E*^ KN O
Or-

EH

o
0)
W
-P

00
O >>

c 0)

EH' ^

V*

CO

HO P O O

c o

fi W U fl)

-m
S

p,

-P W
> O

CO

-P O P,

I -p -P O

flj-^ ,-< w
O.-P

o ^
U) r-l f-t H

0) (-4

B ^ >o o g 0). o -P rt 0)
P, H ^| m (O 6)

"P 4) C .NO) H^-H fl

>> W "^. C EH o

PH t>> W

co o>
PH

rt

I -p -p
!r-lr-t 1 H H

(X
0>

o o o
CO <

-* P! EH O

co raPn BJCO

CO

-p rt to fl O o> oo o to

<H rt o EH rt

EH 6-i OOO '

Pn

o> co 31 ^
OS (T 0)

P. C

pq

-P. C

ra 3
cS cr

PH

a PH O K

co -P O PH O
CJ

VI-F-61

CM <H O 0) O
tOcvj PHVO

*
T-

in,

t-- 1- CM in r- O * vo ^~ -<i-T" CM c CM cn in

G\ IfN Q^ (<^ ^^

^ Vf^ ^O T*~

VO CM C VO VO

co * Ln *^ cn CM to en

o in
CM

VO T-

cn

to to vo
CM

CO
VO CO

>H
CO

ri-s^

co S
*g

S
*

T- CM CM

O c-vo CM r-o to CM T- vo en*o in * Tcn

TJ- VO O VD O
IOCM O to i n

co to CM to o CM cn en * o
T- T- tO

CM

CM

cn

^ KT

in

cn to in

^_

55 g

CM T- O CM i-

voco

co c co cnto co cn T- CM en ^~
CO

in T- cncvi o CM c-en
*~ T~ VO T~

CM vo en t en T- incnvo en
* VO CO *"

vo vo
O CM

in
CO
CM

VO

en

T-

**

o
Xs Q

y
^5 S
CO

r^ r^H^"*^
pLj

O CM in en co o to in to
VD

cn cnco cn tn ^g- to C--VD in o CO CM T~ *- c to to

VD in T- vo r- T- in

^- T- O CM

o T- en in
"

C1 ^j" cn c^ f1 ^- CM vo -*r O T c in TJ- co

fCM

CM tocn v

to

CM

ccn cn
T

' 2-p
5 (H rf
O H

S M CO CO :p H
CM EHpa ^^ ?> CO S l*^t

o T- cn to toi-

co T- go co vo T- cn ^- vo cn to * T- to cn in

CO O O CM O to to vo

VO O to O VO
T- VO

o cnco vo o to cnt^vo

VO

1 IH > W W

rv.

OS M O O C0 M PH d O CO rt S< 6 S H
CD.

d
CO

VO

o CM

rcn ^

VO

cn cn

^ m PH ^
cn en
OS
-

S H
*r-t

O in ^iin in o
[0 T- T-

vo CM in CM CM o in o t m en to in T- CM CM

TJ- vo * m o to in cn to ^r
CO

in to 'M o TCM cj cn ^f- cn

T CM ^f
'dCM

O CM

ro cn

c.
c

vo

Tin

CO

<n

in T ~

CM

to VD

*
M >, \
EH
T-

S **
^1 J>1

CO CO -P

?H >>

CO 03 -P

PH < O
2 fH (-t ^^ r~t ^5 rH ^5

CO

EH

fO r ( rrl iw

EH fn
T

>, fn H c -v, >, f\ 3

^tfN *** >

O 0
W

KA

EH

H H C

0 M\ 3

>5 q P

o fe;
0 M

C5

cc

0)

O W EH w
Cd
f-4

--^ o *"> -P <U C5 E; co +j - D I D

EH - CO rO' tO rH fH

EH\ ^^CQ S *v. s

*^-v^ -4-* EH - CO <U C 0 g (fl H-> . M OJ

o r* ; : < 4,'* *

-vS

<- < EH czj

S-,
<C

EH

CO PH CO ^0
^H

e^.^> erf n r- '-oo

[i| CO tO 10

M c3 <n -p to co o fn

4^ H R

O1 CO rH -P

o '-, P ni~^

ti n) <H a n o> P^ H o o r* o -p rd
t> O i-l

H G

O -P CO W M 0 CO O O EH 0 0 O O
g-H Crf O PH CO

S co
r-H
1

<*
4^ CO O U

rt K4

HO

o-

iO A( -P -P g CO rH H 2 rH EH CJ

> O E I (X a> r-f U) G * t; ) O n -P CJ f^ -P

O fH O O rH | ( ,-4 r-l CD rH

OJ rH

f-^ Uf-1 P 4' Pi

E td **" <H C! r U rH
h-3 v-^

<

CJ nJ

(.I.VH V 1 fn *H

O O G c_i -P Cfj

4-> rH -P <H rH <H ^-

JJ ,-) 4J rH iti rH *H -P "H O >-+>>.

D^ E-l
C5

co a

-P E-( HH CO 0 O t-3 PH EH O P3 CO

- ^ O - P E H g - i e i E H i -1 ; EHCJ O O O O O t - n OOEHOOOOK EH

^^i

O CO

0 0

PH

O 4^ 1 "l 5 EH > EH f ^ EH EH CJ ot-q 3J O O >H EH K S IS 2 PH PH O CO W EH EH EH K

o
H H H 0 0)
CO

PH

VI-F-62

REPRODUCIBIU'J y OF THH ORJG1NAL PAGF /S POOR

Q COvO
O CMCM VI O

CT>VOVO in CM OVO

T- CM

r-

'CM T-CO*

in

'

OCOl

OO CM

O r~v-0 O CO O CM

o
PHVO

000 CD
CM CM Ccr\co

C--CO VOT- OMTN K> *CM

ooo
rA

QVOVO

00*-

OO O-* OT-

S T-O coin
CMVO in
o S
S
Q
F&l

OU3in

cro i in*- in CM cr

*- o cricM o O IA

O^-CD

O ir\- O
000

*d-O CM

ooo oom
T-CM

CM r-in
CO
CM

KNOO CM CO

CM

O O CT\t- CM O tr\ O CM IT*

oe o inooo

00

< CO

0 O 0 *-O OJ

-d- CTi CO CO CM O VO CTv CM T-

O O -

T-

i-

a-^-T-

CM O

cvj oo
CO H

VO

O C-tTiCM O - tA

O f-ir*T- ro

O r-rl-CM

O CM in 0*0 o

'i- O O

ooo

ov

o o co
CM inr-

o
CM

\T- ino CM o co i CM rA in

CO CM K\ CM CM

OMD o

O CTiVO v O - CM

000

en

a m +> -P -H

t>>c 3
EH
rs
o
t

H fl O W

O EH
f] CO pi-,p, CO

CO CO +> P -H >H -r4 C t,C 3

>+ (DC N 0)
O O

i EH A 00
6H

KNtA 00

EH EH

CO

oa
gHO 4>
-H H +> OJ

55 4* 3

ofe S .*.-' EH *">'" EH^V. a, c CO . N ft) p. g H M *>* a S.^| CO CO O

O O CO CO S +*-^ o 4-> cs CVN << I CO O iH O O -+> 3 C - 4* cy O, rH G VH TO i-l i-l r-\ 0) ci O 6 HHH P 55 co -H to fc > 0-C pq W CO 3 >H EH i-P O d craj o >-P , PH Pn PH pr^ pq t-3 Ou r > pr;

co

n) B o> co

W P, QJ rH W O + fHi-l O.SH

a P i>> o

&EH O

OB

pq > 5OE-l

2 fl fl <u oo oco

CO * O PH O fcCO EH

SWO

OO

rH co < o, c pq a) -H to co 3 fc i O n) cr <u

PH > W 3 ^ C CO >> E^ O C O O CO O O ^--^}

ca

VI-F-63

VD tO^^*j ?5

CM
H

55

f-

C~

o to - co to o rc to cnin to to r^ co ^^
to
CM

tO P~CM ^- O VO tO CM CM CM tO

m^ co co CM to CM in *- CM

O
^~ ^t"

CO
* I O

a
CO ^ t*"\

CO

CM "sr

*"

& ^
^

CM^- r-

*~ co co co to

*~ ^r VO ^~ t-

CM

CO

ClTrt*

**i

CO S

^-

to to, T- to hn o TO o cn CM
CTitOCM CM K\

M- CM

in CO CM - o
CM v2 5- T-

vo o to vo

m en to c CM cn me CM mr- VO c-cnt-o & CM tOvo

to

CM

in to in O 10 Tin CM in cn

cn
T-

8
cn
^-tl-^0 VD"CM ^j eocM
CM
^i*

.^ ^3 tj *

to to T- to to o to
10 ^

o tocnvo to
tO

OJ

^^ ^^

CM

to cntovo ** CM o vo cn Tito to vo CM
T- T- CM

o
cn to

in

^~ ^j-

CM

&^

*~

fi o s
__

,
^5 *?
j.

~*\ G-J
pt4 03

O to to CM in o inv vo
O
CM
e ^

^- vo in CM to in to in t- co * CM CM TJT- CM c cn

O P-CM O O

c^- o cn in
incM vo cn to
cn
VO-d-

CM tO CM VO CM
T"" ^^" VO VO

cnto,-<-vo cn
CM ^1- f^^- ^*-

CO

in cn

in to
vo

Cr*

to
C\J

T" [* ^t*

cn

^r^

to

**

CM

co ^-

I
CM
^
g

gl
M 03 EH

CO "S

H vo in O
CM to [-_ i-VO tO

to c vo to T- CM cn vo vo vo to T in VD vo r*cn
. VO VD ^~
CM TCO tO

*- in CM CM o
vovo CO (M tO CM
CO T- CM C <r-

CO CM tO Tj- CM T- VO p-^ CM f- CM CM

VO

' o rt tq
rH C C5

gr?

0^

cn in ~

^:

OJ

cn

CO -H
1-3

S rH
r\ .
Cn>^x

cH

cn cn

t i Sr1 s

oo tO CM
T_

o vo vo
cn

o o T- * ^ o cn C CM CO *dto o to in ^i" to VO CO cn T-

t- i-vo cno
i- VO CM VO VO ^" ^"

O to ^- f vo

CM m co vo
^-

vo

to

TLTN

cn
CM

in

cn in

erf

fj
r*3
"s^

EH to 00
H H

>> \
tO

r-1

-p M -p H
*^x. ^) (3 3

03

PH
to
T

>,
EH rt

m +*
H C

P-4

o
t*3

EH CO 0

o
P FH P
*** *
s ^J Sx ^ fa ^J

> S 3
~
^>S

o
t

W T-

^ ^n
^>.

* *+*

co S^.S
0
k

EH ^*>* ^' >.

ctf
0) 0^

O M

EH to
rt

O t* 4* EH 03 i(U C S 03 -P .NO) C" 03 rH --P rl E

^>fct^

K 6 >> >> cr; a

M t-i

EH -D OJ C jr; m -P N 4) O" rH -P H S

o <^ s * *-^
**
k k

55 O M EH
^*

CO
rH

co
^^

EH

Crf

ttO

Pt( co w to

>

> o

o -P

o >> 1
rt ^^

d e
S>
f-3

o o > o -P rt
4) rH rH rH <U

o w -p co
M O CO O EH 0 O O

n
O O

co
^c p^

s
5

H O H-3 O O
S'fH

C o-

CO PH -P -P t=5 CO rH rH 3 HH CS H EH rt
CO 0 O r3

t* O EH CX Q) rH W EH t3O O +> <U O.-P

O

O i-3 P K O rH

t-3 tJt-3 - P O O .
"~

<

^O rt

M r - H r H (Ur-H

P.<H <H S-< <H

03 a
O CO

CO p4

^O-PEHE-iEHEHi-^ EnW O O O O O ) - 3 OOEHOOOOS EH

r3 rt t^ r* t> r^* f^

O rH

HH
<
E~* ^

rt

> > t*
O 1-3 rH t-3

EH d O Pn CO

O +^ 1-3 M r3

S EH > EH ,0 1-3 EH
< 0 r3 0 3 1-3

-P -P rH 4J rH H-> rH rt rH <M ,-H <H H- *H VH O > > H-> >

^
H-> 03 O 0

EH
t-3

O
<H H C 0} CO

EH CJ

~~

2 Pi PH 0 CO 33 EH EH

o o

f4

33

o,

VI-F-64

^4
CM VI O ^c pj

^C-

rM T-O

CM <T\

VO VO CM c CM O t cr\tocoto Tt* T

T-

IA

VO-^-CM^-O co T- * VO T GO

8 UNOO O COCO T

tr*

T-

OO CM

o tO C--To COO CM o ^ V0

?R
c"^
(H

MCM

CO OT

PH vO

<s 0
O

OCOCT* VO *O OvO
CM CM CT*

co T- oSiA to
T - C M

O CO CO U"^ CM O CO

t*~ IA co to c
**

T CO C** CVJ o

tr*voom vovo

00V

T- <T*CM o o* T- tO

crco

VO

o co *

COOt-10 CM VO T-

en

T- T-CM CMO VO K>TO KN

CM VOVO

OvO T- O O--1-00 OOO

O CT\VD VO

ocnc
OO-r-

o o
o
^^

c^ c^ c^

r^ co vo 10 CM T vo
r~-c u>cr> CO CM tO CM Tto

vo cr* r to co
voco^ ^" ^" *^" T

y
^^

PC4'*'"^

t EH

p^

ptl 03 ^J O CC 4^

vpoco O O t CM tOCM T^CM

O IO LTN CM CM O tOO ^ CM

0 to cr*

o in CM

O CMVO

ooo

o
V f

EH f

B
OOO VO CD CO

o*03>^ M tO

CM

1
1

EHW COS

py

<! ** O EH ^> j ^ o rt C3
p^ r* O

CD CD vo
CM CO O C VO T

tOOtJ-CTiCMOvO CO ^^ ^" T T~
CM

cr\

VO

* T

vOVOCOCMO to ^J* T
tO

^^

vo

8 tLTvCM TO*\ CO T-

to

O T- tO

o o C\J LTl o o'o

t^

CO-H
EH
ooo VOOO cr* T- co o CM o oo COCMtOlA VO-^ITICMO OCM'4O COVO O t O IOC T.

9 pq
EH

o ^^ ^~^ S o
0s-CM

fH

&

O O C

CM

... CM in CM ^t" CA

CM 10

CM

OT-T-

o O^ t* o r- CM * o00

03 -P

03

03
03 P P -H

o
EH (0

to

p<

to o
OT-

>>
03

01 C

-P

EH EH to to 00 EH OS
CD EH 00 1

, EH EH
"0*0

-P w
O O

N QJ *H B

o >, 03 O,
CO

-MO -p -H B
o

O
HO

CO -H

O H f-4 m 03 OJ

g.

^J 03

O O

m fl a <o o o o co

CO CO 03 FM 03CO ^^ Cu O B rH

o n) ) B o

EH

p to p, I O 4*
fn

01 rH. 0)
^| I t.

5 p"^03o -P rt I 3 c HJ +jO rH o o.
Q E *H <H SH ^t

^ t>> o

O
WO OO

EL) T- c f-l rH CT rH H M

o nm o P -P
CO

C H O C O O 03 -P
P. C

oo

m v -H o) t > w 03 3 ^ EH i-^ go

<

-P. C

p . A. i

o PM o a co EH

CO -P

O rt cr <u o i-P K pq w PM O K

<u H cj m 3 ti rt cr <D

VI-F-65

CM O

T- in CM r-tovD en t
O

*^* ^j- ^- CO ^t~ O < ^" O*\ (O ^5 O 1"*"*^ *^~ 1

C *VO

^- ^JT-

o\

^~

oj

8? *

in CM in rh o CM in CO T- r f- ^-

C^" ^^ CO C*^ tf^ KN ^" O CO t^ T~ GO O^ CO *^

v~ ^1^ *^5 r*^*

T-

CM CM * ^CM

tn cn tn
CO

.
PHVD

COS aj O

T ro dV.Q

cntnr^J*

-4-tn c in tn o O cn CM
m
O^
^~ CM

O -*j- vo m tn o **

O^o tn*- o
vo c CO T vO O vo VO CO CM

Cf^ t^~ t^N LPN N^

in co LT\ CT\ CO

CO CO
CM

c^ o^ c*^ ^5

in
CM

O"^ CO

in

C\J t<AVD

T- tnr-^^ fO ^~

^ CVJ VO

vo^r-t^oin O^ f^"S T" C*""1 1^\ O^ CM tn

VO T-

in <* T- ^- o tn CM c* tncvi
<!-

(<^v CNJ f->- f<^\ TOJ T- C^'*- t*. f/^\ (<\ f^ ^\j
T-T-

tn
CO

^~-

CM

CM

en tn

en

&

i
l CO

o ^ en
CO VO O f ^ vo ^~
CM CM

i
CM

tn

co co en co tn vo CM tn CM vo co CM CM vo u-\ CM c cr\ ^~ ^~ ^* ^~* in CD * tCM

vo CM cno o ^i~ tn *^i~ tn vo CO in CM vo O tn 0

inrco o en en *^ co tn ^~ CM ^x/ c in co T ^- vo vo tn

cr. f1
tn **
tn

in
fO,

VD

CO
T~

0 -P

M co

o tn en
cog
^f S vo Ptn
0

cnr-^Ln^ CM vo c~-

C^- tn T o * CM CO

'-o en

GO CO CM tn c CM r- o CM
"3-TC\J

en 03 O co CM T- T- in co o
^~ S^CM CM
T

O en
CO
T

".
cn
CM

> PH PH
CQ

O c3 C CO H

w
o en co o oo
r- tn c\J

vo

co

VO T-

oo

tn

in

CO

&e
CM m co o ** O tn T- CM vo in -<d in
r- CO en TCTv[ CM U\ O

CT\VO r
VO VO VO &

o
CM

CM

CT>

en
CM

O in O in CM CM in co vo *

in in

in in
(Tv
*

05

&

l l
Vs^

>, ^
EH
^~
r*O

rH

tn O 0
W

EH

>> fH H q
**^

eo-p M -P-H
*

(0

f-t

D3

>> *x.
EH

05HJ -P-H
rH -H C

PH o
M

CO O O
fa fa fa

EH

p-j

tn >> C 3 0 fH\ 3

(=5
0 rH EH
CO

EH^!>L\ -v?
co E:"^E
O 55 O M EH <

o
rt I
K

1 -

O to EH to
n)
E

^^Of> --P EH W t<U C E CO -P N 0) O1 CO rH --P -H Q

rH rH
>>>>

EH to 0)C j tn -p - N oj 1
O

"*^.^^

*4^

O 5 E *
4* t * -P -H- W -P CO O CO O 0 0 O 0

*>
* -P W O O

PH CO
v**{

EH

bo

ci B
t* EH O O
(-3

fr, co co co

gHO

CO PH -P -P 5= CO rH H i-H

O lr-1 D< 4) rH W tBO O -P 0) O.-P fnO rHr-trH 0>rH td P.*H <fH rH SH O rH

fij r*1 r* t t^

>

> o o :>> o -P ri"^

W c3 VH d to o

M it -P -H B

K, e
>

> o -P cr)
OJ rH

CO J2S

1 <*

O r3

1-3 tJ)>~3 -P 4) p4 -3 f-. K rH rH flj K rt H *H rH O r-H

EH -P

-P rH -P

^?

d rH -P rH td rH O <M ,-H V-t -P VH PH H 0

c5

b -P

EH

a -H S fn p oJ to fl
C 03

O O

EH a

t*

^~* E~l hH*

CO 0 O 1-3 PH EH U K CO P3

<^ O *P EH EH EH EH r1 EHf=3 0 0 0 0 0 r 3 OC3EHOOOOK EH P^l

<=; o -P i-3 h^ 1-3

EH W 0 (-3 1-3 f-3 Oi-3EH K KK EH

to >
EH

t5 EH ^* EH rQ t-P
*S Ol-3 O

> -P >
Pf r^3

i-q
EH
EH

o o
0
.,-t
rH

CO

O o o
CO

c2 PnPn 0
m

CO W

o o
O CO

CJ

p<

VI-F-66

>3
CM
o

5 tSM CO rrt

OOVO ^t" Cn CM t^ CM T- tO

^^ vO CO CO CM CO C*^ T- toco to T-

T mo^o
^^ T" VO K T-

o IAIO o o
O CO CO O OCM

O intorO CO - CM
OT^VO

00 Tin

^~

?R
ocoo
* CM CM ^r-

T C"

^ 0)O tlQCM

FHVO

**

cr<- o in to .
TtO

^-CTlr-VO CM O CO

^- cr> ** CM o T-mcr>
* ^~

Ovot--oir* ovovo
OOf^

O CM CM CM

O T- 10 -

O>CT>

s
p g o
PI *

8 oo to
1-C-

ovoc-

00 O CO to CM O * -T- in CM

t-T-tncMO
O
10

ovocviOto
.
O OO

tr\

O O C--VO OOfO*T^t-^

CMVO tr *J-CT>
*

0 OO O * 00

in co CO CO c^1T~ vo T- c vS o> to
KN CM

CM to in EH
Ct| CO ^ CO
T-tO

o cnvo in * * -

CTOT-tOO

OIOT--.J-CM . o CMVO

Oin^CMCM

O vo to to

o tocn o oo

S-P

^CM

525 *H

CM

H CO CO 6HW ^S

O OO SO -^JOCM
CM CO CM D"** VD
^

CM O - O CM O C
O
10

VO

*~

fe

en >>_fe
pi r) 0
0 OS 93 PH C tt CO-H
g; g

CAVO ^-CMO VO^CM TJVO tO

OrCM CM tO OCOVOCM^ ... O T- tO

O C ITiCM

O CM in

0*0 o

H >
pq

P5 rH EH 0)
^~ Qj
_-J

O OO
QVO 8 Q

CTiT- CM - CM O CO
Y*

O CM rj- m
cvi

8~ CM
CU

CM into

to

CM CM TJ& CM
CM

CT\-*I-COCMO

ocr>r-T-c^ O to [ -r...
O*-r-

O CTir-^ O-r- CM O O*O*

co -p
O r< -P -H

CO

03 CO 4* 4> -H

(HP >> >

o
H
ft

O
EH fH

EH "^^ 3 to E
O> +

^. >>c 3
r0> C

W
Hi
(4

>> c 3
'
*

toto
O O
^" *

^^ EH EH
1 1 0 0

(4 fn

^ 3
0) C

&f\ IO O

>>

t> S
CO

4> EH

EH

0> + gHO 4 0 0 g-H -P flj

pq co
CO ^^ 3 K EH

--P

rH B

EH"^

Crf

Ej

cd

00 ^ ^**

r-

<D

si
co ro PH
COCO

-H >, > O O >, ^H ^"^ O 4^ d ^^ +> CO PU 0) r-l OT 1 4* O -P <U (X-P C rH H rH rH O rH (0 V Ci,H tH (H <H P S pq >t>t>>

!2;Vl>->O O & 4* O ** flj ^|CO <OrH rHCH-4a)D, COrHrHrHO) (P E H M <M M

o. +>H-g H (-( oo co o>

tQ O)

pM*^~ 13 CO >> f E H O C "*~~v ^D E"H O C3 ^^* C/0 0 0 CO CO coo o o co O O*>4-> W<-e r-lrH CO *~ rH W CO rHVHVn < - O. C ^ -0. C
PQ 0) iH CO fc t CQ3^EH(-^

PM>>co3^ifH PM*^. C co >, >,

OrtPEJ

o M 3s

03 a do

0 Er-t

oco

0 0

5; co EH

CO -P O PH O

05

^1 C^ PH ^ PH PH P^ ffi j?

fe; W i-^l i-3 >-^ i-l

tQ SOt^fc*?*^

co 3 ^ i-5 O rt o* D o i-3 O ft cj* co t-^

p P^ ^q PH p3 I *^

pa a> -H co !>

<

ci

VI-F-67

vo rocn
CTvtOVO
to
PS CM
f*C*~

IT\ ^- c>0 ^ "*i" O CO vO Q^ ^~

O^ 4

T- VO O CM CM t . CO ^^

O min-i- o

tovo in in o T- co cncnfT- -<j-vo r-

CO O vO ^i~ in

cn in vo
CM

CM

cn

O"\

^~*

cn to CO

s
fc&s^

>H to

p^

co s: < o

o rocM vo totn

* ^h cn T- ^ o vo
r- tO CM CO tO

QO CM CM T-

^- ^t.

o65 W

rn ??

cn cn

. cn in CM "^

CM

r^^ co ^^ ^* v2? T cn vo
CO CM

VO -i-T- CM CM
C\J tO VO

men co to -Jr- cnco -

^
p*_

o m
CM

cn

*~
O -^- CM T- ri- O VO

._ K
t*

c-- to cn c-'^r: to CM * cn

u"\ to ^4- cn to
CM

cn

cn

vo iCM

.to

in co to ^j- o C--CM cn
in CM *
tO CM

tom r- cn to CM ^ cncM cn
IO tO t CM ^-T- CM

CM CM

o Y~ *

g Pi
, s
o
"H

C^ Lf\ LTN
jj ^5

CM O ^- ^J" -^ VO ^~ CM HT in to CM CM CO

O i-VQ T
\ CM

T ^ ^r
^CM

T~

CM CO r T- o CM in o in VO CM in CM t"~O

CO T- ^ to r envo to cno CM ^r co m CM
T*" ^"

o
CO

in
to
vO CO

VO P*~

(-}

PEH 03

to

to

"*"

I-

EH cJ
O "P

e2 -P

S S
N^^X

C\J

VH P3 EH W

^"*

O C""> K>

~M P^ ^^ ^*

^J ^* ^* *

u-4

w j=
pq <ri
p3 M Clj T ^H

O ri PH C CO -H

K; SH

^^ ^

tq

S
VD

T- o vo r T CM c to co T- vo >rcn vo r*^ cn O Tcn cn

VD

vo *~ to to O cncnCM CM to in cn,- CM
u\

O -d- r CM to

T vo t in m

CJ CM VO i- CM
T- CM CM

to in
T~

5
o
CJ

2 iH f

~,
^* 1 j fci

O CM O OT- tVO tO CM tO

^- c CM in <=- o fLT\ CM T^- in ^i" cnto in ^

CO 0 CM

c--^- c cno CD r-T vo c^cn

T- co m to c^m ^- in in T^

, -

^_
L^>

CM m co r-

cn

cn

5?

CO

cn
CM

Td-

^-

in in

cn in

^
PH
r< ^ *X^ ^ 01

S
CO O
fH r* (H

EH

EH to O 0
pq ^~

>. ^^
EH

M
>, rl

03 -P -P -H
H C

rl >>

01 _03-P

<J

O
ps3

o
\
^ o

to
EH

EH

>, c 3

t-i * G

0 rl\ B
^~ rti^ IS **

H
ft)

rh

OS rl
t-l

O 03

EH W

O* W rH

H E

^\C5<.^ -4-* CQ rOJ C W -P " N <D

J_

T j

(x, CO CD W CO PH -P +
fc tO rH H

fv] f^j (^ ^j to 03 o PH cd S So o >> > o -P rt'^

> O EH

4^ -H B

s: to -> - N oj
> O -3

*^+,4& "4-* - W 0 C

co ^^>^- ^^ O f* S ** o v

EH-^>,\

CO

^i

*>
k

=:
EH

EH

ft

<U rH (0

Q 3 "M n 01 a> (X S O O > o -p rt

rH
Hp tJt-3 +J ft) OH r^ H S rH r-( tt) C flj H <H V( O rH

p1 rH -P H S

t^ -f^
O

4->

4->
W

c^
pLf

tQ + 03

EH biO

o 4^ 0) 4-p

r-t Q tO O O EH 0 0 0 0 < O EH -P -P iH -P
C=! rH -> rH nj ._| O Vi .-4 H -P *H PH <H O
SEH> EH 43 r^ -< O rP O 2 1-3

J2
^3 P*
EH

co bo ^j **^ ^^
4^ 03 O

PH

O HO

2 ^^ **
6n rt > >
P EH i-^

O nj
1-3

OfHOrlrHrHaJrH

&.VH "H fn >H

0 rH

u
CJ

en 43 nj
03 pj
0 0 0 CO

o o

ctf t> > t* t t

co o o t-3
C/3

PH EHO a

EnW O O O O O h H ' OcSEHOOOOt!

t-5 rt > <* o -P^ ^,-q EH tq o i-3 M |-2

EH

EH
CS

*~"~'

p^ pH PH O CO K EH

<^ EH 0 EH

H -H
U

<u

p4

CO

p.

VI-F-68

TCM
i-CMVO

T- c10 cn CM o e totocnio

VD vO 00 "*-O Cn*- C
f-T-CO

C\J
<H O

cvj-vo

ITVVO VO to CM CO CO i -O CM

PHVO

eo o oo *co_. o-n T -..'. O S CM CM (O W cncn

CM o co

VD Cn CM CM O UMTkO

oo

OVD cn< oo ovo vo

c\j

cn
CJVDOO

i*-vB CM

mvo KM- ir\ e>"*Kr>

ooo

oo r-i-

g
O
P4 0]

T- O KN

ooo o oo
T- C\J

CM en T- o CM T-VD inr-oo o ra en KN ro CM

in

or-c-covo T- co *
CT> CM VD

ir\vo -J-1 CM to en
i- O O

^ (1) EH "
B
O

CM

MoiS2
W

ooo

-8g

r- r- r>_ CJ CM O f"d-Tf tnCM T-

'- oj o
O

o *K> VO

vo

o CM mvo rooo vo * CM

O CD O CM

VO ^ K>

i- O C

CM 00 t^

co ;e

r-vo

EH

CM,I

- O IA CVJ

ooo ooo

cn^ ir\-r- CM o 03
CM CVJ CM

o o a^-r ^~
CM
O -<J- C- OJ T-

O OC

CM
Cti

01

to

-P -H
fl 9

01 -P

01 -p

ci
p.
0)

*? KN O
O-

O EH

P. I (H -p>;01 ra <u Mt>, B H to m to at n t>> o o M^. o -P nj-^. s, o o

0}
.NO)

^. 01

to ?>

^^ to E

>>fc -H

O*> * ) C

,31
*>.

EH EH
MO

00

EH EH KN 00

N 0) -P --H 0

0) F3

P,

-P-H 0

CO

p* >>m :3 P<^^ c w

tH > .

I >>W 3 to ! EH O

HO P O O

8.

S3 g%
. q co
CO 4 O A< O

I -P O -P tt) P.-P EH fir-* to rH rH 4) rH

p n P.

o> rH oi

SIM P.SH <M M<H

3
H

. O -P flj C/KN O O O 01 I 01 <U r-t O O -P -P W-r-oa rHrH C -P -P Q) P< CO i-H SH V-4 TO r-4 i-4 rH Q)
fS ^H *^i *tn M

; O EH EH EH EH EH rH ; W O O O O O i-q ; O PH P-i (^ PH PH 35

>t> > > t >

P4

pq (U H 01 > >> 03 3 1to EH HP

CO <

o o 01 O -P - B H
O
r-t^-t -P. C OJ fH CO >

C~^

pq

O n) cr co O -?
Ed CD fc] P-c O 32

m y to i-3 o rt cr <u t-^ ta PQ&3 PHS

uco

ft V O O

VI-F-69

CM tAt vo rCM
VO

*- -*-VO

ovo r-mo

en oo <*- CM rtA r CM ** rT- 00 O O CM

en
tA CM

VO

co

vo m
,--

'*

tA CM

CO T- CO

en

i-

i- me oo

in

in
CO

CO O ^

o tAin tA *
tA

T-rJ-VO

co * - m -H- o en 00 tAr- CM IA O ro CM

T- t~-O CM O VO O vo T-

VO tA

en

in

. r- tA en vo

vo CM m ^~ O tA in o CM co vo ^
CO O CO tA
lAjAVO
CM O

en en
in
CM

en
CM

r- IACM
tA

CM

in in co inino rmtAoo T- tA en en *
. O O VO rCM

CM <* C-

CM o cnmo

tA hA <CM

i-co inr en CM - 1- me
tA ^^ C tA T- t- CM

in
tA
V*

vo

CO

en
o S o
{*-< co
% O
00

~<

in ^~

<!-

CM ^~

O CO CM ^

in t T- vo in c CM O en CM in CM CM c
tACM

^CMC-^0

a! CO K -P

tA CM

T- ** in en TJm t
CM

.O

CM

c^- co <* m r-cn

CM CM CO VO IA

O invo CM c en c IA^ o co en in T- invo co

CM CM

en

en

EH rt S

O -P M CO

CO

EH >
O rf PH C

co S s! O

CO VO tA

o invo O moo

m o en r~ CM tA TVO T- VO -d- t-

in c oo

CM
^~

VO VO CM * O CM in O CM
^- ^~

o
CJ

tA VO

t r-

o <*

t T~

r^~ T~ FA ^ ^
VO

CM T- c en CM CM tA ^ en o i- vo co in-c
T- CM tA
T

^
T

VO

CO

in

in

en

CO H

O in CM
OT- T-

S^ o
CM

vo o vo r mo m cr.*3- en c vo co tA m * ^~ i- en
0 ri-

S c-- r- o o c T- rO. -<dT~

tA

c en

. in in c c TCM m co en ^-

VO

cr> c in

tA

vo

4
*j ^S^

f-t
>, \

CO
CO -P fH -P H

PH
f* >> ^^ EH tA
*^

EH
0*0
r(
')

CO CO-P -P -H fn H C > C 3
* >+*

EH CO O
t i t M t t

T*T

o
^"^ E *'*
0 M CO PH CO

fr*

W TC5

^0 fH EH\ T- J*A E *>^ Q ^^

3
4->

EH
E

to TM -P

<u C
N tt)

O CO EH CO

E >>>>
O HO O
P CO

<i fn fn

o* M rH p -H a
fd B
O cd
hH*

ft| c/) CO CO > O EH O. 0) rH CO > O i-1 4) iH CO P* -P -P EH boo O -P O) O,H-> 1-5 tJr-1 - 4) O. g CO i-H H O (H O f-4 rH rH CO rH 1-3 (-. ^ rH r-t CO

Is o o >, > OP rt^

P<>H *H ^* VH

EH E O* cq cd

- m co c! n -P - N co tO r-H -P H g rt v-i c-3 co a) S o o > o -P rt

^*5 SC *^s.^^

EH *^ r*^*^CO E"^-E O e^ E *
CJ
k <ZZ 4->

EH
^^

$/>

o to -p co 11 o co o EH u o u < o

k .-)-> -->

EH

c:
01
*** fr* EH t1

^0
"x^ ^

co o o

**
4-> CO O

rt

<n H M

EH P -P rH -P p-J rj ^> rH rt rH O **-< rH *H -P ^H

SH

6^ rt* ^ ^ ^ i p1 1
CO OO H PH EHO 3 CO

O rH (ti t* t* t* ?* ^*

O rH

&-H"

rt

* t* t*
u

PH ^H O CO > > -P >

<lJOPEHEHEHEHt-^

O CO

to a oo

EHCJ Q O O O O n l OOEHOOOOK EH .

=: O -P rP r3 hH
^D h-^ E^ M t^l

EH cq o i-5 i-q H

PH

EH . O

K EH > EH ^3 ^q *^ EH O EH l PH PH 0 CO K

o
H H

EH .

C
04

CO

VI-F-70 '

CM H

a
CO
O 55

OCO-* CM ^ CTN T- CMVO

t^-

T- **- t^CM OVO

CM

CM inco O r- CM
CO

CM

O **

T- t cr> CD'" CM

T-CM O VO O

O M CM *~

O C CT* O C-*- l OCM CT>

Q)O
P-IVO

CM $ CTv T- O TtOCM f-

ocoo

o^ CM m co o
CM ^>

O CO CM "3-CM OCM

^~

^- 00 CM KNO VO

CM co cn
TT-

VO

o cnm o* OCM

O CNJITV

J2. M

O VO VO CO r- VO i-CD O
KNVDVO

vo in co ir\ CM o vo VO T- t?SK\ *
vCM

VDVO K\CM O

O^T_

O VO CM
OCJT^

VO
^*-

d-

O - CM

O 0
^

^ <j O E-l OJ is 2-p

o
CO

~\

s~ i
*

oo o CM O VO T- O in
*- ^
OO O

CM C-- CM VO CM CM -^

r~- O * CO r* in en
T~

in

5*- in CM mo vo t<*\ cn
C-T-T-

O CM vO ^

VO

CM

o in* vo o to c^

8
00^-

P^ CO

in

S5-H. O-P >?

j{

M ea JO EnW ^S
**! O

CM O vo i- O t>
CM

co O vo T- CM o m

in ^

- VO C^-CO

Ten

CM

^- C3^ C^~ CM O O VO (O

CM in

cn

O T- CM to OC--*tO

O T- C O
O OO

o CM in

M 0 rt
CO-H

3 i H

KB
H EH 0)
H 5?

CM O O
T- O
<*-

ooo

^- CM KNVO CM O CM

VO K\ T- C ^

T-

^ VO CM CM O VO tO

O CO vO VO O O vo T

to P-t O^^ O
CM

^-H S

ti-Mn o ^* ^*
T-

tn

in

O CM CM

o cr> c o f^ "^
ooo

P -H

co co -p
O

to -p p -H
l?1CO

H (6 P. 0>

EH to o O iT

hH

a co
CO H

>>

T-

pt, p, ^i +3 co co <y t-t

fe5 M\
>> > O

--P H 0

M 0)

(DC

CO O HO P O O

o -P (fl -v.

O }:

o a a s co a>
Pi CO CO CO PM TO CO <H J

<- -P 05 p, fl) ^H to CC I -P O -P Q) P.+1

o w co cj o o tj -P\ o -P rt
i-q C -P -P ft) p, d rH rH r-4 fl)
-5 C

P,
I

NO)

o> C

<

tO

O rH

3 <H
W
S

t:.>

^^

^^

^H

p to
0 O O CO

CO -P O PH O 65 CO EH

o eH (0

teWOOOOOnl

gO

VI-F-71

,.
C\J

cnmin

tO ^- C ^}- i Q CM T- in t-~to in r

<c

Q *

^_

*H

in . en 5

^jCM e't

vo

^r-oo vo o vo criinto
^* T~ VO PJ C\J

c-o <*- co
p en to totn
CM t O VO r- CM

en vo ro '

to cn to 00

PH

i |

>* ws
^< O

o or^
v

c in en c-~ in 10 **
CM CM

T- r- -^- CM T- O CO CM * CO

o to

^-

CM CM CO *
VD
r- -^" C CM

O CM

53

w
,_
M

r^

00

en

*^ T~ cn to ^^

O CM *~

T- ^- in en

en ^. Y

in

vo OOO vo in CM
O
* vo

VO r- -<i-VO i- O tO

t-invo co in
00
cncM

to

T-

co **

to

vo en to co to ^_
C\J

CM-r- CTlt-O

intovo <* en

to t co en to *^" o in ^*
CM CM tO

to 1 0 O
VO

o to ^~ ^~

^
0

_f

a
0
' *
rH ' '

O to to
^, S VO VO CM CM ^~

CM en o CM vo en Tco in to in to to t co co CM en
T C C
TVO

^-VO r~ VO O

CM

rw^^n*

jS
Q -P
I-H LJ 6HW
^>

un
to

t1 0

O
T -

in

co co T- r en co CM to in CM in.

VO CM CM O

^- en in en T-

T-

< -r- CM CO CO

CM [^ cnm in

tin vo

0 0

in vo
CO

>",
CM
JJ*HJ

8 SI
t J
ft\

p"? ^s

o to <* VOC-C-

VD O -d- 1- c -i- vo
cncxi CM iniCO O * VO T- incM vo ^" T-

^o r^ ^J~ o en co CO 10 O t
^ CM CO 00 CO

T-

co to in vo co

C-T-

CO "*

t^

1 L i

0^

rH

oS
Vf

^j.
CM

<JCM

^^ fy

in

in

co

T- cnvo r c^CM rooo

in in
CM CM

CM

^ vO
o" cn

> tQ

P- C

**-* S
O COVO S3 fi r~^ 5r E 2^^ -^j- -<^- to
T- O tO to c O *-

g^J
t<"*\

CM

o^ o
OS
>H

*^

KN en T- to O^ "^ CO T~
CO CM

CO t- C--T-

v- -^VO -^- C

VD CM ."N O VO

VO

o o

c 1~~ to co r>tO CO CM O T f

vo

in to
CO

T-

VD <*
T-

^ in cr
LT

g
4

00
f.)
r~l

to

>J *x^ EH

M
>>
*^ EH

m
CO -P
rH -P 'H > rH -H q

PH
rH 0

>> ^- EH
O ^~

03 -P -P H rH -H C
rH """^ r^a 3 *

^ O
f>T
fVJ

EH CO O O
f 1 f 1 f 1

tsq

r^ O

C) i

EH CO

O1 M H

..P

M
+
l^^>

} <H -P tO CO 0) t( Q rt 0 ? 0 0 >> KB

-rH 0

t^

.iJ

> 4^

J ^

HO

0 0
-H rH P 03 S ^

< O -Pr^H I-H -^

EHW O O O O O ^ q

EH eq 0 ^ 3 j^

CO P3

EH

"""

EH

*""

CO ft < (^ EH

> > -P EH > EH ^" O i-1? O 2 ^ ^ o CO

t rH i-l K

EH

O EH

O O O CO

PH

CS

VI-F-72

ecific
O< CO

5COrHrH 3 H H rH EH J>- > PEH (^ CO 0 O jA

PH co to to co PH -P H->

t EH O O

O EH bOO MO (d 0 rH

>

P< 03 o -P 0) F-lrIrH PiV-t Vt

o -P n) ^-^

r-H W PfH^ aJrH rH <M

h^

ed > !> t=- > >

EH > O ^ <l) r-l < (-3 ttfh-3 -P 0) O, EH |j fH W rH rH <U & K ri VH IH rH O O rH PH

> o 4* a

O to -p co M o to o
0

w o

O C) O CJ -P P rH -P H -P rH tfl rH *H fH H 4-* <H

RAIISPO

O 01

^^ O *^ * +* EH CO 10) C g CO +J - N O )

O fn EH *^ 3 T- t*o E

EH
g

- w

^s.^*^ H-^

<u q

ry to rH -P H G SH to co a>

CO -P . N O )

o o IE; #> *> o <,^

EH "^^^ ^s^^* " x. co S**^- S S

^H ^i

>s ^>

o
EH EH
^

C.O

p-l
to
bO

EH
i-q

VH

03 O

X
CM <H

OOOTin-^-m r- CM en t<^- * ^*-'<i-

c--ino en CM ovo tj-incno CM

*-* t-vo o
CTif-'TVO-r-00 CO CM

t~

CM

CM
00

men co T- co CM CM CM --*

OoO co CM in in

cncvicn

r*~ r^

*- ^t-

5M

#~
PHVO

VQ

CO

3s
0
O 85 3

in^j-in - o en mcM en
O* CO CM

O 00 *-

J-CM inoo
CM *

T- 00 VO "d-CM OCM

S10^ vo t

-J-CnKM^O

o o in T T-^CM

O O KN*-*-

o ir\cncM O *- ^ tn vo CM m

g
^-4

te

v- UJ ^r T- Ff\ v4-

&*

T- in o vo CM o vo
oo T-^t-m
^^ 1* CM

I
13

KNVO t^ **

v- r^r-cM o co-*-c^ vo ^* l-

mo **- vo r-c-CM
OO T

O T- cnvo o mvo Tmr-CM

S3

O _, . ^T '^ EU

><!

/EH SS
5
E-i ro

is

- o en K"\ *" KN in T- /v in
^^ r*

O OO ino in

CO CT* T- ^~ CM CM ^t-

CM T- CM in
<TT* in ON

CM K\TOD t-CM VO CM

mr-KMn o

o vo incnr <rrACT
T-

o m CM o m

in^j-o CO CM in-i
T- O -

*~
,- T- m CM CM o in
VD vD 00 CO

3 ^ 0 4 CO JO M

ss-^ w.
COg

o oo
T- O C

CM

en
'
^>

i -< -*o
E-J >0S5
^ SB 3'*
P __ M S
rH >H

EHW

mo o

KNCO in

in
ti-

CTv

T-

CM

inc^'* CM en in

^-QVO CM O

O tA C C ^"

vo CM in

o r--* mm

O CM t--MTN

0 -^CO
T- O O

s ss"
3

c ^~
CM

H 3

CO-H

CSrH

< EH

0 OO mo in

rj- CM [^- f

CM O KN
^

rf-PH M rv' *i* f O

CM

T- o r HM iu/*v *r~ p\ \
*<*

CTvt<-NT- [--

tn

in

cr>c m CM o c m r vo m m

O O CQVO CD O T- VD CM T tA CM CM

incri'"- " r c\i *^

occ

ci

$
>H

w c3
f^ ,-(
(Tj

P .

rt +
HO P O O

0)

EA <> O Or-CO

EH

EH-^ 3 O m EH h OO -P >> a> c

Bi'^.

>> h -H a ^s. >>c 3

N 0)

fn

m -p -P -H

O P=3 1-1 ^
EH"^

O t>> 9

CO 03 -P 4-> -H ^1 -H C >>C 3 <T3 S

t4 b
>>>>

t-l p

*v.-^

>> >>

EH EH mm OO
T T-

EH E-l I<MO

00

f: m
o c3
CO 0) PH CO CO CO PL,

P=3 m -P -H B CO > N CO o. P ~-i a PMp,M-Pcocoa>M CO -! >> * 0 0 > H fn 03 tQ 0) te Vi-^ o -P <a^>. B M t>> 0 0

P 0) C

EH

g
W

01 e o H 3 a

8.

as e

p (It

g -H fc
Q) fj fl 0)

pq

C -P W CX 0) H tQ 1 -P 0 -P OJ CX-P EHCrHMr-trHttJH 3H O.SH H ^M (3 B

5 -P*v. O -P 03 CVN O O CO CO < 1 CO O rH O 0 -P P 3 C -P P <l) 0. W T- < fH ,H CO H r-t i-t Q) co H VH H O E H <M V, tt < >o.c

PM 1 to 3 Vi ^ >, PM ^ C n t>> >> PH-V^ C CO >> C\ > EH 0 C ^ CD EH o

a e o >>3^ sp fn PH

EH

"^T~

c/y^ o o co O o -P W- rH
<
-0. C

i-HH

. nco V< rt 0 ErH

0) CO -P 0 PH O

SSOEHEHEHEHEHi-q
^CJPHPHpHPHPHW

SWOOOOOH

sz; O S l_q p., PL, PL, PL, O w j j-i j j g

(P

CO 3 1 fn EH H-1 J cr d) O i-^ W pq w PM o K
CJ3

pq <u -H 03

m 3 ^ h-1 O rt cr cu i-l fd pq W PMX t-3 O

pq QJ -H co >

OCO

oo

SCO EH

<;

VI-F-73

j.
CM

T- o ir\ toinvo
^ **
""

8 men CM in in

in CM ^ vo * o o m vo in fin r-

r~- ^J- inr--O

in "*i" T to

cnt vo CM in O *- CM in T^2 CM

VO

r
C-

CO CO CO

i^S ^

to

t-

?\C\J

P4

c3\o

w^ ~i & ^o -. *

^"*

ininco cn Co , cn g

^ O ^~

co ino toin Tin vo CO cn

IO T- CM i- i- O CM

tto

vo invo T o <*in- cr
*

CTVT- O t O

^J- fO T" CO O 00 O 10 T- vo

co
in ^~
CJ

cj in co ** T- Tf in cn

cn vo in
CM

O O T-

5
*

TJ- to
C<*

mincM T- in *! o *T o CM T ^^ in

C CM CM C ^ o VO

o invo c~- O CO O to in in *h to
CM CM

vo r-r- o vo to C~-T- to to ^- T- vo in
CM CM tO

VO VO

CO V
*

ve

T~

^^

PI o
x*^ Hi EH

., O O CVJ v moo to '

M HH -- - f2 ? ^ -P

2 S

cnc cn in^~ in to

co CM o r- r-- o CM m CM ^ cn to ! c <* cn <* o T- tO t tO <* o

tA T-

o ^ o cno
CM CM tO C

t- C

r~ in "~

in

in T- cn vo N^V <4- CM -*J- -rrCM r o r~ i- in

ro
VO

p
o cn
T-

o a . ii o -p ^? HH CO
CJ EH W

ios o^~2 S r~- cr\in < o .

in

o to cn

Tj-mvotOTto o c-to vo
CJ
T- *

Tin
T-

co ^J" in 8 incj to

00 "^ to VO CJ

^
r*^

ei f? o ^ r-T
g
U4

*^" CM

o vo

CJ

incj cn en "~

T- cnr-co "=* c\i to cn ^

cn
CJ CM

c0

^O ~l r"1

EH

IS jn ^cj- *"^ ^5 0 CM OS
>H

*-*>
*-*

O K> CTN LT\ C"* ^~

[^-.

fT\ ^

j"";
^<

T~

^-

^}- o in in to in co cn rCO in CM
T-

^ <* c~- 00 C^ O *

cn VD

CO to CTi'd- O

cn-^- cn T O CJ
tOi- t

c m co c cn
to CO *^ CJ

VO

*- c-

CO C vo CO

E
PH
^ o
f-l
5
r-(

fa

rl

03

^> *x^

EH

>, \
gj

C^

r^j

K^ t I

TO -P f-t -P H
M ^1 XH
1
|H - J

0O
.

fO

>, g -3

M >j ^^^ H ^
^

03 0) -P -P >H !H -H C
^S^
* 'P

EH CO 0
O
rH ^H ^> M ^l
>>

W T-

0 fH EH-^ 3 ^ %jf\ ^^

^J

0) p). p< 0) 4.
T

O 03*

K E >> ^
Ct, CO tO CQ CO Pi -P -P &S CO rH rH 3 H H K rH
PEH Hi

EH S O" M K

*^. O ^^ * -P M T<l) C, 10 -P N (U W rH --P H f5 flj <H -P W 03 0) M S ? 0 0 >>

r^iSC ^^t^

EH **^ r>~>*1Sx. to E\S

^s>* S

a o
ci
EH
<^

CO

M EH

p-t

CO

cr to i -p H R CJ nJ <H co co O)
KB 0

EH CQ <U CJ ZZ tQ -P . M O ) 0

o
O

O t^

^->

S <?>

*>

fes -p -p

O rIO

t O EH P< OJ r-H 10 EH MO O -P 0) Oi-t J O >HO f H rH QJ H

>

o -p n)\

O O

HI

05 P.IH <H fn <H 0 rH

> o -P rt EH O O O O O > O t-1 0) /H <5j Hi Ut-1 H-> 0) 0. EH -P -P rH -P n (H W rH H <H C rH -P i-( rt3 rH

O rH

n o wo

W -P

CO

CQ

-p

s ^
01

.S5
p

^
EH
H i

a {=- > t- > >

O *H rH Vl 4 <H P-l VI O CO > > -P fc

o o o
rH

CO

< O -P Hi HJHl

03 g 0 Q) O O O CO

p rf

CO 0 O Hi CO

EHW O O O O O n l OOEHOOOOK E^

. pt<

E-i M 0 nl M Hi 0 Hi EHK WH EH

EH > E-i XJ H! 0 K P-l PH O CO W EH EH

<: o ni o s HI

.
tt

H O 0> CO

p<

VI-F-74

g oo r<*-*C\J

m to T- r CM *~ ^*t-co rto vo CM
IO r-

ef- co oo IO tO tO
in CM r-

OCM T- CM O

OIOCM

>H O

T- in
OO)T-

Si fe

O 55

-=
&3

00 -<i-vO
T-Ot-

T- t^ IT> CM CM O VO O t o O TN
vo"~

O cor-^-o t- - en
CO CO

f \r\

*IOKN 8 CMvO T- *-

Ovo CD * O 00 CM CM

O t-

^CM * CT>00

to

O VO -r00 i- CA T- 00 VO

VOCM T- VjT10

iro cor-cvi oco cn

T-

CM
VO

vo to
VO

CM ^CM O

CM in 8 cnvo

T-VO

OOr-

OCM 10

1
O

<i-vo ITN *CT> ^

00 O ^J-

ooo

vo ir-j-cn
00 ^~

C~-C-CTiCO tO tO CM
p.
LT ipy

r-

CM T-VO VO O VO CO fO & w

O CM

^~ p*'-^
P

/ < cu EH K-P
0

P4 CO

2
'-

T- O tO

Tj- tO CM

CM

"-&

O C-CM 00

00-r-

o r-co

O T-VO

^~ p
T-5

CM .1 ^
1

S5-H .

^B

>>x

P sas
W
i_3

H CO CO EHtq WE < <a H >>_

CU r
r|

0-P

rH

oo O-t
TOO

to T- r- CM CM o to moo o * to
vo
O

^- CO VO C^ CM

to

-CM

CM tOlTvtOO C~- cniri a^ CM VO T

O tOVO <* vo O VO C\i * CM O toc-

O lf\O O IfN1"
O O i-

ro

CO

--* *-!

S5 B

S g EH

C^rl 6H 4) f-i a Lf\Pl M

CM

ooo co c o

;= cr=-

a^1--: t~-c\i CM o r ro ^ CO o ~
CJ
T-

CM C\Q CM C CO ** CT>

O CTivO T-

*)

VO

CO

-^-

T}-

O CVJ

O CO O to I OO i

rt H CCt

EH E*0 tO O

co co -P to
T-

cn

f-1 t-l
to hr\ .
EH

r< t-t >>>>

o
EH

O i CO

>

co

<U C .NO) P-rl 0 p, P CO CO CD H >, > O '> 14 O -P

^M
g^ CO

e-i e-t oo

EH EH to to OO
EH

o ro
HO

p o o

a o> oo oco

g -H H p a to ft

CO V PH CO CO CO PH H cd
COCO

P CO P. CU . .CO~ I H- O -P CU P.-P " ^ CU rH I r* <H

g3 Pi co co o fc >> o
+-^ O 4

- N O)

cu

a >
Ol

cr; o

, M 3 fH fH

. c co o C
C/) <

ICO 0 ) r-t C 4^ -P 0) P. CO rH i-l rH ft) E H H H

3 M w > C3 E-i O c\ O O CO CO coo o O CO

>, >

3 S

Cj

O P 3

5^2 PH^ (3

O -P -P

w.a
CO

O -P

pq

- cx'c
eo 3 fH E-l rH cJ cr cu O 1-3
W P-.0 53

rH
CO 3

pq cu H co >

<

-O. C

O SrH CO

iOOOrH-

, PH A< PH ft;

P-i

P-i

65 eo EH

CO -P O PH O

O rt o1 cu i-5 ta pq w p< 53 H)

hHH

VI-F-75

c-r-vo * in

r- VO *

<M 00 t O 00 O O

^J-T- o eno 1
CO ^ CO ^-

co

T~

en in T- c-tvo vo o c en ^CO to
t
VO *

co
CO

en T- en

en

co

to

O CM in ^- to en

inin

c-co o mo t~- tOvo t^CO co r- en en m to en to m

T- IO

in in in

to

en
to

en
^^

GO

VO

co
W

to m w co CD o to o vo T- cnvo ic -en * - in T- T~ en Tto in co o u^ CO o co invoT-cnvo en

11-

* CO-i- to O

in t*^ ^~ cvj to to
T-T-

CO

CO

in

^~

co t co o ^~ T- en cno <* ^ T- m en r- to ^0 r* in ^* co o
^ B

O
CM

CM

in

T-f-O/

in en

en

en

toco in

T-

VO vo CO -sf

o co r-eno cnmo

^foen^o

to
CO

en
CO

VO r- ^J- VO CO to-*

0 to
^3-

i
to

^. vo to

o co vo

COTCO f^.

- T- i- in co co Too en en < ** in co oo ** c en co cncn to 00 OJ en -e-

r- T- CO CO O C\, ^J- c^ O
^-

O in ^if*-

tO

f-T-

co vo in en cj en f^ T- ^^- c^~ in en c-- co r oo en to-sjT c^-

00 00

in
to 00
T

vc

^
o o
OJ

0 CO

O -P rH CO

EHW
El>,
OS r<

CO

o ^- en
TJ-O\>

co S

o tot
vo
00

vo vo r cj oo in *! cnvo o m oj vo ** to m en

o cd
PH C CO -H

to

* to

<- """ co

c-

*"

in envo ** C~- T ~ in oo in
OD <M

CO VO VO vo O

oo in co cnvo oo oo mO TT- to in in
OJ

2
CJ 0

&
c*

to

c^

^~

&a
O C to
O OO 00

^~ vo ^t"

o vo tj- m en o en in m vo T" en
CO VO
VO

o o
CO

T-

CO

CO CO

cn

io

f-

vo in co f jo\ ^j" oo T- en o vo

to <* o cno

cj co m m O O cn^- T- co
T~ ^J~ T f ^t"

T- T- en

in en T^~ T-

LP

C^
L^

OS

4 ^J *1sNii

rl

CO

>
>

03 -P
I* -P H

N.

EH to O O
C5
t

to
*
EH
rl

EH

-v, >, cj 3
*^x. C5 t^

>, fH -H C

^^ EH

>>
to

-P -H H C

n -P

C]

0
fr-1

=;

pL)

CO 0

EH

0 to EH\ 3 > T*
0) C CO T-

^5 ^ **^*. 3 ^" ^JEHI *

^v*^/> k4^

^> w ^>
CO ^ "*** J^
^5 ^*^ 2* <d

^^
*"1
^^

O CO EH 10

E1 co -p
O W rH

-NO;

EH

co

0) C

K e^>^
HO P O O

Cfl r)

M d VH -P w co oj to
tO -P <tJ"^ S O EH CX 0) rH CO EH bOO O -P 0) O.-P OMO ^rHrHO>[-H

--P -H E

2 CO -P N CO O* CO r-t -P -H E B -P --P W J H CJ CO 0) O CO -P CO

i*

M EH < &

PH CO

to
^St^

KB

s.

PM co co co
CO PH -P -P 3 vl H K iH EH Cfl PEH r3
W

o n)

.-q M S rH H cu fxvt <HtoHH K d VH SH t)

0 rH

> 0 ,-1 0 rH i-3 tOi-1 ' O Oi

> o -P

M O CO O EH O O o

<

EH P -P rH -P K rH -P rH rt rH

t)

-P CO O O

S
55

i-^

0 rH

co o o i-q
-P o)
O CO

<o-PE-<eHE-iEHHq

a >

O n j-i M -p VH PM *t-( o

2 EH
t-P

^ *
-p tn o o
o
-rH

CT t* ^^ "^ r^ *^ O +^ i "1 i "i ^ S EH > EH ^i H^ ^^ E~*

PH EH O W CO W

EHfJ O O O O O i - ^ OcSEHOOOOflJ EH

O i-^ EH K K K
EH

C p-i PH O CO W EH EH

<: o ^ o 3 >-^

M H

O
73

o o

Pti

C5

Pi

VI-F-76

CM Vl

1
1

OOOPCM ^*-\p CM CM O
^^-VO

^- CM O T(S t-cnoo CM *-to VO CM

to

*-

p-IO^l-COO ^totVO CM t r(0

mio-^-T- to
CM t*-C CM

*-T-tn

o mtovo o r--<*-vo cntocM

"*cr> ^- m incnCM^o
mr-TCT\T- VO
CO T-

1
53
g

CM ^^> CM O *
m

oco to

t-00 - tO CM OVO CM tO*-,T-

*CM CO

?3 vo"~

o tocn*- * o toto ,
r-r- 10

o en in oo
O 00 tO(0
vo CM r-

WT- vO CM oo m

OVD ^1-

en ,-

tO O T- CO CM O CO CO CM CM*

to

p-vo ^i-

T- too

CVI O

^j-VO C** en
T

vo

CM

VO

mior-'- CD t cnvo *
OO T-

o ovo^
tO CM tO

o CM o en

n
EH

cn
EH OS

*-*

CM O VO CM O CO Ti-tOVO ^^

oo o

CM en to * to to to ** m c O pcnT- vo r in
CM

cnto^r-o ^-covo

T- ^- en en CM

8 vo cn*- co c~toto.vo
cn^cM
T* T-

in CM oo o
CM C CO ,-OT-

M 03

o oo

i a

CM O VO CM O
*3~ QQ

vo

T- T- O * CM O * T- CO CM ** to TCM

to

O C~-

cn*c f^o to cnvo

CM r-

VD tor-

O VO K>CO O O VO to VO -*j

o vo t- vo O ini t- O1"-

^\

?- CM

to

1Sa
CM

S5 M

000 CM O O

CM o en ** m en

CTM^ to to CM O fC-~^- CTiO TCM ,^^vO

CM

cn en >o r-j c
<-Q

CM

T- T-

en *

O 00 VO to CM

to CM N>

incn^ * r to in ooo

CO CO -P P -H

EH E*o to o

O
EH

to

o w

co eo -P p -H
* -P

f-i tn

co

a> FJ
o
O
CJ

^M O >>
0}

EH EH to 10 00'

EHE-f roto

00 T- T*

a, c

co
A CO

CO -

+j .H a
d) rH

NO)

crj

EH

8HO
P O O
P OJ

o n) rt B
0)

B coPn CO
v,Sw

a
S

CO P

P. O -P p rH
P.M

H f-l CO CO 0> ; f^ >, O O ) -P\ O -P rt

>, W ^

c o >, >,
^-\

M rl

; I co

c/o
/l

P> EH O C

o o co w

<H M'

1 C -P -P tt) O. 3 rH rH rH tt)

O OP P W -r- 4J p< r-H

rH H <H

PH*^. c w >, C^. c/jo o o o o -P

> EH O
WT-B rH

PH >,CO 3 >H

r4 3 B

| g H H H P

i wb b

> >! EH EH i b OO i

;O

w
C <1> oo

O CO

65 CO EH

CO -P O PH O

; W Hi H? H! H? ; H! PH PH PH PH

< . o. c pq 0) -.H co > t> eo 3 PI E- H!

O rf 0 <D O 1-5 W W PH O W O

<; - D - C pq 0) -H co > co 3 t-i t-3 O rt cr <u H^ pq pq W PnE

Hi

CO

rH *H

VI-F-77

x
OJ V4 O f-^. c^
CM-C: G^CM
P-l

vO VD VO

O in vo *" a\ , in

invo o c vo cr\ o co to rO CM vo

o en

VO CO * O O

vo co to m in CM

co r^ c CM to CM c o T CM

O -^-T-

Tj-^-

00

in
0

CO 00

oo en

CO CM VO

to

"^^^^

in

?H

torn vo
*
00 00

a5 vo

to S
3i O

Cn

O VO d-VO VO
VO

o cncM CM cno vo
CM VO r-

to

*
tOt- CM

T-

do en in to o
en

(o CM CM r- in T- ^- vo oo en T- vo o c m
v- VD t*~* CM

CM

CO

r in
CM

"

1 0

cn

T-

in

^-*

o
CM

I
w o
J3
0

VO VO ^t

in

^~ en en T~ en o ^~ tovo r tovo en CM o
CM O
.00 tOCM

T-

T- CM r cno CM r o

oo o *- oo c-- in CM
vo oo m r~
CM to ^~
CM CO

to
VO

e'en

in

en en
CM

VO t~-

*i-

iT*
'""^
R

^5

*m*

VO CO ^100 to CM CM TVO

*J *:

EH O
S X

2-P

in o to 'j- en to Tcn vo TJ- co ^- in en cnm . en o . CM cncn ^r 1VO T~ ^^ in T-

mi o in o n- cr\r O
c m vo en c^*
CM

O vo co m C vo en en m co CM en to vo T t

"5l- ^ ^* CM O

CM CM

CM vO

cn

cn
CO

S -H rH 03 CO

"

CM 1
i fI t>
P^

EH W <
^J

to S <0

P"!f^M ^-k ^^ ^^ O flj C=3 PH C O

CO

<D t-vo vo T- rT- toren'"

CM

VO O tO ^}- CM

! to in co to m co
i

vo ^d~ vo r o
TCM
^~

C ^

in

i into
oo
0

VO

CM

* vo * invo
CM CM VO T- CO

^~ c co en vo

in
CJ
T

co CM in
CM

CO CO

- to in in
CM

vO CM

to

cn

to

P=-J

^ S
O "O c 8 tO CM VO *d

'd- CM co to en o to r en *^CM

T-

CJ CO f J i-

V^ ^

fi r

O
CM

^J

o
cd *"

cn
00

LT\TCO

co*i- en
VD

o o -^- < CM r- m^ c- r
T 1 O N

CJ

^_

to

^ \^

CM

s
f_| t*J
^Sii,^

tO

P 4-i rt o 4. _f oHO +a O O

00
CiJ

(-1 >> , ^^ *H EH >> fO ^x O M EH

T
$tf\

03 CO-P -P H fH -H C >> C 3 *v. $

J^

fn >>
^^

03 n-P

PH
r_j CJ
>j^ >> "v"^. r*^"^*^

EH

to
EH

EH
T

>, q 3
^

fn -H C

-P H

o o
>j ^*-*

CO

o
=:
EH CrJ EH

""^xC**^

* +*

*"^*^^

J>5^^

4^

co E^^^E

co

PH CO
^J t^

O OT

EH - CO rJ^ CO -P

EH to
(J4 tO

O M rH
fH

C) C . M <IJ

0) c!
HE

^^ ^r^ JT* ^^

^-^

K e^>^> c=; a
CO CO

Ctf fH

CO oj <H -t-> vi ci c fn

*-> r( E 1

O" H rH -P

s -p --P

> o

o s--,

SB

to PH -P -P S5 tO rH rH EH d

> O EH P< <u i- ( W EH WO o -P <u CI.-P

o o > o -p cj
OJ rH 0> O.

O to + 03 i-l O to O EH o o o

-p
03 O o

s
co
EH <^ fn EH

* p O

> O 3 h3 tOl-5 -P

fnO f-if-lrH CJrH

ri

P.VH VH ti *H

^ fn J <-< jH OJ 0^ (j v^ m M
-P
rt

EH -P

-P rH -P

Ci rH -P rH rt ,-j
P-( >H O t,0 > > -P t

c2

^v

O rH
^^ r I .^\

u Lt

P cU 03 C
0 0 O CO

to. p.*ov1-3 o r ^r4 n

to
w
r*i C^ w/ -M

<s;O-P&HEH6-<EHi_^ EHC=3 O O O O O H l OOEHOOOOE3 EH

> !^ fc>
ffi

< O -P 1-^ |J H^

^ EH t1*1 EH fO t5

o u o

O H-? EH Jc EH

; o >-3 o ? t-^ 0
Ci PH PH O CO W EH

""

H H H O

"

^s

p. to

VI-F-78

CM CM i CM Vl O

c CM vo cn CM CM K> co

CO O -^-Q O *- cnO w-

m vo TT OCM C-

<* CM

inv-cM ** *-cOCO CM VO -3-C~CM OT-

oj*^ PHVO

CO MCM

in

CM

f-CMOO
*

CM
-T-

OVD t^T-^-

Ovo CM

*-

CM

5 M

vo *- in
tnvo vo

OVO CM

CM CO CM ^" CM

CM mo cncvj o o C-CMO in T-

s ^

\o co t CM o - r-cn
CO t-

O vO 00 T-

o*- o
O i- CM

O CJ CTVO O -

n
o

OOO VO O CO CM OtA

cncno m
CO *-

en co

cn

- in
t-I pj .

-*CTv

cn

CMP-

O CM Cn i-CMVO

**-co

8
O inm

o
O

moo

O O CM

O . cio-p>? M (0 CO
S5-H

CM Enpq cogj I < <0 tx, EH >j>0!2;

S88 an co o
C-Ti-

OOO

- VD CM i- O

vo i- 10
rVO

in in CM o CM -i-o *

<}-c-o>-<*-o C-T- r!--- in

CO *-

o c^Ti- in CM o mr- into o ri-cn

O cncnu 0 vo o
, o O T-

ii o oj S
CO-H

^- PH C &
9S
^C2r1

SEH w
in
CM

fn t-Pn 0^^

S M S

OOO vo O O CM O f

<i- to <* CD CM O *-

minvo ^^IO i^. ^

CM

toinvo CM to ^in CO

CM

^VO CM

^^- C-CM o
tVO

vo

8 m-ecM T to<-

r- 00 C^CO

o
C

oO

3"
C

CO co P

^ >>c 3
O EH
0

rl -P -H >rl H fl

^ ^ co
HO

0) C N CU

O t EH"

^i i .4.i to co co
-p a>
0>
P.

CO -P P -H

to

E-( EH MO 00
T-

>tO

EH EH

00

8.

JS 8e
8 " to
CO 0) CO

0)

CO

P M" P. ~ CO rH CQ I -P p -P CO

> o o

o t

g
PI

^ CO

P-H 0

0) MO)

V.

EH

O rl

p oo

O CO

p 3 nC Ao o

Bjj

SI rH cd

PH CO

o 3. w
w

t=>EH
C/rA

PH t>i PH\

I tO

H rH i-HrH 0) H H
H^ I-H HP

CO

w -

C to o Co o co to o p -p
P. C,

01 3

o
^
CO

H 3 B >>co 3 -^ C w EH O K \ O o co O .. O -p

ooopi-^
^PHPMPHffi

mc

PH fx, (X,

4* 0& O SCO EH

gm
o

O J cr CD g3
W PH

H CQ > > CO 3 fc

ow

O rt cr co (a

a > m 3 H
P. C
d) ^H CO

VI-F-79

^^i- in

to vo r- to vo O to
C" ^~ CM Cn T T-

x
^

VO 00 "*
T-

toco CM to co to CO in Tin

r-cotoi- o vo cnc vo
^m ff\ ^J

cn^i- tovo to -j-o toco Pto^ inm t-^^* ^^ f*^ ^^ ^ T-^l-

cn to
CM

to ?

to
CO

CM *f f-

r--

CM

CXJ CM
T

^~

VD

CO

CM Tj-CM

-1

ws

. < o o
^p\

r-co **
T

co vo too vo o o
CTi CM en
O CO CO 'i-CQ

00

in <j\c to t-

CM

in

[ CM tr\ CM

f in
v

T- r-in

t^N

- cno O to j- o <* cn to CM c-cnm

^^

to
CM CM

in
CM

o
CM

r--

in

&5 n
5E?

in co in CM in
VO
^^-

CM

in
CM

cnvo CM c^vo o CM CD CO CO - CO * oS in CM VD to o vo

VO

co oo co *- o in CM CT\T co r co in
to

in CTiT- r- cn r-intoc to1**- m

,f

o to
S *sj"

,
^T-I- cno
to CM CT\CM CM invo toiF-vo oj vo O to CM vo -i-

Pi

i
SS
8
CM I ^ CO ' O -P M CO

g
S

co f*~ m to crvin CM T^in

CT.

O CM VD

vo invo vo o ino
CT-T-

^_
vo
^r ^~

in to to CM vo vo * tocncM
CAT-

in to
VO

CM

VO

in

CM

rT-

r-vo * vo cn in
CM

C-0 i-

T- ^- cn

CO

VO

5
f^l

<^ o
-.^ 55

CO COS

0 T- CO CO ^" VD

cn cnvo en co ^ CM
CM ^~ VO VD CM
T- VD <* CT. CO

c\j vo cn
v~

t
CM

T- cnco co o en*" vo in
^ tO r

in cn cn to co o r vo mvo to in ^ to vo
T ^i- vo N

CM

VO

r*

tt
S
*^-*

*
O CTiCM

V-

**

CM

cn

cn ^
T

to

to

C CO to

CM

cn

tq 3 3 2

o o
CM

rH ^-

c~- t in
VO

O CO to

T- VO in ^ T- O r,- CM CTi O Tto

to
CM

r-co ** c- r-^"
CM

T-

fO O CM C"-J
CO T- TLTN T

to ^- cn to o * C" cn c~

CM CM O in CX

co r *=* co o
r

T- vo tj-T- cn T- CM T-

CO 0 T
^

in in
CT
*

CA

PH ^1 ^ *-^ ^-1 tO
rH CO rH CO

EH

>,

M -P

> ^^

O 0
ps} ^
rH

to
E-(
rH rH

EH O

\ >, c 3
rH EH ^^^
^tO

>j rl

H C &

EH PI H g o M "*^* 3
^ t*^% '"^^'^

W-P -P -H

0
frl

o o
^
PH
***-.
r*^

CO

S PH
CO S^-S

EH **^. ^j**^*

^5 ^< r^

0
i

cd P,

^^ C ' f - CO T-

"^

- -P O) C

**

* 4^

O CO

EH CO
(X)

c; r^s s>>
CM CT co co
CO Pi -P -P 53 CO rH rH HO -P O O 2 rH EH 0)

S CO -P Cs] O) CJ1 CO r-H -P -1 {? (-1 rt <>H -tj CO C'J <U rH

EH CO 0) J-, OT -P - N O ) ' CT M rH -P Hfi K

o
O

^5 x'J JT~* V>

k

&

0 M EH

<^
k

-=:
p^

c-: PH co
^3 ^"H

EH

rJ F3 ^

* o

o j-->

ti rt 1 <n CT n co
F O
tOn
tlT|

z; -P

-P
CO

-p
CO

CJ
Di

r* O EH Cl, a> rH CO EH too 0 4' tt> W.-P O (H O r-l r-H r-l O) rH

tr-3

0 -P Cfl 0) rH
0)

n o cn o EH o o o

CO -P

S * CO
^3 *^ CrJ EH

^1 -P

O n)
1-3

H,*H n m tH

(-3 (H [r, r-1 pH Q)

< 0 EH -P -P rH -P Cl rH -P rH n) jH O HH r< <H - H

O r-H (ti > t t> t> >

O rH
r-3

Pn

CJ O

r-*"

t* ?>

co >-

*M

>->->>

^-

<

-P r-T (-H (-3 O r-3 O S r-3 P< P-( O CO PC

p a m Q) c CJ

CO 0 O !-q

CO

EHCJ O O O O O i - ^ OOEHOOOOK

EH

EH tl 0 ^ hH r3 S O r-3 EH 5C K t! Cj EH EH
CS

E-i O EH

cn o o o

H O

a>

O CO

o o

CO

VI-F-80

CM O

ooo PTVCM o inT^o

O ro O CM CM CM * vo to T}in

VO fOOO O O
VO CM f-.

mcn^i" *~

oco CM T- m
Or-

CM

CM

ca t-vo in

OCM r-

&8

"

ooo in
O

CO C** CO ^ ^ vO O

PHVO

in CM oo
en co

in *<j" vo ^ in fv\ t-

cj

o tomo

OVO CM tO

o to en

S3

s
t

Ovo to T-T- en toco m

mvo CD
CM

vo m ^* o CM o o cncj Ovo T-

^ en in CM o en ~- o co oo

*- T8 r-o i- rOT^CVI

O -^- tovo O inin*O*CM *

a o

8 PI 0
OOO

y
""

^ O to to o O

p7 PH''
EH K4 52; EH rt O B 0 S3-H
* <U

in too
v-O

10 o co en * ti- cj en o to in en cn^cM^
to

CM o o oo o
T- tO tO

in CM c-

T-

tO

O en en co po en in o in T o in in

o en to
O*O* CM

uto co^ T- O 00

ooo

" en to i- 00 CM o CM
COOvO O VD T tO f- VO "*

: "
CO-H

<o

too *-

r^oo ** * o oo^m
CO T-

O - to in to Ovo CM in to

O O O i^ O C'd

o'^c^

OO T-

w o rt 3
> W
a EH

PH C ^

^5
ooo
tO O CTv

55 B EH 0) fc Pn

8 ^^ s o
CM

S5 rH

in m oo <d- to
CM

TJ- ^t- CM en CM o T00 tnf-CM CM to iin oo

CM CJ IOCJ O Ovo to CJ VO VO

U> C\J C--CO 8 UMTNCJ v

C KN1^-

O * vo O OC

CO 4*

co

O
KJ C5

4J -H >,P * fi
"^ > C ^

fn

w +>
CO
O

CO

fa y^l
r*> ^> "X^-V,^

^4

M
H C^ 0)

Eio to o

EH

O 10 c EH (H O ^^ * H-2 >> 0) C
O-* ^"^

o i^
fH >>

^ H c: >> C 3 \3
E *f>
-4^

4^ -H

^ ^> *s^s.^s^

EH EH to to OO EH
O fc 3 B
PH >, W ^

tOfO

EH EH 00

* N O

EH*^
CO JH1 O, tl

0) C
.NO) +> H B

EH
P fH

O T-

p< p +3" M w
O

HO 4>

g-

> CO .C CO

ta h "^

CO "H >, > O

o rt a B

CO Q) PH CO CO CO P4 mw

t.
| 1

oi

OtO

ti 5) oo

CO 4-> 0 PL, 0

o>>>>>> Swoooooti

rf 4* M R q^ | -H o 4^ <U CU 4-> ^ 1 W 0) ,H EH CrH fHt-Hr-H (UrH >-q C 4 4^> ft) Cu rt <M CX<H <H >H H d rH i-l rH 0) Q E H <H V, >H ij-1

O H J- w ci <a o 4-> ca -^. r; ^ >, o o 01 rH W t> 4->\ o 4> rt

PH \

C ci >, >,

>> W 3 2 fH 3 B* M
PL* ^x fJS W

^>

CVN

o o n co

p EH O C^^ crO O O CO

feO

pq o "H co t > w 3 *H EH H-! O c3 c" o> O i-P pq pq W PH O S5

O
^

O 0 4-> 4-> W >- <*J rH r-H 0} rH <H <H < - 0. C

co *~ inC < o. c

oH **

pq A> **H co ^^ 03 3 f-l J O rt rcr o ^

55 CO EH

<

VI-F-81

r miA
o o in tCM CO VO

C*"- f^ ^- CM vo O (A

en *~

'

KN CO O in CO ** 0 -vo TVO

en en en CM o CM CM cnvo

CM co CM tA en CM in ^ *^ in en in
tA f vo C"~ ^" ^-CM r >^>
T-.T*

tA tA

m c-

cniCM

^~

tA tA in
tA ^~
CM ^

. CM T-

en

cn
CO

CM VO

r--co in
t T-

"* VO vo *~ vo O IT\

co
CO

cnco T- T- co in vo T- c r<* en T-

CM irv

in CM i en o
f-"d- CO CM

c vo
^~

CM CO T- CM T^t-CM T- CO CO

T- O VO t vo

VD

o
CM

KS

r-

CM r^ en in ^~

** in
CM

in

m rj- vo O vo O *

in ST
CM

in

PN m r--tA
in
CM

CM

tA TrA 8 VD in T O CO CO

CM PN

in

O Ln o in tA vo o ^n T- in co in 'J- co
tA
*3- laS

CO MD CM O
T

s
o

o
0
0-r-

tAOrO O ITv 0 O ^

in in t-- CM T- vo r T- vo TT *^~ vo vo in CT\T rA o

tAVO CM
T-T-

ininvo o O
C~- CO CO tA

in

CM

o <S *.. c -P
co

tA
VO

CO
T-

in rj

r o TT- vo <* en en

in *A -s- tA co

O O CM T \O

r-

in vo ^
^

C^ C "A CO O K> CM O T
^ T C^

co
r T

CO

O c-t--

^- in ^i- CM co vo in
r- tA O T- CM CTN

T- vo C?\ ^-

co r tff*\

in

*!-

VO"*
G^\

CM

en CM en co O O ^ vo in in en vo n TO tA

CO ^ c~. >A en C CT*T- T- o u-\ u~v <- en

T ^i~ O ^ *^\

CM CO

c^
Cn

CO

o rt

(f\

O^

in

c^

s if
o CM en

o e rcn c in
03
CM

m^voc 0VO fA
^5~ ^ T ^J-

* 0 o: ^ o L^ OJ rr Cj

O CO T CO T-

o
CM

LP,

r'd-

Tt-

r-o mi- cj
VO T-

cj >"^ ^~ r ^?*
r~ VO ^" ^^ O T- CJ C. ^~
1

CJ ^_ ^> ^-

IJ~

LP

cr

r-

s
f-t
>j
"s^

t-{
>)
F i K^ t , ^

tn
CO 4J
fH

EH t-~\ 0O

"**x. EH
3
O

^ ^>

4-* -H *H H C
fH
1
^^v.

n co +^

^
o
2 P

EH

o
H PH
^s^ E^ ^-^

t>)

O
5

co

n) ft
+
C oHO O O

O *"
O CO

cj e x >, w ^.->.
Cti CO CO W CO P-i -P 4->

EH CO rt r-i (-<

O tn E-I ^^^ z$ T '^f^i ^ *^ O *. * t-* EH C3 TO C ET1 CO -t-> - t-; Qj

fA

>, C

**"

r* ) ?% "^^^i

*
+*

Ej

- n

o a

gn "^^^ ^5*^s. C1 .^ *^*. 7^ O v# "~* ^^ O 4^>

t

r*^ (-1 r*1

0 M EH

CO

P-i co
bO
^*

S 00 rH rH rH

EH rt > >
PEH 1-3

O t- (fl "~^ > O <--< O. 0) r--< C1 EH t^ O Q 4-* CU ^- ^ O fn O f-i r-( /1 O rH O oj Q.U V, t< VH O rH

O rH . *J H E r-1 r! VH -(-> M n cy P-i si B so o >, 5

?~

EH ci
CT 5
f*r^

DC rt *H 17 CQ O
> C 1 J ft!

d [3 o o t o -P rt
i^ tJ r 1 + a; Q,
O rH

o w -t-> n
< 0

| O 03 O EH 0 O O

to
O O

2
**i

^ k
+3

rH

rt~CC M
"*"

EH * + rH -> Ci rH +> rH rf pH
P-.
C1 >

EH (^

i^ rt

O CO

m c a cu oo

CT 0 O 1-3 (^ EH 0 33 CO
W

> > > h3 rt > =; o -p^ ^ ^

<M

o o
0
*4

CO

> -P >

EHH Q O O O O i - 3 OOEnOOOOK EH

^ 5= 6-1 > EH J= r4 EH EH i3 0 ^ ,J J < CD r-P O 3 1-5 0 O r-^ EH S ' S5 C P-i M O CO 55 EH EH EH

P^i

c^ H O 0) CO

t5

cu

VI-F-82

CM
<H

X E

OCO Cn VD ^4- CD 10 CM O

rl- IO ^- 1TN CM CM **

cncno^T^0
T-

o o <r>- ir\
O CM CM CM

VD

tO

C^ C*""* O^ **^ O f-C U>

O *UN

U>T^C-

*-

*~

T- C-

rff\ rrt

OJ ^3 ^OCvJ

OtDt-

T- CQvO^CM O O
ITl

jJCMt^ino

too to
ITVCM tO

PHVD

"* O

tO

f-

T-

*"!

OVO K^*~ -

O t-^fO vo to to
O tOOA

ovo ^*oS cr>

lf>vO O

S3

OMTtCD O CM O o T~ CM O ^O ^*
if\ CM

^>

ITiOCM CM O VD COTCTt CO I

Oco w T- r

O*- CVJ

O f-f-VD O UMTVT O CM <4-

ti o
~ su 1
Q
fi| CO

CM

O VD VO CM C
O CM
TtO

><!

000 VD O CO to O VD

co CM CD r * * to
CTi

ITNKMA

CM fOVO VO CM f1 1 0

o <M moo o

o u"v^* cr\ c o o r-o ir\

T-

O CM CTvCTi CO CT"\ fO

OVD ITi

CD CD CM

'

O
CM

S3 EH J

n*

5=5 H _

^" n M 0
EHC3

^S

fa |j ??o^
1-1

too o moo 00 r*~ ^~

O OO VO O CO

* to vO O CM O tO

vo o r--C T tO

**

^T- O

o^^^-o

O in CM vo to N
O VD tO LH t'"

O ^ Cw LO

OC-'r

p~

vO

CTvi- VD CO i-

O ^" O^

CDC* T-

2*0
CO-H

a 2 PH

SE EH or M 53 CPiPn M
CM OS
>H

O 0O vD O O

ITV-J-O O CM O *-

to o c\j
CM

tomco to

CM

in co"~

O to CTi CM O VD VO to CM VO VO

O CO f~ C*" C3 O u^ LTN C1- T

o cr tr ^>
O T 0 * c c c

O to t}-

O W

CO CO 4> fH 4 -H >, t-l -H q

FnJ ^^^ 3

b 1

& o

EH 10

O to s EH M O</ +
>> CtJ^^ g CO
-r-

S
O >> EH*^.
CD >H

^H "H C ^ Ei ;*-

p -H

co to +>

EH EH to to

(H fn ^> ^> ^^"^^

00

u u
^ ^J ^^"v^

E- E--

co
ci
EH
T

OT-

0) C N fl) +> -H B

<*

S '

.NO)

+> 4) C

I H ?*""

~-'~

o t-t 3 e

f, to
CO 0)

* CO

5z h"*^

CO -H >>> 0

a +> co p.

o 4 oj^^

0 >,

co r-t co

O -H p CO CO O l ? S l ^ ^ C? EH o C""^^. g5 P >> O O

c/o

o o to w

O flj

OO O

CD e

1 + 0 +> 0 &.4J EHCrH^rHrHOJr-l (rf <H Pt<H <H M M

CO CO PH

pa

< 1 CO O) r-( O 0 -P 4-> WT- < pH rH 1-3 C 4 +* O> P. TO i-l r-t rH CO CO H H <M O E *H H H >H < .P.C

S3 EH 0 C^C/JO U O CO CD C^ P
Lo'~ y r-d

(^ >,c: s 1-> c^-^. c - ' >> -.

+* 9
CQ ti C CD O CO

H (4

VH rt

raco

o o

cd CO +* o PH o few EH

0 BrH

tz O EH EH EH EH EH t-3 P? W C^ C^ O O O i "\
^OPnP-tPHPHP^rn *s~
^ <

fq CD -H to t> t*
CO 3 (H EH t-P

< .P-C CO 3

pp d) -rH n >

fS Ofc

>

s*

H? PH PH PH P-t W fd

O rt cr OJ O *3 PL, 0 55

O rf cr c -3
^ "^
w

t ^1

cs

CC CP iZ ^S

PQ

VI-F-83

S CO CO Cn
CM

cnvo CM
*~

*co co r-co
CM

O C T CM c O tJ"

VH o
CMC--

t in r-

CM
C-

CT>TCM

VD CM

r-

IA
T-

O OMACM O OMACM VD CMVO

^-

O in incnc AJ CM
^J- CM

iCM
^-

tA VD

in in

tA CT> tA CO

c-

*"

&

f-VO "*
IA
tO

O^ en tA f^- CO CO f CO ^ CO to tA
CM O IA

O CTi O^CT> O

T-

CM

*-

O^

CM ^ ^JT-

vo

in

c-co LAT- m **4~ ^~ ^

t~- LA CM CM

i- -3- CO C CM

- cr>

T-

T- O VD CO CO

CM c- criin

in CM

CM IA

tACO VO

CT>
O
CM

in
-*

O r Cn >* C~- O VD VO CO O CO CO *

CO *CO CM O

LA

r in in
C\J

in CO tA vo

CM

in

CO CTi

in

-i- r^ S CM co in TCT\ CO in

in VD
tA O

O
tA

IA

& n

g
f~\ Frj

O CO VO CO CM CO VO O LA
LA
JQ

in *=j- c-- CO t- r IA
[^ OMA LAVD VD O
CO T "* T-

C, < o>
E
0

0
VD

tAtA CM CO tATtA CO
VO 1-

LA

in en O *~~ o ^~ ^" CO tA eg co Tvo vo in T- en

VD CM

vo vo in cr\co r c <* en co

tLACO O O

O c

tA

in

CA CM VD LA

T- t- en

vc CO

K -P

OP
CO

Mn
K

O CM VO

CO

co !

8& ^
CO

CO

o o

rI?

<T> CM CM "tf- CTv VD Cn CTv LA ^" LA CM ^~ CO f LA LA T- LA ^*CM

C VD O CTvO

CM CO C LA LA CM O tA CM CM tA
LA

to

VD LA "^r CM T- ^ VO CM
tA

C" CO
(A

O -*CM

o CO * o LA CNJ
o
CM

O T- VD O CN! o C.

<* co <*

CM * CT> fA T
O ' T~

S3

^~ ^4. CNJ

i-

IA

IA rf~VO "* O

r- ~^ LA CM
CNJ T-

O CT, O tA rA tA OLA

LA LA

LA

CM

CM

CO

IA CM

-^

r c

^~~

.- C. CM

LT

cr

a
EH

tA

EH

m m -p p -H

EH O EH -m

eg p -H

P<

o
fH

CO

>>
0
W 03 4> u O
O -P 4) -P 0)

d Pi

fj a H -p w w o h K\ rt '
CEj Q
t

^x O O P EH CO T4) C E f -P N 4) O W rH --P ~H Cl

CO PH CO

do

cy w ,
O1

HO -P

EH O O

O e^ P. 4) bflO O -P 4) '! O M rH rH OuSH *| I ClJ

>
rt

!$ O

o -p rt1*-^
rH W fX-P 4) r-H 11 ^ t

O >,

K H,
>-

o m -p to
r-( O CO O EH O O O "! t>
O

(0
4)

>-3 l-i K

a.

EH -P -P rH ; rH -P rH rt

C to -p rt co p! fl <u
O CO

O O ft -H

EHW O O O O O h H

OOEHOOOOS:
EH

EH KJ 0 i-q 3 O Kw EH

O -P l-H KH

co > > -P S EH > EH ^3

M -P O

-p 03 O O

o o

-=; o K^ o 3

C PH rH O CO EH

o o

4) P. CO

VI-F-84

OOO CVJ

CO"* CO T- mcM

CvKTiOO ^-

OCMVOi O CM l<>

in CM

O O 00

OMf\

CVJ

*-

r-

in

H o

X co.
CO

'-*()

ooo O *o crv

in m totn cvi o CM -Shoo TJCM

IAO

8 -r- m *-* t*~K> v

cvj 8 O-(M' *

IfN

T-CVJ OO

s s

O\Q O CM O
'r- CM

o cr-v O mvo
O CM *

ir\

3!CVJ
CM ^ O

1
(=\ fr m , < <u
EH
K-P
M CO CO

OOO T- O KV

co o

r-cj m

o T~ oo ^* in * O VD in

O * CO O CO

O O CM

CM
I

EHW
M-*

000 T- O CO

"J- CM K> CM O t<"V 00 T-

CM CM CM

in oo
M > O efl H P< C ^
n J^

r-

vo

K>

O 8 c-

O T- (A m
O O i-

CO H w se

.rf

EH 0)
S3 S O CM

co mco K^ in co
CM

_ .

I CJ O CM

CM

- VD ^drA ^o vo

en'" ir> Cv. c

c T-^- r-co
O U3 VD CM T-

C OC

o mr

c oc

p
>>H

CO

o
pq O

P H
f-> >>

n co -p
EH EH
00

EH EH
<Nh

O O^

td P<

KN

^> to
CO P W

-P

-co
,C CO
HO P O O

c/3 ro PU cd w Vi 3
O BrH 03 CO -P O PH O

o n) n) 0 o>
CO

I -p O

p.

O
rH CO P.-P
*H

CO P.

0)
-P

EH

^^

O>

-P

P.H

->^~ O -P oJ I CO 0) rH C +J -P <u Pi H i-H rH rH 0) E MM H

0) CO 0) '4 f~t >> O O

PH >, 05 3 >H h P.^x. C W >,>>

CO

>,

W - e CO

o o o to in O o -P -p
^ rH

EH O
>
CO

o w

m 2
O) -H

+> d na
O CO

W OO O O'

> >

gs

to 3 M EH i-3 O ej cr1 0) O i-P pq pq w PL, o 35 cS

m cj ^ to

S na

oo 3 o rt cr*

. P. > C tn

VI-F-85 -

eg r-O

\r\ co o
CM O.

": 8 "tfvo

* co m en co "3" CO . cneg en cn^ c- eg

* CO CO T- CO Oin

VD T*

in co invo cvi O vD to vO in 'itT

T- cno to o

in to en co >^> to to co co o o i- eg co VD
T T ^"

en co T- r-o

C-

to cn
CO

^
o t *
CO
CO CO C

c-

CM

s
eg en in eg

cn f
Cn

T-

VD CO CO m CO VO
-<i-

^- co T- in co o in to en rIA

VD in VD en o vo e C*~ eg eg T-in
in r~ i-

invoinvDVD
*- o r-cn en eg c en in ^~

o
^ eg in

in r en r-covo eg in
to in eg

VD co tor- co o cn
^

cneg to eg o
en rto
.co en

CO to
>J3

VD

eg

in

VD eg T en VD co VD * en to ^f in

i- O f-CO to

vo

T
^J"

* o

CO

IA CM

i
o
O

i
CO CO

8En8
t^\ O vo
^_ VD
^.

N"N T

to eg VD t VD VDin co eg .in ^ . too eg m

VO
=* CO *~

eg LA <* co ^ e^ t

i-

VD ev ^" to o inT- f- to cnc~-'o^ ^ <en vo eg

^- o ^~ co ^~ c o c--->i-rr-co m^ rto eg C--VD T- T- en

to eg en to ^~

in ro
VD CO
T-

EH rt
04 H 03

in o en to

o co in co co en
0*\ VX5 O^

eh a; fH
o a FM c
r-i

* ^~

o ca

-T-

C\J

^- co ene-envo cv co VD r cneg <3in 6S t- in ^ ^f~ ^^ eg * o

^_ T-

m en T- en o vo Ln -i- to eg to to
<- r- t IA

T- eg cnro r to VD in m m
T- -^-VO CM

VD

rCM

in

to

en

ts'e
o CM rEH 4)
O PM
^- CO LT\

LA en c ^- cj Q t~^ c--co **
C^~ T~

o to cn^ o
OT- eg r-.^^ Tc--

O^' eg

|
eg

>^

en CO T- o < eg eg *3"

to !*< eg VD
T- CJ CJ

IA eg

-ti-

'"

^j*~

rLA

in

S
PH
rl

CO

EH

^ EH OO W i-

>> EH

m -p
{>> fn -H C
^ '

03

>> EH

P^

n-p ^i ^"fi
**-4^

09

0
rl r< IH

O
0 M EH

g.
PH

O Pt EH"^. 3
^- ^ffN

aj CM a>

cs

^ rt\ ^~ r*>5G *

O tn EH w nJ fn M

EH

E w -p
O" W rH 1

**^v O ^^ * *P 0} TO C
-P T-{ B

M 01

ft

'S B^?-^ PM co TO to
HO P O O

fcS CO rH rH O (H O ^ r-H r-H tt) rH P1.<H n ^ 3 <H H O nJ 0 rH W rH Hi rt >fc-t > > EH rt

1-^

to ^ -P -P E< boo o -P a) n,-p

t* o EH P

n) SH -p w to (p V< t-' o -J rt \
o> M
01

y, 1 m H-> N a) ? 4^ h 4^ Q W rH -U H B S rt <H CQ n o ra H^ to
t

EH

tn

*^v^9

o C

CO S^ *"^* J^H O ^^ "^ y^

*5

*^ 4->
4^>

co

EH Ci
O PH

t-5 tj>4 -P 0) o.
t-q M tr| r-> rH O

>O 4 O rJ 4) rH

flje-t o o o

i_l O M O tf

<j

&0 W ^^_ <^

fc

EH -P

^ rt >
-=! 0

O rH

gagc^u
to>
2

H rH P

^?
r5

-P

EH <q

tn o o
rH

> -P>
? l-P

o
H O

-P r-:) r3 Kl
O rP O

-P OS W fl

CO 0 O r3

P4 EHO W
CO

EH PJ 0 O O O O f-3 O CJ EH O O O K 0 EH

EH W 0 i-^l H h3 0 H1EHP3 KH
EH
9

C^ PL, PH O CO W

oo o to

M Q-*

EH

EH

<u

to

tc

CO

p<

VI-F-86

1
T^

3 S-

o o *sl (O c u
CO

o^
CM

oo
00

CM

D *

c o o o
Lul _J

_
^
r-

o s-

ta

CM i

CM

<> CO

CM

CM CM

CO O CO ri . 10
CO
O)

a.

1 0

to QJ

a.
+
C

o i
O
CM

C _0

+J

o o 'C 10 c u
CO

C7>

in

*^"

CM

CT

CM

VO
^f

CO
03
<U (U

-r-

to

4->
O

(O

S-

s-

1 0

'i +J 5 E O

o o o LU to

^j;

O r S(U CO

to c

* CM

CM

CM

CM

CM CM

to

(U 0

'o. i.
C 0) r- >> O)

to

u r~ x:
(U

CO >0. O CO 1 _J Z > _l Q1 J O O O Q-

c
1'
r"^

(0 O)
04->
^3

VI-F-87

O 00 VO
CM
H

^s dj
E

O ^IfN

CD CM ^J"

* ^ VO 00 CM to T00 00 T- ITv T- CO

O ^J- tO to CM CM T- f CM

en

CM T-

C--CM vo

IfNO CT\ O

o-^- CM m cn
T

o vo cn co o mc^vo
co cn ^~
TT-VO

CM r- t~

CM -^ O
KN C-

O T** CT* VO -

CM cn cn
CM

...

CM

0
*-t-

cd~v
PM VO

4>'t~fcQf"

t/I Cn .a; S ^J c3 g; ca h3

O CD O

O COvO o ^j- LTV

^- cn co en
C^- T"
^~

O t "* O CM CM IO
lf\

co

CM CM in CM cncM 0
CM

T-

[O

^- CM KN CsJ ^*00 CM O VO VO ^~ VO 00
>^-

omen into o cnvo vo CMVO r~ ^~

O mCM -do O to in ^~-

CM m 00

T"

T tO

_ OT-m fes o co en 2 cvivo en

CM *- CM

OVO CM

O tOir\CO CM O CM ^d~ CD C*~ ^" ^ to r- CM O VO

TT-

CM f-m CM

cn CM- to
to

CM O

VD KN tO

o vo cnin * inco vo to
^~ ^~ CO

o ^" c cn o ir\c-~ r
VO O 00 ^ T

to

P I

a
o
h-l
fz< CO

,.

0 O O 0 O O

<i- CO in C CM *-

ooo
T- ?

O ^) r- 'd-

^ co T-

O to CO

*^~ to
^~

to

vo rj-rtf- CM r cn in in *~ vo cn ^~ r*~ i^
* T-

CD CO l^* t^ CO

o ^j- cnc~ ^~ m CM

ir\ c^~ co ^*"

O VO T^ C\J

^ <u

CM^rn
CM

CO 'd--^T- CM VO

CM tocr>

EH a

o oo o oo
CM CO VO CM C-T-

0 O O

vo IT\T- -^-cvj vo in in CM co c cco <* CM

r to
COTvo

vo cn in CM to cnco o vo ^j- vo vo vo to

OO*d- r~^iO r~ CM c vo . . .CM ira cnco

T- r- tO

o o - LH o cnco CM
CSJ CM Xf\

rCO ro-cMnCM oco

CO
tO

EH cuM

o oo O 0O oco
CM m o CM -^- cn

t- to R CM VO .in CM CM
CM

vo r- T- cv c
vo CM VO

0 0 -* T- cn oc-r- to oo , VO ^i" CO
T~ T

o CM -^- >* tnc co rr-^ CM O-

in
CM

o.'

m to -p
-P H

n
O
C" -P P H tn -t r, -^ 3

p
EH

(H

rH

CjJ

EH

t<N
r-l
t>5

o
f>
0 1 1 ^^ 01 p^

p!

b o <^ >
. ro

EH fn >>
M CO
CO

OO

ffi a, f~<
M

-p

f. w
41

o ri <fl C
CO to PH CO CO

--; H-> in p. c1 i -P O
EH C r-l fH

* ** fn ^\

-P >, ?

-HJ 0 C N d) H p U) W O M 0 >i 0 s 0 P (C ^ O r- 1 C) -P rH r-H 0' r-H

oEH
:

K\ to
EH r>^

EH EH
C 0

O >j EH-\ W C Ot
O -H

C, C -P -i f f-t C5 t" CJ

*%
C-i

R
>. '^
J

F~ -

P ^5 ^ t^ t > ^ ^^
< "*^^ ^- ^

{ ' t~* >> O

a c. -P
t* >

o o m c o o o co
F> CO

co

a e > ^* * t^> w
!3 O EH

P.<M

^ VH V-i V-( Q E
tt i1 (*

b -P \ o + rt ' >- a o ^ LI to c> __ O O -P -P 1 i -P +J C --' C.

r-H --H

O 3

H F

O ^< PU J>^ <' PH ""^^ C C? EH 0 C ^ 1

x e
2

rH

>5

r_

*-i

co

0 0 -P r-H

f
O

o
C 'H

<rt O

EH E^ ,-T

0 PH 0 S CO EH

e CO

go P, P-t

00
PH
PH rM EC

5
g r^

^5^^
o o
*

0 0 J

a.'c -H CJ > 3 ;- -5 o a ^'T-0 ~ ic a

pq <u
CO

^
-P

=;

pq

VI-F-c

VOCM in in in to
CM

CM CM fvO CM
OCM

CO

CM

^ss
*- CO

in

00 IO CM

CM VO VO

IOCO
T-

CM

in

VO CM

CO

CO

VO CMVO

"

mintCD toe
in CM
vo O
CM

in CMVO c

vo moo

in*in

CM

me-in t- vo O

CM CM

T-

O tomoo * <r\O vo inoo rn^inincM co - o in

to ** oo in o

O CM in GO

CM CM i

OMOIO CM

tO Cn 00 T- CM f IO VO in CO tO CM 10 rCM tO t tOO

CM IO 00 tOVO C-CO t-

co

toco

iVO CM **

in

$
H o .
CO

in

CM

CM K\ttOlO IO"1-CO ^h - - CM

cr>

8S8
ra
CMVO VOrCM

eo T- T- mvo CMVO ** o m co T- T- en
CM CM ? mo

o T- c in T*- in vo t
CM

CM

_i O to O toto *:qvo T" CM ON

O
T-tf<J- O tO

CO
tO

vo
.

s
VO

toin^- o vo *- inc--cn to

vo c vo co * T-

cr o
CM

cog

S CJ
CO '

avo <* oco o vo *

VO

vo
- KNCM T-

CO

CO to

- vo co vo ,"\
T- CM tO

C~ O T~ C~> t CMVO CO VO to

vo
O O VO

CT\
O T-

to CTi

00

O O in o OCM

g en

OfOCM IO CM

CM -^ cnmto CM in f-f- O O ^* O*i to to in CM en TJcr> o i-

CM CM CM VO CM

^r-o en in

rocM o vo o mvo cno CM

in T- in T- CM
CM incno in

VO CM

in

CTi

5? en
VO

CO CO -P

EH to Oh EH to TC n -p <o C - N <u

EH to
O fH'

co n-->
-H

d
co 0 O
-P M CO O O O -P CO O O

PH

CO CO

M EH

SH

jg
0)

C] CJ

cy wj-i .+> -H e [a cc <H +* CQ co o & 0 > o o > o _

> O EH P,
0) rH

EH -co o c E W -P M CJ
H R PS C <H W CO CU

o-H-,

O M C J (HrHiHCUrH O 01 O,V-t H t* <t-t O H EnCJ O O O O O i - n OCSEHOOOOS3 EH

EH bDO o -p a> P.-P

CO

^ >S > O t-3

O r-l

o -p rt

S CO
n o o
El O EH

C r-l

OJ &t rH O

2 +>

O O -H ^ rt co fl a a) o o

EH 4* *> rH -P C=: rH + rH 0H j-l <M O -P >

45c!

< O -P hj O r^H EH S

i> EH
> r^ O

EH

EH

iPn O CO

O CO

o O a,
CO

H H H O 0) V)

n o o o

VI-F-89

858" O CM *
CM H 0j

VO t- C T_ ^J.

O ^-

CM CM vo cn CM o en T o cn "! tn r T- co o tn
CTvtn CM

VO CM TCM *
T

O cnmvo in vo tn tn ^jcnm <

m^vo O O CM cnm T- tn CM
VO CO CM

i- vo

vo

*" .1

O cnrcn O co ^ r in mom ^t- * m ^~

8^
PH

8
O O 5

O CO CO O * O 0 O CM

VO <M *

CM T- lA|Ov CQ -^- .CM O VO T-

o T- r- tn CM vo in
cT-

CM T- O CM T-

r_3

a- cntn

tn

vo ^

vo tn ir\ P-T- rcn v-

T-O

P~

T-

^i-co O 8 men * tn tn inii-vo - tn

O vo tn ^lO -tf-T- tn
OT- O

tn

**O VO VO

CM

O iin ft . O COtn
vo vo tn
T

O vo CM cncM O r~ CM - O iCO vo CM in Tin CM tn

VO * CM CM tn

inco r~ tnvo cn

S ^

in p c^ ~ CM tno CO

O tn *d- TO O CM r^ LOCM cn T- CM tn

CM

S P O

o
PH co EH rt
^^

><j
*~*

O OO O OO 0 00

vo moo d-T- cn
^""*

VO T- OVO CO CO CM

CM T- cn cn CM c- ^jc tn ^- c vo en inr- in c-

co m CM ^ in CM CT>Ttn c-- cntn cnr CM cn tn

O tnvo O c^o cno vo o ^ VO ini- m^* mtn

CM co

men

V0 C^-O CM

in
CO CO C * CM VO VO O CO COVO -i- vo

in _ 6
1
*" v^j

^
H

^ cn
Ci
f-| jJ

0 OO O OO
O OO vo 00 CO

CO tni- CM co c- o CO vo T- tn
CM CM T-

^"^ ^"^ .a* *^

*"

pq

EH >>-.ft

vo CO vo vo tnc\i
VO
^

tn

^~ r co

'*

O tn in O tn o cn cno m . vo m O cncn tn tn r

O r-^f-m O O T- ir\

mvo c\i

^
3

PM C ^
CO H

in tn
*tf- vo vo cn c\j tn m ^- vo m ^ co
VO 'd'

SS EH 0)
fH VO ^"i
T-'

S3 '"^
S

O OO Oo o
O OO

CO P- O CM CV CM f^CO

'

vo mo
O CM

vo <*

inrr-

t*~ m ^~ m m in

c N-N cn ^ *o t~- T- co c~\ C- T in Q C*\

T^

in tn ^ Tt CM cr> n
tn ^*- LT

OS

g
co
CO -P
CO CO P P -H
P( ^3 ^
-*>

W
fn m o
OTE-l

>>^i H g

f-t

P -^ O p-*] , "j
r-l

tn tn ^i ^>j
^^x^^*1

^^^N^

w^

EH ^N 9 O tn a * EH t-( O fr> -p >> T01 a cr;^ N a Ciq co p H f\ cn -H >> ^ o

3
-P M P.

5-* *H C j>^ p H ^^ ^j
^^

E-* EH K^ tn
C O FH

tn tn 0C
T ^~

E-t E-4

O > EH\
CO

P Q) n

c: a

S
rt
ft O

o-

A <n o rt

co

PH PH rH +'

W t/1 0) M

o t*>

nl a

K I P o p a> a. P
-1 C r-4 ^4 rH rH <1) rH (u V^ C^*M ^-1 ^-4 VH

O r-4 CO

M P. P -1 p O H h CO CO ft) t-, f-( 1 >> 0 0

t> -P ^. o P rd

c: r o ^ 3n r ', -U vt r, -. >> : f- - o c ^~. -~,

o>^

-^

E-H
frj

*
6
*

O f-t 3 E
PH J>> 10 :3
C(>-\
r-i

o o ^ f'O

CD CO

. p O O

CM co co co PH
CO CO <H J 0 e rH

CO 4>

P B W

-P rt
CO

S^
3

0 CO

o o

o PM o ft co EH

CO P

gOP^P^P^P^P^W S o!

Swoooooi-q

(~) O P P 3j 1 W Q' r-H f:J - oH r-H r-l H-) C P -J ttl P C/ J f-J *H **-H TO rH i-l r-H 0) P G 'H V( V< f-l *-* P. t* pi) Q) r-l CO ^ t> > >fc>fc to 3 S-> E-" >-^ fe O > >

^"ti T y .( r ") r-H ^- H < .c c

pq a) r-i <n s
CO 3 Vl r3

0 -*->

g fq ^, j ,j ^ O c3 cr 0 O -3
O

S PP

O ri cr o J pq ^ P-, 0 s t: eq a c-,

"* P

VI-F-90

COvom OtoO
CM

vo

c-

vo T-VO i T- in
CO GO tO

VO CM <** C

to CM en

OMno i t^tOr- cnvo in to R^fcR 1 " t _ men -* - T- to in

vo

CM

CM

T-

^ o" co en

co

co vovo Otooo CMf-CTi en

to CM

o mcM ^- ** o \f\ vo c o
in

t<^ O *!- K> C ^ K\

JOT- tovo in
vo mvo
VO

K\O IOVO to

CT\CO tOT- KN i- VO

to

T-

CM

CM VD

T- r-vo ^F-vo

CM mo

co VD

**
CM CM

cr> *-

.
CM

T-VO CO to

co

T-

T-

vovo en to to to inc-cp to in c\i

P o

o in too * OTCM m< ooi in

vo co CM
CM O CM

VO c

T-

in

en CM cno ***- r-o o CM in en co to o vo o oo Ttoioin

CM to cr> co

CO

CO

T^

en
^

to

BCO (^
^ Q)

CO CM T-

o cnvo ocno into

^3 ^5 C"~

CM en CM * to CM en co to o r covo
C--

rc 4*
EH

CM

Nl VD O CO'i-

vo VD vo C~-CM CM C*CM o en en
vo CM
CO CM

VD en to T- in

t T- en co *o in tor vo r vo CM t--vo en too -^I-CM

CO
VO

in oo
c-^ co ,-

TtCM' <>J TCM

ir\
X

in

in T-

en

0-P

M co

co

O C\J CJ
O

in i- Th en T- oo cr> tr CM C in c^ en T00 T- CntA CO vo CM

00 CM mvo vo f-O

CM CM

CM

00 T-

SR
CO -

in^- cr\ in toe

T-

O CM CM

*I-T-VO i- en vo T- en c^ to vo CO ro co CM CM tooMncri T- to inrCM

T<in
to to

to en

*
CM T- ^f- T- vO VO C~CM CM

to

O CM 8 om O CTiVD
VD ^1" O

cnt- r invo

vo m en en

to-* in to in o * en ^ CM o o

cno T- O m ^- oo vo vo en T- TJ- K\ en o T- in CM co m
T--T-

in in O
CM

o en in
O

s
VD

en
CM

oo
CM

8"-VO

(X

CM

CO -P

to
01 CO

EH
O 01 1-

EH to
O

P-H

eo -p

CO

cl
to >>

s
EH
g

EH co

co > co

cu C N a> -H a
O >,

CO PH 4* +>

to w w

t> O EH Pi 0) rH CO EH MO O -P 0) P.-P

EH > co o C! E to -P . N O ) O* CO i-( -P -H B S rt H to to o> KB O O > O -P rf fc- O >-5 O iH I -P Q) p.

M K r - l f H Q) Cj <H S-l to

co o o

CO PH CO

a m f>
0)

es
E^ -P

o w P CO CO O o o o

-P

p n o
0

t)3

co

2
-p co o o o -p CO o o o

O o)
h^

O rH C8 t t* fc> t> {

P.IH H to U
-

oo 1
CO

<o
Ot-H

-P (H -P P rH J rH t-| <H H- H M O > -P> EH ^ i-q O 3 HH

EH

OCSEHOOOOS

O WK

Kl g o
EH

H H H O 0>

H <H fH O

CO

P. CO

VI-F-91

CO CD O
CM <H O
-

f-^roj T- CM to,
T-VO

c t - t A c O C M O O CM CM tA r O T tA

mvo in CM o
IA T-

O intA CM O

o co o O o-?vo %
OO T-

o o o -* T
O - (A

CO CO C -^-CO O fA CMCO

CTi f- O CM CM O COT-C~-IA t

OMAin

CTitAO CM O

-aCM

O
* ooo

oco o
O O CM

o T- mt

cro

C~-T- c\i i- CO -

^r^ vD O tA <NJ O CM

ir\ CTVTin '

o c-co CM o p- 1-

O VO c~-O CM O CM -<i-

O LTvO

O OO

O OT-

o s o
H
Cu'Tir ef CO (2-P

,, 5

CO O CO

s 5

c O in T- o O

VO * CO CO CM O O

T- tA tA
T tA

t--5t"t-vo CM "rCM C-

CM

inincM in co
CM

tAt-C^-CMO

O tA v> !- tA O tA tj- CO T 9 O T- tA

O O tACM

O CM in
O C) O

EH OJ

VD
C*l

S ^ O,.-.
(-Z-J

O cS 5

^o e5 *^ 2 t^j ^> Gq ^
^_

-^ o co
TCO

CO O Ln r-o^

f- CTv
T-

O CMVD VD C
T tA

in tA co CO CM o cr

U3 CM in CTi tA
T-

^ vo ^- CM o

o CM UA oj r~o o o T

O VO T- >rO ^~ tA

O ^~ CM

o oo

BS a

CO H CO O CO

EH <U

^rj ^^ ^ **~^

i^. g M
S

r~ o co - o en
T- m CM ci- in

CTiT-CncJ
TT~ T~

C~-'~ *}
tA ^~ T

c cr c vc ^> o r- c * *
0 C T-

O^

T-

"^

C5 O O

n to -P
O

C) CO

e> o
EH
A O

tA

-
S
4->

-P -H

o w
o
EH-

-rH

(H >> i
0)

i EH
A
1

Ot'*

--P
0) O

EH -\ O O

KW

4) fl N <U

O T-

o o
H 05

CO to Pn

x; w o d nl S <u S co
o

.10

to

E<

> :* o
4

> 03

K> P.

to p, a> t-( to o -p ai a-p

rH 4) rH Vl ^t <H

P Q

n E ( i VH w ! 0 fc>
, W ,-q

S;

N 0) -P H I tO tO 0) o > O . O - cd I <1> H 1 -P fli n. I i-l r-l o

c:

EH Crf O f-t 3 An J>j t,"

EH O

6
t>> ib :s f-.

M 03

EH o ^ o O

EH C' r:\
>

'i
E-- t-P O -5

c^
(U 10
1

O O t-J

o *-

P. R
rH 3 CO t
r"!

I <U * to 3

a PJ PH OJ
0) O

E rH

rt co

o PH

CO -P O CO EH

rt

rH rH rH P-.PK PH

; cq K
O

rt

cr

O 53

rt cr o ~
^|

p ^ p^ ^^

VI-F-92

.. CM O

>*j . ^c S

to vo
VO

CM i-IO

O en in
^t-

VO

co en o vo CM c** ^f* ^i- CM o T- in CO CM m CM en vo vo

CO VO to CM CVI !-T- CM

CO IOVO f-O

to

C-O

*
,
CM VOf-CM O CO CO t-

t- in o to CM ococno
i- CM tOO

S G\
itf\

^~

it
P4\0

** J2 _,

-* .

CO 0 S

c-cnvo CD i-in
to CM

<-*

CM en o oo CM c~- vo **-i- tOOO 1-1 to vo i T To to

CM o co en c^* to in co vo ri- CM IO

VO

to
VO

to

in

^O ONVO C^-C4 C^^iv*

T*

_.
^^

CM i- CVI
T"

HH

co ** cr\co * C*
in
^1-

T~ u>

i- in CO <MO in co en
T-CM CM T~

toco r-enco c- r-cO r-cn ci t*~ en CM CM

^v

in

VO

00

CM

o
s
0
^x

P frj w
tt?
&^ ^H

t"^ P^1^^

.. 53
S3

co in oo mvo * o vo to
KN T*

mo CO to tor- 't

O CM O t CM VO iCM CM ^~

CM CM r-

CM in to CM vo ino ^- ^~ T~
[

CO C~ C CM to VO CM tOtOVO
CM
1

i- 00CM tOir-t o

vo en
^^

^J-

4J

rl-

in

CM

CM

>> O -P

o S-H M ra J2 .
1
"F^ ?* g g
^H
CJ

Cj

CO 10 CM
T
^

^-vo T-

en m c*** co CM vo r^^ enco oo o in i- to o in OiVO

en

CM

CM

co co en CM T~ enco co t-o to rto

co -*-OCM en vo ino CM co to o-*o in 1-Tfco

>
Hi PP

Pj C
J< -j
g-jj

55
S ^
VO " ^^""^

&
M S

CO C*1^ O^

mr-rm

CM in o <* CM o '""> in oo i- in
in in

VO

VO i- O CM O

CJ

c-co r tovo

cn o ^~ to o CM T- co r
cv

^_ in
fN

o i-

VO r-

en

CM

a
^ ^^ EH to
b

*^

f-i >>

f-t

-P H

m co -P

f-i
^)
^-^

CO 4^
-P rH

pH ^^ o

EH CO O

00 Wi-

to

O f-i EH~^ 3

^ >, c 3
<u c N (u

_EH

In H C

KJ

O * *^* 9

^^

?*^

^^

a o
EH EH cr!
CO

O ra

EH ra (0 (H FH
B g co ^^ PM ra co CO P* -P -P

EH ra TS ra 4-*

'~*^fo^ P"
> o o ^
rf^
f-l

- >>S
tH Ji; O* Ci! C=!
>

co S^E
O

rt B

O1 W rH P.-P H F pd (C <H -P W CO C' t> 0 4>

- W CO C CO -p H CD M rH 4-> -H 6 rt H 03 CO d> P 0 0
O -P CO rH

V*

*i
rt Vr* rt ^1

t^ O EH fXi o r^ to EH WO O -P 0) P.-P

sz -p --p O w -P ci M o wo > o -P rt e-i o o o

-t-' (1) O,

1-3 UH^

^ 0 E-< -P -P rH -P

-p ra o o

<^ fr|
EH

O <tf
SH

P^'H *H ^ VH
t* J* t>- t> r>-

H H H cd a) rt

EH 4-* p-| up a

O rH

*** o <
< O H-> -P ^ rH1

CO

W OO h^ P4 EHO W
W

<J CD ~P F-f EH -4 f-< i-^

hH"

flj

& rH -P rH rt rH O M .H M -P H fM <H O LO > > -P >

EHfJ O O O O O r H

OOEHOOOOK

EH
fir.

to

PiCP CO O

EH '=? O i-P HH (-3 O rH EH K K EH ~

C3

52 EH > EH ft i-q

c2 FNPn 0 CO K
EH
K

O EH

^ EH

1*4

VI-F-93

om
CM
<H

CT> T- ^- VD CM O CT^

>< ^c E

1 0 (ACM o*^ * CM T- * 1 KN "^

VO O
VO

CM

M5

*-

^~

co to O
CM

T-

CM T-

CTNCM 8 C O O T

T-

o o 10

8 8 O\CJ
o CM VO

& VD

cd **x,

hor

cn
^S *^
CO ^

o co

IAT-

O to CM O O>

t VO

tA O ?%

lA^

IA

covo cn

CO CM O

en

CO

o r co

OT-

o\o

O >S
f l .

CM CM VO
^ ^ ^

o O v

s?

V ^*

rH

T \J i

CM

OVO CO

O M S ^^ O CM VO

j: ^

IA T- CTi C^- CM O ^f O T- C^CM

CM IAVO CM O CTlKMA

io

to

o CM tA o o o"o*

O tO

o l^ 0 C o o*'T- CM

rH O

s
S

O OO IAO IA CM
v-VO CM

CM CO <*

CM CM T-<j-

IA CM T- CM O O IA
-r-

O IA O CO IA O VJS CTS-^- CM O CM \>

OO O * O

00 -r-

O 0O IA O O to O r A

CM o

O CM v^) CM O CM IA O CTi C~-

O * CO

O O O CM -r-

O i- C. O tA VO

O CM -^>

O OC

CM 03 NA

r-co

CO-H

EH CO VO PH

O OO IA O IA tA O fCM
UMA

SR CM OD 1A CM

C CM O I CM

CO

\; c

o r- o c-j co
C LA O r O T- CX

O OJ C O C\.

CM

O C C

OS

si >H
CO -t-> CS EH EA K-> O O T-

m
to
O

n
EH EH fA rA 00
EH EH lAfA

w
O f- ' -tj
TOi fi 14 0) * -4-^ H tl

00

EH M >
M

EH

x: w
CO <l)

tn o cj
cd S

to

P. f< -p tn fi o>
H >, > c>

o +

nJ~

w o

W A< H !

ttl I

C -f

d> r-H

cu B o cd
rH

erf

cf
H 05 0) O (H CO

PH CO CO W (X,

Q) rH f-1 <H

rH r-l r~\

n.

fit T- o CO rH

B 3 PM~-^ w t> EH o r. C/XN O O o o

- P. C

o r< 3 e p.< t>> W S f-t p*-^^ t: w t>

CO PJ

t/>A

55

O O M O H->

CO

r-<C<

coco <n cd

O B rH

aS c! P< a>

CO 4* O PH O CO EH

nJ

fc: O EH EH EH EH I S WO O O O' =; O PH P-t PH PH I

w
I I-H I rH 1 K
>

p3 o ^t tn
PL,

O rt cr <u O t
fa FP W PH O C5

CO D fn EH

<! pq a) M O cj

P. C <H n > 3 f~t i-^ cr o i-l

VI-F-94

{toco en
CM

*j ^s

Cn 1 0

00

vo <n to cn to vo VO 0 in in in om
00
1 0

*- en to CM in
CO CM O
lf^ ^r* ^^
*t^

VO T- CTit--tO

mo cnmo t- r- in CO O CM inc^O
CM

vo 00

o
CM

to

Ps

10

T-

in

^M

wr ^

CO

cos
J~ _. "

iR2

VO CO t~-CO tOVO CM

to
CM

* t- O CM !-

CM CM CM

ro I-H
I-H

VO ^

vo

tO CM IO

CM

vo CM to

C CTv

vo

cn toco co cr>o vo cnvo CM TJ- VD co to to en 04 to-^-vo ^~

^

cocorS3
O 0

* oo in i- to vo
KNtOCO t

CM

T*
CM

CM

in en ^~

f^

r-o o CM o vo f-cn to in
vo
*J-

r-vo t- **- o CM in c^ tn en to men in

CM

i- T- CM

^*in
^cj-

in CM cn in vo
CM
T

O CO U^

-*J-T- O CM CM <* CO

o o cnvo
.-<i-

into
CM CM

'vO^-CMC^

O O to

s
ra

^-^1-

"~o CO
CM

o o <* <*
*~

t-

to mvo ^*- to tovo "<* ** O T- in t~- CM ^

VO

5 cn
"^

-> 03
P^ I >H
CO

"1
H 0
^*

O tO CM O f^ to

CTiCO T- t CM fO *f CO vo CO CT> i-O cr> [ en

^J- CM CO CM tO

VO VO t^CO CO

to
CO

o ^"

VO*T- 5
VO

T^

FH C CO -H

PH

CTv

vo

>-

to o en to^jT- c en co rT~

CO VO
<t

o toco
E ^^ ^*

r^- to CM in o

eriCTiinc~- CM CM vo vo r CM O in vo to vo v
O TiCM

O T- CT\CM o CO VO CM r- to co ^^ to to

in co CM vo CM CM vo en to in

C-J VO

cn

cd
>H

(H CO O O

EH

EH

M T0) to +j . u a)

Of V\ <-\

<a <H -H w to a) n > o o

A. 0) O 4J 4)

- 4-> H C

fj
DO

HH

So

fn t-t

n) C O. 01 <u o (Uco

H a

o
EH

VI-F-96

CO ^- 00

CM

in

CO to O 1^ O

<DOO

CM T- o o\ <*-

CMOf-g

in T-co ^ O vo O c CM O in in O i- o to
O OO

minT-o c *- o to T*~

to cr> o CM o in T
CM

J-

mo o -

CO

O CM O in T- O ^* O CM

O T- co * <* in O
O O O

O r-

O* T- O

ocMcno
T

r-

W> CM CM O f- VO ~ O ^ ^ - O C * to
^t-

v o c M O c n o m -

in O

CM O O O

CM
Ot- O I

in

OCMKAO

* in

O ^D

CTl C l

CM

orCM

o oo

o o oo

inr- co

O vo O "=? VO '

oj o o m CM

o oo

c o oo

O CM o in
T O "*" O '

o
O
f-

o oo

' O O in > COO

EH O O

EH -P -P o o o O ctf (d
T- <H H
PH Cu OJ CO H H

o o

EH o O

to PH to
03

EH o O

0)

EH o O

to' to

to
CO

^ oo m
tO fH ^

ss
J

CO O
CO

EH to O EH
N O

03

EH o ' C

rt -O

to o
EH
CO -P'H

% S EH O to
O
I-H

n >s n
t3

to rt

O
41

tO C ! Pi <>>
g-

o o 3 03 ,Hc EH D<tO C

o cu e> cH hrj ta o>

EH P. rt (fl H PH ft^\ -H f-i ft

>

tOCOi PH

i-H C

T- C'H- -P <U iH i-H) O 03 CO C C -

^*s: - p- rt t: n li
o> o c f<
4->-p

p- cu c-:
I <- j O ' I tH

- . S= 3 o

-P
W

tt>
C ^

C, TT cj H-> r * 0) rH C" fn

C. - rt

n fl fl a) oo u co

O =1 ft -P

O -H fH <fl

o <u -P <u
> EH

a .- t- c rt c - 3o
C O i-

w o
03

o B
CO i

p,pq pq p, p,pq pq p, p,

-I >

CO CO -P CO i-H

CO "" I C! CU CL O P CO > rH H EH -/ O X r4

-u

oopppoooo

"" O

VI-F-96

COCOVO

CM
H

E
r

- CM C tOi- tO
Od *j-f-

<f rh ^ O CM ^O CM

CO VO CM ^J- T* tO T- CT> lf\ TIT>*VD

O cnvo to to
CTvCM rtr\-- O VO CM

O to CM in-<i-

to

O QVO O O VO CM CO . . .CM

CO O CO T- CMVO

- CM

to
C^ f ^J- ^- CM CM CO

*"$

<ur
Wr-^

PH

rt vo

CO ,_,

* to

CO CO tO
T- O *

C3 OS5

*3i ^

CM o incvj u\ c^ vo ir to
ttO

co

rovo to CM m CO UMn
r-VO CO

CM crvtoi
CM

IO CM IO

i*-

cr\

co

O CM toinvo O tovo vo
CM t CO ^~

O in co TO CO tOVO

CM

mo

^~

^* ^~ ^*

covoco

to cr* ir\ i" CM o *^

CO TT

T^5 O

tovo m

t-

CM

CM ^" tO CM O ^J" ^" i

O CM vo iniA
lf\T-

T-

tO

o o r to o ^c-^co
vo T- cr\

to

T- in 01

"*
T" r !

0 s O
^~N

CD O CO
><!
*_*

c* O Lr\
T- O O

vo CO to

O CM 10 LT\ CM tO O CM C*- to T tO CO

p *

r^l^^

HH

EH
b^

fi CO

jf^ .

(=H TO ^3

^^

(<^ fp\ Q1^

to

T* to

^j-

CT in T CM CO tl- O CO <r"
CM O CM

CM T-rT-VO

^"

^^ ^

in

O T- VO

^~

T- CMVO

. in CM co VD co

^ * S VO CTv

O VO -<3--J-

in cr\ ~o "3. .
CM to O
v~

CM

K H O4J >j ,_( to CO

CO vj

OlA

pLf EH ^> - ^z I 2? H rvi M o rt ri > PH C

CO 1

~~* ^ ^5

<-* ^^

T O- CTi fM CM C^- IA VO ^HT ^J" ** CO to

T- O CO

in ^~ to

toco c-CMC^g

to

c^~

CM i-

VD i- m vo in cr> CO vo

O CM CO O T-

o T- CM cnc- . CM *
CM O O

o VD o. vo 0 0 -- ex
CM to vS

i- CM <*

w
OQ <

CO H

^.S1 K f
w 5 vo ^ *""* N
r- ***

CO OCO
T~ O O^

EH

& ta.
fT\ LT\ fyj

CM -^-xjO

CM in c ** CM o cv O to o vo cr> in CM in to co CM to

T- ,-

T- CM O

r-c-vo

O CO "^ C "^
T

O CM f-

o * r- to cr>
VD in cr\ ^ ^->

O to c^ LA

CM

CM

T- c\. r-.

I
0)
CO 4->

n
Cr3 4->

rH

w
g^

o
H <D
+
E-t E^\ to O OT-

^. >>g 3
H 1

>> M H q
<l) Fj

rt

-P -H

sL ^1
^s^^^^

rH

4' H
fV] r3
rH

o EH

to ?: O/^
^r*

EH"^. 3

-4->

J^ r! "*^. J
* *"

EH EH to to OO
T T

d JH ^i ^> *^Sfc*^^ EH EH to to 00

to *c4 co o rt
CO
CO OQ pj 05 CO

pcj *^v * N d> pq 05 4J r H C>H p, t-i +' co w a) JH

CO -H S ? O O t>, JZ ^4 ^^ O 4-* rt *^% 2 4-> W P. 0) rH W
prj 1 4^ O +> O) f^HJ

P*

O t>> <^

EH ^^^

g
t"-,

CO

H Q)

l) (3

4-"

EH
O

EH
rl 3 R"

~-

b +>v^ o 4^> rt

P. 43 H Q H rH CO CO OJ rH >> 0 0

PH >, CO 3 *H f-l
O O W W

o PSe

PH^. C J >> >> C/K\

PH >, CO 3 *H PH v-^ V-; M >i tu EH 0 C^-C/X> CJ O CO

1^

PH

rt a 0)
CO

EH C H

2"1"1 -p O $ 01
0 0 O CO

o o

rt HH P^HH. VH fn ^H P 0 W > t> goqoOOOOi-q

Vt rH r-) 0) r-)

* B rH 0 2
CO 4-> O PH O

O O 4-> 4-> W ,- <^ jHrH CO CO r-f r- ( r-H 0) CO rH <H H P EH<.lVH K < - O. C < PQ Q) -H CO t > CO 3 rH EH (-3 g 0 > > O CJ1 <U O >-P O H pq c=3 PH o EC t3 I^P^p, CjJ r^

r-1 c H-3 4-> a> 'P<

w 2 j^
rH <H

0, C
CD

rt cr o i-q

P r-p

fqK PnS

^ <

0*

VI-F-97

vD T- O

CM H
O V

1
JH
V

t-c-rf- to m co to
to

CM cno co * m in cnr--*-M3 CM m en t to CM to en - co m
rj-

CM t xjTjS en cnr- in
in^t-co O T- en

VO VO CO O CM

CM
T-

to CM VD to en CM in c CM in o VO T- o intco in CM in t en
fc

CM

en co ^

to
CO

CM
CM
T1"

in

tO

to

P^

J^>

co s

CO

tOi- CM

^J O

o ^5
rH

i-too in to to
CM

in co O to ** TJ- -<dto r- c-- in CM in en en to CM tocM vo to CM

10
CM

O CM CO CO
^~

i- to tot CM

^" ^t" VO

i- tO

cnr-co to VD CM to

VO C--

VO 00 CM C C 00 to CM 00 K*\ ^4" VO

CM in in CM vo

CO

cr\

^
T-*

VD CM CM

rc
vo

in

in

CO T- CO

S5

t-f-IO

O to^

s
w
0

r [

in
CO

CM

en co * co ** in r ^ r- 00 f- CM in vo ^ to m to o . -^ in Tt en ^
O CM

to CO MD to VO CM VD ftO

CM to in
CM

VO VO

VD i- T- cnc-CM in in CM vo to in en in
TT- CM

i-

tOOO CM VO

s en
^^.

5
^~ ^>

0
^-

VO

0 CM

JZ co to CM CM r~- en co
m en CM
(Ti O to CM i- tO T-

s
pHj

M
03 3 ^-t

CO invo in en in O O 00

T- CM in VD to
co cnt-~ CO CM Tto ^?~
T-1

"S" /EH
O 00
p^

to vo

in CM

T- *- VO tO t CO to T-

T- CO CM T- VO tO CM CM CO S^

in*- CM c in

to
CO
T^

frl

"5 ~^ rf

vo

T-

CM

O T- co in co en r- rCM

tOQ **"

CM

CM

tovo * ^ c T in c ^> T

en
*^~

tr f*
CO
V

in vo oj t^
CM C\J

a
in,- -*fCOS

0 -P M CO EHH

in CM to co CO in T
^r CM T- v-=J-VO

voc-cnvovo
- O lOt- ^P^

CM en co en en
^LO ^ T Ln

CO

<
CO

<! O K^
r^H O

*J- tOVO CO CM CM

1 0 d
PH d
-H

r>* e*

r
O CO

CJ

r in en in CTO to en rf

o T-

C"- in O
VO VD ^~

to en co T- >*
iT

c-~

i- vo en co o

in
CO VD

LT\ C\J f^

CM Tj-

en

VO CM vO vO

in

w fe; B l-g
vo ^^

!s;
rH

00 f-** CQ C "=t
.to CM CM

en'* to

"-^

**

m co en en to to o O inco if^ >in vo CM O to en vo ^n f- en en o O r-j

CO to ^ VD C\l T Lf% r T~ LO CO
T- t C J

VO vO T~ ^r~ C1

^- ^ en i-n *o

r^~ ^" CM VO

in c CM m co Cj VO C> CJ in

CO

en

in

to
CO CM

CO CO -> -P H

f-l >>

EH to O
rt

F<

- CO T-

QJ

C7 W rH

-P -H

Crf E3

>

o . .

0 >,

cj rt HI e: R ^
>
K3

EH co o S O -P - tj O- O -H -P H I
t-3

to '> ZZ O> E.^ r: O

i"*
O W -4J CO i_( O W O

<>
CO O

c-) PH CO

m m

CO

> O EH P< EH b3O O -P

0) rH QJ P.

O ^q I

O O -I-1

g.
O rH

o o

m 0 A o> oo o co

P OJ

e^

hq i* ~

O-3I -P 0)

<a i

EH O O O

""* d

EH -4J -P rH -P d rH -P rH Rj f- O *H <H *H -P ^H (X. H O

<

CD O O O
<H H O 0) CO

EHW O O O O O l - q

OOEHOOOOS:

< a -P! oO EH
O r-q EH i

CO > > -P > t3 EH !> EH f* i-q

-p 0) o o o o
0) Px CO

e PH P-iO co W

VI-F-98

*f yco

O ^- CO -ej-co
CM -eHOCVI

r-in

*-

ej-mcno CO T-VO O cvj mo

incM o u^ 0-^0

to

in

OCMtOO

T - m CM T- O en vo vo CO ** O to vo to
CO T- O
tOT-

CO to O to O in T-

en to "iO

CM or

^^
CM

0*0 o*

i- C~-

o>rft r\ PH ^

JM

COin-^OVDVOCMO-^-

CO

in1"- co * O VO O rcM o m in
O T- O

CM G\

o mo

T- o o to

0*0 o

inin T O r T o to T*~

tocnocxio in*in CM o to VO c co o vo co t^> ino O T^

-si-ovo 2

** en

CM

f0

"

o"

><i- vo

in in O T CO to o ^ jn c^ in CM o in O
CO CM tO C CM in CO O

OT- CO^ ^O CM O in T - O - r - 0 CM O*O O OT

mo o
T-

O T- o

OCMCTvO

in C M C M O C T cr'3-or-'CM O O O

V O C M O C T v O mi-

in o in

vo xf
W
I-H

o to
T

o"

i
o
TABLE '\rr-F-9 5 TRANSPORT/LTION TRAFF] 'reliminary Estimates) MCO_

o ^- to o

O CT* CT\ O

e
OVO

OT- CO *

in CM o m 0-^0 to
O OO

co r^m
CM

in T - m O t o O c - - vo CM o O in to

OCMtOO

OvOO'd-CTv c in

CM

CM o co

-8
CM

to

CM in T-

el-

^~

o* 0*0 o

o ~

%T

O =J- CO O CO O * O CM
>H ^

^ ^5 *^r

MS CO

o c r oCD ^
CO t T- 0 O to

CM O

in- co <OVO O t CM o in in
Oi-O

t~- T - O inroor-^*~ 0* 0* 0* 0*

in

oj

vo O
tO

o 525 o
C=P

O ino

0*0* CD

S5* O in

^Q r*~- oj LP\ o^ ^~ ^*~ ^^ CO O ^*o

OinO
T-

O T- CO -^
t- 0 T- 0

* in o O CM o in O
CM T-

o
""

in

OtoOr-*
0* 0* 0* C

_> O

in C
O*

^C el-

"*-'

hM * *-*

"*

in

otoo'^co
vo O
O T-

o oo

s
EH to O
i-

EH -P -p to o o o rt rt
EH
tO O T

rH 0

rH 0

T- <H <H

EH
tO O

CO rH CO "\

CO rH to PH CU <1> CO <M H CO ^^ CO W

rt

H
f^s

P< O
CH

EH

co PH CO

"^

B 3 CO

O ^~

+
H O
.{->

B 5 to 1 -

co

-CO C EH P,CO C EH ft P-l OO O CO O O 3 CO O O

O O t

CO PH CO

993
CO M

B 3 CO

C +J -P
O
CU O)

r-<

M TJ ^ EH O HP rH CO V M 13 M -P EH -P

EH to 0 EH

n
CO O M

CO
>>

EH to EH 0 EH

CO

rt
P
rH
O

CO tO

o -o
-P T-

t-*0

c: rHO
o
CO

rH

>.) bO to

r\ t

H fn p rt
CD O CO

0 0 rj H ^

CO 0) rH rH 0) rH rH PH C C CO W CO CO 0) 0) CO CO ft)

c c -

PH pi rt 300 C!'P -P cu m to
O)

E< >x^ ^ ^%^

-P ^H

M i- -P -P -P <H co -P <H t> t_j rH **-^ C* ff* ^ ^H rH ^^r" 3 o r^ VH y, 3 c^ [**7 Cj VH ^ f4 V* 0 <H w ^^O O VH EH -p p R ^<,- O -'^**rH

EH

E<0

r-HEH t-

-P

ra

r>> rt
-

co o

CO T3

M EH

CO O

- rH

CO O r-j k

c)

^H

^\

H EH -P to 0<H
rtrH
^-4 "^

0 ij

-S

0)

rH -en)

to - G~^~

a( r* ,_*] ^ O QJ Hr9 4)

a} -P 3 p. 4>
r^J

EH CO O

f-i -H O i-f

^^ -H -P

to -H O rH

C ^0 W M f^ dl *^ "^ flj f~H CO

+^

CO rH <H

rt cu cu rt rt co co rt nJ f-i to Cq O B PH P.PP p, PH|) pn pit ot

CO O O O O O O O O O O r PT") fV] pj J

rH CO CO f-4

to

CO

co o o

P. OH

o *J O ^j* C O ^ O ?TJ CJ O -.*-* H t2 flj O ^^ '"t (L5 O rH CO V* f*i Pi CO O CO W fH CJ O *-* -P 03 0)4J-P W > >j-P t*1 CO CO O ^5 C] rH r~t *H EH Cj O FH rt C ^H rH r~f rH H P_j pn pT| "T* ^^ p^ g-f O p t ^_{ p^j p_( PH ^f S

o o

C o>

Q &

PH

H^

PH r*i f i r~i
CO O O O

ci> -^ -^ (-^ r-H

r^I CJ

<

PH

*O nH O 3 o 1:5 rt o 2 C flJ O -P -H O 0 0 -P CO rH <U CL. C - O - P -P CO > >j -P-P r1 H H-} rt rH t-H X fn '"' pLj f-^ (L^ pLj pLf ^ t_^ PH P-H ^""1

EC

O H W CO H
3

<H

VI-F-99

CM <H

^c ^^

O CO *~ in <*-<* IO CM KN

co T- en ^r ^J* ^^ *-co
vo

f- IO O 'l-CM CM cn VO t*-vo O tocn T- CO CM to CM VD tO

vo cntvo c-ri-vo to ^VO CM TJtO CM tTl

in c vo O **
CM CO C~-*~

^-

to

to
T~

^i-

vo cn IA
t-VO

CM

o CD cnto o oStoo . VO in CM CM ^"^^

g>r-^

f-

SH
CO

O CO T-

in CM rs-VO CM r>to

nJvo PH

<S O

to o tn
CO M O

to "^
CM

CM
CTVT-

CO

cnco co tocnCo vo Tm to TJ*

CM T- CO
0 T-

O CO C>- O O O CM CO T- * T-

O O CM *

tO

VO

ininco - to

O to-rh to to CO

to

rH ^ IH (P O

S^H

inT- ITN toco T>

CO VO tO

O VO <!CM CM CO "* CM CM VD tO

O CM

f-^ CM in

cn

rj- T- CM CO C"^ to
^

co co cn CM to
c~C^

incno T- in
C-VOT- T- C~-

too <n *-%

o T- CM r> Tinto TT- CM -i-

O vo ^" CO

CM CM

o
t"H
p" (ij'cp

><j
*5
~

' U
r?

^ nt EH
? *H .

in O in to o in CO to to T- "3in
000

O OO

mo CM vo CM in <cnCMco Tcnco en ^CO

O TTJ-

VO

co O cn ^- CM to
O

to vo ^^Ln r-CM cnvo to

to

o cnvo co <M o men o to

in *^ T T -^in^h
CM VO

in rvD <* CM CM LO cn . ..
VO CO T-

CM

CM

^
|

H|CO S
**^

^^ O

mo o too to
CO CO Hto

T- 10 CM O CM T- tO CM O O CT\ "CO O T- CM

to

co IA r CM cn vo o" J\
O r- Th

o c~-to ** co o cno CM vo vo to
O -^

O CO "-0 C~-

S frg^
CO H

in

CO

T-

to-i-co

O to rm invo CM ^~

K S EH

S3 S EH Q) "i vo *~^
r-^

!^ tj
S

to o rco in in
T

O 0 0 in O m

C--O CM C CM tO CM

CM cn ^~ t^~
O'J-

cn

T-

O^

O^ T~

r-

to m o CM CM r vo VD ^~ in c VO L-s in

O o cnin cn o tor- cncn CM H in CM T~

T tO *^~

[* CM to tO ^* VO

CM

CO

CO V> H CO

3 ft
rt +
HO

O
EH

to
>> T-

,fi
- tj
tn c/i 5 o 43
EH

to to 00

EH EH to to OO
EH

to

O r-

to ft I

m
CO 0)

co W o. o H I

0)

ti

(3 o rt
"p.
O)

o >, W ;S ^ ?i q PH
t=>EH
C/KN

El

>, t*,

o; o P-I
w co
pq

8.

o ct) a e
co

p.
r>

3
I CO

I l-\

O O

CO CO PH

PH

mco

O CO

a d> oo

O PH O SCO EH

rt co -P

ErH

*>> > > : 'S w o o O O i

W

H r-t E H

W ttO

O CO (0 O H-> 4'

P 3 >> w ! EH b o O
"^Hl

B ^ w C' o t)

K 0 t>
-

>
(-H

H Cl C< - P. C <D ^ CO t > CO 3 5H EH H3

tq pq Cd ft, O

rt cr cu o i-P

rt cr o> i H PHI

0) -^H 00 ! 03 3 M i

-P. C

pp

VI-F-100

top-CO
CM

CM o vo cn cr\ o vo cnp- o ^~ ^- CM
CM pCM

P-T-

OMn

tO

P-'*'

T-

p-O p- in CM inin T^^ cn to

CO CM *CM *!T-

O too invo CM CM tOp- in to to in v to

^* T~ VO * *-!-*

P-

to in p-

CM ^-

00

CTv VO O

in
CM

VO

T CO C CO ^* to CO CO p- tO P-P-

crv co T- CM cn crv vo

in
IO

in

CM

vo cn co vo

oo totovo pco inp-T- to en in to in to

VO

T-

VO

T-^

-r-

vo 00 CM into 00 CnvO CO "* C T~ CM --3- to T- m T- CO CnCn to OJ T- VOCO **- K\

fkM.

en
CM

CM

CNJ

in

en in O in

too CM o cno p-

4- cn CM co ** * CM CO p- tO P-CM incM CM
O T-

to CM
S g O

T- tO VO

t^\ ^^ ^^ ^" f^ loin*- Tvo vo p-to in

in cn O ***^CM co m Tin to to CM vo P-CMO to to-4- m

CO VD CO (TV

vo 0
O
CM

^^ to

l 03 i <U

mi- o into to p-^tto CM Tvo

O CO CM

vo o CM vo in p- pco * cn in to CM o

cno CM T- <* . cnco to T-** vo p-CM VO To vo T-

r-CninpVD P-CJ1 p- to .CM pCM p-CM i-

! -P
O

in
O in in O co cn in co
p- O VO to VO CM -*jp-CM CM (TV T- O Cn

to
CM

CO VO p p CO

vo to vo ** <TI T- vo m to cn Cn Cn CM T- pvo to to ^i* T to T- in p-T- CO

to to in
CM
T

00

pp-

cn
CM O
CM

co

to
CM

o -P
M 03

,-cnp-toin
T- CM tO
CO

cr. I "S
1-H

O cn .to
CTi

mco To T- to-^-

to co

CO CnCO tO p-

CM CM

in to

O C t~N O C O T- Cnr- CO CO 10 to p- ro
CM -<1-T- CO tO

P-

vo

O OJ

1 G

IK "H

to
O to cn p- CM co

CT>

CM to en CM to
to in^ tovo
CO P-CM T- CM ~_ ^-

T- rj- in crv
OJ

o CM
in to

to
to

to

*^

in p-

K
2

I^
EH Q)

VO -st- CM CO
T-

vo>?i

in pCM

CM -dCM

T- o cnco P-O CM P-VO cnvo 9S *!.p-inCM o cn to

CO T-

cnino
P-

T- m c^ cr c
V

P- Q CO wT\ ^~ p- VD CO CJ CJ T~ C Cn Cr ^c~
^ T T

cr. c ff^
^
fC\

cr. c^
in

T-

V T T 0 1-

cc Cv-

V^

EH o i O

EH to O to

-P -<-t > H -d ?i

to

03 03 -P

to t>>
EH O O
to

CO 03 +>

EH CO

o ^1
>>to >,

>>:

to

CO CO
M CO

0)

p<

EH CQ

03

a to
A %

EH 03 T0> C S W +* > N 0) O1 W H -P -H B
CC| B

g ra -p . N Q J
Q* 03 rH -P -H

EH 03

fi

ot^s:** o *
O W -P 03 M O W O
EH o O o
O

M EH

6 >>. >>
CO 03 (0
HO

PI o-

CO

ft.

-p

CO f-H

p o o

IH^

i 8> !
PH EH O ! CO

(0 O EH P. 0) EH WO O -P 0) D.-P O ^l O to rH rH 0) H p,tH (H O a O i-l

E O o >> O -P

> O .'

K a > o -p a o o
Vi

nj <H ei 03 0)

I
W O

*
00

<

-p

rt t> t fc>

fcC Ctf MH V, O .-4

EH -P -P l-{ -P Ci rH -f iH rt pj

OO i

<n

EHPJ O O O O O H OOEHOOOCJfe! EH
PCI

<;o -p^^Hq
O hHEHX WS
EH

SZ EH> EH ^i i-q

fM C O IO > > -P >

(2 PMPn O CO K
EH

EH O EH

H H -H

o o o

03

o o o o
V
CO

03

O O O CO

V D< CO

a,

VI-F-.101

O T- o to
O OO

00 "^t" O vo o om ir\

ifvirv< o
r-

o to

00 O CT> ' O O>O K> tK> O VD O O CM

Vt

o
OJVO

>-( tO

to E CO O toco O rof-t CJ3 CM Oir\O T- o O

cr>

rj- CO IT* * O UJ VO CM O * .-<J-lOOOT-CM-<tf-OCO

in T- 00 * O VD O CM o tr ir\ O T- o to
O OO

r- - o to i-

>T-0

to CT> O CM O 10 >-

o to r-co O VD CO 10 CO iro o T-

CM

O ^

CMtOO TCO

CM-^OCO i-o
(O VO

OirvO

C-CM O ITS O T - O to . . O OO

r-0

tO

T- o

T-

c~-to o co
mo O

O <-O

O C~-O tO CM to C

EH to O

, CTT

SPS SPS (rT

C o c> : P.I ^< i ' ^
0}

SPS

HO P O O
P OJ CQ 0

ao

to P4 to w CO CO OJ 41 co co <u a) ex p CO f-t t-t CO CO f-i fn tn co o o H rt cu <u rf nj QJ flJ <d rf ^* r-( P. p<cq pq p, p, O B P<
O O O O O O O OO O

C 4^ 4-> H O^^^^. 3 O Q) fl) CO c^l t'O (.0 f! E* ii- rl a] .C O^ -rl f< rH O OOJ3J 0 0 o] T- C7'4 4-> 0) r-H rH fl) 01 W <u rH f-H C C C G -

SPS ccn sus J

10 0

, 1CrT factor factor

tO tH *4

P^ O> CO

CO <H <H ^ CO 10

^S9 W rl f4

fl

PH

o to

O O

VI-F-102

o-^-eo

t<M
CM

IT\CM t VO CM f-lT CTIOCrCr> CO totj- CM tCM <r-

to

vo

CTiCOCOl CTlVOVO mso**CM t- CD

O C\J CO i- *

O 00 C-O O

S r-iot O CM **

*"

H O

yn^
WT-

en

ITS CM p VO CM C IfN

cd-^.

PHVO

> o in
t I CM O

CM

cr> to cr cr\
to vo

tO-Hr CM CM cn T ~

co

T-

<TiCO CO toCT\VO VO
CM^- CO

o oo ro o

O C^tOC-

O CM CD T- *-

O O CM -<i-

KS

*-

IO tOCO

O O CM ITCM in
tOTT-

lACM f-VO CM I tO-J- CM CM CTi''-

en to cr> cr>
vo

T-

co

mco co tocnvo vo
CM ,- CO O -r-

O 00 C ^ O O CM 00 - *
LfMTl CO tO

O t~- IOC

CO -r- CM *CO CM

to

O O OO ^J to O to Ti-

cr\ to

o s.
o
PH CO

< <u

&

^
M

!^

PH

EH >

o w
C5
E-t EH)0 to O

n to -p
(->

O
CO -4-> P -H

3
T0) C

o
N 0)

to to .

oo

E-i EH \ r<-\ O O
EH OS O

o >>
E-l\ CO K ft

0)

. co
HO 4* O O -H H P flj

co

>H -p co co cu fn

--P H 0
O -P

>, S o

o >>
fij\

g.

fi CO

o n)

CO OJ PH CO CO co PH
coco <M rt
O

a6
.
Er-l

CO P, CD H CO P O -P 0) PU-P

V( 01 10 Q> >, O O
I CO CU C -P +> <U i-l rH <H <M <H H
HH HH

-P -i H

.NO)

o> F:

O H 3 3 PH >, M 2 PH\ C tr>

e""
CO

3 E > OT 3 to
. C M !>l

V. o -P cd

i-H O O -P -P Cd-r-oy ^ P. CO r-l VH CU ^ < - P-C

P3 EH o c/o o o co

o c^o o
O H->

co
PH (P
CO

5w o o o o o,
PH PH PH PH PH I

EM EH E-i E-i E^

PH PH PL, PH

0} 0 fl 4) O O O CO

CO O PH

o rt c- o o K pq ^ PH O CJ

eq 0 .-i co t> C-! 3 to E-i

y H r-l M o- c
rH

3 J- -3 O f3 cr c J

CO S>

VI-F-103

en TCM

to oo f- to <n co t co co T>< T*-m ito f- in cvo co en vo en co r en co

c--f-incnc\i vo o vo T- *

VD CO CTvvD <* O VD

CM

CM * m t<> VD T- co CT* o~ in

CM

T-

vo in

*
CO in<

vo r in

CO

co

cvic-cn

O W

o in

^o co in co cncnvo co oo > c * .-o Tinc-- to c^-co vo en ^r in co vo to CM in f

C O CO C Cn *~ VO

cnco
VO

vo co co CM ^jenvo r>-'sj- in CM -i- to i- co >- vo co *

T-

in en en
CM CM

in to in
CM

in
o in
vo

*- C--CM <r>
OJ CM CT to

T- cnco ooj r- en tovo c- cnin

O ^O
VD CT>
CJ

- CO VO i-

CM

CO t T- *
CM ^J- CT\VD VD r- CO VO VO VO

o rT-

in CO
<M CM

to
CO

CM

8 2

*- in c^ CM

to o

in

in

O S

fe

CO

O -P
M CO

CO

e 03cH fn

ci O

co

o
S3

a
QS

a
EH
CO -P -P H

co

CO

o
M EH

to
EH

EH

^
N QJ

co co
CO

W T-

tt) C

Of CO H

w td "H

-P -H B

HO +> O O

g.
CO

fc O E^ Pi EH tOO O-P
O H

0 >,
V r-\ W Ol P< -P

co oEH CO CD Cj o -p - p O" CO rH -P H FJ C=3 cd "H u tn a o CO -P CO O CO o KB o o > o -P d o o a > O t-1 O) rH <

PM oo

ft
0)

e
E-)

-P CO O

O
PH CO

g^^asa
r t

Hi t3t^ -P 0) P^ hi fH tq H <U

rH -P

rH -P rH

EH
Sti O
J"P ^ 1
H i

Hi rt >
3j O

O rH

-P rH

>-3

PM co I !=5 EH>
PH

-p fc

+> rt

EHffi

co K

EH O EH

H-> co o o o
H H O

-P co o u o
H <H H

O CO

C co o o

fl

a> co

U P< CO

CO CD

CsJ

i LO

CO O

VO O

1 0

in

i^~ in

-x

OO Q_

oo o>

00

co

in co CM in

i evj vo
LO

to

o
o o d) o
iStO OJ O

oo oo

Q. -

<1J

o o
(O
O

c ii s: oo
=> Q-

S- W 0) >O

LO

r^.

T-

f~^
OJ

C
r-

o
3

4-

s_ o

4->

o oo
I

o
Q.

S4->

(1) CL.

in i
C f^

S- in to to
oo oo oo Q-

01

QJ ^O

o s:
in

CD

_a

03

CQ

a.
CD
rtJ 5CD > ct

Q OO

l/l c o

O) M4_ LU

+J O

cn 10
r

o oo a.

1 in sa) >

l/l in nj 2:
CO

o in
00

SCD CL

in in
oo oo
Q_

un UD

in in

4-> (O

in CD

CD

o
O

Q.

in

o o in

o o o in

o o o in

I/) CD

tQ

X 03

i-

VI-F-105

^COm^-OvovocviO'd-

><jcootocoOtoc^-r~ovo

t CM o m O T- O to

m T- co 'tJ- o vo o

in

c*~ to

mmr-o

T o m CM o to . vo TC C O O V O C O t O

toenocMOin^-

^- OVO O
CM . CM 0

,<H 0 f01 VO
bOicrj\
Qj IQ

S5

CM

en

OmO

T- O O

to

O OO

ino O Ti

t>-i

CO -1- to O O i- CM <*- O CO COECOOfOCOOtOt--r~OVO

* co m * o vo vo CM o <*
CM
omo

r*i ^w

fe

en

*- O O

to

in T- oo ** o vo O t~- CM o m in O*-Oto ooo"

*

ininT-O c T O to i *~

to en O CM o in - -tjCM incvjoto .vo f-coovocoto O* inoo-r-

OVO 0 -P to

J-cpin-<j-ovovocM o ** S 5 c O O t o c o o t o r - - r ovo S
KH

in *- co * o vo o f-CMOm . in

inmr-o f- * - O
tO T* ^-

tocnocMOiniincMOto .vo

<* OVO 0 O CM .

en

CM oino

T- O O

to

cno vo en
0-r-

ooo

Ot-OtO

mo o T-

C~COOVOCO^ * 00

* *

to

O *

w o o

.
mr-CO'J'OVOO

*~ T

11

ef o

~ f*H CQ
<2 -P
>H CO
0

ycoor-c OCOT-CMOTS co ^ o o omo rto

OCMtOOVOr-VDOtO

r- cvj o in .
O'l-OtO

in

p- T - O
tO T-

inmr-O

CMOOinCNJ

mtoor

OVDO'd-vOVOO

in

** OVO o CM
^ O C\J
0

to

o" o o

o o o o"

CM EH ClJ rS 1 & H ft O -P

tHEHW

1 M CO

-^-O -*J-CO O CO O ** O OJ OCMrOOVDT-VOOtO

S5 CO rT- O O to
omo

mi-cO'^OVDO

f-cviom. O^-Oto OO*O

in

t~-T-o to T^

inmT-O

mtoOc~- CMOOincv OOOO

OvOO-d-vOvOO

ir>

* OvO 0
CNJ

-P

to

^ fc pa c h H O crj
W PH C

O*

e>
^J-O-^-COOCOO'^-OCJ OCMtOOvOT-VOOtO CO T- o O

< E2 2

EH E ^C rl
VO PH

C rH EH <1) (4

S5 co o r~- c^~ o co T*~ CM o T

S

inT-co^i-ovoo C CM o in . in OT-oto OO*0

min^-o p^ . ^ O to T^

ovoo-^vovoc LTN ro o c m CMOOincv 0*0*0*0*

^ CO O C\j *^
< 'S-

f^

tO

OinOr-00

VO O
r- T-

c*

a *
EH to o
rE-,
tO

O T t

o o EH -P -P to o o o nj rt
EH
tO CO rH M

rH

rH

T- <H H

CO

to
EH to

EH O t>>

O
t rH H

PH
CO .

O
T-

co
EH
tO

0)

rd Pi

co

P^

g
p

co
co
^

CO CO H <H ^-. CO COo

PH CL> <U

to
fl

PH

E c t;

co rH fn

3 CO ff
O^>\

EH

o EH Tto

O -r3

cd co -O O
M

CO >>

4->

rt -O

0} >j

EH O EH CO to T-fO

r/j

o o -o rHEH-r-HJTEHO

4->

rt T3

f3

>-t

M__EH
CO

ra

r:

-^

K 4> 4->

T-

f|

o <u d)
ej-^ b') tifl

C/3 ~T- rH > EH rHM4JEH4-> 'H'd COH^Vl-C* C rHrO rH *~^fi hHrH~-v-C

H-

rt O HO 0 0

CO r; EH Pico f' Er< p. n! n) X PH -\ H P-t OO -H M f t o co o o ;i co o o ri o o J

CO

CO

eW

tO

E^l "*^^ ^- ^^ r^ ^ O **H C ~ ^^ -.</? O VH ^-^ 4-* 4^ C1 *^^ ' O CO +> l( M H FH CO f-1 H r > r-l t-> H 4'

FO <H O *H 4-> ;~^ p fo P^ *H u 3 a. K

C O O . i-J II - 4-> 4-> 4 > V-, ! CC. >PlrH^--C:

c V^ 5-

(rj ^^ ^ O*""**. CO rH rH tt) M

rH

T~ CJ^ 4 4^ C) CO (0

-P (8

H f-l

cotocococu<ucowa>cup.p( wtnf-icncnf-itHCOcooo CHrtcucurtcJwonJnjPih

O B Ps P-fP P4 P< PH PQ P< P,

PH

C C

C n

O 0) 4-> O

rH <^ M c ~^ cc) iH o ^ << r-H <s '- 1 a> t; o' ^.; " , ^ 4" ; IK ai 4-> rt fl 4' fi 3j 0) 4-> r, a - t; T.H c *3 r - * ' - ; L * -i U) > fH S CO t) C CtJ U) W W C -. fl ^< Oi r-H C' t-. 1. r c " O Cn c! rH T) c> rs o t; r. o :J o t 1 "3 T' '--' "~ "J r-I
t 4 ~*

> *** CM C

r-n - "! T; c^ *^~- c ,-; C' -^ *> / ' ^ rI "-T- O C~J

1 i

C rH .

O +> H &i <L O 4 H O O rH f I C CJ - f-i CO fH &i P, CO O tO W rH C! C C tr >COO)OO4J4-1eO tO 4^ 4^ CO t" ^j+J P- C > ' C~^* EHn!CHfHrHrH>H>nJrHrHHEH^1OrXf-i;^ J2 -

Cl ^-j ^ -P *^ w
Ct r-' i '

0 0 - '

-H

PH
. a!

PH
PH

""o"
. 0

m ^ ^ tn t. bM
Q

0 CO

C o> o o

o PH w tu co tiQ c=3 w r~i r~i r*! r*i

SCOCiOOCJl-^r-^r-Hr-^l-^CJ

COOOOOOOOOOO

VI-F-106

ORIGINAL PAGB IS POOR

OCOTfrj
M " ^H
*T^ r-t

pr\ O IA CO CM O

lf\CM rhVD CM O^ |O ^~ O"\ to ^~ CM CM O t-

CO

to

r-

IA IO ^~ CM T- CO
O T-

CA co co t^ ^" crvo\D T-

O CO C^O O OCM CO T- ^-

O c IOC O O CM *

mirxoo T-KN

to

O to.'^i-

to to CO

bfj^
Q "**'*'*

CO
^* ?^s

v)

K>

OOO*lA-^CM IO O IA

IfNCM tl-VO CM

cr* to T cr\

t IA

m CM o

to

to ^" CM CM O -

00

o\ co co to T~ crxvo vo tIA tO ^" CM T- CO O r-

O CO C^- O O O <M 00 T- ^~
T~

O f- toc-O O CM * fO

c-

LTN LT\ CO ^-- t*A

o to* to to co

1
oco-itoo IA *fcniA
CO CM O
ITCM OMO tO^JCM thVO CM T CTv CM O T-

r-iA
CO

CTv CO CO to

la

cnvo vo
CM T- 00

i-

v
lf\ \f\ Q

o f tor> ^~
T- tO

O O CM ^J-

to

c~

*-

rotoco

O to-.*-

to

o
E

""*"

o ^"^ ^1 55 , PH'TO' *" 6-1 c2-p o EH ri o E

T Mn^

oo o IAO o to o to

- tOQ O CM r~vo T- tOVD O T- 00 O CTi CO 0 T- CM

CO lAc CM CTv

COCO T-

r-

iri

VO O IA O T--^CO t-

to-* CTi VO 8 t- O CM oo VO to

O 00 VO C O tO C IA
IAVO CM

o*-

tto
000 LA O O

7 <$ ^o
^ c; r? M O rt g
K
CQ

tooto
COCO i-

T- to O O CM T to VO O T- CO to O CTv CO O T- CM

CO IA fr-CM CA

VO O 1A 00 *~T-

O C^- tOTj- CO O CTi O CM vo VO to to-* 00

O CO

VO

o to r- LA
LAVO CM
-

f~

r-

in

00 H
CS rH

r~ to
000 ino O
T- to O O CM T- tovo O '-OO O C~CO Lf*^ C*^ ^ O^\ ^" l^* ^~
O T- *

SS

S g

EH 0) S3
P|
T-*

t 1 *

co co T-

o o> -co

T- CM IA

to

00

T-

o ^ ^~
tOTj-00

O CT\ O CM VO VO to

O CO ^ C C to [-- L^
IAVO CM
T-

to

CO

CO
CO -P 4 -H

rH rH EH EH

(H rH

w
rH H (0 0) EH E*0 10 O Oi-

to
O >>
N O>

to to 00

toro

EH 6H 00
B

-P J

C O HO P O O 3 -H fi fH

rt Q PM co co co PM m co VH oj
CO Q) O E rH

n A co u n)

>

CO -H

I
O

>>
CO A,

O U
O -P

o >,
rH tO P.-P

: e.
I

-P 0) C CO . N O )

H (-1 0) 10 V i rH >, O O

-P H a
o -P trj
0) rH

CM >. w 3
tr> EH o c>o o O W T- c*j CO

rH

8 rH rH >> >>

i -P\

CO

H >

I C -P -P 0) CU (0 rH rH rH 0) 6 "H <H H rH
O

c - o co co O -P -P .H rH rH H <H IH EH t-^

B C W >, pa EH O C^^ c/^o o o co

W CO <

pq <B H co t t

pq <u H to >

rH V-J -0. C

O CO

ss o o

co +^ o PM o
S5CO EH

n)

o rt cr oj o >-3 fc^ po p^ fX^ C^ p^

CO 3

O rt cr o >-3
Cd pq M Pn S

tO 3 rH ^

PQ

VI-F-107

CM r-cn IAC **
C\J

co co o *- cn cn vo t~- co r co ^ to TLA 10 LA

O ^" IA VO C

0
LA
Tj-

H O

CO VO CM r-

vo cn

'Sr

*- co r - to cnco
t LAC

VO 00 *- ^ IA CM ^i- KN T- CO

c T- CM
VO

cn vo co ^~ c *~ co cn cn c T- VO CO CM ^

O CM O t CM

cOj>

00

c-

c
!-

i-i-C-

cos

IA C Kj~ * CO
O T-

CM c cn

LA 5

IA

co co o T~ cn cn vo r- co c co * to Tc c to c co vo cn * LA CO VO to CM
-

o ** c vo r tf- CO O i- to cncn C LA LA c t- cn ^_ vo

VO CD - >* t

cn VD co ^ o CM ^ >o T- cn - co cncniA T- vo CD cn

LA O LA

CO
LTv

CO

CO

v ^-

CM CM 0

^-

*--*cIA ^~ *^"

CM t cn
o i-

O IA

co co o *~ cn cn vo c co t- co *- to Tc t to c co vo cn ^^ LA CO VO to cvi
LA T-

O ^" 00 VD c ** CO tO'r- to

VD CO *- "<J-CO

.cncn c LA to C T- VO t

cnvc co <* to CM < ro T- cn T- co cn cn to

v

CM CO

o
9

O to VD CO VD IA
^_

cn c
to
CM to

to

n o s
o
P=H

^
O LA LA

o co cn too co
LACO
CO

vo CM *- cn T- o cn ^h cn to to co
lAcniO ^"~ tO ^~ CO TCM CM

CO CM IA t VD CM VO

CO CM IA tO LA
T- O T- tOC

?$

o
CM fn I

O -P

*i
o o

c t to
O LA IA

VO CO tO CM O CM tOVO 00 CM

o ^ cn T TCO IA ^^ c CO
CM * i- CD O
^ ^~ LA VD CM

O C C * LA

cn cn ^ to
CM LA

to

c00

^ O

to
CO CM IA C VO CM VO

to
T

vo

cn

to O CO
^ T

o co cn
LA CO

vo CM T- cn *~~ o cn 4- cn to to co
IA O-\TO T tO * 00 TCM CM

co CM T- ro LO
T~ O ^~ tO f^

VD VO tO CM LA

CM to cn
CO

o c r 'd- co LO ^ c o CM ^r r- CO IA ^- ^- LT\ cn
t

IA CM
*^LA CM

^.
^~

~-

to

cc c*^
LT

^-

to
O LA LA

a^
PQ

to
CO CM IA C *-O CM VD

to

T-

_T

^~
CO CM c to -^ r- O O to t tO CM O CM tO to

o co cn
to o CO * 1
LA CO

vo CM r- cn ^~ o cn ** cn to to oo LA cn ^~~ CM
O T- tO-<t CO CM

CO LO * r ^"

a T- c- T- o

c t r ** c

^ CM

IA

,,_

CM T T CO C: 1 i ^r LA r-""

CO

cn

IA

o' ^

^ ^~

cn to

R
CO

fH >J

CO

CO

EH to
O I

-p

CO

0
-H

EH CO O O
H I

qS
<u C N co
B

to

EH

>>
EH

co co
PH CO

5
<D

rt
PH 0) &

EH co TS% W -p
Of W rH

EH - co
ni n FJ *>H O utO t^P

DC

O43

ro nj VH -p w co o> h rt q ? o o >,
> O EH fXi EH tjflO O +'

-P H

SL! CO -P CO W rH -P H C

cn
ra
O O CT

t^-

o +> rt^^
0) r( W d' d,-P

n <u O > o -P rt
01 rH

O CO -P CO M O CT O En O O O

* CO O O
-P CO

<s

O H O O O

O O
HP

Hi C_> h rH r-l 4) rH Rj O,V| <H Ht SH O rH

ftf t> > t=~ t*

HP tl3t-"l -P W ' HP HI W rH rH CU

DC n)
^
<

"n SH

E-l -P ' rH -P er: ,H -P --H ri pj

EH
HP

O rH O

p d C <o o o o co

g*

>

n) > > t
jj

PH

G __

-P HP rH HP

EHPO Q O O O O n P OOEHOOOOK

EH cq o nP 3

ZZ EH > EH ^3 rP EH < OHH O 3 nP O

fXiPn O CO S

o
-H 0
CO

o o o o o

EH

EH

""

EH

EH

tt)

PH

CO

VI-F-108

.,
CM <H O
*>

^*j

cvj r-cn
lf\ c*- ^J"

is

n co E
g 3
0S5
hw

co co o T~ en cnvo r-c^ to c co vo en nin covo to CM in T

C T-CM t- CM VO

t into

n- co co T- to cnr-

O ^" CM VO P

vo co *- n- CM cnvo co n-co CM n- tor- r *- co en en to

vo
CM
CM

en

to

CM

T- VO CO CM Cvl

vo

J\
rM VO

-r-n-cCM r-cn
in 5
0
*

co co o *- en en vo
c*~ C** to vo en in co vo to CM
C" CO C"^ CO n~ to T

T-

^^

f^. co ^r

o n- tovo r n- co T- T- to . en co r in*CT- en
vo

vo co T- n- to cnvo co n- TCM n- to T- co

CO

T co en en T T- vo co en ^

in en
O CO
CM

to
vo

CO

to

o
*

iQ

"*"

vo

,_ z5 tJ H
-

Pi o s
o
Pt r=HX-X

CM tcn m t n O o iin n^"

O in in o co en to o co in co r P-*. to

t-n-t-

co co o f- en cnvo c^ co c co * to Tc^ c to f*- co vo en nin covo to CM in T^"

co CM in r*- vo CM vo vo c^ T en T o en tt- en to to co
O T- to -4CM

n~ co n- T to ^co c^-in en F-T- in vo ^~

*

CD ^" ^" VO ^*-

vo co -n-ncnvo co n-nCM n- to - co *- co en en en T- vo co in

en
CO
CM

in en in in

CM

in

.. 3 5

HH 03

EH

^5 ?a

g
CM t
pc^

EH a
O -P M CO
^*t *^J ^*

cn to

CO

en

T-

co CM vo to in t- o CM tor .vo nto CM vo CM to in co nto ^ co CM CM to in

T- O CM to t vo CM

o o r-r n-vo O T- cni- CM nco m to c~-nCM n- T- co vo T- n-inin ^~ n- in

en in vo* to
T

p
CO
^

rT~

;_ EHW

2, rwg B

o co en ^Sco ^rO 00 ^ o mm o co en too co inco t-T"

CM int CM vo S enr- to vo to co CM cnT- o en n in cnro T- tonTcn en to

CO

O T- Cnr- CM

CM CM

to CM T-CM to en
CO to to

i i o nS > PH C I ^ 00 -H
CJ]

co in f\ r CM CM n- T- co TT- n- men to

vo to en
0^ ^-

?0

C\.

en "

>~i^
f

"*
OJ

H K <I <H PP
EH ^
VO^_

rS

El

,_ 2 g

05

co CM in c vo CM vo vo CM i- en T- o en n- en .to i~\ co LPv CT\TCM O T- tonCM CO "en en to

co CM co to m T- o T- to r V.O O
PO CM VO CM f^> CM

o o co CM

CO

to

to

r- t-n-oo T- cnr- Tin to c o n- r- co vo T- n- CA CM to

to c
tO

oj

^^_ **

cS

^ **-
-

***
CM

S PM o
cd ^H
r^i

-_
f^ ^> ^NS^ rH >3 03 W -P

EH

^v.

,H

HJ -H

>> C. -P \
EH
fO

f4

__

w ndJ

EH to 00

f^ H ri

H C:T

o
rH
rH
r^>

o
CT CQ

CO

fH
r*>

H nj
P5 *
H M O ^ HO

WTCiJ

^5 M EH ^*N** 3

^^fo^ p
>H rH

0)

O w EH 03

B"^-t!
PM to w to to fv< -P -P tSStO rH H a SHH
^> e_^ . n CO O O (-^
EH
Ctj t^

(d

Of W H --P -H 6 W (d H -P w M <y fn
KB >
> O E-l P<
0) rH W

E-t W -r- ' 0) C S W -P . N 01

cy w r-i -P H e
Q

EH * 03 g 03 -p
rt

o M ^^* 3 *"" 3 P*

^> 3 3

EH "^> r*s"*^0

^^

S5 O M
EH

CO
PL(

<D C^ .Hiy
0

o t^ i^ *5 >
*
S -P J--P O W 4 C?3

CO

^ ^D O *rj
P^

EH
K

bD

<H H 03 <U

-P 03

^0 0 >, O -P flj1^^

> o -P n) fc o i-g a> rH

hP
r-3 fe3r"3 -*
3

KB

EH bOO O -P 0) P.-P O rH O rH i-H rH CJ rH

<U D
f-H Q)

rt

P<SH H >H H

rH U4 rH

l_( 6H < EH (A

0 rH
r>

**" O rH

O *H rH VH -P *H FM VH o
00 > > -P >
3 r-3
=; O r-3 O

O W O O O 0 O O O -P -P rH -P rH -P rH Rj j-H

S co p t5
^J

^4

^ -p
03 O O

EH

03 O O

O O g-H

p afl CO
Cj O
O CO

PH EH O 33 CO W

E-ifa o o o o O r - 3
OOEHOOOOK
EH

^ CD 4^ rt> h^ i ~j | 1 <* EH 3 O i-^ M J

S EH > EH J3 i-; EH EH W

<

Oh^l EHK Wtd EH

PH PH O CO W EH

H H
H

c
H
rH

0 0)
CO

O
P4

o o

1.4

tt

CO

VI-F-109

CM p-cn
f\J

fej

2^

O in

f-

o
0>^T >H

co co o T- en cnvo r~- co c- co * to T tO P-CO vo en * in CO vo to CM in TP-p-

^1- CO CO T- to

O "l-COVO p-

VO CO *~ ^J" CO

cnvo p-in en p- to
VO

cnvo co **-(> - co en en en

T- vo co T to

CO CO

to to

vo CO ,_

PP-

en

co
00 CO

T-^P-

>-^ M-4 yQ

wS ^J ^J
0 55

\pi?
o

co co o T- en cn vo
p- p* to

p~ co f co """-J" to ^~

CD ^^ O VO p-

in

vo en **covo

f CO

^
S5
^
O
r^t CQ

s
o o
s
i>j P<

5 t-p-cn ^PCM
O*

in

T-

en [ p >f P^ m ^** ~ QQ vo

** CO CM T-

tr\

VO CO T- ** O

cnvo co "*CM T- CD cncnpCM rJ-fOv T- pr-VD CO CO

VD CO
VO

vo
siCO

CO

pCM en S ppcn
f*.

to

co co o T- en cnvo

P-CO P-CO 'd-tOT-

in

i-

vo en covo to CM in Tin

pVD

^-00 IT>T- to cnpP-T- m

CM

O -*-T- vo p-

VO CO T- -<t T-

cnvo co ^ in CM * tO T~ f~r- co cncniA T- vo CO in

CM

in en
CO

s
p^
vo CO* CO

to

^1 in 8 CO in en toQco
in co ppto

vo CM T- en T- o en
^d~ en to in cnrO t 10 ^jCO

CO CM in P- VD CM VO

co CM P- to in
T- O tO tO P-

EH
g

"5 Pi
EHrt

cn to

Ten

to co CM CM

CM to in CO VO to

tO CM CM

vo o

O T- cnr- to co into p-o

CM ^5-

T- -H- in in

m CM

vo

in pO p-

T-

^ in in ^~

0 g.S
O

-P

>H

^^

Hi r T

^^ . i

O inun O CO en

7
pt)

<*
*^ ^**

<0
*^"*

O cd
rr->
Lj

tq

"
K^
O LTvin

rcn to

vo CM * en ^ o en d- en to to co in cnrCM en
tO-^TCM

CO CM in C VO CM VO

co CM to to in
i tO CM
r

oo to

O tO tO pVD CO CM VD tO CO

O C p ^i~ to

co into p-co

o i- cn- to
C\j 'd- T- CO VO ^^-ino^

pin in

* -dVD

^
^

pto
to O

,J

in

pT-

pq S3 B pq 2 ii
***

c_j

VO^Jj, T ~

. M n,

*r

*-* i i

S G*\ CO in co

CO CM in p- vo CM vo VD ^M ^ en T- o en <d- en K> to co i^ en T CM
O T to rjCM

co CMC>J to m en <- o to p VO VD to CM T-

o r r~ "d- en to O T- cnt- CM ^J" co in to t~- VD to

CM ^" T~ CO ^~

ppto

tl a

OJ

cn to

CO

en

T-

z^
CM tr\ OJ

in

CO CO ro ^

CM VO

^-~

CJ

o CM

co
^ PH *"" OJ ^ 'C3HJO CO

CD 05-P
EH to ^ * 2 S7 gi ^ . ^ ,.,
Q_ _j w I l O

t4 >,
EH to

EH to

>^f-i'HC -^>jg3

k 1-1 _ >>Q3

O O

_^ > > f n > > _ > , o c Q -T EH CO

WT-

T - X ^ S

^- >>S

r-O St^-^E

^ E H - W T - o T c E H - t n c T r t O ^ S E H W S Oto Sw-p .MO) S C W - P - N O c J w S EH G-WrH^-PHB CTHiH-PrHes-p.-P 4 - > O ~ 1 ^ - v ^ nJHM tOnJVi-pMW<utH fc3rttnntQ4) ow-pcj w PH * . - * K G >> >> d Q ? o o > > o d B o O M O C O O oco W ^^"-~> o-Pnj^. >O-PCJ EHOOO o f3 > t t C O W W . > - O t < P < 4 i r H W t > - O ^ l OirH-aJ J O - a J - P - P tO P* -P HJ EH tiDO O -P 4) P.H-> (-^ tJt-j - P 4 ) p 4 F<+ -PrH-P Cq CO 07

"~

O CO

co ft o o

^ u

"^ rH E-i'>> ^EHp COOOt-3 FM EH O 33 CO

fSt/OrHH COr 5 H <H

O rH O r-H AH VH O "< r ^ " ' r t >>>.fc>> I-H rit to > > -P l> -=5 oJO-PEHEHEHEHi-^ C^O-PI.H'I-HI-H' 5=;EH>-EH^i|-1 FH EnWOOOOOt-^ EHWOh-^Mi-^ -c;O^O^i-3 O O O EH O O O O K O I-H EH K K S3 rH PH O CO W EH EH EH

Of-lClfliHrH^rH H .HrH^rH P<<H V lH i t H O (d P,H < r r 4 t H

^ ^ , ^iI I i r - H r H> H^ ; 4r-HH4 " KnJ " M << H M Krt "M HM

r^rH-PrHnJ-H O ' M r H ^ H - P'V 3 ^ O'MrH'*- *H

EH EH

O O

O t)

PH

PG

O o M -H <H Vi EH H O O 0) 4) P.

CO

to

VI-F-110

c-in
in CM O i n O tO

O CM too in T- in vo

<*-in< i co O u^ cr\c~- ( i CT* \o O cn< OT- KN

VO O O CM !-

co o i co
IOT

O OO
<H O

0) T-

>H
CO

* co m * o vo vo CM o **
Ti-toOO'-CM'^-OCO
CM CTi

00 < O VO O O in in *- O to

in in - O

c- 10 O - ^-

in CM o to vo r- oo o vo co to
mo O * CO

tocr\O CM O inCM

OinO

- O O to

O O'O

vOkOCMO ^cM<* O' co

T- O T- O CM VO CTV
O T-

O - CO **- ** in O O CM O l^ * O
-r-

omo
CO

T-QOO\O
KN

o oo

- O *

O CM CTi O
-

in

mo o T-

O C~- O to CM to C1

t-iooco v

O *- O --d- O in T-

inC'-^

o
voOKN

o *~ oo < co c-~ in in oo o in CM
O - O to

in - in
vo

O CM to O

I S3 H P4 O -P

rn EH nS Ta

3 -P
CO

f^ CO s! 0)

co c-

-"-co to

ooo

CM o o in to o ooo

O VO O 'd- (Ti c in O to O C-- CM

CM

CO to

= ^i

i M to

cos
O

O CM

O -^- CO O 00 O ** O CM O vo T- vo O -

< O

W Ci ^i
PQ PH C

CO

5-00

in i- co * o vo o f- CM O in in O - O to

in in i- O
f-

O VO O

to

T- O

i-

o oo

m t^ o r- CM o CD in CM
O OOO

VC O

<=- cr

HI o rt w

<; co <H
EHS 6

C)

S-3
VO PH i

O CM t O V>

oco
OC

T- O T-

o >- co T O rj o in
O

c vo o * t- IT c
O OOO

00

r-

vo o
O T-

o oo

EH to O
tO O
TCO

o o EH -P -P to o o O rt rt
tO O

EH

T- <H <H

CO

f-l

co
EH o PH CO

to en a
o o

CO f-t f-t PH CO CO CO "M <H

PH co

gg

to co

o
CO Fl EH

H O

ao

p oo

CO C 0 <L> O O O CO

+ rt

cr-p -p o co co cotncow<ua>wwa><up<P< co^-i^iinco^it-icotooo 'HrtcoojrtrtojorirtfHrH

CO 0) r-l r-l
ft I

O CO

to ftto c e-i oo H P^ cx^ H ( rH o o pco o o p o o

0) iH r-t
^
f-* r*

U CO CO t bD to p< rl rt

c^ f-f

^t

O E3 P< CXPP CP P< O.PP W PH P<

cppooooooooo
Ci
I-H CJ
PH
O

vi-F-m

O * CO

ino f ~\
to in
CM
O C-

in oo vo CM CM CM O to to vo ^~
CM

IS

^^

^ CJ

to

en CM CM invo to en in ^ m o CM CM CJ to
0
T-

o co c-o in o CM 00 -r- in
in
* T~

O r-tOVO O O CM CO

&

to O to ^ iAtoco

tO 00
lOCM c VO CM

MCM

CO CO 0

PHVD

in*tf- CJ in 00 CM 6* "j-cn in

en to en en CM en'-

t-to 00

en co 00 to Tcnvo VO T~ into ^h
CM T- .CO O

o co c^o o CM CO T
in moo
T- tO

O C- to C

O O CJ Ti to O to dto to co

^^ M

O 0 CJ in CM in T~ tOTv

t-^

S?5 en
to
O 0o mo o too 10
CO CO
^r

CM

in^cp c CM en CM ^r c to to c~CM CM to in

to
T-

cnvo in CM in en CM vo mo ^JCM *- o O

in 1000
.

o co r CM to o CM CO T- to
T~ T- tO

O C tOrO O CM tO

to O to ^*"
tO to CO

Pi o s
^-N

r- O tOT- CM ^-CM

O H

O
EH

P^t^**
tn CO

!x! ^

*3i 0)

0 O

EH rt

f r ro

T- o CO CM O ^d" f> O T- vo in

vo

CM

^- T- to VO vO t 0 T- V.D CM

co to o * en
CM

o t- to OCO o CTvO CO o

O CO vO to

CJ

co

T^-

to ^~ CO

Ttf"

o to r vo invo CM
V

S H

to ii co co
^~ | |
Crf

EH t3 ~^ J^ <^ *5 O
I5?0*5

o rt 93
PH C CO -H

c
-^

00O LO O O too to

T- to CM O CM T- to CM O

t tr\
^ QQ fOv

o en co o ^~ <- cj in

^t" C T vo O LT\

CO in r-co cr>

0 r t^ ^ 0 *- ^0

o CT>O C\J vo v^Oh"^

eco

co

co

O T-

^-

o to r ir invo r. ^~

O CO 0 t-

E* f

to

H3

aB
<i rH

EH co
_ pi i_ i S
T-^

s O mo o
to O

r- O CJ C (X T- O -* CO

\S\ LP

or
O

to ,-

vo

JC

$
t

VO CO cv CO O CO

^ o cv

CO vo

c r- t-^ c o c- c cv

LO

|_T*

^T

o f? r^-ir * I_TN \o c

M- CO

SJ

cl

to CO H-> -p -H
H C

CO

to

K
N 4a H

rt P.
0)

EH E*o to o O TCO CO
CO

OO

EH EH to ro OO

CO

o EH'
o t>>
rH CO

co
^1 0) >> O
^ O

o
Pn
0) U O) i O)

EH ct: o

> o

, to
EH" C>

> HO +> O O

2 P

PH CO CO <n PL, 03 CO

4^ C') P. Or} I 4 > o El C H fl rf <H P S

+ a>
( r-f

fl)

nJ

EH O C' o o o o o

O
CO

o in o -p

VH

O CO

rt n c a a> o u

CO

rt

O EH EH EH EHEH i W O O OO Oi O PH PH PH PH ffi

r-) r-H H V-i

co .< - p. c pq a> H o > > O rt cr <u pq f3 P,

EH l-H

< P. C pq a) -H co >
O ta Hi

,-H PH

O i-H
O K

CO 3 H J ca cr <u i-4 Pn PH E

O PH

VI-F-112

ODx-*_^

><
S CM

^c-to
CM ^

t-.*

vo c**~ c^~ to en
CM ^-

O O O ** CTi O in O^ CT\ CO ^^ ^- ^~ ^~

r-to

CM tominco CM O ^-c\J t^ mo CM

CM CM -^CO in VO ^" VO VO ^^

1*0

o ^
O)T-

^
^ to

9
^c~
O

CTCCO

to Sg
CM

CO

CM tocninrt- N

^ in
CM

CO

O ""*"

to in
CO

to

in oo

OCM P-i V.O

oK

co S <O

CJ t^-CTi

in
O

in
-<i-

en co T-CM CTiCTvvO T- oo r-co toco dco c to r^ r^~ iin covo to CM in ^4" CT>vO 00 cr>o o r- CO f~ T~ ^J- ^- CM

" f. VD

totovo cmt--T- to CTMn tomto *tO ^ ^

00 00

vo co CM in to cnvo CQ ^*- c~CM ** to T in T- co crcr*to

T-VO CO *
r-

00
V-

tCM to
CM

CM

en CM in

T~

en in o in

K
E

g O

CVI CM O^

*** in t-'TT- c-oo oo

CM

to

en p>- co c-cn CM VO to en m 0 o *~ *

CM CM O i- CM

c-a^^csj to to to to r- en en in

r-incDc- Tr--vo T- vo o VD r---<- co o to O VO CO to T- mvo en VO

**
T

,J "*

CO ^j f^. L

in to

s
0
s-** Sx-x

o c^ to

g T

R mc~
cto

d- t^to vo to m CM CM C~-TVO CM VO VO

VO

vo

COOD CO OS

<* cu *z* C^ 4^ 5 EH
EH

C=H CO

vo CM cy* ^
O
0

O CO 5
-dT-

to

CM

CM

en co CM to en co mvo cncn Tin CM *

f- O vo C CO
CM to CM C~- CO

^- o

to,- T- incr* in invo co cntCMC^OO

-dvo

VO

00
CO* CO
T-

CO CO

vo

^-

<^

VO

VD

tjm

^^

fn

to 1

O 4-* M CO ElW EH ^s CJ tH

^H CO COS ^S 0

o mm

R s

fOvOtOVDC\i^d-

inco

cd 0 C eq PH d CO 1 R & e
EH <U
VO PH
^^ %_-* 5^

^~ C--

O ^~ to ^d~ CO ^

c- CM CM ent- o en o en 10 ^co CM mco TCM

^CO

CM

to

en to

en

CO

en r- to in en co ^rin to CM 10 to en
CM

o r- cnt- co co m ro c~- to 0 JM * T- co o CM ^~ ^j- in en in

CJ

O C~- t^ O C~-

c-

VO

(^

'^
CTv

LO -^

to

to

o i- in o r--rM

to m.^^~
CM CO
f^-

CO CM ri-

co CM en t--iCO CM

CM OJ O CO

c\! i- to m

'd
T"

to

c-

vo c^ to

VO i-

in c

to CM en
T"~

'"

CO CV [- CO t^ vo O^, ^r N> CO

c vo en in^- r0,.

^~

T- co CM CM o c-. t-~ en ^~

c>
IT

~\

cv

00

CM
T^

w
EH to OO W TEH to O
_

n) P< 0) rt

f-t

T- >T>

EH to O to'

>q 3

CO 4-> 4J H H C

cl

EH CO O O

to
CO CO

o
EH CM CO (Q to CO A< 4* 5g CO r-l r-t

EH .rar- a) - .N cy to rH .

c^ e
>

PJ (C <H 4'

>

>

CO

o -^

rt\

O EH PH

cj nj

f-t tOO O ^lO

O rH

O + 0) P.-*-1 ^Hr-HrH OrH

0) ^H OT

t> o >-i
O

S e > o -p o o a
, jri

O Ci)

EH , CO E1 to -f'

O s; H Q) W r-t 4J -H E 05 <H CO co <u

O r-H

co s:- -~ o &
"Z, O M EH

O <1 E <>
4-> -4? CO 4 to O CO O O O O
CO O

o n.

~3

CO S5

S
o o o
O CO

P,H VH ^ <n

a *-\ 4-> r~\ K) O <M f^ <H 4>

-f'

EH ^

O O -P 05

^ EH

d
P6H (^

O CO

ra a <u oo

CO OO Kl PH EHO W CO

EHW O O O O O t - H OCJEHOOOCJS3 EH

i^rtfr^ > <o-<->e-<^e-.EHHH

< O -w ^ 6-( tiq o ^ O i^l EH X EH

CO > > 4-> > ZZ EH > EH > ^ ci O ^ O 3 tJ 2 PH P-.0 CO PS EH

EH O EH

o o o

60

0, CO

<u

o 11
CO

VI-F-113

X <O

en oo co
LO

LO o rs^

CM cn ^o

CM LO

cr>
CO
LO

00

o
LU _J

I
I/) C/J 3

CM CM CO

LO

LO
>!-

cn LO
LO i

CM

cr>

CTi CM CM LO

S1

c j

cn r*~
CO

rs~ LO
CM

<r> *i*

i CM

r-1

CM

r
OJ t/5 (O

*d-

i
U. I

so -i->
c
ro
i O O
LU

X (O

CM

LO en
LO

en t c*

CO

CM

r*^ i i

^j* i

00 <> CO OO

to
OJ

CM

3 I/)

ii

CL

c
O i+J

sfO C <D

cs
1

o
3 S_ H01 I/)

GQ

DOO

oo
O) CD

o o 3 OO i . c

cn r^ r** r-*

LO co co

oo cn o i

:* r***

VO CO

8
Ol

co

CTi

4-> 10
O C_>

c o

s_
O)

C3
kD CO
LO

r^

OO

IO

O"^

>J

LO

cn
|

iE

CM

LO

cn
LO

E oo
O00

fO

oo Q. oo
CD

.)-> ro

0)

O) U O)
* ^

O) (O

>

J _1

>1

^:

Q-

*^; ^=* 1

> I
r^ O

== i
or~ O

c_>

VI-F-114

i
X O

r^

CM

^1"

LO
LO

co
LO

CO

o
r^
CO

s.

* csj
ID

CM r*^

co ^^

o LL!
E
t/>
CO

CM i CM i CO

LO r
O d-

CO CO
O LO i

CM CO CM

CM O^ LO LO

*<

t
c s

co co
CM O CM

LO r~^
CM CM

CM LO
CO CM

cn vo
r

a, f^ o LO co

to p o tJ
C
i-

a;
1-

o >-

X rd 2:
-

ID

LO

!->

+-> o; <_>
S-

CO

fO Q.

CO CD CO

CO l> LO

CO CT> VO

LO i i

CO CO

10 JD

ft

1 0 LO

in cu

CU +

LU

o
LU _J

ii
>
UJ _1

ca

I o oo o. oo JO
(U CD

(B J-

w c

a.

TC 4-> CU

c so <a o oo

-i-

in in

E
O

co
i^
CO

LO
i
CO

UD

cr>
cr
CO

CO

CT(

CO
^^ LO

vo

c o o
CD

3 i .

10

I D

^
CO CO f^ 1 OO CO LO U3 CO
LO CM LO CO

O <_3

2 0)

c
^

LO CO ^

c o I/) cu a.
1 0 ID CO

a. oo
in in ca cu ^ ^

4-> fO

o cu

10

CU

cu

cu

>
_l

>
_J

>
D0

a:

CL.

"re o i

o z: *

VI-F-115

ecJin

EDIN EX-338-7o

SECTION V I

APPENDIX A

PRELIMINARY DESIGN ANnLYSIS

OF A SPACE POWER SATEILITE

- HEAVY LIFT LAUNCH SYSTEM

by:

ENGINEERING ANALYSIS DIVISION

Prepared by! NASA Johnson Space Center Houston, Texas 77053 VI-APP-A-1 December, 1976

EcJin

EDIN EX-333-76

CONfRI BUT ING UPGANIZATI OH 3

(He would l i k e to acknowledge the outstanding contributions from the ? I M ft TinN personnel for their support in the document ation of this report, Also, technical assistance and advice from personnel of the f o l l o w i n g di"lsions of the Engineering and Development Directorate is greatly appreciated and acknowledged: PROPULSION AND POWER DIVISION SPACECRAFT DESIGN DIVISION STRUCTURES HMD MECHANICS DIVISION

FDIN EX-338-7C VI-APP-A-2

EDIN EX-338-76

1.0

ABSTRACT

A preliminary design launch vehicle having a 30 pound per cubic foot payload density has been sized to deliver the solar power satellite into low earth orbit. The vehicle is a tandem-staged, reusable straight winged launch vehicle capable of delivering a 1 - m i l l i o n pound payload to a 270 nautical m i l e , 5.5 degree inclined circular parking orbit, This launch vehicle has been designated EDIN EX-338-76. The EbIN EX-338-/6 concept used l.OX/C^HQ booster' engines and LOX/LHg engines in the upper stage. The weight scaling coefficients were derived from Space Shuttle Phase B System Studies. The booster stage rocketr engine firopul fion system weight scaling and performance characteristics reflect a 1995 technology level. The second stage used uprated (Pc=4000 PSIA) existing space shuttle main engine <SSME's). The gross liftoff weight of the vehicle was 21,095,563 pounds. The booster stage required 16 x 1.916 nii 11 ion pound vacuum thrust engines; the second stage needed 14 x 544 thousand pound vacuum thrust engines. The vehicle was designed to a liftoff thrust to weight ratio of 1.3. The diameter of each stage was 50 feet.

EDIN EX-338-76

VI-APP-A-3

ecJtn
TABLE OF CONTENTS

EDIM E X - 3 3 8 - 7 6

PAGE 2 . 0 SUMMA R_V ....................................................... 3 . 0 _I_N_T REDUCTION ................................................. 4 . 0 METHOD OF ANALYSIS ............................................. 4.1 ASSUMPTIONS AND GROUNDPULES ............................ ..... 4.2 SIZING A N A L Y S I S ............................................. 4.3 LAUNCH ANALYSIS ............................................. 4.4 ENTRY ANALYSIS .............................................. 5 -LLrl uNj- DISCUSSION ......................................... 1 2 3 3 3 3 4 4

5.1 GENERAL VEHICLE ............................................. 4 5.2 BOOSTER STAGE ............................................... 4 5.2.1 GEOMETRY ............................................ 5 5.2.2 AEPOSURFACE GROUP ................................... 5 5.2.3 BODY GROUP .......................................... 6 5.2.4 THERMAL PROTECTION SYSTEM .......................... 6 5.2.5 LANDING SYSTEM ..................................... 6 5.2.6 ASCENT PROPULSION GROUP ............................ 6 5.2.7 AUXILLIAPY PROPULSION GROUP ......................... 6 5.2.8 PRIME POWER SYSTEM .................................. 7 5.2.9 ELECTRICAL CONVERSION AND D ISTRI BUT I ON SYSTEM ....... 7 5.2.10 HYDRAULIC AND CONVERSION AND DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM.... 7 5.2.11 AEROSUPFuCE CONTROLS ................................ 7 5.2.12 ENVIRONMENTAL SYSTEM ............................... 7 5.2.13 AVIONICS SYSTEM ..................................... 7 5.2.14 PERSONNEL PROVISIONS ................................ 7 5.2.15 PPOPELLANT LOSSES AND LOADINGS ...................... 8 5.3 SECOND STAGE ................................................ 8 5.3.1 GEOMETRY ............................................ 8 5.3.2 AEROSURFACE GROUP ................................... 9 5.3.3 BODY GROUP .......................................... 9 5.3.4 THERMAL PROTECTION SYSTEM ........................... 9 5.3.5 LANDING SYSTEM ...................................... 9 5.3.6 ASCENT PROPULSION GROUP ............................. 10 5.3.7 AUXILLIARY PROPULSION GROUP.., ...................... 10 5.3.8 PRIME POWER SYSTEM .................................. 10 5.3.9 ELECTRICAL CONVERSION AND DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM ....... 10 5.3.10 HYDRAULIC AND CONVERSION AND DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM.... 10 5.3.11 AEROSURFACE CONTROLS ................................ 10 5.3.12 ENVIRONMENTAL SYSTEM ................................ 11 5.3.13 AVIONICS SYSTEM ..................................... 11
5.4 5.5 5.3.14 PERSONNEL PROVISIONS ............................... 5.3.15 PROPELLANT LOSSES AND LOADINGS ...................... ASCENT TRAJECTORY ........................................... ENTRY TRAJECTORY ............................................ 11 11 11 12

EDIN EX-33S-76

ecJin

EDIN fX-338-76

LIST OF FIGURES

PAGE

F i jure 1 Figure 2 Figure 3 Figure 4 Figure 5 Figure 6 Figure 7 Figure 8 Figure 9 Figure 10 Figure 11 F igure 12 Figure 13 Figure 14 Figure 15 Figure 16 Figure 17 Figure 18 Figure 19 Figures 20-28 Figure 29 Figures 30-31 Figure 32 Figures 33-34 Figure 35

Assumpt ions and groundrules Rocket engine propulsion system patameters Liquid rocket engine data Vehicle summary weight breakdown. Launch vehicle trajectory parameter summary Mated configuration geometry Mated configuration drawings Liquid rocket booster geometry sutiiinary Booster pitch trim aerodynamics Booster drawings Liquid rocket booster weight statement Booster weights as a percent of empty weight Booster center of gravity data Launch vehicle secorid stage geometry sumniary Second stage pitch trim aerodynamics Second stage drawings. ... ; Launch vehicle second stage weight statement Second stage weights as a percent of empty weight.. Second stage center of gravity data Ascent trajectory plots Ascent trajectory tables , Booster entry plots Booster entry trajectory tables Second stage entry plots Second stage entry trajectory tables

13 14 14 15 15 16 17-20 21 22 23-26 27-28 29 29 30 31 32-35 36-37 38 38 39-47 48-56 57-58 59-60 61-62 63-73

EDIN EX-338-76

VI-APP-A-5

EDIN EX 338-76

2.0

SUMMrtR ,'

The purpose of this study was to determine the p r e l i m i n a r y requirements for a tandem-staged, reusable straight -winged launch vehicle to d e l i v e r the = olar power s a t e l l i t e <SHS> into a 2.70 nautical m i l e p a r k i n g orbit via a 50 x 270 n a u t i c a l m i l e insertion o r b i t . The v e h i c l e was sired to d e l i v e r a 1r u i l l i o r i pound payload to the parking orbit when launched due east from a 5 5 degree latitude. The payload was placed into circular orbit at the jf70 nautical m i l e apogee using a 51,390 pound propulsion system. ft 50 foot diarneter was assumed for both stages. The vehicle stages were sized using a set of weight and geometry estimating relationships <UA6ERS>. The coefficients for these WttGERS were derived from Space Shuttle Phase B System Studies. The booster was assumed to be an a l u m i n u m heat sink entry "ehicle w i t h t i t a n i u m a l l o y covering areas w i t h excessive heating. The second stage used a hardened compacted fiber t hernia 1 protection system C T P S > . A 10>. dry weight contingency was added to >*ach stage to a l l o w for weight g r o w t h . The booster stage rocket engine propulsion system weight scaling and performance characteristics reflects a 1995 technology level. The secund stage u^-ed uprated e x i s t i n g space s h u t t l e main engines (.SSME's), H) 3d pound per cubic foot payload density was used for this c o n f i g u r a t i o n . Nlso, an e x p e n d a b l e interstage was assumed, The v e h i c l e was sized us in? a 1.3 liftoff thrust to weight ratio ^T/U) arid a 1.1 second stage T. ID. F i n a l l y , the c o n f i g u r a t i o n used LCCVCgHg for the booster propellant and moderate -.hamber pressure <P c = 3uOO F'SIA) gas generator cycle engines. These engines were l i m i t e d to a ma* iinum vacuum thrust of 2 nil 11 ion pounds, The second stage used LOX/LH2 p r o p e l l e n t w i t h h i g h chamber pressure <P C =4000 HSIA) staged combustion cycle engines. These engines were uprated to a m a x i m u m vacuum thrust level of 580 thousand pounds, stages were designed to be aerodynamically trimmed Both vehicle hypersonically at an angle-of-attack of 60 degrees to m i n i m i z e aerodynamic accomplished by proper selection of heating during entry, This was aerodynamic surface areas and deflections. However, it was determined that a 75,000 pouna ballast had to be added in the booster nose to locate the entry center of gravity (e.g.) properly to prevent the aerodynamic surfaces from becoming excessively large. The gross liftoff weight of the v e h i c l e was 21,095,563 pounds. The booster stage weighed 14,094,797 pounds w h i l e the second stage weighed 5,867,823 pounds, The booster required 16 LOX/PROPHhE engines; the second stage required 14 LOX/LH2 engines. The configuration is summarized in detail in the plots and tables presented in this analysis. The configuration is designated as EDIN EX-338-76.

EDIH EX-33S-76 VI-APP-A-6

EDIN EX-338-76

3.0

IMTRQDUCTION

Preliminary estimates of the SFS system indicate that an operational powergenerating satellite w i l l weigh about 200-rni 11 ion pounds in geosynchronous earth orbit. Since most SPS scenarios call for the assembly of up to four operational satellites per year, the number of earth launches is several hundred por year and launch vehicle payloads of 1 m i l l i o n pounds w i l l probably be required. The transportation system necessary for the implementation of the SPS would require "heavy lift" launch vehicles (HLLV's) to be dedicated, designed, and developed specifically for the SPS mission. In addition, the high launch rate required by the SPS program in some measure dictates the desired characteristics of a launch vehicle; for example, vehicle lifetime, the extent of reusability and operational mode would have a direct bearing on total program costs. This report is part ot a parametric study to I'efine variable vehicle concepts to support the SPS.

F.DIN EX-338-7C

V|_ A pp_ A _7

EOIM EX-338-76

.0

METHODS.. OF 4.1 HSSUMPTIONS AND GROUND PULES

The: assumptions and tjroundrules for the sizing analysis are presented in f i g u r e 1, The analysis may require updates as groundrules and requirements change w i t h p r o g r a m m a t u r i t y , 4.2 SIZING UNALYSIS

1 he v e h i c l e stages- uere sixed using UlnGERS, The coefficients for these UHi"-LRS were d e r i v e d from Space Shuttle Phase B System Studies. The booster "35 assumed to be an a l u m i n u m heat sink entry v e h i c l e w i t h titanium a l l o y overing ar eas w i t h excessive heating. The second stage used a TPS -. onsi st ing of hardened compacted fibers CHCF) bonded to the body structure f ternal to the i n t e g r a l a l u m i n u m mainstage p r o p e l l a n t tanks. Titanium structure and HCF were used for the aerodynamic surface TPS, The booster stage racket engine propulsion system weight scaling and p e r f o r m a n c e characteristics reflect a 1^95 technology l e v e l . The upper stage used uprated <.PC-4000 PSIA) existing space shuttle m a i n engines CSSME's). 4.3 LAUNCH u N A L V S I S

All trajectories for this analysis w e r e computed using a 3 degree-offreedom trajectory program i n t e g r a t i n g the equations of motion of a p a r t i c l e moving over a rotating o b l a t e spheroid planet under the influence of g r a v i t y , thrust, ard aerodynamic forces, During firs* stage f l i g h t , the "ehicle f l e w a vertical rise for 16 seconds and then pitched over at a constant inertlal p i t c h rate for 10 seconds, The vehicle then flew a v r a v i t y turn trajectory to staging A 4 second coast period was allowed for stage separation. During second stage f l i g h t the v e h i c l e was flown using a ne-ar o p t i m u m 1 inear-tanjent steering law to insertion. The vehicle then coasted to apogee of the insertion orbit where the payload was separated from the vehicles second stage, The o r b i t maneuvering propulsion system <OMPS> circularized the payload at 270 nautical m i l e . The OMPS for this analysis used a solid rocket motor having a vacuum specific impulse of 300 seconds and a motor mass fraction of 0,80, Saturn V aerodynamic data was used for this p r e l i m i n a r y analysis, The reference area used in conjunction with the aerodynamic data was calculated based on the crosssectional area of the base diameter of the vehicle.

FDIH EX-333-76 VI-APP-A-8

ECJm
4.4 ENTRY ANALYSIS

EDIN EX-338-76

The entry trajectory analysis for the booster and second stage were computed u-ing a point mass program to determine major- system environiients. Vehicle heating rates, ranges, dynamic pressure, loads, and other pertinent trajectory results are given in figures 30-35. The aerodynamic data for the vehicle wing size and trimmed balance characteristics were generated from Newtonian hypersonic flow theory. The governing criteria for wing sizing is the entry trim requirement and not vehicle landing speed , The first and second stages of the system have c.g.'s in excess of 70X body length aft of the nose. The major reason for the aft e.g. is the heavy engines and thrust structure in the aft end of the vehicle. A canard is used to provide subtonlc stability and control. At hypersonic speed it is desired to have the canard it a zero degree angle-of-attack to reduce wing area requirements. Various combinations of canard, body flap, and eleven incidence can be ui-ed to provide the control required for a sudfonic o-~ hypersonic angle-of-attack transition maneuver. 5,0_ RESULTS HND DISCUSSION 5.1 GENERAL VEHICLE Rocket propulsion system data obtained from F-ropulsion ^nd Power Division personnel is presented in figure 2. Main booster propellants are LOX arid propane with second stage propellants of LOX and hydrogen. System vacuum p e c i t i r impulses are 340 and 466 seconds, respectively^ The booster stage required 16 x 1.916 m i l l i o n pound vacuum thrust engines with the second stage requiring 14 x 544 thousand pound vacuum thrust engines.

Vehicle gross weight and size results are presented in figure 4. Gross lift-off weight for the configuration is 21,095,563 pounds. Booster stage inert weight is 1,349,769 pounds with a propellant load of 12,557,911 pounds, The second stage inert weight is 736,425 pound* with a propellant load of 5,066,640 pounds. Dimensions and gross geometric characteristics of the launch vehicle configuration is presented in figures 6-7,
5.2

BOOSTER STAGE

The booster weights in terms of percent of vehicle empty weight is presented in figure 12. It is apparent from this figure that the greatest percentages are: ascent propulsion, 31.7%, body group, 29.0%, and the wing and tail group, 10.7%. These Item*, make up 71.4': of the stage empty weight. Most of this weight is located in tha rear of the stage. This produces an aft e.g. of 75.45* body length. The 75.45% e.g. could be relieved if the propulsion system weights could be reduced or relocated. This data presents an area amenable to engineering work; such work could reduce the vehicle weights and result in a w.ore favorable e.g. location.

E.DIN EX-333-76 VI-APP-A-9

EDIN EX-338-76

5.2.1

GEOMETRY

A geometry s u m m a r y of the booster stage is presented in figure 8 The ;',>st em tank volumes are 79,625 cubic feet for fuel and 136,842 cubic feet for o x i d i z e r . The basic v e h i c l e has a slenderness r a t i o of 5,333. The = ys tern length is ^6,9 feet with a 50 loot diameter. The basic plan loading is 1?0 pounds per square foot which has 11,123 square feet of theoretical Hi ri 6 area, The w i n g area requirement is d i c t a t e d by hypersonic entry t r i m and fiot v e h i c l e landing speed, The booster w i n t selected has a sweep angle of 44 degree? and an aspect ratio of 3 54. The wing span is 193,43 feet and the w i n g body chord is 67 feet, The canard has an area of 2,523 square feet w i t h a sweep angle of 0 degree;, I he canard s-nan is 91.66 feet at an aspect r a t i o of 3.33, The vertical t a i l consists of a single fin located at the aft end of the body. The tot si vertical t a i l area is 2,elO square feet. The a e r o d y n a m i c surfaces have not been o p t i m i z e d , but have been selected to p r o v i d e * workable baseline. Impr ovements can be made at a later "ehicle i t e r a t i o n cycle. The booster confijuration and its pitch trim ^orodvriam i cs -=re presented in figures 9-10. In order to I eep wing areas lower, a ?5,OuO pound ballast in the booster nose was used. This ballast can possibly be traded against ^ reusable interstate at 3 later date when the vehicle's interstage m i g h t be designed for reuse, The vehicle landing *peed is estimated to be ISO Hiots. The booster detailed weight statement for subsystem and component weights is presented in figure 11. They are L;enerateiJ and d e s c r i b e d as ueight fractions developed from the Ul^GEPS, 5.2.2 AEPOSUPFrtCE GROUP

The booster wing weight has been determined as 116,359 pounds. The canard jnd vertical t a i l w e i g h t s re 9.217 arid 13,353 pounds, respectively, An d i i x i l l l a r y body f l a p for trim is estimated to weigh 8,750 pounds, The total -e resurface g r o u p w i l l require hi ore detailed analysis to determine the o p t i m u m surface size, material design, and construction techniques. The current analysis is an exponential function of empty w e i g h t , load factor, area span, and iri^ersly proportional to root thickness. These data have been obtained from historical results and applied emperical techniques. The canard and vertical t a i l a r e a ha"e been selected proportional to body surface area, The coefficients applied to the canard area was 3.65 pounds per square foot of theoretical area and the vertical tail was 5.12 pounds per square foot. The body flap surface used 7 pounds per square foot as the weight scaling factor.

EX-33S-7S

VI-APP-A-10

EcJin
5.2.3 BODY GROUP

EDIN EX-338-76

The booster body group weights are presented in figure 11. The body group includes tanks, thrust structure, skirts, bulk heads, tank domes and other structural components, The total group weighs 379,674 pounds with the LOX tank neighing 86,391 pounds and fuel tank weighing 50,269 pounds. Detailed structural analysis must be used to update these weights. These data have taen obtained from emperical results of historical data. The nose structure, forward skirt, inner tank, and base skirt are determined as a function of surface area. The mainstage propellant tank weights are determined directly proportional to tank volume. The aft skirt and thrust structure are determined directly proportional to the vacuum thrust of the itage.

5.2.4

THERMAL PROTECTION SYSTEM

"I he booster TPS weight breakdown is presented in figure 11 . The gross system weighs 63,447 pounds . The body structure, tanks, and other main fuselage components are considered to be heatsink . In this study the wing, canard, and vertical t a i l were considered to have HCF insulation with titanium panels applied at local hot spots. These weight data were obtained as directly proportional alues of surface area. 5.2.5 LANDING SYSTEM

The gross landing system weights are 55,203 pounds and are presented in figure 11. Detailed analysis wil be required for substantiation of these data. The current analysis considers the landing system weight as linearly proportional to the landed weight. These data have been obtained from extrapolated historical data. 5.2.6 ASCENT PROPULSION GROUP

The ascent propulsion group consists of main engines, accessories, ginibal systems and fuel and oxidizer system. The weights are presented in figure 11. The group weighs 415,396 pounds. These data were obtained from Propulsion and Power Division personnel. 5.?.7 AUXILLIARY PROPULSION GROUP

The auxilliary propulsion system weight is estimated to be 10,986 pounds and is shown in figure 11, These data have been scaled linearly proportional to the stage entry weight, These data have been obtained from historical results.

EUIN EX-338-76

VI-APP-A-11

EDIN EX-338-76

5.2.8

PRIME POUILP SYSTEM in be

The p r i m e pouer system weight estimate is 3,881 pound.? atiu Is shown t i j u r e 11. This data was deter ruined f r o m WAGERS and considered to l i n e a r l y p t o p o r t i o n a l to v e h i c l e landed weight.

5.2 9

ELECTRICAL CQNVEhSIGN HMD DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM

i he felcclr i c a l syfte.n is est iruated to wtigh 1,818 p >unds and i s shown in figure 11. These data were estimated from UIAC-ER3 and is considered to be a i-oristar.t weight.

5.2.10

HYDRAULIC CONVERSION

AND DISTR IBLl T ION SNSTEM

1 he h v d r a u l i c confers! on and d i s t r i b u t i o n system i* estimated to ueigh ^ S ? pou id? and is shown in f i g u r e 11. These dsta were estifiiated frorn ^ ' liiAGEP'3 and are obtained directly proportional to vehicle landed weight.

5.2.11

AEROf-LlPFACE CONTROLS

The 5ei o.urt ace controls arp est i ru;-it ed to uelgfi 21,746 pounds arid Bre shown i.i tig'ire 11. The.-e d a t a are estimated from UiH&ERS and historical data, F^ch s u r f a c e control is considered directly proportional to it's own t h e o r e t i c a l surface area.

5.2.12

E N V I R O N M E N T A L SYSTEM in

The enwi ronriiental control system is estimated to be 0 pounds as shown figure 11 since the current requirement is for an unmanned system

5.2.13

AVIONICS SYSTEM

The avionics system weight is estimated to be 4,900 pounds and is shown in figure 11, These data are estimated from WAGERS and historical data, For this study it is assumed to be a constant weight.

5.2.14

PERSONNEL PROVISIONS in

Currently personnel provisions are tstirnated to weigh 0 pounds as shown figure 11. Current groundrules require an unmanned operation,

EDIN EX-333-76

V|-APP-A-12

EoJin
5.2.15 PROPELLENT LOSSES AND LOADINGS

EDIN EX-336-76

Empty vehicle weights and various propellant losses and loadings are presented in figure 11 arid are estimated to be 27,392 pounds for residuals, 193,002 pounds for inflight losses, 2,515 pounds for RCS, and 236,322 pounds for preignition propellant. 5.3 SECOND STAGE

The second stage weights in terms of percent of vehicle empty weight is presented in figure 18. It is app-arent from this figure that the greatest percentages are: ascent propulsion, 17.7>., body group, 34.05;, and wing and t a i l groups, 11.98'<i. These items make up 63.7'4 of the stage empty weight. Host of this weight is located in the rear of the stage. This produces an aft e.g. of 72.S/: body length. However, this aft e.g. is not as severe as tha booster e.g. so no ballast is required in the nose of the second stage. 5.3.1 GEOMETRY

A geometry summary of the second stage is presented in figure 14. The system tank volumes are 174,099 cubic feet for fuel and 63,751 cubic feet for oxidirer. The stage has a slendern^ss ratio of 5.004. The system length is 250.19 feet; its diameter is 50 feet. The basic pl^n loading is 98.8 pounds per square foot which has 7,368.9 square feet of theoretical wing area. The wing area requirement Is dictated by hypersonic entry trim and not vehicle landing speed. The second stage wing selected has a sweep angle of 44 degrees and an aspect ratio of 3,54. The wing span is 161.51 feet and the wing body chord is 52.47 feet. The canard has an area of 2,353.2 square feet with a sweep angle of 0 degrees. The canard span is 88.52 feet at an aspect ratio of 3.33. The vertical tail consists of a single fin located at the aft end of the body. The total vertical tail area is 2,433.9 square feet, The aerodynamic surfaces have not been optimized, but have been selected to provide a workable baseline. The second stage configuration and its pitch trim aerodynamics are presented in figures 1516. The vehicle landing speed is estimated to be 180 knots. The second stage detailed weight statement for subsystem and component weights is presented in figure 17. There are no detailed design descriptions of subsystems. They are generated and described as weight fractions developed from WAGEkS.

E.DIN EX-333-76

V|_App-A_13

EDIN EX-338-76

5.3.2 ftEROSUPFACE GROUP The second stage wi ng weight has been determined as 64,253 pounds The canard and v e r t i c a l t a i l weights are 8,59? and 12,454 pounds, respectively, Hn a u x i l i a r y body flap for t r i m is estimated to weigh 8,750 pounds. The total aerosurface g roup w i l l require more d e t a i l e d analysis to determine the optimum surface size, fnaterial desjcn, and construction techniques. The current analysis i s an exponential function of empty weight, load factor, c<rea s p -a n, and i n v :rsly proportional to root thickness. These data have >= 11 e e n obtained from historical results and applied emperical techniques, The canard 3nd vert ical t a i l area have been selected proportional to body s>ur face ar -=a . The coefficients applied to the canard at ea was 3.65 pounds (.e.r square1 foot of theoretical area and the vertical t a i l was 5.12 pounds p =r squar e foot , The body flap surface used 7 pounds per square foot as the weight scaling factor. 5.3.3 BODY GROUP

The second st3>pe body group weights are presented in figure 17. The body group includes tanks, thrust structure, skirts, bulk heads, tank dornes and other strui tural components. The total group weighs 242,338 pounds w i t h the LOX t^nk weighing 27,647 pounds and fuel tank weighing 99.563 pounds, retailed structural analysis must be us-.id to update these weights. These lata have been oblaintM from ernper ical results of h i s t o r i c a l data The nose structure, forward s k i r t , inner.tank, and base skirt are determined as a function of surface area. The nainstage propellant tank weights are determined d i r e c t l y proportional to tank volume. The aft skirt and thrust structure are determined directly proportional to the vacuum thrust of the s tage.

5.3.4

THERMAL PROTECTION SYSTEM

The The second stage TPS weight breakdown is presented in figure 17. gross system weight is 116,237 pounds, In this study the body, canard, and vertical tail were considered to have HCF surface insulation w i t h t i t a n i u m panels applied at local hot spots, These weight data were In addition the obtained as directly proportional values of surface area, hydrogen tank required internal foam insulation,

5.3,5

LANDING SYSTEM

The gross landing system weights are 29,922 pounds and are presented in figure 17. Detailed analysis wil be required for substantiation of these The current analysis considers the landing system weight as data, linearly proportional to the landed weight, These data have been obtained from extrapolated historical data.

fT'IN EX-338-76

VI-APP-A-H*

EDIN EX-338-76

b.3.6

ASCENT PROPULSION GROUP

The ascent propulsion group consists of main engines, accessories, girnbal systems and fuel and oxidizer system. The weights are presented in figure 17. The group weighs 125,738 pounds. These data were obtained from Propulsion and Power Division personnel. 5.3.7 AUXILLIARY PROPULSION GROUP

The auxllliary propulsion system weight is estimated to be 5,678 pounds and is shown in figure 17, These data have been scaled linearly proportional to the stage entry weight. These data have been obtained from historical r esult2,

5 3.8

PRIME POWER SYSTEM in be

The pr ime power system weight estimate is 2,104 pounds and Is shown figure 17. This data Wcs determined froiii UIA&LRS and considered to linearly proportional to vehicle landed weight.

5.3.9

ELECTRICAL CONVERSION AND DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM

The electrical system is estimated to weigh 1,818 pounds and is shown in figure 17. These data were estimated from WAGERS and is considered to be a constant weight.

5.3.10

HYDRAULIC CONVERSION

AND DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM

The hydraulic conversion and distribution system is estimated to weigh 8,640 pounds and is shown in figure 17, These data were estimated from UDAGERS and are obtained directly proportional to vehicle landed weight.

5.3.11

AEROSURFACE CONTROLS

The aerosurface controls are estimated to weigh 16,101 pounds and are shown in figure 17. These data are estimated from WAGERS and historical data. Each surface control is considered directly proportional to it's own theoretical surface area.

EDIN EX-338-76

VI-APP-A-15

EoJin
5.3.12 ENVIRONMENTAL SYSTEM

ED1N EX-338-76

The environmental control system is estimated to be 0 pounds as shown in figure 17 since the current requirement is for an unmanned system.

5.3.13

AVIONICS SYSTEM

The avionics system weight is estimated to be 4,900 pounds and is shown in f i t u r e 17 . These data are estimated from WAGERS and historical data. For this study it is assumed to be a constant weight.

5.3.14

PERSONNEL PROVISIONS in

Currently personnel provisions are estimated to weigh 0 pounds as shown figure 17. Current groundrules require an unmanned operation.

5.3.15

PROPELLANT LOSSES AND LOADINGS

Empty "ehicle weights and various propellant losses and loadings are presented in figure 17 and are estimated to be 15,625 pounds for residuals, 71,534 pounds for inflight losses, 1,311 pounds for RCS, and 22,294 pounds for preignltiori propellent,

5,4

ASCENT TRAJECTORY

Ascent trajectory data are presented in figures 20-29. Pertinent parameters of most interest are! Max Max Max Max Max G Booster = 3.6 G Second Stage = 4.0 Q = 733.5 psf Heating Rate = 17.5 BTU/SQ FT/SEC Heat Load = 1,810.9 B1U/SQ FT

Staging Conditions Time - 13S.3 Sec Relative Velocity = 6,149 fps Relative Flight Path Angle = 17.86 Altitude = 143,943 Feet

deg.

EDIN EX-33S-76

VI-APP-A-16

EoJin
5.5 ENTRY TRAJECTORY trajectoj y profiles are The b a s i c point mass entry 30-35.

EDIN EX-338-76

presented

in

figures

The major trajectory parameters for

the booster stage are:

Max Q = 121 psf Max G = 4.9 p Down Range = ii n' mi Max Heat Load = 427 BTU/SQ. FT. Max Heat Rate * , 3.6 BTU/SQ. FT. /SEC

'Ihe major trajectory parameters for the second stage entry are:
Max Q = 49 Max & " 1.86

Down Range = 5,37**- n. mi. Max Heat Load = 38,6l8 btu/sq. Max Heat Rate = 53 b tu/sq. ft.

ft.

EDIN EX-333-76

VI-APP-A-1?

LDIN EX-338-76

FIGURE 1. t * + * t * +

ASSUMPTIONS HND CPOUNDRULES

TWO-STAGE STRAIGHT WINGED REUSABLE TANC'EM-STAGED LAUNCH VEHICLE HEATSINk BOOSTER 1 MILLION POUND PH'il.GAD <DOES NOT INCLUDE MANEUVERING PROPULSION SYSTLM)

PAYLOAD BAY FILL EFFICIENCY WriS 6u* PAYLOAD DENSITY IS 30 POUNDS PER CUBIC FOOT PAYLOAD LOCATED IN FORWARD NOSE STRUCTURE VEHICLE SIZED FOR DUE EAST LAUNCH FROM SITE 5.5 DEGREES LATITUDE

* *

50 x 270 NM INSERTION ORBIT (.270 NM CIRCULAR PARKING ORBIT) PHASE B SPACE SHUTTLE WEIGHT AND GEOMETRY TECHNOLOGY USED FOR WEIGHT SCAI. ING 10 PERCENT DRY WEIGHT CONTINGENCY ADDED ON BOTH STAGES NO AIR BREATHING ENGINES ON EITHER STAGE

* * * t * * * *

50 FT. DIAMETER STAGES NO MAX Q CONSTRAINT 4 G MAXIMUM ACCELERATION L I M I T LOX'PROPANE PROPELLANT USED IN BOOSTER STAGE

LOX/LH2 PROPELLANT USED IN SECOND STAGE BOOSTER PROPULSION SYSTEM WEIGHTS AND PERFORMANCE DATA REFLECTS 1995 TECHNOLOGY LEVEL SECOND STAGE USED UPRATED EXISTING SPACE SHUTTLE M A I N ENGINE BOOSTER T/W = 1 . 3 , SECOND STAGE T/W = 1 . 1 LANDING SPEED FOR BOTH STAGES IS APPROXIMATELY 130 KNOTS SATURN V LAUNCH VEHICLE AERODYNAMIC DATA ESTIMATES FPR PPOPELLANT CALCULATED BASED ON IDEAL VELOCITY RESERVING 0.75* OF TOTAL

* * * * *

EDIN EX-333-76

VI-APP-A-18

FIGURE 2. ROCKET ENGINE PROPULSION SYSTEM FttRrtMETERS PARAMETER PPC'I I I LANT MI' IM,<E R A T I O (OF) CHfni. t.P PRESSURE <.P5IA) ENGH-E OPERATION CYCLE EXFH'^IGN PATIO <AE'AT) VACUUM SPECIFIC IMPULSE (.SEC) c. u ifTi o > rr_r TiP t r I M P I |I I - P " < ^ r r ^ _> r H i r. C.L . p L t _ r i<^ iiiiL. u.-_'C. voL'^x FUEL r-E-NSITY (LB?-'CUFT) OXII-1TEP C-EN3ITY <LBS-'CUFT^ FUEL STORAGE TEMPEPATUPE <DEG F) OXH'IZER STORAGE TEMPERATURE cDEG F) STAGE 1 LOX/C3H8 2.68:1 3000 .0 GAS G E N E R A T O R 40 .0 340 .00
Oft *t 11 oU d . 1 1

STAGL 2 LOX'LH2 6.00 : 1 4000.0 STnGLf- COMBUSTION 200.0 466.0

46.50 71 .38 -297.0 -297,0

4.42 71 .38 -420 .0 -297.0

FIGURE 3. LIQUID ROCfET ENGINE DATA

FMRAMCTFR
NUM:> K OF ENGINES VACUUM THRUST ENGINE UBS) VHCIJMM ISP -.SEC) SEA 1 E''EL THPUST'EN&INE <LBS) SEA L EVEL ISP '.SEC)
E X I T A R E A - E N G I N E kSQ IN) ENGINE UIEICHT

STAGE 1

STAGE 2

16.0 19162^2 ; 340 .00 1714014.304.11 13713.0 19162.9

14.0 543924.3 4C6.00 341334. 8 292.43 13^34.1 8118.3

VI-APP-A-19

F IGUPL' ITEM Pf-E - I G N I T I O N

4.

V E H I C L E SUMMER t

W E I G H T BREAKDOWN (HEIGHT /LES)

UILIGHT PPOPELLANT 236322

2 1 331385

PPE-IGNITION

GFOSS LIFTOFF WEIGHT FnnSTEP L I F T O F F U I E I G H T M H I N S . T H & E PROPEL L A N f INEFT iiiFIGHT <LLS'E CONT; DP "i 1 HI E I G H T &HLLAST IMEPiTAGE t INLL iLP * ,1j M C O N D S T & THPUE.T B U U f U P f - P u F f -.HIOND - E T G LI F I OFF UltH-HT riMlN'E1m.-.L INEFT DP r .HEIGHT FPOf-EiLHtn MNCl FFF UILIGHT - I EE '. C u N T ^ - l O C n n u n 0' f.1390 C O N T I N U E NC f 1255T911 1345769 14094797,

1 1211? 750 uO

rurjTifjuLrj'i'i

iDE'-IUN

FIGURE P A F h M E fEP IDFHL V E L O C I IN FLIGHT FLIi-HT (FT 1 ' LE.EC^

Lf'UHi.H

VEHICLE

T P H J E C T O P i ' F nh'HMF.T F.P SUHMnF STnGF ?.

29: 3o 9

STrtGE CFF'i ) PrtTH nf-'L-tL ^C'LG> (DfL-1 C F F C. > >.FF'E ^

953 1 . 9

FELHiIVE PELHllVE I t J E l . IrtL I f ' C K 1 IAL ALT ITUDE &UFN riML

17.36

. 17

VELOCITY V F L O i IT !
1

6148

245=i5.2

F u T H nNGl E

14 :-:
7 6 1Q 1 14394? d
13i:, "-C 35.9
451 6?0

16
261 :t .4

3 0 7 0 U5. 2

FHUGL - rni,'
riHl I HUM D ' i N H M I C EUFNUUT INI flHL BLIFiJ FciitJFE <. & > 'PSFv CF'LF,' DViHHIC P ^ E S ? U P r HCCELErATION

7'3

5 4 1 1 4 .0

1 .3 3 6

OUT H C C E L E P A T I U N 'G)

VI-APP-A-20

fPRODUCEBIUTy OF ORIGINAL PAOf 18

FITURE 6.
TOTAL VEHICLE

MHTED CONFIGURATION GEOMETRY

LENGTH

519.1 266.9 50.0 193.4 11123.3 91.7 2523.0 2 0

ruiiSTER LENGTH BOOSTER D l A M E f E R BOOSTER WING SPnN BOOSTER WING AREA BOOSTER CANAFD SPAN BOOSTER CANARD AREA i I K H P E N C E bETUJEEN STAGES

SM:UND STAGE LENGTH

SECOND STAGE M n M E I E R SECOND STAGE 'IHN& oPAN SEC ONE' STnGE W I N G nREH 50.0 161.5 7368,9

rt.o.2

SECOND STAGE CANARD SPAN SECOND S-THGE CHNHPD APEH

83.5 2353.2

VI-APP-A-21

FIGURE: ? MHILD CONFIGURATION PLAN FORM VIEW

VI-APP-A-22

REPRODUCIBIL1TY OF 'r ORIGINAL PAOI IS POOR

FIGURE 7A MuTED CONFIGURATION SIDE VIEUI

VI-APP-A-23

REPRODUCIBILITY OF THB OR-ICrfNAL PAGE IS'POOR

FIGURE ?B MUTED CONFIGURATION FRONTHL VIEW

VI-APP-A-24

"--

FIGURE 8. L I O U I D ROCKET BOOSTER GEOMETRY S

LOX TANK VOLUME F U F L THNK VOl UME t:n|>Y WETTED SURFACE AREA S T A G F SL ENL'EPNESS P A T I O I U I A L ^ T A G E LENGTH nf 1 C-IHMETER iHGE r - I A M F T E F B A L E S K I R T I ENGTH A F T S K I R T LENGTH FUEL TANK AFT EKD ENGTH FUEL TAW B A F F E L IIN.--TH FUEL TAW FUD Ff D LENGTH L O X THNK nF F t'J D LtNL-TH LOX T A W PHKF.EL L E t J u T H LOX THNK FUID BKD LENGTH

1 J6842. 79625,

166. 30 50 .00 5U .00

IS .4=. 23 .8 17 .68 3 '-J.05 17 .68 17 .68 62 . 19 17 68 22 .68 62 .50 6-1 .50 50 .no so .no
120 .0?:

SK'IRT LENGTH NOSE LENGTH

INTEPSTnGE LFNGTH T N T E F S THbE nl- T DI I N T E F S T t i G E F Ul L ' D I A M E T E R INC- L O A D I N G IhLOF-l'TICHL Ul ING nPLn i -POJ;ED UUNG APEn I ! AD ING EDGE SHJEEP ANGi f_ If .lit ItJG EDGE 'ElnEEP ANGL E HI ING A S P E C T R A T I O "i ING TnPEP FAT 10 i F O M L T P I C til ING EPnN J.TPUCTUPHL lilirJG SPnN U1NG POOT CHOPD ("INL- BODY C H O F D 'UING TIP CHOFD Fl F.VON A V E P A G E CHn/CCANnRD T H E O . APEn

CANARD EXPOSED APEA

HI ING ROOT THICKNESS HJING CENTROID OF ttFEA CANARD ASPECT RnTIO rANAPP TAPER PATIO C f i N A R D G E O H E T F I C SPHN CANnRD POOT CHuRD C A N A R D TIP CHORD VFPT TAIL THEO. AREA BODY FLAP CHOF-D BODY FLAP AREA NOTE - ALL DIMENSIONS ARL GIVEN IN FEET ALL APE AS MPE GIVEN IN SC'UARE FEET ALL VOLUMES ARE GIVEN IN CUBIC FEET VI-APP-A-26

11123.3 7-495. 1 44.00 27.51 3.5400 ,4350ft 19S.4T ? 4 7 , 24 78, 15 67. 0 0 . 33.. 9 8 15. 15 . 252:. . 0 1 146.T 8.3544 71 . 0 9 5 3.3300 1.00000 91 .66 27.53 27,53 2 6 0 9 . c. 25.00 1250 .0

BOOSTER HYPERSONIC T R I M * * * * * REFlKFNCF DIMENSIONS 11123.28 f+* RHDIUSBODY 25.00 LEflC-TH = ** III INC*** S E .P H- 7 4 v 5 . f i f c BOD. C67 Ou TIP - = 33. i?3 X Ltf F.I,= 1 ?.-*. 9U

ESP A-- 1 Mb.

75

LENlMH-266.90 NOSE L= 62.50

coor c=
TIP "IE C= BC=

2?.5j
27.53 6?.5f 91 . f 6.

'. PHN-

I * 4".

MiRLPLI E" JN * CHOFD15 1*. T E F L ECU ON.0"

i" I ' *H
--

44.00
I N C I D E N C E - - 1 5 00 &OP' FI ,iF + H= 1250 Oo 1= 25.00 nNi.1 Ef'O
r n 1. M f n 1 lrf "4 T f M L, n 1~\

XC'
lit l C i li ti r l

i B-

. 7'..45
- --

e
J5 3>1 15 4n 45 50 55 L.U ^5 70 75 :U o5 I . I I . I . I . I . I . I . I . I . I . I . I I . I . I . I I . I. I . I . I . I . .25"3214 3'-t4 4 ' <5 SSn5 L.25j! e.^52 7505 9t?' ,35?5 8-03 9104 917 J

PF
040 n*o ."74 n j*3 112 1 < .151 .It 9 .195 1 "S 210 .213 .2 : J

ID

UOfc^ .24n? C'i:3 32ft} .0241 44 ?4 03C.13 . 56'5 "515 f-738 Ot7.i 7^ii r.0^'... .9043 H'll 1 nir? i.^iti 1 l of ? 1 ?> > 4 1 1 ^00 I 5 4 t 1 25 , 4 . 1 1'^4 1 I'O 7n . 1 :J t 1 " 3 7 4

b 10 4c. 1 'o^ 15 "7 1 7 15 2H If 2. J 5< 450 ..'tC7 7-?? Cf^J l^cJ 2?S9 2^73

bF i'12 016 >22 rt?7 'i .> > n y} -J44 U49 '154 H5S " tl "64 Ufc5

C Dl . fi".. ^ 0 5 J O fc 4^'^ . Q j l * .Out5 -.0714 &^ t -i5 .0244 . " 1 1 3 - , 0 ? 4 u 1 1 " lci 02'-i. H 1 7? - . 1 1 ?1 1 . 4" "O . 02" 7 "242 -.143.'* 1 t'-..'. . 0 1 1 9 O':)rt .It 77 1 . -- I 4 ,0ni4 0^' .l'-17 2.^07 U " 1 5 .0-l'Ji 2 1 4 3 2 4::v - . 0 0 5 , 1 .D*" '-'' . 2?47 2 . 7 H C * 5 - . f i l ? i . ' . O C 4 ' - 1 - 2 u -2^ 2 ^ 0 4 4 - . 0 2 0 0 . O.V5 - i f f , 3 OC 15 - . 0 ? C t , 0 7 9 4 - 2 7 7 1 3 175"* -.Ol'^'t. O t 5 4 -.2-33t 3 . 2 4 4 2 - . 0 3 7 9

'

^MJJtgyji^OGIBlljITY OF DRIGINAJL PAGE IS P 1

VI-APP-A-27

FIGURE 10 BOOSTER PLAN FORM VIEW

VI-APP-A-28

FIGURE in A BOOSTER SIFE VIEW

VI-APP-A-29

FIGURE IOC BOObTER

ORTHOGONAL

VIEW

VI-APP-A-31

FIGURE 11. L I Q U I D P O C K E T E'O'JSTER uir_JC,HT SfATFHENT

IUING GROUP T(4II. GROUP CfnNAPD VERTICAl BODY FLAP BODY GROUP NOSE', I NT TPV> FHIP SKI FT LO" TANC INTER ThiM FUEL IhNK AFT Sf IF T TH,''Ur.T ' rf'Ul r i l K k tnSE SK1K1

116859. 2570 .

9217. 13353.
8750 . 379674 . 43747. 19592. &6391 . 39937. 502t.9 . 0. 1221:00 , 173S9. 3447.

riiLPMnL pKurtcnoN
BUDY t N I R T TPS FLAME SHI ELL' LOI' TANK INSULHTIQN INTEPTHW I N S U L A T I O N FUEL TnW INcUt nl ION

HUNG THS
CttNilPD IF 5 VERT TAIL If 3 BODY FLAP 1PI L hNL>ING SYSTEM NOE.E GEAR M A I N GEAR DPOUbE CHUTl ff CENT PROPULSION MM IN E N G I N E 5 ACCESSORIES GIMP.AL SYSTEM FUEL SYSTEM OXIDIZER SYSTLM nUX. PROP. SYS. PRIME FOIHEP Fl ECT CONV nN[' DISTR HYDRAULIC CONV AND ['SIR AI RO SURFACE CONTROLS WING SURFACE CONTROLS CANARD SURFACE CONTROLS VERT TAIL SURFACE CON1RULI-. BODY FLAP CONTROLS AVIONICS E N V I R O N M E N T A L CONTROL PERSONNEL PRO 1 ' I S I DNo DRY HIEIGHT CONTINGENCY

0. 13035. 0. 0. 0. 30 395 . 6754. 9847. C.

55203. 4490 . 50 7 1 3 . 0. 41 5396 . 006607. 0. 43538. 3060 . 62190. 10986, 3881 . 1818. 15939. 21746. 15y22. 864. 3171 . 1789. 4900 . 0. 0. 1121169 112117. 75000.

BHLLACT VI-APP-A-32

LIQUID

ROCKET BOOSTER WEIGHT STATEMENT

<CON'T) 130828e-. 1421 1 . HO?.

E M P T Y UlEIGHl RESIDUAL FLUID'S OX ID PFti>S L- ASSES FUEL PRESS C-nSSLS

PCS PRIME

pniiiER FLUIDS

0. 0.
11778.

HYDFAULJC

LANDING W E I G H T M"-"i> I NFL 1 1~ HT LuSoES PRIME FOIUEP F P n P E L L A N T t-LSEkVES ENTPS IHEIC-HT ADuPTER

1335673
1980U2. 691.

0.

Ib3437l.

PLS PROPELLHNT
F"if> I N F E R S T A & E OF P f t Y L O A D 5 Lh'PMllON S Y S T E M 3589. 1596195.

J E I U E - O N (HEIC-HT A T MF i C U T O F F Mh-IN'-'TH^E f K O P E L L A N T

MHIN-THI,E O^-IDITFP
s i HI,E. FUEL BOCi?fEF L I F T O F F lilL f-'l-E-I&NI r i O N P P O r ' E L L H f J f

914243=..
3412476 .

14154110. 23t3i2.
14390432 .38723 3517454.

PPE-IGNITIOf4 WEI&HT
BOOSTER MnSS F R r t C l I H N T O T A L LOX IHEINHI T O T A L FUEl itfEI&HT <*> ALL UlEIC-HTS ftPL 1 M POlirU-S

VI-APP-A-33

riGURE 12. BOOSTER l/iEIC-Hri AS A '/. OF EMPTY WEIGHT ITEM

PCT
8.532 1 .725 .669 29.021 4.850 4.220 31 .751 .840 .297 . 139 1 .218 1 .662 .375

WING GROUP TAIL GROUP BODY FLAP

E'i'.DY GROUP

THERMAL PRG1LCT ION LHNDING SYSTEM

ASCENT 1 POPULSION AUX. PROPULSION SYSTEM PRIME POWER ELECT CONV AND DISTR HYDPHULIC CONV HND DISTR AERO SURFACE CuNTPOLS AV IONIC?. E N V I R O N M E N T A L CONTROL PERSONNEL PROVISIONS DRY HEIGHT DESIGN RESERVE CONTINGENCY PALLAST EMPTY WEIGHT

.ono
.000 35.698 8.570 5.733 100 .000

FIGURE 13. BOOSTER CG DATA ITEM FORWARD NOSF1 STRUCTURE BALLAST FORWARD SkIRT LOX TANK LOX TANK PPLSSLIPANT FUEL TANK FUEL THNK PPESSURANT INTEKTANK STRUCTURE LOX TANK INSULATION FUEL TANK INSULATION INTtPrANh INSULATION BASE SKIRT BODY FLAP TOTAL STAGE
STAGE XCG (PCT LB>
AFT STA * WEIGHT

X CG *
36 ,79 5 .00 73 .84 116 .27 116 .27 203 .25 203 .25 167 .05 116 .27 203 .25 .00 257 ,68 279 ,40 201 .39

62.50

.00
85. 18 165.05

.00
237.45

.00
18t>.72

.00 .00 .00

266.90 291.90 266.90

43746. 5S 75000 .00 19592. 10 86390 .92 14210 .97 5026S.&7 1402.67 39987.0^ .00 .00 .00 17J38.72 8750 .00 1179158.67

75.454
IN

O>

ALL STATIONS hND CENTERS OF GRAVITY ARE GIVEN FEET LOCATED AFT OF STAGE NOSE

VI-APP-A-3^

FIGURE 14. LHUNCH VEHICLE SECOND STAGE GEOMETRY SUMHHRY

1 OX TANK V O L U M E
b375l 74093 3&371

f uri

TANK VOLUME:

fJrtDY W E T T E D S U R F A C E AREfi FAVLOftD VOLUME PAYl OAD BH'I VOLUME f IHD NOSE VTiLLIHE STP,r,r UENt'ERNESS FAT 10 T O T A L STAGE LENGTH
Hf T D I A M L T F k M A G E OlHhhTLR BA'EE SK IK 1 1 ' E N l - I H L FN&TH 1ENGTH HFT S K I R T I FNGTH LOX TANK AFT bib L OX TnW
LOX

0.
01359, 5.0038

5n . n 0 50 ,uO
22.70 28.68 17.68 24.97 1 ? . t3 17.68 88,67 1 P. 68 22.63 .00 62.50 .00 50 .00 50 .00
9&. ?? 7368.9 4467.6 44.00 27.51 3.5400 .43500 161.51 201 .24 63.59 52.47 27.66 12.02 2353.2 1024.0 6.8040 57.86S 3.3300 1 .00000 88.52 26.58 26.58 243C. .9 25.00 1 250 . 0

&AKFF-L

HD E t [ - Lf NuTH fUEl 1AM ATT Ft 0 LFNGTM FUEL T A N K BHhFFL I FNGTH FUEl THNI, FIHD L\ 0 LENGTH FWP K I h T LENGTH PAYLOAD BnV LENGTH FIH[i NO&E I ENi'-TH INTEPiTAbL LENGTH INTEhSTAGE AFT PIAHK.7EP INTER iTnuE FD'O IH'NG LOADING HEOPE1 ICAL W I N G f , POSFf UUNG APEH

i IMPING FDT-F.

.UIEEF AN>VI E

T A I L I N G ET'GE UlE EP ANGl E ill ING ASPECT P A T I O 'JUNG TAPER R A T I O '--EOMETRIC UUNG SFn STRUCTUPHL W I N G SPnN U'lNb KOOT CHOFCDUNG BODY iHORD

HUNG TIP CHOPCEI.EVON AVERAGE CHORD CANARD THEO. APEH

CfNAkD EXPObFP APFA W J N G PGOT THICf'NES^ U 1 N G CENT RO ID OF AREA CuNAPD ASPECT RAT 10 CuNftRD TAPER RRTIO C^NHPD GEOMLTP1C SF^N CK NARD ROOT CHOPO T A N A R D TIP CHOPC' VERT TAIL THEO. A F E A t'ODY F L A P CHOPD Bn['Y FLAP AREA

NOTE - ALL DIMENSIONS APE GIVEN IN KEET ALL APEHS HFE GIVEN IN SQUARE FEET ALL VOLUMES APE GIVEN IN CUBIC FEET VI-APP-A-35

FIGURE 15 SECOND STAGE HYPERSONIC l f - I M DATA M + >** REFERENCE DIMENSIONS <* **** AKEA = 7368.92 LENGTH-- 2f.0.19 * + * BODY *++ *** WING -M * *+* CANARD *- RADIUS= 25.00 EXP A= 4467.56 EXP A= 1024.03 LENGTH = 25n . 19 BODY C= 52.47 BODS' C= 26.53 NOSE L= 62.50 TIP C= 27.66 TIP C= 26.53 NOSE=CONE X LE BC = 197.72 XI E BC = 62 . 5u SPAN = 161.51 SPAN= 88.52 Stl)EEF= 44.00 SillEEP^ .00 INC1PENCE=-18.50 * WING ELEVON + * BODY FLAP * CHOPD= 12.02 A= 1250.00 XlG'LB= .7255 DFFLEC TI ON= .00 L= 25.00 ANGLE= .00
M L. r rl ri
^ 14
^11

*~M i

uri i

25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 55

.228 .254 1 , 0?46 .279 1 . 1516 . 300 1 . 1929 .317 1 .2173 .329 1 , 2-*0 .337

B .3494 .4447 5451 ,6479 . 75U 1 .8488 .9409 1 .0237

BF .061 .085 . 1 \2
, 140

, 17fi . I*'?

C .0036 .0110 .0224 . 0373 .0553 .0759 .0983 . 1220 . 1462 .1702 . 1933 .2147 .2337

HI .2166 .3031 .3989 .5010 .6063 .7115 .8136 .9094 ,??60 1 .0707 1 . 1313 1 . 1760 1 ,2033

B . 1396 . 1706 2U21 , 2334 .2*35 .2916 .3169 .3386 . 3560 .3687 .3762 .3784 .3752

BF -.020 -.028 -.036 - . 045 -.055 -.065 -.074 -.083 -.090 -.097 -. 103 -. 107 -, 109

C .0015 .0047 .0095 .0158 .0234 .0321 .0416 .0516 .0618 .0719 .0817 .0907 .0958

ID -.0528 7966 -.0739 1 .0766 -.0973 1 . 3846 -, 1222 1 ,7114 -, 1479 2 .0473 -, 1735 2 .3S21 -. 1934 2 .7058 -.2218 3 .0084 -.2429 3 , 2809 -.2611 3 .5150 -.2759 3 .7035 -.2868 3 .8407 - . 2935 3 . 922^

.0458 .0419 .0360 .0287 .0200 .0105 .0003 -.0101 - . 0205 - . 030i; - . 040 n -.0434 -.0557

VI-APP-A-36

FIGURL It S.ti.uU[> STAGE PLfiN FORM V I E W

VI-APP-A-37

HEPRODUCIBILJTY OK T ORIGINAL FAGS IS POOR

FIGURE 16A SECOND STAGE SIDE VIEW

VI-APP-A-38

FIGURE 16B SECOND STAGE FRONTAL V I E W

VI-APP-A-39

FISUPL

16C SE'CGHD STntE ORTHOGONAL V I E W

v I -APP-A-40

|TEPDDUCIBILrrr OF THE ORIGINAL PAGE IS POOR

FIGURL 17. I.HUNCH VEHICLE SECOND STAGE WEIGHT STATEMENT

HUNG GROUP TAIL GROUP CANARD VERTICAL BODY FLAP EHDY GROUP NGSE-.INC TPS) FtoD SKIRT L0\ TANK TNTEPTANK FUEL TANK AFT ShIRT THPUST S T R U C T U R E BASF SKIRT THERMAL PRuTECTIOH BOC-V FNFP.Y TPS FLAME SHIELD LOX TilNK, IN? Ul nTION INTLKTANt: I N S U L A T I O N FUEL TttNk I N f U L A T I O N W I N G TPS C u N A R D TPS "EPT TAIL TF3 BODi FLAP TFS I HfJDING SYSTEM NOSE GEnR M A I N GEnR DFOUbE CHUTE H'ZCENT PROPULSION MHIN ENGINE? ACCESSORIFS G I M B A L SYSTEM FUEL SYSTEM OXIDIZER SYSTEM AUX. PFOP. SYS F P I M E FOIHER n.ECT CONV AND DISTP HYDRAULIC CONV AND DS1R AFRO SURFACE CONTROLS UiING SURFACE CONTROLS CANARD SURFACE CONTKOLS VERT TAIL S U R F A C E CONTROLS BODY FLAP CONTROLS A"IONICS CNVIRONflLfJTAL COfJTROL PLRSOrJNFJL P R O V I S I O N S DR>r W E I G H T CONTINGENCY

C4253, 21051,
12454

242338,
40.M7

19592, 27647, 0, 99583, 0,

116237,
54141 , 1 3n35 , 0, 3'jO* , 65IU , 201 St.,

54141 ,

29922
2-424. 27IS3. 0.

125783
113656. 0. 8961 . 1422. 1749.

5678, 2104, 1818, 8640 , 16101, 10548, 806, 2957, 1789. 4900 0 0 647578. 6475S,

VI-APP-A-41

LAUNCH VEHICLE SECOND STAGE WEIGHT STATEMENT BALLAST EMPT, DIE I GUT RESIDUAL FLUIDS OXID PRESS GHSSES FUEL PRESS GttSSES PCS PRIME POWER HYf-FMULlL FLUIDS LANL--NL-. WEIGHT Mr-3 INFLIGHT LOSSES (-,< I HE FOUIER PPuPFLLANT \ I SERVES ENTF". WEIGHT PC; PPOPELLANT FiHD INTERSTAGE OR PA'i LOAD ADAPTER ..FPERATIOH SYSTEM
STfcGf INERT IHEIGHT

CCO(J'T)

0.
712336 15625. 72:23 2018. 0. 0.

727961 71b34. 377. 0.

1311 . 0. 0.
801183, 5039^*51 . 27389. 4342834. 7238U6.

MnINSTHL-E P R O P E L L E N T IMPULS1"E P P O F E L L A N r FLIL-MT PERFORMANCE RLbLR'^ES MAINSTA&F OXIC'I?fR M A I N S T A G E FUEL SEC . i& LIF TOFF IHF IGHT ! K C - I G f J I T I O N FROPELI.ANT

STAH-F P R E - I G N I T I O N WEIGHT SEC STG M A = S FRnCTION fUTAL FUEL WEIGHT TLHAL LOX WEIGHT ORB U MuNEUV PROP G i'ST

5890117. .86346 748451. 4421258. 51390.

VEHULE USEFUL PA^LOAD <*> ALL WEIGHTS ARE IN POUNDS

lOOnooo .

VI-APP-A-A2

FIC-URL IS. SECOND STG WEIGHTS AS A '/. OF EMPTY WEIGHT

1 fEM

PCT
9.020 2.955

uUNG GROUP F A I L GROUP pnf'Y FLAP K.UDY GROUP THERMAL P R O T E C T I O N L HMD ING SYSTEM

1 .228 ^4.020 16.318

4.200 17.659 .797 .295 .255 1 .213 2.2^0 .683 .000 .000 90 . 9 0 9 9.091 .000

ASCENT PROPULSION
A U X . P R O P U L S I O N S 1 . STEM 'H1ML" FOKIER t 1 ECT CUNV AND DIS1R H i D R A U L I C CON" HND D l S l P HLPO SUI F ACE CONTROLS f\'iriNIC c Lt.-/IROrjf1^NTAL CONTROL Ft f-'E.ONNLI. P P O V I S I O f J S [ F V HlEIi^HI , [-filGN f - E S E R V L C GUTINGENCY F:H| L A S T E f l F T V Ult IGHf
C

100 .ono

h J i,l IRE 19. ITEM F O R W A R D NOSF1 STRUtTUr^E BALLi'ST FOR^lnRD S K I R T LO^ \MW LOX TANt' PPESSURANf FUEL TnNK FUEL TANK PRESSUTANT INTf-THNK STRUCTURE LOX TANK IMSULHTION FUEL TANK INSULHT10N I N T t f T A N k INCULATION BASE S K I R T BODS' FLAP TOTAL STAGE

SLCONC- S T A G E CG DATA
AFT STA * W E I G H T
62.50
.00 85. 18 216.49 .00 173.85 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 250 .19

X CG *
36.79 5.00 73.84 186.33 186.33
126 56 126.56 .00 186.33 126.56 164.46 238.34

43746.58 .00 19592. 10 27647.39 f 222. 76 99582.64 2018.34 .00 .00 6519.60 3505.91 21394.25 8750 .00 638579.93

275. 19 250 . 19

262.69 181 .52

STAGE XCG CPCT LB) CO ALL STATIONS AND CENTERS OF GRAVITY tIRE GIVEN FEF.T LOCATED fiFT OF STAGE NOSE
VI-APP-A-^3

72.554 IN

co

cc o
CO

<r o
o <c
UJ UJ

cr

LU h-

CO

x
UJ

o f\J
cc
ZD

LL_

to I fi
Ofi

9 01X
01X

\\l
i

21 lib
. \. .

:
\

oe

02
os

13A

01
0

001

r c,
u o
Ld _1 U -t

VI-APP-A-45

Ci

<r

UJ

CO

<r

UJ

09 g

Sfi OIX

OE I "*"

SI

Hi

i
0

13DDH
00'SZ. 00*05 00'Sc

OO'OCi

00'0

iOUHl

VI-APP-A-A6

001

GZ,
1

OS

SZ

d IH'J
01

o
bHd'lb

Qi

VI-APP-A-^7

>~

UJ

DC:
t1

<I

a
<_

O <J>

*-1

LJ

i- ex

Ti

OIX

VI-APP-A-48

<r i <r ui

to
LJ

CJ

0*!

IhGH

01

VI-APP-A-49

a.

(J

u_
UJ LJ

'J 01

O Li_
CT t -1

:>< cr

(J3 CM

ocr<;

05 *i

oo'o

VI-APP-A-50

( J or ru
UJ

cr
GG
<r > <r
2 hAj
CO
U .

in

CE

__ i

C\J

UJ QC ZD

CD

f. 01X

lib

MPRQDUCIBILny OF THE ORIGINS PAGi 18 POOR

VI-APP-A-51

(,

'

O I

a > a
t2
Urf

n: rr; en
Ll.J

o <r

a: a"'
f\l LjJ

cr
LL_

Oh

f, OIX

OE

lib

VI-APP-A-52

FIGURE. 29 ASCENT IRriJULTukY WF.1&H7 (LPS) HCCEL (&)

Cf '

<LBS>

0 F.

THI OTL

CHIP

t F i* ) N LirruFF) U 2:7424231 .5
2 U

4 n
f. 0 t .n

li. n 11 n 1 -< . i.'

2,--426r, 2 , 2 27403131 ,27444664 .5 2? 46 10 OS , o 27482391 .2 27503771 .2 27540234 . 0

2 10 95563.0 20915206 .0 20734&49 .0 10554492 .0 203741 !-,5. U 20193778 n 20013421 .0 19833064 , 2 19652707 2 1 ->4 72250.2
1 =12^1 =*,n o

1 .300 1 311 1 , 323 1 ,335 1 .047 1 ,3tO 1 .373 1 .38?

.0 .5 1 9 4.1 O 1
13 19 2,'
1!
v

10U 0 100 0 100 . u

10U

,n

100 . IJ 10 U 0 100 .0 100 . II 100 n 100 .0 ion .0 100 0 100 ,0 100 ,0

.00 .01 .02 .02 .03 .04 .05

.06

vBEi-!N 1 IL T> IL 0 27577004 er <-V i,l 89,-|? .0 U U

, J , i - C . f i e ,._' ; 718i 61 2 24 U 277761*7 . 7 ?t, n 2733357U 7 fFfL' T 1LT; 2790fc4n4 il 13 n

2ii r.
2> n

1C' 11 Ib'Jt 2 18^31279 .2 1S75U9.12 5

36 4 1 .401 1 . 4 1 : 47 , -i 50 i ". 1 , 4 ?0 1 .445 74 . I 1 .461 9U , 1 1 .477 107 , Q

.00
1 .39 2.78 4. 17 5.56 6.95
5.99 7 08 8.26 9.51 10 .84 12,24 13.70 15.21 It .76 18.36 19.98 21 .63

185705t5 5 2797c'iC84 . 2 13390 2U ?. 5 2R0555I3 .7 32 n 18209tM ,5 28 13*= 6 32 .5 1&H29494 5 3-1 f 28221744 .5 36 .0 17849127 .5 176e87c'0 3? . 0 23310499 0 ^ 17488423 ,7 40 . 0 /402'jl7 , r 2S497J77 . 5 42.0 1730 06 6. 7 285946^9 5 44 .0 17127709 .7 28693831 46 0 1694, "352 7 2*794464 0 4C. .0 167t9''-5 .9 2 3960 26 . l 165?e o9 ,0 50 0 28993004 .0 52.0 16406222 ,0 29039897 .0 16225925 0 54 .0 29201192 .7 16045568 , 1 56.0 29301360 .0 15365211 . 1 56.0 29399952 .0 60 .0 15684354 1 29496454 .5 62.0 15504497 ,2 29590403 .5 64 0 15324140 .2 29681377 .7 15143733 2 66.0 29769015 ,7 14963426 4 68.0 29852946 .5 1478^069 .4 70 .0 72,0 29*33035 .2 146H2712 . 4 .7 74 , 0 30003624 14422355 .5 30079498 C 14241998 .5 76.li ( M A X I M U M DVNhMIC PCES oUPE'' 14061C41 .5 78, U 30145413 .5 30206204 .5 13881284 , 6 30 .0 13381234 .6 80 .0 3(1206204 .5 S2.0 30261773 .5 13700927 .6 J t. 0 30312110 .0 1352H570 6 86. 0 13G40213 ,6 303572S1 .0
30 n
C1

1 .494 1 .511 1 . 529 1 547 1 . 5 6 1 . 5.,'j 1 .604 ], 624 1 .644 1 .6t-5 1 6<J5 1 706 1 .726 1 746 1 .7o6 1 .7T5 1 1 .802 1 .817 1 841 1 .8^6 1 .8^5 1 .928 I .962 1 .9=13 2 .026 2 .Obi 2 .096 2 .096 2 . 132 2 . 168 2 .206

127 . 6 149 1 172 .4 197 .4 224 , 1 252 ,4 282 2 313 .4 345 .7 379 , 1 413 .3 448 2 483 3 518 , 5 553 , 2 587 . 3 620 . 1 651 , 1 679 , ? 706 . J 729 , g 750 . 2 767 . 1 778 3 733 .5 782 .0 773 .2 773 .2 2 757 __ o 734 704 .8

1un , n
ion n 100 .0 luO li 100 .0
100 .0

100 .0 10U .0 lOu 0 10U .0 100 0

10U li 100 fl

100 ,0 100 0 100 .0 100 .0 100 .0 100 ,0 100 .0 100 .0 100 .0 100 0 ion 0 100 ,0 100 .0 100 .0 100 .0 100 .0 100 . 0 100 0

23.30 24.98 26.67 23.35

30 .03

31 .71 33.37 35.01 36.63 38.23 39.80 41 .34 42.85

44.32 45.76 45,76 47. 16 48.53 49.85

VI-APP-A-53

VEHICI E ftSCENT T R A J E C T O R Y
TIME

THRUST

WEIGHT

ftCCEL

THFOTI

CHIP

30397320 . 1315^35b - 88.0 30432154 0 12979499 . 7 90 .0 12799142 7 92 . 0 30462743 2 304S9459.5 12618785, 9 94.0 1243&423. 9 96 . 0 305127oO 5 30532960 5 12253071 . 9 9 .0 305505119 . 7 12077715 0 1 U0 . 0 30^50509.7 12t'i77715 0 100.0 11897358. 0 305*5707,0 102.1" 30cj?Qf<^2 . 2 11717001 . 0 104.0 30590112 2 1 1536644 0 106.0 30 60 On ,15 7 li:-5*87, 1 108. 0 3060350o . 7 1117^930 . 1 110.0 30615847. 7 Hi 5*5573. 1 11? 0 114.0 iO 622 160 .0 10815216. 2 30*27583.2 1U6P4R59 .2 116.0 3063224U .5 10454502 2 lie 0 3U6562 3.3 . 7 10274145 4 1 20 . u 306n9fc,70 .2 10 09:-.; es. 4 122.0 3U642613.7 9913431 . 4 124.0 30645133 2 9731:074. 5 126 0 30647303.5 955271,7. 5 128.0 20649160 .2 9?,'2360 5 130 .0 30650752. 7 919?003. 6 132.0 30 652 11 9.5 9011646. 6 134.0 30653592 . 7 8831283. 6 126.0 30654301 5 8650 ^32 .7 138 0 30654561 . 5 8537652 .1 139, 3 <ENO BOOSTER STAGE BURtO .0 6941452 9 139.3 .0 143.3 6941452. 9 < BEG IN SECOND- 3 TPGE BURN) 7614940 .6 6919170. 2 143.? 7612653.2 6733441 . 6 151 .3 7613555.6 6657713. 1 159.3 7614093.3 6526984, 4 167.3 7614417 7 6396255 9 175.3 7614615 . 0 6265527. 3 183.3 7614735.9 6134798. 7 191 .3 7614940 .6 613479S 7 191 .3 7614810 .5 6004070 . 1 199.3 7614556 . 8 5873341 . 5 207.3 7614335.8 5742612. 9 215.3 7614904. 1 5611884. 3 223.3 7614915.9 5481155. 7 231 .3 7614923.4 5350427. 1 239.3 7614940 .6 5350427. 1 239.3 7614928.4 5219698. 5 247.3 7614931 .6 5088969. 9 255.3 7614933.8 4958241 . 3 263.3 4827512. 7 7614935 3 271 .3 7614936.4 4696784. 1 279.?

2 .244 2 ,283 2 . J?3 2 . 3t,3 2 .404 2 . 445 2 .487 2 .487 2 .5 JO 2 .573 2 . 618 2 6o3 2 . 7u9 2 75P 2 .807 2 .357 2 .909 2 .96^> 3 .018 3 .075 3 . 134 3 . 1*5 3 .25S 3 . 32;. 3 .391 3 .461
3 .534

3 .5C2
01 1 .008

670 . 2 t28 .4 590 .7 553 9 513 .3 484 . 1 451 .5 451 .5 420 .4 391 . 1 363 3 337 , 1 312 . 4 238 4 265 .6 244 . 4 224 .5 206 . 1 189 .0 173 .2 150 . t 145 . 2 132 .9 121 .6 111 .3 101 . 3 93 _ i 88 .4
88 .4 64 .9 64 .9 41 .0 27 .3 18 .6 12 .8 8 .9 6 .3 6 .3 4 .5 3 .2 2 .3 1 .7 1 .3 1 .0 1 .0 .8 .6 .5 .4 .3

100 .0 100 0 100 0 1 0 0.0 10U .0 100 .0 10U 0 1ft II .0 mu .0 iori .0

100 .0

51 . 14 52 .39 53 .61 54 .79 55 .93 57 .03

5y . 10
58 . 10 59 . 14 6d , 14 61 . 11 62 .05 62 .9 63 .84 64 .69 65 .51 e .30 67 .07 67 .82 1:8 .54 69 .23 69 .91 70 .56 71 . 19 71 .80 72 .40 72 .97 73 .32 73 .02 74 .43 61 .03 61 .67 62 .72 63 .59 64 .46 65 .35 66 26 66 .26 67 . 17 68 . 10 69 .04 69 .99 70 .96 71 .93 71 .93 72 .92 73 .92 74 .92 75 .94 76 .97

10u 0 U. HI 0 100 ,0 100 ,u 100 0 1UO 0 luO 0 100 0 100 .0 100 0 100 0 100 .0 100 0 100 0 ion . 0

ion in u

.0 II

.0 .0

1 . 101 1 . 121 1 . 144 1 . 167 1 . 19H 1 215 1 .241 1 .241 1 .268 1 .297 1 .326 1 .357 1 .389 1 .423 1 .423 1 .459 1 .496 1 .536 1 .577 1 .621

100

.1

100 ,0 100 .0

100 0 100 .0 100 .0 100 .0 100 .0 100 .0 100 .0 100 .0 100 .0 100 .0 100 .0 100 .0 100 0 100 .0 100 .0 100 .0 100 .0

VI-APP-A-5 1 *

VIIHICI L ASCMH TRAJECIGPY

TIME

IHEIGHT

nCCLL

CHIP

7t.l493T . 1 7614^37 .6 7614933 .0 7614908 .2 7614938 .4 7614938 . 6 76 14 =138 , 7 761 4 * 38 .7 7614938 .7 76149~-:8 ~? I 76149J8 p 761 4^38 . 7 7614^38 ii 3yi 7M4938 . t, 390 , 3 7614-^3^ .4 40? . J ?614C'38 . J -i 415 _' 7614--O8 .2 423 v ,-614938 . 1 431 ~; 7614-H38 . 1 409 .' 761493S .0 44? 3 76 14 ^38 . U <IN if.CT ION,' 451 . 6 7M9675 , 0
1

28? _' 295 ". 303 311 t 31 - . 2 327 335 -, 343 .3 351 35" . J 367 ^ 375 s 3S3 -.

4566055. f-, 4435326. 9 4304S9G 4 4173'69. c 4043141 ~. -912412 6 37S1&E4. 0 3650 9:-b 4 3520216 . 8 33894^8. 2 325P7t9. 6 31?Rn41 . n ? r< ''": K- 4 ,: 2St^5Sl: 8 .-VI.585b 2

::ei'5iz-.

-j

247439S 1 2343669. 5 2212940 9 2082212 3 1951480. 7

1 .668 1 .717 1 .769 1 .824 1 . %&'> 1 .946 2 .014 2 .056 2 . 1 f, 3 2 .247 ?. 3 J .' ?.4 '--4 2 .541 2 . 656 2 .783 2 .923 3 .077 ? .249 3 .441 3 .65.' 3 , 9n : 4 . OIMJ

.3 .3 .3 .2 .2 .2 .2 .2 .3 .3 .3 .3 .4 .t . C. .6 .6 .7 ,8 .9 .9

100 .0 100 .0 100 .0 100 .0 1 0 fi .0 10U . 0 10U .0 1 0 0.0 1 0 0.0 lOu .0 100 .0 100 .0 100 .0 100 n ico .0 100 .0 i o o .0 l u u .0 .0 10 ft 100 .0 10U 0

78 .00 79 .04 .0 .09 31 . 15 82 .21 83 .28 84 .35 85 .43 86 .M 87 .59 88 .68 89 .76 90 .85 =>! .93 33 .02 ?4 . 10 95 . 18 96 .25 97 oo 98 .39 9? .45

1879 "MS. 7

1 .0

^rt 7

100 .02

VI-APP-A-55

FIGURE 29 ASCENT TRAJECTORY

T I ME <SEC >

VEL REL <FPS)

VEL I (FPS>

GAMMA R (DEC)

GAMMA I i'DE&)

ALTITUDE <FT>

RANGE <NM)

(BEGIN L IFTOF'F ) ,n 1519 .0 .0 1519 , 1 19. 9 2.0 4 .n 1519 , c 40 . 6 sj _ o 15?0 62. 0 6.0 84. 2 1521 .3 8.0 107. 3 1522 ,7 10 .0 131 . 1 1524 .5 12.0 14.0 155. 8 1526 .8 (BEGIN T ILT> 1529 .6 181 . 4 I6.fi 1534 .0 2QQ-. 0 18.01541 .0 235. 4 20 .0 1551 .0 22.0 263. 8 1563 .8 24.0 293 . 3 1579 . 5 323. 9 26.0 (END I1L T) 1595 .4 28.0 355, 7 388. 7 iei3 . 2 30 . 0 32.0 423. 1 16;-i3 8 34.0 458. 8 1657 . 2 36. n 495. 9 1683 .6 534. 5 1713 . 1 38.0 1745 .9 40 .0 574. 7 42.0 616, b 1782 . 0 44 .0 660 . 1 1821 .5 705. 5 1S64 . 5 46.0 1910 .9 752. 7 48.0 802. 0 I960 .7 50 .0 853. 2 2013 .9 52.0 906. 5 2070 .5 54,0 961 . 8 2130 .3 56.0 1019. 2 2193 .4 58.0 1073. 7 2259 .5 60 .0 1140 . 2 2328 .4 62.0 64.0 1203. 8 2400 .2 1270 . 0 66.0 24?5 .2 1339. 0 68.0 2553 .4 1411 . 0 2635 .0 70 .0 2720 .1 72.0 1486. 3 1564. 8 2808 .6 74.0 76.0 1646. 5 2900 .3 < MAX (MUM DVNHM 1C PRESSURE) 1731 . 5 2995 .4 78.0 80 .0 1819. 8 3093 .8 80 .0 3093 .8 1819. 8 82.0 3195 .6 1911 . 6 84 .0 3300 .7 2006. 8 66.0 2105. 5 3409 . 1

31 .32 89 .91 S3 .91 89 .91 89 90 89 .90 89 .90 89 .90 9U . 1 1 89 .79 89 .06 87 .99 fab .69 85 . 22 84 . 13 83 04 81 .88 80 .63 79 .31 77 .92 76 .47 74 .97 73 .43 71 .84 70 .22 68 .58 66 .93 65 .26 63 .53 61 .91 60 .24 58 .57 56 .93 55 .30 53 .69 52 , lu 50 .55 49 .02 47 .53 46 .07 44 ,64 44 .64 43 .26 41 .91 40 .60

.00 .75 1 ,53 2 .34 3 . 17 4 .04 4 .93 5 .86

- .5 19 .0 79 .5 181 .7 328 .5 519 .7 758 .0 1044 .2

1D81 , 7 lc-71 ,0 2214 . 2 2713 .2 3269 . 7 3835 .0 4561 .5 7.301 .0 61U5 ,5 6976 .7 7916 .5 89.-J6 ,2 1 0 0U T . 5 1 1 1 6 1 .5 12389 .7 13692 5 15071 .2 16526 , 2 18057 .7 1966 .0 21350 . 7 23111 .0 24946 . 7 26856 , ? 28838 .0 30890 ,7 330 1 4.0 35206 .5 37467 .5 39796 .5 42192 .5
44654 .0 47179 .7 47179 .7 49768 .2 52418 , T 55129 t 2

.0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .1 .1 .1 .1 .2 .2 .3 .4 .4 .5 .6 .7 .9 1 .0 1 .2 1 .4 1 .6 1 .8 2. 1 2.3 2.6 2.9 3.3

6.81 7 .79 8.79 9,?9 10 .79 11 .79

12 .81 13 84 14 .85 15 85 16 ,82 \? .76 18 .66 1-3 ,52 20 32 21 .07 21 .7f22 .38 22 .94 23 .43 23 .85 24 ,20 24 .48 24 .70 24 ,P^ 24 .95 25 .00 25 .00 24 .95 24 .87 24 .75

a* ,60
24 .41 24 .41 24 .20 23 .96 23 .70

3.7 4. 1 4. 1 4.5 5.0 5.5

VI-APP-A-56

VEHICI F A C C E N T

1 IMC

VEL REL

VFl

C-HMM R

bttMM

AL T I T H T ' E
57? J<=. 7

RANEE

2207 8 252" q ="IJ U 2313 6 36 3 c 1 3754 .6 2423 .0 ?l- o c,4 o o r ^ t 5 253* .0 Hill 1 t ^fc. U 2652 .7 }? 0 41 '0 4 2773 . 1 4?rl 4 li'il .ft 2897 1 4i>-r . 4 28?7 . 1 me . o oft 1*1 5 4397 9 I'll ft 315fc 3 453t- . & in 4 0 '291 5 467* 2 1'lf ft C - 4 3 0 .5 452=' . 1 ing o 49-M 5 :-573 . 4 11 ft . o 5)17 t MC.O C710 1 1140 5/ 34 4 5370 3 5 4 4 4 > 4ii25 5 11 . 4194 4 5 1 ' i ^ -r IIS " c- - * 4:47 3 c 1 2 n .ft 5 C '4 : ' . 0 4514 .6 122 .0 tilt 2 124 .0 4t,?b . 1 true .& 43t2 1 12t 0 t 4 ^ 1 * 5U41 f. lie 0 5127 . 5 *?! 0 1 30 . 0 6^.'4 Ci 5417 . 7 132 0 134.0 7H.':- 5 5612 .5 71 C',' 0 i :- 6 . o 5312 4 74. : -~, 5 tul7 4 133 ft 139 . 3 6 1 4 8 .9 76 1 : 1 (EMC- E s G Q E T E R STHGE E?HFN > 7619 , 1 6143 9 13-=" ., 7557 .5 61 10 1 143 3 ( B E G I N S E C O N D STAC-F E U FtO 75S7 .5 61 10 . 1 143-3 6317 7S04 .2 151 .3 ^ 8ft 30 2 6535 3 159.3 6764 2 62t.5 6 167.3 8510 . 4 7 0 0 2 .9 175. 3 &764 , 7 7252 0 183 3 9028 , 6 7511 .3 191 .3 9023 9 7511 .6 191 .3 9302 , 5 7731 3 199.1 95S6 . 1 8061 .5 207.3 9879 , 7 215.3 8352 ? 10183 7 6653 ^ 223 3 10493 , 3 8966 .2 231 .3 92S'-> .9 10S23 8 239.3 10813 .8 239.3 9289 _ 9 1 1 1 6 f t.5 962b .2 247.3 255.3 11508 .9 9972 .2 11869 . 2 10331 .5 263.3 1?142 . 0 10703 .4 271 .3 279.3 12t;7 .8 11088 . 4

?-:, n

3* 52 ir} 3t' .59 C-.5 .74 34 .61 33 53 ' 2 4.J 12 48 31 . 47 ",u . 4 9 19 .54 !& t 3 ^ i' . 7 4 16 ?5 ? 6 .07 15 .27 24 51 23 . ? 7 J 3 05 ~* " 36 21 . 7n 21 06 2ft 4 4 19 oS 1 ? 27 18 .72 1& . IS 17 . 36
3i

23 41 23 1 1 -V . 7 9 22 4 22 . 12 21 .77 ^1 41 21 , 4 1 21 0 4 20 .67

. 2<5

19 . 31

1 3 54

19 . It. 1? . 78 l o 4M IS 0 2 17 . t 5 17 .29 16 ^2 \ f 56 I t I'l 15 1 1. 15 52 15 15 14 35 14 53 14 33

14 33

2 63>. 0 r 2 66 '..4? 2 60551 . n 725A--5 .7 75657 CJ 75657 78792 2 8197? 7 85197 it 884t 3 2 9177H 5 951 It . 5 93500 . ^L 101*20 (\ UI5I.74 i lfti:t 1 7 112:?1 (\ 1 ^^C^ 0 1 1 =! 1C1 7 12:1 : t ii lit ,'t^ . n 13041, 2 1241! =" u
IT

=o rc'j

l?7':'t

1415, ^ 2 143* t i 1
14I 1 }-* ? 2 15125? . 2

6 1 6.6 7.3 7.9 8 t> 9.3 10 . 1 10 .1 10.9 1 1 .8 12.7 13.7 14 7 15. S 16 . 3 19.0 19.3 20 5 21 9 23. 3 24.7 2t> 2 27.8 2n .4 31 .1 32.9 34 7 35.9

17 86 I f .8C 16 . 8 3 15 42 14 u ^ 12 .85 11 . 7 0 10 62 9 .el 9 .61 S .68 7 .31 7 .Oft 6 .25 5 .56 4 Q 4 92 4 32 3 .78 3 .27 2 .81 2 .39
2

13 4? 13 .43 12 43 11 4 3 10 . 4 9 9 60 <3 77 7 .99 7 . 99 7 .25 6 56 5 .91 5 .31 4 .74 4 .22 4 22 3 73 3 .27 2 85 2 .46 2 . 10

35.9 39.7 39.7 47.5 55.6 64.1 72.9 82.0 91 .4 91 4 101 .3 111 .5 122.1 133.1 144 .5 156.3 156.3 163.5 131 2 19-1.4 208.0 222.1

151 5? . 2 I t 5 . 4 3 e; ITS i ! 4 7 190507 5 2u2:n4 . 2 213117 .2 223553 0 223592 . r 233305 2

242>30 2 250531 .0 2 5 ? t r i .2 2 6 5 ? 1 1 .5 2 / 2 = 6 7 .2 2725t 7 5 275651 . 7 2':4173 _ ~ 2351-. 3 _ ^> 2 t ' ? ^ 20 7 2975t,7 . 2

VI-APP-A-57

VEHICLE ASCENT TPfitECTORY TIME

VEL REL

VEL I
13027 0 13440 .4 138t8 ,6 14312 .2 14772 .2 15249 .5 15745 .0 16259 .8 16795 .2 1735? , 5 17933 .4 18539 .5 19172 .8 1*835 6 2u530 .4 21260 .3 22028 .6 22829 3 23697 . 1 246U7 . 6 255 ?? .5 26136 .4

CAMM R

13AMM I

ALTITUDE 301019 ,5 303934 .5 306511 .2 30&590 . 5 310253 .0 311520 .7 312419 . 0 312974 .2 J13J14 .7 313172 .0 312300 .2 3123f'fc. .2 3 1 1 7 LI 1 5 3109UO . 2 310023 7 3091^6 .0 3027fi .0 30752 3 , ^ 306963 .5 306677 .0 306761 .7 307005
t

RANGE
2?6 i
_

287 *-. 295 .3 303 . 3 311 , 3 319 ^_ 'j o 327 335 . 3 343 . *J 351 .3 359 .3 367 .3 3^5 . 3 383 . 3 391 . 3 399 .3 407 . 3 415 . .1
423 .3 431 .3

11487 .0 11899 .9 12327 .7 12771 . 1 13230 .9

13708 . n 14203 .4 14718 , 1 15253 .5 15810 ,S 16391 .7 16997 .9 17631 .2 18194 . 1 1&989 .0 19718 . 9 20487 .3 21298 . 1 22155 ,9 23066 .5 24036 .3

2.00 1 .65 1 .33 1 .05 .79 .56 .36 . 19

.04

439 , i 447 , 3 < IN TKCT:torn 24595 .2 451 .6

-.08 -. 18 -.25 -.30 -.33 - .34 -.32 -.28 -.22 -. 14 -.04 .09

1 .77 1 .46 1 . 19 .93 .71 .51 .33 .17 .04 -.07 -. 16 -.23 -.28 -.31 -.31 -.30 -.26 -.21 -.13 -.03 .09 . 16

252 0 267 .7 233 .9 SHU .8 ?18 . 3 3:6 .4 355 . 1 374 .6 394 .7 415 6 4?7 . 3 459 7 483 .0 507 .2 532 .3 558 . 4 585 .5 613 .7 643 0 73 .6 690 .9

. 17

VI-APP-A-58

FIGURE: 29 ASCENT TRAJECTORY

TIME (SEC.) MACH ALPHA <DEG)
LAT (DEC)

LONG (DEC)

HT RT TOT HT <B'bF/S > (B'-SF)

REL ftZ <DEG>

(BEGIN LIFTOFF) .0 .00 2.0 .02 4.0 .04 6.0 .05 8.0 .07 10 .0 .09 12.0 . 12 14.0 .14 (.BEGIN TILT) 16.0 . 16 18.0 .18 20 .0 .21 22.0 .23 24.0 .26 2 . 0 .29 (END TILT) 28 0 .32 30 .0 .35 32.0 .38 34.0 .41 36.0 .45 38.0 .48 40 .0 .52 42.0 .56 44.0 .60 46.0 .65 48.0 .69 50 .0 .74 52.0 .80 54.0 .85 56.0 .91 58.0 .97 60.0 .03 62.0 . 10 64.0 .18 66.0 .25 68.0 .33 70.0 .42 72.0 1 .51 74.0 1 .61 76.0 1.71 (MAXIMUM DYNAMIC 78,0 1.82 80.0 1.92 80.0 1.92 82.0 2.03 84.0 2.14 86.0 2.25

.000 -.008 -.016 -.025 -.033 -.040 -.049 -.056

5.46 5.46 5.46 5.46 5,46 5.46 5.46 5.46 5.46 5.46 5.46 5.46 5. 40 5.46 5.46 5.4t 5.46 5.46 5.46 5.46 5.46 5.46 5.46 5.46 5.46 5.46 5.46 5.46 5.46 5.46 5.46 5.46 5.46 5.46 5.46 5.46 5.46 5.46 5.46 5.46 5.46 5.46 5.46 5.46 5.46

-80 .60 -80 .60 -80 0 -80 .60 -80 .60 -SO .60 -80 .60 -80 .60 -80 .60 -80 .60 -80 60 -0 60 -eo.60 -80 .60

.0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0
.0

.0 ,0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0

90.0 90.0 90 .0 90.0 90.0 90.0 90.0 90.0

90 .0 90 .0 90 .0 90 .0 90.0 90 .0 90 .0 90 .0 90 .0 90 .0 90 .0 90 .0 90 .0 90 .0 90 .0 90 .0 90.0 90.0 90.0 90 .0 90 .0 90.0 90.0 90 ,0 90 .0 90 .0 90 .0 90.0 90.0 90.0 90.0 90 .0 90.0 90 .0 90 .0 90.0 90.0

-.002 -1.118 -1 .758 -2.0t8 -2. 14? -2.061

.000

.0
.0 0

.1 .1 .1
.2 .2 ,3 .4 .6 .7 .9 1 .2 1.5 1 .9 2.3 2,8 3.4 4.2 5,0 6.0 7.1 8.5 10 .0 11 .7 13.6 15.9 18.4 21 .2

.ono
.000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 PRESSURE) .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000

-80.60 -80 .0 -80 .60 -80 .60 -80 .60 -80 .60 -80.60 -80 .60 -80 .60 -80 .60 -80.60 -80 .60 -80.59 -80 .59 -80.59 -80.59 -80 .58 -30.58 -80 .58 -80 .57 -80 .57 -80.57 -80 .56 -80.55 80 .55 -80.54 -80.54 -80.54 -80.53 -80 .52 -80.51

.0 .0

.1

.1
.1

.1
.1
.d
.2 .2 .3 .3 .4 .5 .5 .6 .7 .8 .9 1 .0 1 .2 1 .3 1 .5

1.6 1 .8 1 .8 2.0 2.2 2.4

24. J 27. 8 27.8 31 .6 35.8 40.4

VI-APP-A-59

V E H I C L E ASCENT TPAJFCTOKY TIME MACH ALPHU LAT LONG Hf RT TOT HT PEL AZ

.OOU 88.0 2 .35 ,000 90 .0 2 .45 .000 92.0 2 .55 .000 2 .65 94 ,n .000 2 .76 96 0 .000 9'.0 2 .87 OUO 2 .98 100.0 .000 2 .98 100 .0 .000 102.0 3 . 10 3 . 22 104 0 .000 .000 3 . 35 106.0 108. n .000 3 .48 .000 3 .61 110.0 .000 3 .74 112.0 .000 3 .87 114.0 000 4 .01 116.0 .000 118 0 4 . 15 .000 4 .28 120 .0 .000 122.0 4 .42 4 .57 .000 124.0 .000 4 .71 126.0 000 4 .86 128.0 .000 130 .0 5 .01 .000 132.0 5 . 16 .000 134.0 5 .32 .000 5 .48 136.0 .000 5 .4 138.0 .000 5 75 139.3 BURN; (END BOOSTER STAGE .000 5 .75 139.3 .000 5 .67 143.3 (BEGIN SECOND STAGE BURN) 13 ,395 143.3 5 .67 14 . 133 151 .3 5 .84 14 .774 159.3 6 . 13 6 .47 15 .322 167.3 15 .780 175.3 6 .84 16 . 154 7 .24 183.3 7 ,6ft 191 .3 16 .447 7.66 16 ,44c 191 .3 16 .663 199 3 8.09 8.54 16 .807 207.3 16 .884 215.3 9 .01 16 .897 9.49 223.3 16 .849 9.99 231 .3 16 .745 239.3 10 .51 16 .745 10 .51 239.3 16 .589 10 .89 247.3 16 .383 255.3 11 .28 16 . 131 263.3 11 .69 271 .3 15 .836 12 . 11 279.3 15 .501 12 .47

5. 46 5.46 5.46 5 46 5.46 5.46 5.46 5.46 5.46 5.46 5.46 5 46 5.46 5.46 5.46 5 46 5.46 5.46 5.46 5.46 5.46 5 .46 5.46 5.46 5.46 5.4t 5.46 5.46

-80 .50 -80 .49 -30 ,48 -80 .47 -80 .46 80 . 45 -0 .44 -SO .44 -0 42 -SO .41 -80 '9 , -80 38 -&U . 36 -CO .S4 -80 .32 -80 .30 -SO .28 -SO .26 -8G .24 -80 .22 -&0 . 19 -80 . 17 -SO , 14 -80 . 1 1 -SO ,ne -30 .05 -80 .02 -30 00 -80 .00 -79 .94 -79 94 -79 .81 -79 .67 -79 .53 -79 .39 -V9 23 -79 .08 -79 .08 -78 .91 -78 .74 -78 ,56 -78 .38 -78 . 19 -77 .99 -77 .99 -77 .79 -77 .58 -77 .36 -77 . 13 -76 .89

2.6

2 3
3.0

3 2
3.4 3.C 3.8 3.S 4.0 4 .2 4.5 4.7 5.0 b.2 5.4 5.7 5.9 6. 1

6 4
6.6 6.8

7. 1 7 3
7.6 7.8 8.0 8.3 8.5 8,5 7.2 7.2

45 .4 50 ,7 56 .4 62 , 5 69 . U 75 .9 83 . 3 83 . 3 91 . 1 99 .4 108 , 1 117 .3 126 9 13? , 1 147 .7 158 8 170 .3 182 .3 194 .8 207 .8 2.il .3 235 .2 249 , 6 264 .5 279 .8 - 295 . 7 312 .0 322 . 5

90 .0 90 .0 90.0 90.0 90 .0 90.0 90 .U 90 .0 90 .0 90 .0 90.0 90 .0 90 .0 90 .0 90 .0 90 . 0 90 0 90 .0 90 .0 90 .1 90 , 90 . 90 . 90 90 . 9U . 90 , 1 90 . 1 90 . 1 90. 1 90 . 1 9U . 1 9U . 1 90. 1 90 .2 90 .2 90.2 90.2 90 .2 90 .2 90 .3 90 .3 90 .3 90 .3 9" . 3 90 .3 90 .4 90 .4 90 .4 90 .4

5 46 5 46
5.46 5.46
5. 46

322 .5 353 .6 353 .6 406 ,4 452 . 1 492 5 528 .6 561 0 590 .2 ' 590.2 616 .6 640 .8 662 .9 683 .4 702 .4 720 .3 720 .3 737 .2 753 .2 768 .7 783 .9 798 .9

6. 1
5.4 4.8 4.3 3.8 3.5 3.5 3.2 2.9 2.7 2.5 2.3 2.2 2.2

5.46 5.46 5.46 5.46 5.46 5.46 5.46 5.46 5.46 5.46 5.45 5.45 5.45 5.45 5.45 5.45 5.45

2. 1
2.0

1 .9 1 .9 1 .9

VI-APP-A-60

V E H I C L E ASCENT T R A J E C T O R Y TIME MrtCH rtlPHH LuT LONG HT RT TOT HT REL AZ

28? .3 295 . ; 303 .3 311 .3 319 3 32? O 335 .3 343 "^ 351 . 3 359 . 3 367 ^^ 375 -i 3S3 3 391 _ o
3?*> ^

12. 81
13. 17

407 _, 415 , ^i 2?. 38 423 _ T> 431 o 24. 35 439 . 3 25. 37 44? .3 2t 43 < I H TLGT ION; 451 , t 27. 03

13. 57 13. 98 14. 43 14 91 15. 41 15. 95 If.. 52 17. 13 17. 77 IS . 45 19. 16 19, 92 20 . 72 21 . 56 C. i~. i 45

15 . 13u 14 .724 14 .2S7 13 &2U 13 027 12 .&11 12 .272 11 .713 1 1 . 13? 10 545 9 940 3 313 8 ,f9t. e .Obi 7 . 420 e . 7 7C" e . 124 o .474 4 . 823 4 . 1 74 o 528

5 44 5 44 5 .44 5 .4-1 5 43 CT 43 5 43

5 ,42 5 .42 5 .41

5 .41 5 40 5 .40 5 39 5 .38 5 38 5 .37 5 .36 5 .35 5 .34 5 .33

-76 b5 -76 . 39 -76 . 13 -75 .96 -75 ,58 -75 .2* -74 .98 -74 .6? -74 .34 -74 .01 -73 .66 -73 , 30 -72 .92 -72 .5? -72 . 13 -71 71 -71 27 -70 .82 -70 .35 -C9 ,se -t-9 . 35

1 .9 1 .9 2 .0 2. 1 2.3 2 .4 2 .7 2 , <a -* 3 ^ 3 .7 4. 1 4 .7 5 ,4 6 .2
7. 1 8 .2

9 .5 10 .9 12 .6 14 ,4 16 .4
17 .5

814 .0 329 .3 M5 . 1 861 6 87? . 1 89? . 9 916 .2. 940 .6 9t.5 .3 992 8 1023 .9 1059 . 1 109? . 2 1145 .2 11 9b . 1 12^9 .2 1329 .9 141 1 .5 1505 .5 1613 ,5 1736 .6

90.5 90 .5 90 ,5 90 .6 90 .6 90 .6 90 .6 90.7 90 7 90 .8 90.8 90 .8 90 .9 90 .9 9n .9 91 ,0 91 .0

91 91 91 91

. 1 . 1 .2 .2

i 17b

5 32

-t-9 ,06

1810 .9

91 .3

VI-APP-A-61

j J LJ

cc
\

o
"T

C LU X!
U

*_ uD'

1
* 1

1-

i
1_ '

id -^
f: <C 0

<

^
1

i- - - ^ I-t-t

Q
LO

LU hCE
0

. < ^
O
III I-LJ

! 1

LU ^>

^T1

>
Ul LJ

CO

P
u.
LU Q

; t-i
<r

;^
.1 LU

rr

lAl

o: CK: .j

or
L i ^

to o o
CQ

LLl

<x ^^-^

'

^"

^<- | i i

CD

Of

O 00
LU

-(--;>- ^ / ^
^ ^S/

f\(

" 4, 1
J-J

nc "^i

i.
n.\
09

OIX

,i
jh
1

-.r.
GE

rjg
c,
:

Oh"

^ :iA

o
i

VI-APP-A-62

<r

t a

ul Ul

a;

o o
CO

02 t 08 .I

51 I 09

01 I

ib3H lb3H
NX3U

9 I

i0 t 0

Oh
00'02

02

OIX

oc'Ofi oo'oe s OIX

OO'OI

00*0

VI-APP-A-63

FIGURE 32 BOOSTER REENTRY TPATECTURY TIME <SEC>

ftLT (FT)

VREL

GHMMA
^
<DE

LAT (DEC)

LONG

<NM)

1336369. 0 WEIGHT = 143942 .2 139. 1 15ti276 .2 147 .3 17098*3 .2 I5b. 3 181992 . 5 16?.; 191242 . 2 171.5 198713 . 7 179 3 187. 3 204391 .0 20R264 .5 195.? 21 Hi- 31 .0 203. 3 2 1U591 5 211.3 219. '^ 209053 ,5 227 . 3 205730 .7 200648 5 235.? 19.-S846 .5 243. 'i 1*3392 5 251 . 3 259 . ? 1 7*53*5 0 It 40 "!.-:: 2 267.3 275 15 11. 9 3 5 138591 5 28 ? i 291 .? 125-":0l 7 114^45 .0 29-=>.3 1047e7 , 1 307.3 97554 . 5 315.3 92118 2 32? . 3 87742 . 7 331 . 3 83831 . r 309.3 800J2 7 347. 3 76103 .2 355. 3 7206H .5 363 . 3 67935 .2 371 .3 63827 .2 3Y* . 3 59845 .0 337.3 56074 .7 395 3 52554 .7 403.3 49275 .0 411.3 48268 .7 413.8

t!43 .9 5707 .3 5443 .9 5^64 ,0 51 33 .9 51 35 ej 4 ^60 6 4904 ,2 4863 ,2 43C-'5 .4 4S18 .9 4811 .5 4810 .6 4 1 22 4810 .3 47 :*5 8 47-54 . 1 4660 .8 4473 . 5 4141 9 3642 .5 3032 4 243H 0 1-324 .4 1 5VS .9 12bS .0 1057 .2 914 .5 811 . 1 731 .6 664 .5 603 .7 516 .8 497 .3 455 .9 444 3

17 .P.6 17 .26 15 .81 13 .92 11 .75 9 .40 6 .91 4 .34 I .71 - .^5 -3 .62 -6 .28 -8 .89 -11 .45 - 13 .91 - 16 .22 -18 .33 -20 . 12 -21 .40 -21 ,8S -21 .3b -20 . 02 -18 62 -18 . 1? -19 .27 -22 .32 -27 .07 -32 .95 -39 . 17 -44 .97 -49 .84 -53 .64 -56 .46 -53 .64 -60 .35 -60 .81

5.46 5.46 5.46 5.46 5 . -+6 5.46 5.4C 5.46 5. 46 b. 4t. 5.4t. 5.46 5.46 5.46 5.46 5.46 5.46 5.46 5.45 5.45 5 45 5. -V5 5.45 5.43 5. 43 5 45 5.45 5.45 5.45 5.45 5.45 5.45 5.45 5.45 5.45 5.45

-SO .00 -79 .88 -7^ .76 -73 .( 5 -79 .54 -79 .43 -79 .32 -79 .22 -79 . 11 -79 01 -78 .90 -78 .80 -78 ,69 -76 5<3 -73 .49 -78 .39 -7? 29 -?e 19 -73 . 10 -?? 0 1 - 77 .93 -77 .86 -77 .80 -77 76 -77 .72 -77 .69 -77 .67 --77 .65 -77 .64 77 .62 -77 .61 -77 .61 -77 .60 -77 .59 -77 .59 -77 .59

.0 7 .4 14 .3 21 .1 27 .7 34 .2 40 .7 47 .0 53 .4 59 .7 66 .0 72 .3 78 .5 84 .7 90 .8 96 .8 102 8 103 .6 114 .2 119 .5 124 .2 128 .3 131 .7 134 .4 136 .5 138 .2 13y .6 140 .7 141 .6 142 .4 143 .0 143 .5 143 .9 144 . 3 144 .6 144 .7

VI-APP-A-6A

FIGURE 32.

BOOSTER REENTRY TRAJECTORY

TIME <SEC>

MACH

Q <PSF)

Al PHA <DEG>

HEAT <B/SF>

HT RT <B/SF/S>

REYNID NO.

WEIGHT = 1336369.0 139.3 88. 4 5 .75 147.3 43. 0 5 .27 24. 5 5 .06 155.3 15. 4 4 .07 163.3 10 . 4 4 .92 171 .3 17?. 3 7. fc. 4 .89 187.3 5. 9 4 .87 5. 0 19?>3 4 .85 203.3 4. 5 4 .83 4. 4 211 .3 4 .80 4. 7 4 .77 219.3 227.3 5. 3 4 .73 6. 4 235.3 4 .69 8. 3 243.3 4 .63 11 . 4 4 .56 251 .3 16. 2 4 .49 25* 3 24. 1 267.3 4 .39 37. 2 275.3 4.32 58 5 4 .21 283 . J 87. 0 291 .3 3 .973 .56 113. 0 299.3 121 . 3 3 .01 307.3 109. 5 ?.44 315.3 323.3 89 2 1 .94 70 . 2 331 .3 1 .56 56. 7 339.3 1 .28 48. 3 1 .08 347. J 355.3 44. 0 .94 42. 5 .84 363.3 371.3 42. 8 .76 43. 9 379.3 .70 44. 9 387.3 .64 45. 3 395.3 .58 44. 8 403.3 .53 44. 1 411.3 .48 43. 9 .47 413. f

60 .0 60 .0 60 .0 60 .0 60 .0 60 .0 60 .0 60 .0 60 .0 60 .0 60 .0 60 .0 60 .0 60 .0 60 .0 60 .0 60 .0 60 .0 60 .0 60 .0 60 .0 60 .0 60 .0 60 .0 60 .0 60 .0 60 .0 60 .0 60 .0 60 .0 60 .0 60 .0 60 .0 60 60 .0 60 .0

.p.

.0 52 .0 85 .2 108 .7 126 .5 140 .8 152 .7 163 . 1 172 .6 181 .7 19U .8 200 .2 210 .4 21 .9 235 .1 250 .7 2fc9 .4 291 .6 317 .7 346 .3 373 .4 394 .7 408 .3 416 .0 420 .2 422 .5 424 .0 424 .9 4?5 .6 426 .2 426 .6 427 .0 427 .2 427 .5 427 .7 427 .7

0.5 5. 0 3. 4 2. 5 2.0 1 .6 1 .4 1 .2 1 .2 1 .1 1 .2 1 .2 1 .3 1 .5 1 .8 2. 1 2. 5 3. 0 3. b 3. 6 3. 1 2. 2 1 .3 ,7 t4 . 2 ,1 .1 .1 ,1 ,0 .0 ,0 .0 .0 ,0

82270.4 42211.1 25603.4 16997.6 12080 .0 9148.6 7381 .8 6356. 1 5850.7 5762.8 6071.0 6827.2 8168.0 10351 .3 13829.7 19394.7 28446. 1 45134.9 75637.8 .125352.8 190681 . i 251792.8 288595.9 300622.6 298295.8 296789.8 303363.4 322119.6 354950 .8 401458.4 458817.4 522532 . 4 589292.6 640789. 1 683097.0 694959.4

VI-APP-A-65

UJ
>.
;

cn
HI
UJ HCE

o
>
uJ UJ

on
cr.
UJ

GC on
UJ 01

)fi

02 i
lib

01 I

1 I 0 I 06'

, OIX
Ofi

c OIX

oe

02 I

13A

01
09-

oe

oe-

VI-APP-A-66

cr '

Of.

a:

UJ

o
LJ

i OIX
09

oe

02

01

0"

U ItQH
OE

OIX

o
1U3H
00*01
00*0

ocrofi oo' s OIX

00*02

VI-APP-A-67

FIGURE 35.
TIME (SEO
ALT <FT>

SL< our- STAGE REENTRY TPAJEPTOKY

GAMMA R CDFG)
LAT (DE&)

VREL C.FPS) .7 24J54.6 24:58.2 24361 8 24?65.3 2436C.8 24072.2 24375.6 24278.8 243.82.0 243S5. 2 24 :?& . 2 24391 .2 24394. 1 24396.9 24399.6 24402.2 24404.7 24407.0 24409.3 2441 1 ,4 24413 3 24415. 1 24416.7 2441ft. 2 2441 ?. 4 244PO . 4 244? 1 .2 24421 .7 24422.0 24421 ,9 24421 .6 24420 .9 24419.8 24418.4 24416.6 24414,3 24411 .6 24408.4 24404.6 24400 .4 24395.6 24390 .2 24384.2 24377 . 6 24370 .3 24362.4 24353.8 24344.5

LONG (DE&)

RHNGE
<NM>

72S337 UIEIC-H1 4979.7 399999.5 498?. 7 397045.2 4995. 7 394123.7 5 I'm 3, ? 391235.2 50 1 1 7 383380 .2 5019, 7 38'J559.0 5027,7 382772.0 5035. 7 3S0019 . 0 5043 7 3773011 . 7 5051 ,7 374617.2 5059.7 371969.5 50 tV. 7 369357.2 50?uj 7 366, 'SO .5 5083. 7 364240 .5 50 91.7 3c 1737.0 5099.7 359270 .7 5107.7 356842 , 0 5115 ? 354450 7 5 1 2 '-i . 735^095 .0 5131.7 34C|783.2 5139.7 347508.0 5147.7 345272.0 5155.7 343075,7 5 It3. 7 340919.7 5171.7 338804.7 517y.7 336730 .7 5 1 8 7 . ? 334698.7 5195.7 332709.2 5203.7 330762.2 521 1 .7 323859 ,2 5219.7 327000 .5 5227.7 325186.7 5235.7 323418.5 5243.7 321696.5 5251 .7 320012.0 5259.7 318394.5 5267.7 316815.7 5275,7 315286.5 5283.7 313807.7 5291 .7 312379.2 5299 . ? 311003.2 5307.7 309678.7 5315.7 308408. 5 5323.7 307191 .7 5331 . 7 306H30 .2 5339,7 304923.7 5347.7 303873.5 5355.7 302380 .0

-.88 3.92 -.87 3.95 -.86 3.99 - ,85 4.03 -.84 4.06 -.83 4. 10 -.82 4. 13 -.81 4. 17 --.SO 4.20 -.78 4.23 - .77 4.27 -.76 4.30 -.75 4.33 -.74 4.37 -.73 4.40 -.72 4.43 -.71 4.46 -.70 4 .49 -.69 4.52 -.68 4.55 - . 66 4.58 -.65 4.61 -.64 4.M -.63 4.67 -.62 4 .69 --.60 4.72 -.59 4.75 -.58 4.77 -.57 4.80 - .55 4.82 - .54 4.85 -.53 4.87 -.51 4.90 -.50 4.92 -.49 4.94 -.47 4.97 -.46 4 99 -.44 5.01 -.43 5.03 -.'41 5.05 -.40 5.07 -.38 5.09 -.37 5.11 -.35 5. 13 -.33 5. 15 -.32 5. 17 -.30 5. 18 -.29 5.20 V I -APP-A-68

-145,61 -145.09 -1 44.56 -144 ,04 -143.52 -142.99 -142.47 -141 .94 -141 .42 -140 .89 -140 .37 -139.84 -139.02 -138.73 -138.27 -137.74 -137.21 -136.69 -136. 16 -135.63 -135. 1 1 -134.58 -134 05 -133.5? -133.00 - 132.47 -131 .94 -131 .42 -130 .89 -130 .36 -129.83 -129.30 -128.78 -128.25 -127.72 -1?7. 19 -126.66 -126. 13 -1^5.61 -1*5.08 -124.55 -124.02 -123.49 -122,97 -122.44 -121 .91 -121 .38 -120 .85

.0
31 .5 62.9 94.4 125.9 157.4 188.9 220 . 4 252.0 283 5 315.1 34& 6 378.2 409.7 441 .3 472.9 b04.5 536. 1 567.7 599.3

630 . 9 .62.5 694 . 1 725.8 757.4 789 . 0 820 .7 352.3 884 .0 915.6 947.3 979.0 1010.6 1042.3 1073.9 1105.6 1137.3 1168.9 1200 .6 1232.2 1263.9 1295.5 13?7.2 1358.8 1390 .5 1422. 1 1453.7 1485.3

SECOND STAGE REENTRY TRAJECTORY TIME <SEC> 5363.7 5371 , 7 5379 . 7 5387.7 5395 7 5403 7 5411.7 5419 7 5427 7 543'j 7 544_-t.7 5451 7 5459.7 5467.7 547-S.7 54&3 7 5491 .7 54^3. 7 5507. 7 5515 7 5523.7 5531 7 5539.7 5547 7 5555. 7 5563 f 5571 .7 5579 7 5567 7 5595.7 5603 7 5611 .7 5619.7 562,'. 7 5635 7 5643.7 5651 .7 5659,7 5667.7 5675 7 5683.7 5691 .7 5699.7 5707.7 5715. 7 5723.7 5731 .7 5739 . 7 5747.7 5755.7 5763.7

Al T O'T;
301943.7 3U1064.5 300243 0 299479 2 ^9-3773 5 298125 2 .97533. 7 296999 2 29C520 .2 2*6n96 .5 295725.7 295407 5 29514U ,0 29 19? 1 . 5 294749.5 ?9-?fc'i2 2 294537 5 29449?, 0 294483,7 294510 0 29<15b7 .2 ?94o5': 2 294764.0 ?94.97.2 293049.5 295? 18 .0 295399.2 29b589.7 295786 .5 295386.5 296186.5 296383,5 296573.7 296755.2 296924.2 2971(78.2 297214.7 29*7330 .5 297423.7 297491 .2 297530 7 297540 0 297516.7 297459.0 297365.0 297232.0 297059.0 296843,7 296585.0 296281 .2 295930 .7

VRtTL <f-PS>

GAMMA R <DEG>

LKT

LONG (.DUG)

RMUG.C <NM) 1516.9 1548.5 1580 .0 1611.6 1643. 1 1674.6 1706. 1 1737.6 1769 1 1800 .5 1832.0 1863.4 1894 .8 1926 . 1 1957.5 1988.8 2020 .1 2051 .4 2082.6 2113.9 2145 i 2176.3 2207,4 22?8.6 2269 7 2?00 .8 2331 .9 2362 9 2394 .0 2425.0 2456.0 2486.9 2517.9 2t>48.8 2579,7 2610 .6 2641 .5 2t>72,3 2703.2 2734.0 2764,8 2795.6 2826.3 2857. 1 2887 . 8 2918.5 2949,2 2979,8 3010.5 3041 . 1 3071 .7

24034 5 24323.9 24? 12. 6 24;,0i> .7 2.42^8 . 1 ?4274 .9 24261 . 1 24246.7 2*231 .8 Z.4 1 6 . 5 2 <1200 .7 L4 1"4 5 Z4l-&.0 24151 2 24134.2 ^4117.0 40 so. 7 24082 3 240 t 4 . 8 "4047 .3 24029.9 24U12.5 23995.2 2C97S.O 2C.':>60 .9 2 " : 4 .0 ';'4

-.27 -.25 - , 23 -.^2 -.20 -.18 -. 17 - . 15 -.13 -. 12 -.10

-.09 -.07 -.06 -.04 -.OS - .Q2

2:.:'27.3 ^; >io .8
2?894 .4 23:173.3 2C- 3c2 .4 2334'". .7 23331 .2 23815.9 23SOO .8 23785.9 23771.2 23756,6 23742.2 23727-f 8 23713.6 23699.5 23685.4 23671 .3 2S&57.3 23643.2 23629.0 23614.7 23600 .4 23535.8 23571 .0

.01 .00 .01 02 .03 .04 |14 .iTS .05 .06 .06 .06 .06 .06 .06 .06 .05 .05 .04 .04 .03 .02 .02 .01 -.00 -.01 -.U2 -.03 - 05 -.06 -.07 - .08 -.10 -.11

5.22 5.23 5.25 5.26 5.2S 5.29 5.30 5.JZ 5.33 5.34 5 . :". :: 5.36 5.37 5.38 5.39 5.40 5.41 5.41 5 42 5.43 5.43 5. 14 5.44 5.45 5. 4b 5. 16 5.46 5.46 b.46 5.46 5.47 5.47 5.47 5.47 5.46 5.46 5.46 5.46 5.45 5.45 5.45 5.44 5.44 5.43 5.43 5.42 5.41 5.41 5.40 5.39 5.38

-120 33 -119.80 -119.27 -118,74 -118.22 -117 69 -117.17 -l lfa.64 -1 tt . 1 1 -115.59 -115,00 -114 "34 -114.01 -113 49 -112.97 -1 1?. .44 -111 .92 -111 40 -110 88 -IHi ?,5 -10 -.33 -109,^1 -108 7=1 -108 27 - 107 75 -107 23 - 1 U6 , 7 1 - 1 0fc. 1 9 -1 U5. 6/ -105.15 -104. 4 -104 12 -1 ii 3.60 -1113.03 -102.57 -102.05 -101 54 -101 .02 -100.50 -99.99 -99.43 -98.96 -98.45 -97.93 -97.42 -96.91 -96.39 -95.88 -95.37 -94,86 -94.35

VI-APP-A-69

SECOND STAGE R E E N T R Y TRAJECTORY TIML <SEO

ALT <FT>
295533 . u 29508c .2 294590 .0 294042 f 2934 4 J. 7 292792 .7 292088 .7 291332 . u 29U521 . 7 289658 ,5 283741 , 7 287773 .0 286752 .2 2S5t>8Q .5 284559 .5 283390 .7 282175 ,5 280917 .2 279618 .2 276281 .7 2791 1 .5 275511 274087 .5 272643 .7 271186 . 7 269721 2 268253 ,0 266787 ,5 265330 0 263886 .5 262463 .2 261065 ,2 259C98 ,2 258367 .0 257076 .0 <i55829 2 254628 .5 253476 .7 252373 .7 251319 .0 250310 .5 249345 .5 248418 .7 247525 ,0 246657 .2 245807 .7 244967 .7 244128 .5 243279 .7 242412 .5 241517 .5

VREL

GAMMA R (DEG;

LAT

LONG
1

RnflGE O1M>

5771 .7 5779,7 5787.7 5795 7 5003.7 561 1 .7 5819.7 5827.7 5835.7 5343.7 5851 .7 5859 7 58t>7.7 5875 7 5883 7 5891 .7 58^9 7 5907.7 59 It. 7 5923,7 5931 .7 5939,7 5947.7 5955 7 5963.7 5971 ,7 59^9.7 5987.7 5995.7 6003 7 601 J .7 6019.7 6027.7 603*5.7 6043 7 6051 .7 6059.7 60C7.7 6075.7 6083.7 6091 .7 6099.7 6107.7 6115.7 6123 7 6131 .7 6139.7 6147.7 6155.7 6163.7 6171 .7

23556 0 23540 t> 23524 . 9 23508. 8 23492 2 23475. 1 23457 .4 23439. 1 23420 . 0 234 Ou . 0 23379 .0 23357. 0 23333 .7 23309. 1 23283. 0 23255. 1 23225. 4 2^193. 5 23159, 4 23122. 6 2C f>33 . 0 230 in 3 22994 1 22944. 1 22890 .1 22832 .1 22769. 9 22703. 2 22631 . 6 22555. 1 22473. 4 22386. 3 22293. 7 22195. 5 22091 . 7 21982. 2 2186?. 2 21746. 6 21620 . 8 21489. 8 213-D3. 8 21213. 2 21U68. 1 20918. 7 20765. 3 20608. 1 20447. 1 20282. 4 20114. 0 19941 . 9 19765. 9

-.13 5. 3? 5. 36 -. 14 -. 1C 5. 35 -. 17 5 .34 - 19 5. 33 -.21 5. 32 -.22 5. 30 -.24 5. 29 5. ?8 -.25 5. 26 -.27 -.29 5. 25 -.30 5. 24 -.32 5. 22 -.34 5. 21 -.35 5. 19 5. 17 -.37 5. 16 -.38 -.39 5. 14 -.41 5. 12 5. 10 -.42 5. 09 -.43 -.44 5. 07 -.45 5. 05 -.45 5. 03 -.46 5. 01 4. 99 -.46 -.46 4 .97 -.46 4. 95 -.46 4, 92 -.45 4. 90 4. 88 -.45 -.44 4. 86 4. 83 -.43 4. 81 -.42 -.41 4. 79 4. 76 -.40 4. 74 -.38 -.37 4. 72 4. 69 -.36 4. 67 -.34 4. 64 -.33 4. 62 -.32 4. 59 -.31 -.30 4. 57 4. -.29 54 4. 52 -.29 - . 2<? 4. 49 -.30 4. 46 -.30 4. 44 4. 41 -.31 4. 39 -.33 V l-APP-A-70

-93. 84 -93. 32 -92 81 -92. 30 -91 . 7? -91 . 28 -90 . 78 -90 27 -9 . 76 -89, i^ - 38 . 74 -08. 24 -87. 73 -87. 22 -86. 72 -t'b , 22 -E5. 71 -85. 2.1 -84. 70 -84, 20 -33. 70 -83. 20 -82. 70 -82. 20 -81 . 71 -81 . 21 -80 . 72 -80 . 22 -79. 73 -79. 24 -78. 75 -78. 27 -77. 78 -77. 30 -76. 82 -76. 34 -75. 87 -75. 39 -74. 92 -74. 46 -73 99 -73. 53 -73. 07 -72. 62 -72. 16 -71 . 72 -71 . 27 -70 . 83 -70 . 39 -69. 9& -69. 53

3102 ,3 3132 ,9 3163 .5 3194 ,0 32^4 , t, 325C. .0 3285 5 3315 .9 3346 .3 3376 ,7 3407 . 1 3437 .5 3467 .8 3498 . 1 35?8 ,3 3558 .g 3588 8 3618 .9 3649 .0 3679 , 1 3709 1 3739 . 1 3769 .0 37 98 .8 3828 .6 3858 .3 3888 .0 3517 5 3947 .0 3976 4 4005 ,7 4034 .8 4063 .9 4092 .8 4121 .6 4150 .3 4178 .8 4207 .2 4235 ,4 4263 .4 4291 .3 4319 .0 4346 .5 4373 .8 4400 .9 4427 .9 4454 .6 4481 . 1 4507 .4 4533 .4 4559 .3

SECOND STuGE R E E N T R Y

UAJECTORY

i THE
6179.7 61S7.7 6195.7 203.7 6211 .7 6219 f 62if . ? 6205 . 7 6243 7 6251 7 6259 ,' 6267 7 6275.7 23 7 62^1 .7 62^'9 7 C-3H7 . r 6315.7 6323.7 63:.l .7 63:"5 . ,' 6347 7 635C-. 7 6263 7 6371 7 6379 7 60S 7. 7 6395,7 6403.7 6411 .7 6419.7 6427.7 6435.7 6443.7 6451 7 6459.7 6467.7 64^5.7 6483.7 6491 .7 6499 7 6507.7 651-5.7 6523.7 6531 .7 6529. 7 6547.7 6555.7 6563 7 6571 .7 6579.7

ALT

VP?El CFF'S >

r iot.35 . -t 1940 1 .4 19212 .3 1^0 18 n IBSlo . 1 1 1. 1 2 .0 If. 39 3 .2 1S179 .0 IT ^5U . 17714 .0 1 7 4 C o. 1 17; 12 .4 lt.046 .5 It.c70 .0 It 3-'2 6 16Uc4 3 15775 1 15455 ,0 15124 C 14784 .0 144?4 0 . 14075 ' 137U8 4 1 ?034 , 1 i:^53 . 1 125--* 0 11173 . 5 1177 0 1 1 3 {"-.9 10967 .7 10357 .6 10143 .9 9726 .8 9306 8 S884 .2 8459 .3 8032 .8 7605 .4 7177 .8 6751 2 6326 .5 5902 .8 5480 .3 5U61 .0 4646 .9 4240 .7 345 .5 3464 .4 3100 .5 2756 .9 24?6 .5
1

C;AMMA R tDE U>

LAT <DEG,>

LOHC-

RHN&E
>
'NM> 4584 .0 46 in C. 4635 4 46fO 3 46&4 . 9 4705 3 4733 . 4 4757 ? 47&U 7 4&UC 3 4326 , o 4849 .4 4571 .7 4893 . 6 4915 . 1 4936 . 2 49^7 .0 4977 4 4997 .3 5016 8 5005 .8 5054 . 4 5072 5 5090 . 1 5107 .3 5120 .9 5140 .0 5155 .6 M70 .7 5185 .3 5199 .4 5212 .9 5225 .8 523W 2 5250 . 1 5261 4 5272 .2 5282 .4 5292 .0 5301 .1 5309 .6 5317 .6 5325 .0 5331 .8 5338 _ 2 5343 9 5349 .2 5353 .9 5358 . 1 5361 .9 5365 .2

240585 _ 2 239608 .0 238579 .0 237438 5 236334 .7 235112 7 233&:0 ,2 232456 . 7 231023 .0 229521 . 2 22795b U 226331 . 5 224e.54 .5 222901 .7 221170 7 219378 .0 217360 .5 215724 5 213873 7 212011 .5 210108 0 20.E-252 n 206350 2 204427 .2 2U2475 . 2 200486 0 103449 .2 196355 . 0 194191 .7 191940 , 7 189619 .0 187190 .5 184C56 .2 182009 .5 179245 .0 176358 .2 173347 .0 170208 .0 166939 .0 163539 .5 160007 .7 156347 .0 152567 .0 14S679 .0 144691 .2 140610 . 2 136433 . 2 132174 0 127813 .7 123353 .7 113789 .0

- .35 - .37 - .3v - .42 - .45 - .48 - .52 - .55 - .58 - .62 -- .65 - .c.9 - .72 - .75 - .78 - .&0 - .33 - 85 - .88 - .90 - .93 - . 3t - 1 OU -i 0-t
4

4.36 4 33 4.31 4.28 4.25 4 .23 4.20 4. 18 4.15 4.12 4.10 4.07 4 05 4.U2 3 i3 ^ 3 97 3.91 j 92 3 . 90 3.87 3 . &5

-69 . 10
-6? ,e8 -fc.8 .2& -fc-7 .84 -c7 ,4J -67 .01. -t.6 .63 -6 . 23 -t.5 .84

-65 ,45 -65 ,fi7 -4 . ?0 -64 Li -t 3 . of. -fc 3 ,fu -fc : . <--Ti -62 =il -62 . "jf
-62 .24 -61 0] -61 . t.U -61 .?3 -f n .09 -fil .69 -to .41 -t.n . 13 -59 .86 -59 .60 59 .35 -59 . 11 -58 .83 -58 .65 -5S .44

.09

3. &"> 3 . $r> 3.75 3 , 7o

3. 74 3. ,'? 3.7CI 3.68

-1 . 14 -1 .21 -1 . 29 -1 .38 -1 .49 -1 .61 -1 .75 -1 .91

-2 .08 -2 .23 -2 .50 -2 .74 -3 .02 -3 .33 -3 .68 -4 .07 -4 .52 -5 .02 -5 .58 -6 .23 -6 ,08 -7 .88 -3 .95 -in .24 -11 .80 -13 .70

3.66 3 64 3 ? 3.60 3.58 3.57 3.55 3.54 3.52 3.51 3.50 3. 48 3.47 3.46 3.45 3.44 3.43 3.12 3.41 3.41 3.40 3.39

-53 .23 -58 .04 -57 .85 -57 .67 -57 .50 -57 .34 -57 19 -57 .05 -56 .91 -56 ,79 -56 68 -56 .57 -56 .48 -56 .39 -56 .01 -56 .24 -56 . 13 -56 . 12

VI-APP-A-71

SECOND STAGE R E E N T R Y TRAJECTOR.' TIME <SEC)

ALT <FT>

VREL <FPS>
2141 . 7 1S74. 2 1635. 3 1425. 4 1?13. 7 in,33. 6 95S. 2 348. 2 754. 1 674. 3 604. B 544. 8 493. 3 448. 5 411 . 8 381 . 9 373. 1

GAMMA K <DK
-16 .no -18 .74 -21 . 99 -25 . 73 -29 .91 -34 .43 -39 .08 -43 .61 -47 .77 -51 .34 -54 .24 -56 .45 -58 .03 -59 .03 -59 .68 -60 .03 -60 .09

LAT <DLG>

LONG <DEG>
-56 ,03 -56 .04 -56 .00 -55 .97 -55 .94 -55 .92 -55 .91 -55 .83 -55 .03 -55 .87 -55 .86 -55 .85 -55 .85 -55 .84 -55 .84 -55 .84 -55 .84

RHNGE <NM> 5368. 1 5370 . 6 5372. 8 5374. 6 5376. 1 5377. 4 5378. 2 5377, 3 5376. 6 5376. 0 5375. 4 5375, 0 5374. 6 5374, 3 5374. 0 5373 8 5373. f

6587. 7 1 1 4 1 1 8 .5 A595, ? 109347 . 2 6603 7 104487 .2 99560 .0 661 1 .7 94600 .7 6619.7 9653 ,5 627. 7 84770 .7 6635.7 6643. 7 80009 .0 6651 .7 75429 .0 71085 .0 6659.7 6t67. 7 67014 .2 6675. 7 t3.?35 .5 660 7 5974," .2 6691 . 7 56537 .5 6699. 7 53581 .2 670/.7 50-339 .2 4t>954 .5 6710 .4

3,39 3.38 3.38 3,37 3.37 3.36 3.36 3.3b 3.35 3.35 3.35 3,35 3.34 3.34 3.34 3,34 3 .33

VI-APP-A-72

FIGURE 35.

SECGtU-

STAGE REENThY

T*ftJECTO*Y

TIME <SEC>

MflCH

0 <PSF>

ALPHH <DEG)

HEAT )

HT RT fB/SF/S>

PEYNLD NO.

UIEIGHT 7283^7,7 4979.7 18 .54 .0 4987.7 18 .97 .0 49^5 . 7 19 .44 .0 5003.7 .0 19 .71 5011.7 19 .96 .0 5019.7 2il .22 .0 5027.7 20 .48 .0 5035. 7 20 .76 .0 5043 7 21 .03 .0 5051 .7 21 .32 0 .n 505? 7 21 .61 5067. ? 21 .91 .0 5075.7 22 .22 .0 .1 503 7 22 .54 .1 5091 .7 22 .37 509^,7 23 .09 .1 1 5107 7 23 .26 .1 5115.7 23 43 .1 5 1 ?. 3 . 723 .60 .1 5121 .7 23 .78 .1 5 1 3 'I . f23 .95 .1 514P.7 24 . 12 .1 5155.7 24 .30 5163.7 24 .47 .2 .2 5171 .7 24 ,64 5179.7 24 .82 2 5187.7 24 .99 .2 5195.7 25 . 17 .2 .3 5203,7 25 ,34 .3 5211 .7 25 .51 521^.7 25 .64 .3 .4 522?. 7 ?5 .75 .4 5235.7 25 .85 .4 5243.7 25 .94 5 5251 .7 26 .04 .5 5259.7 26 . 13 .6 526,7.7 26 .22 .6 5275.7 26 .31 .7 5283.7 26 .40 .7 5291.7 26 .48 .8 5299.7 26 .56 .8 5307.7 26 .64 .9 5315.7 26 .71 .9 5323.7 26 .78 1 .0 5331 .7 26 .85 53?9. 7 26 .91 1. 1 5347.7 26 .97 1. 1 5355.7 27 .02 1 .2 5363.7 27 .08 1 .3 5371 .7 27 . 12 1 .3

60 .0 60 .0 60 ,0 60 .0 60 .0 60 .0 60 .0 60 .0 60 .0 60 .0 60 .0 60 .0 60 .0 60 .0 60 .0 60 .0 60 .0 60 .0 60 .0 60 .0 60 .0 60 .0 60 .0 60 .0 60 .0 60 .0 60 .0 60 .0 60 .0 60 .0 60 .0 60 .0 60 .0 60 .0 60 .0 60 .0 60 .0 60 .0 60 .0 60 .0 60 .0 60 .0 60 .0 60 .0 60 .0 60 .0 60 .0 60 .0 60 .0 60 .0

.0 15 . 2 31 .4 ^3 .7 66 .8 86 .0 106 .3 127 .7 150 .4 174 .4 199 9 226 .9 255 .5 286 .0 318 3 352 .7 003 .0 427 .4 468 .0 510 .9 506 .2 604 .0 654 . 5 70? .8 764 . 1 823 ,4 886 .0 952 . 1 1021 6 1094 . 3 llr'2 .0 1253 0 1337 .8 1426 .7 1519 .7 1616 .9 1718 , 4 Ift24 .3 1934 .7 2049 .5 2168 .9 2292 .9 2421 .4 2554 4 2691 .9 2853 . 9 2980 .3 3130 .9 3285 .6 3444 .4
VI-APP-A-73

1 8 2. 0 2. 1 2. 2 2. 3 2_ 5 2. 6 2. 8 2. 9 3 1 3 3 3. 5 3. 7 3. 9 4. 2 4. 4 4. 7 4. 9 5. 2 5 .5 5. 8 6. 1 6 5 6. 8 7. 2 7. 6 8. 0 8. 5 8. 9 9. 4 9. 9 10. 4 10 . 9 11 . 4 11 . 9 12. 4 13. 0 13. 5 14. 1 14. 6 15. 2 15. 8 16. 3 16. 9 17. 5 18. 0 18. 6 19. 1 19. 6 20 . 1

2 .0 2. 3 2 .7 3 .0 3 .5 3. 9 4 .5 5. 1 5 .8 6 .7 7 .6 8.8 10 . 1 11 .7 13 .5 15 .4 17 .4 19 6 22 . 1 25 .0 28 .2 31 .8 35 .8 40 .3 45 .4 51 t. 57 . 5 64 .7 72 .6 81 .5 90 .7 100 .5 111 . 1 122 .6 135 . 1 148 .5 162 .8 178 .2 194 .5 211 .9 230 , 1 249 .3 269 .4 290 .2 311 .7 333 .8 356 .3 379 . 1 402 .0 424 .9

SECOND STAGE REENTRY TRAJECTORY

TIME CSF.O
537', ,7 5387 .7 5395 , { 5403 .7 5411 , 7 541! . 7 54c7 .7 5435 . 7 5443 7 5451 , 7' 5459 p 547 .7 5475 .7 5483 7 5491 7 5499 . 7 550 7 p

MrtCH

0 <HSF, 1 .4 1 .5 1 .5 1 .6 1 .7 1 .7 1 .8 1 .8 1 .8 1 ,9 1 9 1 .9 1 -3 1 9 2.U 2.0 2.0 1 .9 1 .9 1 .9

1 .9

Al PHH

HLAT <E,/SF) 2606 , <j 3773 . 1 3942 7 4115 .5 4191 ,2

HT PT (B/SF/S)
20 .5 21 .0 21 .4 21 8 22 , 1 22 . 5 22 .7 23 .0 23 .2 23 .4 23 .5 23 .6 23 .7 23 .7 23 .7 23 .7 23 .6 23 ,6 23 .5 23 , 4 23 .2 1:3 . 1 22 .9 22 .& 22 .6 22 .4 22 .2 22 . 1 21 .9 21 .7 21 .5 21 .4 21 .2 21 .1 21 .0 20 .8 20 .7 20 .7 20 .6 20 . 6 20 .5 20 .5 20 .6 20 .6 20 .7 20 8 20 .9 21 .0 21 ,2 21 . 4 21 .7

REYNLC- NO.

55 It! .7 55 'i3 i 1
5531 . 1 55 s* . 7 5547 . 7 5555 . f 5563 ,7 5571 .7 5579 -7 1 5587 7 559b .7 5603 7 561 1 7 5610 , 7 5627 ,7 5635 7 5643 ,7 5651 7 5659 ,7 5667 .7 5675 .7 5683 .7 5691 7 5699 -J 5707 .7 5715 7 57?3 p 5731 .7 5739 7 5747 .7 5755 . 7 5763 7 5771 .7 5779 .7

27 . 16 27 .20 27 .24 17 ,27 27 .29 * * .31 33 t- I 27 ,34 27 .35 27 .35 27 .34 27 ?2 27 . 20 27 .28 27 .26 27 .24 2 7. 22 27 .20 27 . 18 27 . 16 27 . 14 27 13 27 . 11 27 .09 27 ft 6 27 .03 27 .00 26 .96 26 .93 26 .90 26 .87 26 .84 26 .81 26 .79 26 .76 26 .74 26 .71 26 .69 26 .67 26 66 26 .t4 26 .63 26 .62 26 .61 26 .61 26 .61 26 .61 26 61 26 .62 26 .63 26 .63

60 ,0 60 .0 60 .0

447. 5
469. 7 491 . 2 511. 8 531 . 5 549. 9 566. 9 582. 4 596. 3 60S. 4 617. 9 625. 1 630. 7 634. 8 37. 3 638. 5 638. 3 636. 9 634. 4 630 . 9 626. 6

60 , U 60 , 0 60 . n
60 .0 60 .0 60 .0 60 .0 60 .0 60 .0 60 .0 60 ,0 60 0 60 .0 60 .0 0 .0 60 .0 60 .0 60.0

1 .9 1 .9
1 .9 1 .&
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
.8 .8 .8 .7 .7 .7 .7 .7 .6 .6 .6 .6 .6 .6 .6 .6 .6 .6 .6 .6 .7 .7 .8 .8

eo .0
60 .0 60 .0 60 .0 60 .0 60 .0 bO .0 60.0 60 .0 60 .0 60 .0 60 .0 60 .0 60.0 60.0 60 .0 60 .0 60.0 60.0 60.0 60 .0 60.0 60.0 60 .0 60.0 60 .0 60.0 60 .0 60 .0 60 .0

1.6

1.7

4469 . 6 4b50 .4 4833 .4 5018 .2 5204 .5 5392 . 1 5580 .6 5769 . 5959 . i 6148 .7 6338 2 527 .5 6716 .2 6904 .3 7091 . b 7277 .9 74e3 .2 7647 . 3 78SO .2 8011 .8 8191 .9 8370 . 7 8547 .9 8723 .7 8898 . 1 9071 . 1 9242 .8 9413 .3 9532 .5 9750 .7 9917 .9 100S4 .3 10250 .0 10415 . 1 10579 .7 10744 . 1 1090S .3 11072 .7 11237 .3 11402 3 11568 .0 11734 .5 11902 , 12071 .2 12241 o 12414 .2 VI-APP-A-74

621 . 5 615. 7 609. 5 602. 3 594. 4 586. 4 578. 4 570. 5 562. 9 555. 6 548. 7 542. 4 536. 7 531 . 6 527. 3 523. 8 521 . 2 519. 6 519. 0 519. 4 521 . 1 523. 9 528. 2 533. 8 541. 0 549, 8 560 . 4 573. 0 587. 7 603. 7

SECOND STAGE REENTRY TRAJECTORY

TIME MftCH
Q

ALPHA

<PSF>

HK6T <,B' SF 12588 .6 12765 2 12944 3 13126 . 1 13310 .9 1 *:4'>'3 . 1 1?L.91 .0 12637 0 14087 .3 14292 4 14502 .6 14718 .4 14940 .2 1 5 1 C8 4 154rt3 .3 15645 .6 15?y5 . 6 16153 7 16420 4 16696 .2 169.31 .3 -i 1727^ t175SO . 7 178:<4 4 1217 2 18549 _ 2 18690 i ; 19240 1 19598 .6 1 9965 5 20340 .2 20722 3 2 1 1 1 1 .0 21505 8 21905 .8 22310 .4 22718 5 23129 .4 23542 .3 23956 .2 24370 .6 24784 .5 25197 .5 25608 .9 26018 .3 26425 .3 26829 .6 27230 .9 27629 3 2&024 ,6 28416 .8

HT RT

RETNLO Hi).

2e- .61 2t. 59 it. .58 26 .56 2t 54 26 .52 5 '- ~: 5 7 ?6 .49 53'ii 7 ^ t> 47 5?51 7 26 . 45 5S51* . 7 26 . 42 58t 7 , 7 26 40 5975 7 2^ 37 58&:-- . 7 26 24 5891 7 2c .31 5895 7 26 .27 5q""i 7 . 7 26 .24
57&7 7 5795,7 5803,7 5311 7 53 1* , , 5827 7
5915 . ? 26 20

1 .9 1 .9

2 .0 2 .0 2. 1 2, 2 2 .3 2. 4 2 5 2 7 2 .8 3 0
3i ^ 3 .4 3 6

2c . 16 2t . 11 ?6 .06 26 .01 25 9b 25 .82 5971 7 25 67 5979. 7 25 .51 59.E7. 7 25 . 35 S9C---, 7 25 . ie f O O J 7 25 .01 60 1 1 7 24 . 64 60 19. 7 24 67 6027.7 24 .50 6035 7 24 32 6043.7 24 . 14 6051 .7 23 .96 6059 7 23 .77 6067.7 23 .56 6U75.7 23 .39 608T.7 23 .20

59: :: 7 59C1 7 5939. 7 5^47 7 5955 7 59f3 f

0 .9 4 2 4 s
4 w 5 .2

60 .0 60 .0 60 0 60 .0 60 .0 6U .0 60 .0 60 .0 60 ,0 60 .0 6fi 0 60 .0 60 .0 60 .0 60 .0 60 . ii 60 .1 Ci.' 0
60 .0

5 6 6 0 6 5
e. 9 7. 4 ^ .9 8 S 9. 1 9 6 10 .3

60 . 0 fc.0 0

6u .0 6C . 0 6(1 0
60.0 tO ,n

21 . 9 22 . 2 22 . 5 22. 9 23. 2 23. ; 21 > 24 . 8 25. 3 ?5 . 9 26 . f 27 . 28. 1 23. 9 29 , & 30 , & 31 . 7 ?2 . 8 ?3 . 9 05 . 0 St. ? 37 5 38. 6
71

620 .3 639 . 1 660 .5 684 .5 711 . 5 741 .7 775 .4 813 . 1 855 .2 902 .0 954 . 1 1 ill 2 , 1 1076 .5
1 147 .9 1227 .2

60.0 6U . U
60 .0

6091 .7 60^9.7 6107.7 6115.7 6123.7 6131 ,7 6139 7 6147 7 6155 7 6163 7 6171 7 61/9.7 61S7.7

23 .00_ 22 .81 22 .61 22 .40 22 .20 21 .99 21 . ?Q 21 .57 21 .36 21 . 13 20 .91 20 .68 20 ,44

10 9 11 . 5 12 1 12 .7 13 .4 13 .9 14 5 15 . 1 15 .6 16 . 1 16 .6 17 . 1 17 .5 17 .9 18 . 3 18 .7 19 .2 19 .6 20 .0 20 .5 21 .0

60 .0 60 .0 60 .0 60 .0 60 ,0 60 .0 60 .0 60 .0 60 .0 60 .0 60 .0 60.0 60 .0 60.0 60 .0 60 .0 60 .0 60 .0 60.0 60 .0 60.0 60.0

29 o 40 9 42, J 43. 2 44, 3 45, 3 46. 4 47. 3 48. 2 49. 0 49. 7 50 3

50. 8 51 . 2 51 . 5 51. 7 51 . 8 51 . 8 51 . 7 51 . 5 51 . 3 51 . 0 50 . 7 50 . 4 50 . 0 49. 6 49. 2 48. 8

1315 1 1412 3 1519 .7 1638 2 1768 .7 1911 .9 20 6S .6 2214 3 23c4 .5 2523 . 4 2t91 .5 t. 68 5 3" 53 .5 3245 .8 3444 ,4 3648 .0 3855 .3 4064 .8 4274 .9 4484 .3 4691 .4 4895 .0 5094 .2 5288 5 5477 .3 5661 .2 5840 .5 6016 .5 6190 .6 6364 .7 6541 .0 6722 ,2 6911 .1 7110 .6 7323 .8 7553 .8

VI-APP-A-75

SECOND STAGE REENTRY TRAJECTORY

TIME 'SEC t
, fc.1^5 .7 6203 621 1 . 7 *219 7 6227 7 t2?5 7 624? ,' 6251 -7 6259 7 62b7 -7 6270 7
628:,
1

MrtCH

Q <PSF)
21 . 6 22. 2 22. 9 23. 6 24 4 '-j er 3 o w t . 27 . 3 28. 3 21* 5 30 . 6 31 9 33 . 1 34. 3 35. 6 36. 8 37. 9 3<=< fi 40 . 1 41 . 0 41 9 42 7 4:-. 5 44 1 44. 7 45. 3 45 8 46. 3 46 8 47. 3 47 7 48. 1 48 5 46 8 49. 1 49 3 4?. 4 49. 4 49. 4 49. 5 49. 5 49. 4 43. 9 48. 3 47. 3 46. 1 44. 6 43. 0 41 2 39. 3 37 5

<DEG)
60 .0 60 . 0 60 .0 60 .0 60 . 0 60 0 60 . 0 60 .0 60 .0 60 . 0 60 .0 60 0 60 .0 60 0 60 .0 60 . 0 0 .0 t>0 0 60 0 60 . 0 60 . u 60 .0 60 . 0 60 .0 60 .0 60 .0 60 .0 60 .0 60 .0 60 .0 60 .0 60 .0 60 .0 60 . j C .0 60 0 60 0 60 .0 60 .0 60 .0 60 .0 60 .0 60 .0 60 .0 60 .0 60 .0 60 0 60 0 60 .0 60 .0 60 .0

HEfiT (B/SF > 2C805 . 3 231*1 .9 295T4 C| 2C-C>55 .0 3U322 0 307u6 .0 3107): 8 31 444 2 31n7 .9 3Z.le7 .5 32522 , 4 32b72 1 33C15 9 33553 .0 33882 5 34203 . 6 54515 .6 34817 .4 35108 .4 350S3 .0 35655 .4 35910 .3 36152 . 3 3>>?31 2 36596 ,9 3*799 .5 3c988 9 37 If 5 3 37C29 . i 37480 .4 3761^ .6 37747 . 1 37363 ,2 37'=e3 .4 38063 . 1 38147 .7 3P222 .9 38289 .0 38346 .8 38396 ,S 38439 8 3C476 . 1 38G06 .5 38531 .5 38551 -t 38567 .8 38580 4 38590 . 1 38597 4 38c02 .9 38606 9 VI-APP-A-76

HT RT ' CB'SF'-S.48 , 4

REYNLD NO.

20 .20 19 95 19 ,70 19 .43 != . Ib

18 88 IS 53 18 28 17 97 17 c5 17 . 32 16 97 It ,62 16 .26

48 . 1 47 .7 47 .3 46 , 9 46 .6 46 . 1
45 .7 45 ,2 44 .7 44 . 1 4^ .4 42 .6 41 .7 40 . 7 33 . b 33 4 37 . 1 35 .7 34 .2 32 7 31 . 1 29 . 4 27 Z, 26 1 24 5 ?2 ,9 11 , 3

62=11 i 1 A293 ,7 6307 . 7 6315 7 63c? ? 63 ?1 _ 7 6339 7 6347 7 6355 7 6363 7 6371 7 6379 . 7 63? f ,7 6395 7 403 7 641 1 7 6419 7 6427 .7 435 .7 6443 .7 6451 .7 6459 7 6467 .7 6475 .7 6483 .7 6491 .7 6499 . 7 6507 .7 6515 .7 6523 7 6531 .7 6539 .7 6547 .7 6555 .7 6563 7 6571 .7 6579 . 7 6587 1 6595 .7

15 .89 15 .51 15 . 12 14 72 14 . 32 13 .91 13 .50 13 OS 12 6t 12 .24 11 .81 11 .38 10 .95 10 . 52 10 .OS 9 .65 9 , 2^ 8 .78 8 .35 7 .92 7 .49 7 ,07 f> .65 6 .24 5 .83 5 .45 5 .08 4 .71 4 .34 3 .98 3 .63 3 .29 2 .97 2 .6c. 2 .36 2 .09 1 .85

13

13 2 16 t 15 . 2^ 13 ,8

12 .5 11 _ 2 10 .0 3 .8 7 .7 6.7 5 .8 4 .9 4 .2 3 .4 2 ,8 2 .3 1 .8 1 .4 1 1 ,8 6
.4

7S.03 8 0 7 ,' . 0 837b , 3 8704.5 90 t 4 . 1 9457.2 98f 5 5 10350 0 10851 .1 11388.7 119 1 .5 12567.7 13204.7 1336> 5 14558.5 15267.7 15994.0 16734 2 17486.7 18250 .t. 13026.5 19316.7 20625.5 21453 1 2232! .8 23224.5 24176. 1 25186.3 26265, 6 27425,2 28676.7 30031 .9 31502.7 33102.3 34343.7 3o743.5 3SF.20 .9 41096,9 43720 .0 47133.1 50999.2 55345.3 60200 .3 65593.0 71562.2 78160 .6 85462.4 92565.4 102613.5 112797.7 124371 .4

SECOND STAGE REENTRY TRAJECTORY

TIME ',SEC i
660 3 .7 661 1 ,7 661^ . ? t6,' . 7

MACH

0 <PSF

ALPHA

HEAT

HT RT

PEYm D NO

1.-2 I .42 1 .25 1 10

66 1 b .7

664? -7 i 6651 7 66^3 766t>,' 667 b . / 6t ?i . 1 6691 .7 6699 .7 6707 .7 6^10 ,4

.98 .87 .78 .70 .63 .57 .52 .48 .44 .41 .40

35 . 7 34 .3 33 .0 3? . 1 31 .4 31 1 31 fi 30 , 9 30 .7 30 .5 30 . 1 29 , ,' 29 2 28 .7 28 . f_

60 .1"! 60 .0 60 .0 60 . n 60 .0

6n . u
60 .0 60 . II 60 . 0 0 .0 60 . I'l 60 .0 60 .0 60 .0 60 .0

35609 .8 38612 .0 ?S613 . 5 38614 . 7 38615 .5 3S616 . 2 3S616 .7 28t 17 . 1 38617 ,4 3&tl7 . & 38617 Q 38613 . 0 38618 , 1 386 18 .2 38618 .2

.3 .2 .2 .1 .1 .1 ,1 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0

137677. 2 153160 . 7 171345. 6 191938. 6 21SL>57. 4 24'J454. 2 27rib49. 1 311 170 . 8 349328. 2 383993. 9 429380. 5 471S69 2 51)46116. 9 533581 . 3 54?470 2

NASA-JSC

VI-APP-A-77

SECTION VI APPENDIX B WESTERN U.S. LAUNCH SITES

FOR THE

HEAVY LIFT LAUNCH VEHICLE

VI-APP-B-1

WESTERN U.S. LAUNCH SITES

The HLLV as conceptualized in previous SSPS studies is a hightraffic vehicle of large size. It may be presumed that it will have dedicated launch and landing facilities, and that operations will be routine, in the sense of commercial airline activities, rather than by special and intensive efforts such as marked the Saturn/Apollo launches. The selection, design, and scope of equipment of the HLLV launch site will be large drivers on the design weight and cost of operations of the HLLV, as shown by the following table from data prepared by EX4: Launch Site Latitude, Peg 5.50 28.608 32.30

Launch Site South America ETR Arizona

Launch Elev., Ft 0 0 6,000

Gross Payload, Lbs 1,051,390 1,016,315 1,034,487

OMPS, Lbs 51,390 49,675 50,564

Net Payload, Lbs 1,000,000 966,640 983,923

Payload Change, Lbs 0 -33,360 -16,077

In short, moving the launch site north requires a vehicle or payload weight penalty for orbital maneuvering propellant; locating the launch site at high elevations saves main-stage propellant and vehicle weight. The most desirable launch site is thus at the highest feasible altitude at the point closest to the equator. Within the Continental United States, this combination occurs in the Southwest from West Texas to Arizona and Nevada. Advantages and disadvantages of a Southwest U.S. launch site are summarized below: Advantages: Climate - is characterized by rain falls of 6 to 10 inches per year. Operations are seldom constrained by adverse weather; military and commercial airport operations are conducted under VFR rules 95-99% of the year. There are no hurricanes or other large-scale tropical storms. Corrosion is minimal, and preventive maintenance costs on facilities and ground equipment are in the range of 10-20% of these for equivalent items at a seacoast launch site. Savings in corrosion control requirements on the HLLV may be in the order of one to two percent of vehicle weight for equivalent vehicle lifetimes.

VI-APP-B-2

Direct Costs - payroll costs are based upon prevailing U.S. payrolls; and field-station bonuses and overseas pay differentials are avoided. Transportation costs are nominal, and payloads may be shipped directly by rail, avoiding trans-shipment and handling costs and delays. Money remains in the U.S. Indirect Costs - Existing communities can provide support of their local economy (e.g., homes, hospitals, medical care, groceries, highways, recreational and entertainment facilities); whereas, an island launch site, such as Kwajalein, requires about as many indirect personnel as direct (e.g., BX/s, or PX's, field hospitals, recreation centers, etc.). Total costs for an island launch site are about double those of a conus site. Operational Advantages: An inland site has potential alternate landing sites available for returning orbiter vehicles. Disadvantages: Operations; Launch opportunities are limited, in comparison with a near-equatorial launch site. Launch and landing operations impose sonic-boom and launch noise overpressures on a broad footprint. Safety: Given the number of flights, the probability of a catastrophic failure during launch approaches 1.0, and a debris corridor must be provided. This report examines some of the cost factors for an inland, Southwestern U.S. launch site, which can be used in examining the cost tradeoffs between launch sites. Throughout this study, data for launch rates was taken from JSC-11568, Initial Technical, Environmental, and Economic Evaluation of Space Solar Power Concepts, using the program model for "Truss in LEO;" vehicle configuration and performance data was taken from EDIN EX-338-76 when it became available.

VI-APP-B-3

HLLV SITE SELECTION CONSIDERATIONS At the commencement of this study, at the suggestion of Mr. H. P. Davis, JSC Future Programs Office, a nominal launch and landing profile was selected which consisted of a due-East launch, a booster stage landing 200 miles down-range, and an orbiter landing using the same landing field after return from orbit. While this mission profile is simplistic, it provided a convenient baseline from which to begin the study, and upon which to base comparison between sites. To this profile were added the following assumptions: a. Launch site buffer zones are sized by: (1) Noise impinged by launch on adjacent property owners. (2) Explosive hazard limits of launch vehicle propellant load at launch or early boost phase, taken as 10 kiloton high explosive equivalent. b. Launch debris corridor scaled from WSMR practice for off-range missile tests. High hazard events are at first-stage ignition and lift-off, and at separation and staging. (For EDIN EX-338-76, separation begins at 144,000 feet altitude, 35.9 miles downrange; second-stage ignition occurs at 151,000 feet, 39.7 miles downrange. ) c. Landing area approach zones sized by desire to keep sonic booms of over 8 1 psf limited to areas of low population density (less than one person per square mile). Above criteria developed a "key" shaped zone representing potential land area impacted by HLLV operational characteristics (see figure 1 ). Since it is desirable to launch at higher altitudes, it was assumed that launch sites could be located in mountainous terrain, and that potential savings in vehicle weight and performance would pay for fairly extensive site development. Since the booster and orbiter are envisioned as fixedwing craft, it would be desirable to have landing sites at the lowest possible elevations, to minimize the size of wing required for nominal landing speeds. While NASA need not own all the land shown in the "key," it would be desirable for the Agency to own the land at VI-APP-B-4

d.

e.

f.

g.

CO

z o
CL
CO CO LJ CO

Figure 1 VI-APP-B-5

the launch site, the landing site, and the actual right-of-way of the tow path returning the launch vehicles from the landing site to the launch site. Ideally, this land should be in the public domain, already owned by the Bureau of Land Management, DoD, U.S. Forest Service, etc. h. Land in the launch debris corridor, approach zone, and hazard zone surrounding the launch site need not be owned by the NASA, but should be restricted from development, by interagency agreements, BLM protective withdrawals, purchase of development rights, etc. Use of Indian lands should be avoided, if possible, since changes of treaty lands would require Congressional approval.

i.

From these assumptions, and from study of 1:100,000 scale aeronautical maps, seven sites were selected for further study. (See Figure 2). Additional maps (scale 1:250,000) were obtained from the U.S. Army Map Service, and land use maps (scale 1:500,000) were obtained from the Bureau of Land Management for the states of New Mexico, Arizona, and Nevada. (Texas land is almost universally private or state-owned, under the terms by which Texas entered the union.) In the course of further study, one of the tentatively-selected sites was found to offer no compelling advantages (Indian Springs, NV) and several compelling disadvantages, among them a high population density in the Lake Meade Recreational Area and very adverse terrain for the landing site, lying north of the Grand Canyon. This site was dropped from further study. The following tables indicated our findings on the launch sites.

VI-APP-B-6

VI-APP-B-7

tn
C5

** 1 CN rH

n
rH

rH 1

!|
|

n
rH K \

CN 1

n
rH *T*

ro

n I

r~ 1 3<
rH

to

rH

Sft
H\ CO > 0)

& \
CTl rH

\
^ O

(1) rd P g

tn
"S}1

\
O
rH O

i~f "V^ TJ &^

c w

o in o 3* \ in
CN

o
CN ^S1 \

in

o ro \ o ro
O

o o
CO rH \ O
rH O rH O rH

rd O

c c

CO
rH rH

u> o
rH

in
rH

ro \ o
rH

ID

10 o

in o

CN

o
rH

CO Q) 4J H CO

in I
rH rH

Q EH CO
PH rH rH 1 CN CN 1 CN rH

CT> C

r} 521 v^ +
-

ro 1
CN rH K _ x^

rH 1

00

ro 53

H
r<

o
(U

CO
rH

O *
1^

rd

4-* ^x
H > CO O
nn
l

fd <D S

o o o >. o
rH \

K EH
PHJ

J5 v^ O
l>

rH H

K 2 o

rH prj x^ _ O

x^ _

w 53

J3

pr.

S! O K
P<4

o o

o
0 (O

\
o

\
in
o
CN rH rH

in

O O VD

o
0

in
o in
0

VD

o
f^

\
in
o
CN ^*

o o o v o in
CN

rd

rC

O C

c o^ dc
rd 0

O ^X

in in
rH r-H

VD

Q W EH W
Q

o m o
rH rH

o y
CO

K! w

o
rH

in o
rH

o
rH

H > M <IJ
CO

OJ

a.

c
JJ
H -P
O H -P rd O O

0)

o in
CO

in in
ro

in
"3*
O rH

O
rH

rd i-3

o
CN

o m
o
rH

in in
CO

ro

CN

ro

ro

ro

CT CN

O
N

CO

(U

c;
rd
PH
rl

Cn C

rH

X EH
C 4J g 0)

EH

CO H

r|

CO

a c
rd

-p C 3

rd

53

e rd
O

Q)

O -P
r|

g
(U
rH Q

4J M CO

s
rH

c o

T)

EH

fd

-p CO p a)

C O

a .
CO

<U tr> C rd
PH O O 0)
ffi

o
rd Q)
rl
rl

-P

r]

a
C!

rd

^J

pj H

rd

rl M Q)

rd cr>

<-; O

rd g

CN

ro

rr

in

VD

r-^

VI-APP-B-8

Abondoned Southern Pacific RR right-ofway thru Gadsden Purchase area, reversion to U.S. Govt.

Mostly parallel to active southern Pacific Track

4-)

w 0 id
53 0 TJ MH -P C O rd to XI -P CU T3 rd 45 -P tJi-H id

i-H CU
rH rH

C o

fd

X! -P id ft

id
ft

a
o c fd

-rl

CO

rH 4J VO CO CO D

O M to 43 rd O ft ft C 3
rH Id W CO rH

ourne s due Cruces,

CO

CU 53 CJ O (D

tf
0

(U 4J
rl

(0 i_3 rH

to < cu

CO

Cn C
rl

Q
^

>i g -a j^ M
x! a

H in o O ^o ro 4H
rH CO

M O
k

id

-rl Q)

-H
PH

p fd en ij
p, *!

M .y

rQ

rH rH CO H

o H rd gJ

>i

rH rH

4J

CO EH H CO

13 C id

CU >-H D -H id > rd CU -P MH -H CO D O >

x: -P v^ o
53

3 JH M O

MH O 4H O CN O
r| 4J
rj

tn 4J rd rd rH cu
J_| PTI

Q CU Q

CO X EH

o
to
CU

h of
-P
O CO

p, Bed

h of

to

rd CJ

c o c

<u -P id H

-p 0*1
W 2^4

<-;

* .*"! CU -P H 3

*
fd

rH

O CO

o oa a co &

rH rrj

4J

to id 0) X

H CO

g co
0)

CO

m EH

o T3
CM O

53 M Q 53 Q

a
H

W
CO

CO

53 o
O

w
to

cu x; o P, < o c * o to EH c
^ CJ
rl

to

C
U

C co
CJ J3

CN ^] rj

en

o
EH
H-l O

pa
p4 ^

to

in 43 rH cn O

rH

cu

H g 0

^ EH

to O
H

UH fd CN

0 4J 00
0) -P
rl CO

to

en c

MH
0 W
3

W
CO CO CO

rd MH -P O C

m . to
C X -H EH

53 0 5 CO CU
rl

aa
M '

^ CO

D4

to

a
rrt

X! U
3

rH 0 -P -P CO H

C rd
rl

Q)
rH

cu
rH

r; -P 3 O

-p C 0
3 CO

rd

co

id

O O-H ID

c fd

a>

a c

,-) g

H
J_j

a ft
cu
r^J M i ' ^~"

o fd
0 rH

cn
rH

rd CU
^x, .f-\

U W

O ^

^
rl

ft

a o

M cu Q) rH H H CO g

t>
53

>

53
*,

rtj

cu O"* a
PH

h.

CO

cn C
rl

* C

CO

V-| cu

fd -P

^ ^^ rd W V -p id c cu
C
3 O

X
EH
t

0) 53

g
id
-P

^j O P
rl

a
.
rH

c o

rl
1 3

c rd
f^

a
0)
rH

c o

cu

43

H . CN

EH

id

-p < to -p to 0) rd jfj *5 C*3 IS *" <

. ^J1

<u CJ c rd o CL,

53

a
^

CU

c
PH

Cn

co id g
H
p*

x:
CO

^
.

o CJ cu 3 a . 10

H tc* CJ

. ro

Roughly parallel to US 90
3

Parallel to US 80

to

EH .

rH rl g

cu

rd

o
C

O O CO CO

o
M

to

C X

rl

-p . c id 3 MH o )H a
rd i < m Q) o
rl >

id

EH

^ CO id n to

X EH

, .
tv*

rd cu ft
rl -P

id

in

r-

VI-APP-B-9

15 miles to 115 KVA lines, 15 miles to pipeline

in
H

Mostly public domain; No electrical power BLM, U.S.F.S. No gas pipeline No large adjacent community Not Studied in Detail

0 ft H
ft

Private and State 18 miles to 510 MW Lands, undeveloped power plant - 6 miles t pipeline

Availability of Support Services

in

rH -H rH rH rH 0 0 <-H -P > ft CO O 0 0 .p rH ro H CN 10

rH CO rH 0 rH H

o -p

rd 0 H
-P O 0 rH 0

rH

'O !"~l VD d -H

CO O (N rH -H E 0 0

d c

H rd E 1

H -H rH rH rH

Access to launch site mostly private land, miles undeveloped-landing e. site on WSMR

Land Use Status

d T) 3 d rd 0 -p > d -H rd
M rH - 0

rd T)

d rd
rH

0 P rd P
CO

CO W EH H CO

d
rd

CO

ft

m
rH -P CO

0 -p
rd H ft

P4 rH 0 CO > S 0 1-3

D T3 CQ

&
rH

250 miles s; Tonopah unch site

5 miles to

80 miles

miles to

O 3

miles

^ CQ < EH

to
0 rH

to 0
rH -H

CO H
iH

0
rH

o QJ i_i U P d
S -P
QJ rd

\
>

0 rd
-P rH

S3 -rH

\0 > -p
S3-H CO
. . CO 45

to O
-P

-p

H to Q

to

to A rd o co
0

\ to X N EH tn
^
45

0 0 .p 0 ) 00 -H ^ -H \ CO

en d 0
3 rH
rH E

rd O

QJ x^ M rd rd QJ QJ J-l

> rd -H

> rd
rH

C7> d 0 3

- d o <d d d to d
O rd rd rd
10 rH ft rH

--H

<U 0 in -p 0 -P CN -H ^r -H \ co \ to X is] EH tn <! 45 d

O rd rd rd
tO rH ft rH

X 3
EH rd
V CO

ty 0 45 O *. d
rH CO

rd

CN

in
ro

EH -H
T)
V

*. 0 X 0 --P EH -P X - r H

O rd

H rH

d 3 to d
O
3 O rH O

O "-H -COT)

0 d -P rd
0 CO

-H
- CO

EH to

0 -H

O
CO 45

<

rd O o K} -Pin

CO

rd O I-H- -P
>

CO

ft u 4J
rH

EH 4J H -P
tsa rtj

O rH O

EH -P W -P

W 43 -H

0 d

tn

to -d 0 d rH rd *d rd
ft d
W rH O rH

rd U

- Cn rd d
CO -H

4* P

d o d

rH rd -H CO E

> J2 . 0 O">

S3

rd PS Vi 0 rd 2

ft

to tn

.
-H rd -P

N itjj *.

X
EH
.

EH v. ^ rd 0 ft H -P rd

rl (-)

d
3

CO

rd 0 ft 0 45 O

"^

s
S3
.

tn d (
O W
.

O -P
0

d
.

rd H

0
rH

to

-P M O 45

'd ^ H .

43 rd EH .
ro

rd ft <!

rd E

d
.

O 0 3

H 45 CJ

in

ng site

-p 1 d rd d -P rd

vo

lands, undeveloped No gas pipeline to semi -developed No large adjacent ranching community

to 0 Q) d m d -H

to

VI-APP-B-10

en
CO

Oj

1
8

VI-APP-B-11

Figure 4

VI-APP-B-12

Cost Comparisons between Launch Sites To compare relative costs between launch sites, it was assumed that launch pad and landing site construction and site preparation costs would be roughly equal between the various sites. (This was a simplifying assumption only; these costs may vary by a factor of two depending upon the actual terrain selected; but limited study resources did not permit site inspections.) Major differences were assumed to lie in the amount of land to be acquired; land in Federal ownership was assumed to be available to NASA without additional cost.. The other significant variable was in the cost of acquisition and construction of the transportation route of the booster and orbiter back to the launch site. Overlays on land status maps provided an approximation of land to be acquired from private ownership, and local realtors -provided gross estimates of land values. Launch vehicle transport routes, informally called tow paths, were selected "by review of 1:250,000 maps and (from Eastern Arizona to Dell City, Texas) by personal reconnaisance. Table IV displays the findings of these cost studies. Costs of land acquisition should be taken as figures of merit only, since they were based on broad estimates and land quality is highly variable in the Southwest. The figures for land acquisition in Texas, particularly, are uncertain since the largest unknowns are the amount of state-owned land and the policy of state government officials if an HLLV site were selected in Texas. Costs of tow-path right-of-way and construction are based upon railroad-type construction practices, rather than highway practices. Pricing was performed using rules of thumb of the Southern Pacific engineering staff, and are probably accurate to within + 30%. Costs of providing utilities to the launch area were derived from estimating data provided by El Paso Electric Company and El Paso Natural Gas Company engineers. If longer booster flights are required, there exist a number of potential launch-landing site pairs along Latitude 32. Table V displays tow-path costs between the letter-designated points shown in the previous figure.

VI-APP-B-13

CO

CU -H 4-> H
rH

H flj 4-> CU

D M
o5.C
>H O

g
o
ro 1
O CN
g
00

g
g
"3*

W (Tj
h3

(U C C 3

g 1 "

g i~~

o
ro 1
O CM

MH O O
4-1

CO 4-> CO O

cn ca EH H CO

4->

to to

1 CO

1
CO

cu

CO

CD
rH H g
CP 2^ O

cu
rH

1 CO

I
CO

Q)
rH

cu

1 CO

0)
rH rH g

x:
(0

u
)-H

rH

rH

H g
J>3 00 CO Ot CO

-H g

H
^T|

CU C -P
Q U O EH <C 0

S tr c

- CO

ro VD ro rH

Q CM O
M

in rro rH

VO CO

ri* r^ in "d*
CO CN CN rH

e ro g

-H g

00 O

CN ro
in rH

cr\ ^ in
ft ft

in o
VD CN CN rH

^ ro CN

rH CN

in ro
CM rH

CM rH

o 2

I
w ^ w < EH

CO -P CO

w
in VD

$>

W Q
EH

5
.

u
-

o ro *3*
<O-

g o
cor-H CN

CO-

in co-

g *

g o o
CN
rH

o
rH
CO-

0 "3*

CO-

o
CO

O -P CO rH tO (d

c: M cu g
rH (5
1-5 CO

- H

o
CN rH

O O
CTl

4-j cu cu ty
to
0
ft,

** ^i*

0
rH H

0 O O >.

0 O
^* . 1 *

M EH S3 W W
M Q

ro

rH

O1

to
-P
CO
O

o
^*
CO-

13

0 U

co-

V> rH

co-

g CM rH

g
CM <~D
CO-

O
CTl CO-

to
flj -H

EH CO O U
L

X! g O
M

CD
O
rH

in
(N
rH

in
CTl

CM to

3 tJ1

ro

0 CN CN

O CTl

ro

K,

Jg

>

Nl

"Z

cu CP
J PH

*.

to
H
M

>.

<<

IS3 <(J

tn C

4-1
CH

H (0
O

^
^ (^ 4J g
g

X
EH *. CU tji

X EH . ^ nj

0)
CM
H 4-1 (0 C H r*,

d)
S3

e
4J

>_| 0 -P H fj

CO

CU

fO

g
rH

CU C

O
4J CO 4-1 CU _<-*, S ^l1

C rtf 0

cu

CO
(Tj

E
rH

T3 C M CN

XI 03 EH ro

cu j m
VO

x:
CO

rH

in

VI-APP-B-14
r*^

^ 0)

n d Cr

-P CO O U

<N
rH * CO-

a a
rH m V>
i-H CN (T> i-H

* VD
f~ rH

a s
rH O

1 O EH 1 EH 3

>
.J n

O CU
%.

<
^N

CQ

EH

EH W U

rfS -P

CO <U rH H g

CO Q) rH -H g

CO (1) rH -H g

CO CU rH H g

CO 0) rH -H g

CO Q) rH H
CN

Cri

r n
CTl I--

oo
I-

o vo
'sf

in n
^J1

0)

r~ o m
rH

rH rH

< fr

K EH

CNJ

!S O
EH

H O PU

-p c
O
ffi

CO

VI-APP-B-15

Selection of Candidate Site No specific site recommendation is made, based upon this surveylevel study, since refinements in vehicle design, launch azimuth optimization, and launch-to-landing site distances, would rapidly supersede any of these study findings. However, to examine other cost and design aspects, a launch site in the Pyramid Mountains near Animas, New Mexico, and a landing site near Dell City, Texas, were postulated, and tentative site facilities and operational time lines were developed around this site. (The considerations discussed below would not, however, change significantly from site to site for the Table Mountain, Whetstone Mountain, or Hueco Range sites, since their configurations would be similar to the Pyramid site.) For the site concept selected, the Industrial Area was located midway between the launch and landing sites, since the largest number of the HLLV operations team will operate in that area, and local transportation and homes, businesses, and other-elements of the supporting economy are available without cost to the program. Preliminary concept sketches were prepared to sharpen our understanding of the design and operational problems, and a preliminary operations timeline was postulated as a method of sizing work crews, quantity of equipment, number of vehicle assembly bays, etc. (The first sketches were made before EDIN EX -338-76 became available to us, and are included only to show our general approaches.) The design and cost drivers identified for the HLLV ground facilities are listed below: Launch Area: Design drivers - high "production" launch rate (10-12 per day) - probability of catastrophic failure at launch, over life of program (35,000 launches) approaches 1.0. Consequences - permanent party at launch area should be kept small, and LV handling, erection, loading, and checkout should be highly automated. - launch crew should be "vehicle-oriented," should come to the launch site with the vehicle, and be capable of erecting, loading, and launching in one working shift.

VI-APP-B-16

MPRODUCIBILITY OF TH ORIGINAL PAG I JS POOR

Figure 5:

Launch Area Concept

- launch vehicle repairs (except very minor repairs, e.g., quick changes of LRU's) should be performed at the Industrial Area, even if this involves returning the LV from the launcher to the I.A. - erection procedures should be simple, with tilt-tables or other positive vehicle handling, rather than by cranes, hoists, slings, and dangling loads. - if line sizes and loading times permit, propellant loading should be by gravity feed rather than pump feed, to avoid propellant pump failures impacting launch schedules. - launch sites may be located on or near mountain tops, requiring steep grades for the launch vehicle transporter. A design/cost study of alternatives for achieving these higher-altitude sites (e.g., comparison of cog-wheel railroads, cable-assisted systems, etc.) should be performed . Landing Site: Design Driver Consequences number of launches per launch window may require "ripple-firing" of HLLV's - GSE should be available to move LV's from runway in three to five minutes, at least to dispersal (parking) areas. - permanent party at landing site is small; receiving and servicing team meets launch vehicle at landing site, loads on transporter, and performs post-flight checkout on transporter during trip back to Industrial Area. launch vehicle deservicing (draining, purging, etc.) must be kept to a minimum, if vehicle turn-around times are to be achieved. Best practice would appear to be no deservicing except when LV's are scheduled for overhaul.

VI-APP-B-18

REPRQDUGlBLLJTy OF THE ORIGINS PAGI J8 POOR

-p

OF THE ORIGINAL PAGB IS POOR

Transporters; Design Concepts Following airline practice, it may be desirable to keep the launch vehicle electrical systems powered-on at all times. Transporters will furnish this power when vehicle is switched from internal to external power. LV's will be on transporters except when they are on the launch pad or in flight. Checkout of LV's should be done by a "Mobile ACE" station on each transporter. (In this concept, boosters would not be tied to second stages, but could return immediately to the launch site, to meet a new second stage, unless major rework or refurb were required.) transporter should have a small maintenance shop aboard, as well as crew rest quarters, galley, etc., since trip times from landing site to launch site may be 12 hours or more in duration. drive-train of the transporter should be propane-fueled, to simplify logistics. Either a diesel-electric or turbine-electric drive would be suitable. Cog-wheel gearing and an alternate low-speed, high-gear ratio drive train will provide for moving transporter up and down steep grades at launch site, and positive control at creep speeds at the landing site and in the industrial area. transporters are envisioned as interchangeable between booster and second stage vehicles with only minor kit changes. Vehicles are supported on the transporter by inflated air bags, to avoid alignment problems and provide a cushioned ride. Tow Path Design Concepts r- Interstate highway construction was compared with rail construction as follows: 1976 costs 4-lane Interstate (right of way, grading, draining, cut and fill) (Ballast and pavement) $1.2M/mile $0.6M/mile $0.6M/mile

VI-APP-B-21

1976 Cost 1976 Cost

6-lane Interstate

$1.65M/mile

Railroad, single $175,000/mile track, two-rail construction, using new 119# rail, including rails, ties, ballast ($33/foot) Cost of double track $950,000/mile with cuts, fills, right of way, draining, ties, ballast, and rail

(Very Large Array Radio Telescope near Socorro, New Mexico, performed equivalent analysis and is using rail.) Industrial Area: Design Drivers - HLLV's are probably too large to build elsewhere and transport to launch operations area, and therefore final assembly facilities should be at the launch center Industrial Area. - Payloads, as assembled, will also be too large for conventional transportation and payload assembly should similarly be performed at the launch center Industrial Area. - Production rate of HLLV's should be reexamined since rate as shown in JSC-11568 will require a large number of vehicle assembly bays, - Number of assembly/refurbishment bays is also dependent upon reuse and refurbishment rates of LV's, and time required for overhaul. Final concept shown, following railroad round-house and turntable technology, assumes that production rate of LV's is fairly constant, and that assembly bays can also be used for launch vehicle refurbishment. Launch Center Construction: A preliminary construction phasing for the launch center facilities was developed as follows: VI-APP-B-22

Figure 9 VI-APP-B-24

TABLE VI Initial Construction Three launch pads ($120M each) Propellant Tank Farm Landing Area Towpath Propane Pipeline and Pumping System Lox Plant, Part I Six Final Assembly/Refurbishment Bays Payload Buildup Building Admin/Logistics Building Launch/Vehicle Parking Pad Launch/Range Control 10 Transporters Third Year Construction Rectenna and Power Distribution Hydrogen/Electrolysis Plant, Part I Three Launch Pads Expand Propellant Tank Farm 10 Additional Transporters Tenth Year Construction Six Additional Final Assembly/Refurbishment Bays Six Additional Launch Pads Expand Propellant Tank Farm Lox Plant, Part II Hydrogen Plant, Part II 40 Additional Transporters
40 720 200 40 60 360

Est. Costs (1977 $ in M)

360 150 70 140 200 40 40 20 5 1 90 90

1206

100 40 360 150 90 740

1420

Total Estimated Cost of Facilities, 1977

$3366M

VI-APP-B-25

UJ

o:

in
CO O

cc x
OJ

cc o I
z
f
O

UJ

ce

I- a:

cc O

2: or ct:
ce O Q. X

in or x
CVJ

o
oo CC UJ

CD

cc
X

ce 0 ., o ^
oc cc
OL X

S3 QO
t/)

cc
V

O
'

o
CL < O. CQ CC O O

> o: O

UJ

to cc
X OJ

s
O
UJ

o: 5 E O

o
Q: CL

O.

as
QC LU Q
CC

<

CC

1 0

a:
Q

VI-APP-B-26

UJ

cc

STAFFING A preliminary estimate of the staffing required for HLLV operations has been made/ based upon the following assumptions: - final assembly of the launch vehicle is performed at the launch complex industrial area, but other manufacturing operations are performed elsewhere. - payloads are assembled, integrated, and loaded into payload units at the industrial area, but are manufactured elsewhere. - all HLLV operations are conducted on a three-shift, seven-day work week, since the cost is small in comparison with the cost of maintaining the on-orbit work crews in space. Final Assembly crews were based upon present Shuttle final assembly crews at Palmdale (36 engineers, 258 technicians, and 40 supporting personnel) and Dryden (12 engineers, 184 technicians). Launch crews were based on a "core-team1 concept, with a core group of 4 engineers, 16 technicians, and 8 support personnel per vehicle per shift. To maintain twentyfour-hour operation, the core team, per vehicle in the operations pipeline, was estimated as 16 engineers, 64 technicians, and 16 support. To this core team were added trainees, backups for sickness and annual leave. Landing crews were also based on the core-team concept, with a core group of 4 engineers, 12 technicians, and 2 support personnel per vehicle, per shift. Refurbishment crews were estimated as a fraction of the final assembly crews. Since no experience from Shuttle is available, these estimates must be regarded as soft. Payload buildup crews were matched to payload launch schedules. A learning curve was applied to their productivity, so that there are signficantly fewer personnel/payload in the years of peak activity. This estimate is also 'soft'. Peak staffing occurs in the twentyseventh year of HLLV activity, peaking at about 1500 engineers, 5300 technicians, and 1200 support personnel. Total staffing was: Engr'g-38,830 manyears, at$1.55 Billion, Tech'n-122,110 manyears, at 3.05 Billion Sup't - 30,900 manyears, at .93 Billion $5.53 Billion, 1977 dollars. Vi-APP-B-27

This staffing was based on achieving the launch rates for the Truss SSPS in LEO. The following table displays the staffing, by function, for each year, starting with a year Zero indicating the size of the site activation team.

VI-APP-B-28

"

ti

m u\

*ji O r>- f

fiu

*m

< t > 11 O

jiOiinn'vOiO'

<

-IP-H

>'"i'''-

"~

Oi

". R

t, .,
Rooo ooo o o o o o o o o o o o o oooooooooo
3 O C\tC\l -3 \0 O<OOOt^u^l^iAO<>OO
1 1 f t '" r

" '

000000000
T i O O O OOO f\O i^
ti^OOvO\OO<-* ^*\j fy

000000000
OOO

O OO OO O CJtNlCM

.OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOQOOOe flO O O l / N O O o ^ O O C l A i T ' C O IT^ * O O u - i o ~ i u - i O O O O O O O O cyinm,ir\v)vovDtt-r-(-tooeotco3e\o\o.CT\oiOOOOOOOO

O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O

OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
O O f \ J l/Nmi^lT-l/N-Al^l/Nl/1

"

L^W\lALl~llT\L~lir>Lr\

OOOOOO
*

~ t r \ i ^ o o O O t r v i r s i . - N i r i _ _ _^. C O O O O O O t, c\ -

o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o

'OOOOOOC O O O O O O O O
J C\J t\lOj (\JOJ C \ J ^ r _ 9 - 3 ^ ^ ' \ C v O O MW

> C O O O C C O O O O O O C O O C c. c o - y r . O . W T U J t-t t t o-=?-3_= 3 mm-i^i - J r - ^ f \ j c v c y o j o , n t M f \ i r \ j

OOOOPOOO

O O O O O O O 1 5 C OO O O O O O O O O C O O O O O O O O O O O O O " > ' o^COC' i 1

C O O O O O O O O O O O O C O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O

O O o Ot

VI-APP-B-29

PROPELLANTS Propellant supplies for the HLLV will be of such scope that dedicated production plants and systems will be desirable. A survey of availability of propellants in this area did not reveal any major problems except for sources of hydrogen. a. Propane: Propane appears to be one of the few fuels that that will be reasonably available in the 1990 time frame on the world market. A local LP gas distributor who serves on the Board of Directors of the national LP gas distributors association reports that the association anticipates that there will be no major world shortage of this fuel in the next decade. Probable sources will be from production in the Middle East. Estimated prices for propane on the current world market are: Algeria, 24C/gallon; Saudi Arabia, 36C/gallon, Venezuala, 20/gallon. An average world price of $115 per metric ton may be used as a baseline present price. Chemical and Engineering News predicts an average U.S. price, in 1985, of Sl.lC/gallon (C&EN, 18 April 1977) as compared with a present price of 13.8^/gallon. Propane, butane, and natural gas are still being flared in most locations in the Middle East for lack of a market. Propane may, however, find an alternate use as existing natural gas supplies are depleted; plans to supply a propane/ air mixture in existing natural gas markets are being studied. At present, New Mexico produces about 600 million gallons, and consumes 100 million gallons, yearly. Total U.S. Production in 1974 for propane was 12,347 million gallons, down 6% from the peak 1973 production of 13,100 million gallons. By comparison, the HLLV (EDIN EX-338-76) will require 850,000 gallons per launch, and in the peak program year (2022, Truss in LEO) 2282 HLLV flights will require 1,920 million gallons. The total flight program will require 30,000 million gallons. In short, HLLV operations will have a significant effect on national supplies of propane. Commercial suppliers of Propane are already investigating storage of propane in known salt domes in West Texas and Eastern New Mexico. Propane would be brought to terminals in Houston and pumped through existing pipelines to these storage domes. Propane may also be produced by hydrogenating coal, of which there are ample supplies in New Mexico, Colorado, and West Texas. However, the price of manufactured propane does not appear to be competitive, as predicted, in the 1990 time frame. If propane is selected as the HLLV booster stage fuel, contractual commitments for this fuel should be made as early in the program as possible. VI-APP-B-30

b. Oxygen: Oxygen is, of course, readily available; its principle cost driver is the energy required for compression and liquifaction. Dedicated production plants for LOX, either GOCO or COCO, should be included in launch site planning. Since the production of LOX will itself be a major user of energy, it is recommended that locating a ground rectenna at or near the launch site be considered; electrical power from the SSPS can thus be used to bootstrap the deployment of additional SSPS's, and the excess sold to the local power grid. Peak year requirement of LOX (Truss in LEO) for 2282 HLLV flights is 16 million tons. c. Hydrogen: Present sources of hydrogen depend upon cracking natural gas, propane, or refinery "lights". These will be in continuing high demand during the HLLV program, and may not be available. Hydrogen can also be made by flashing steam against coal; this process is, however, both environmentally "dirty" and expensive. Hydrogen is made in commercial quantities in Canada by reverse electrolysis of water (cf. Consolidated Mining and Smelting, Ltd, Trail, B.C.) because of the ready availability of hydroelectric power. If the launch site includes an SSPS rectenna, electrical power from the system can be used to make hydrogen at the launch site. Requirements for water as a feed stock are not excessive. However, most water presently available in the Southwest is already allocated; in the case of the Rio Grande valley, the existing water supply is presently 110-120% allocated. An existing unallocated source of water, however, is .the output of municipal sewage plants, which are of surprisingly high quality since they must meet EPA requirements. For example, the Las Cruces municipal sewage plant (50,000 population) processes 4.5 million gallons per day; if electrolysis produced hydrogen from one-third of this water, there would be available from this source alone 460 million pounds of hydrogen per year. The HLLV will require 750,000 pounds H2 per launch; at peak launch rate, hydrogen consumption will be in the order of 1,720 million pounds per year. Production of hydrogen by electrolysis will not be the cheapest method during the HLLV program, but it may be desirable to do so since, again, the SSPS program could be presented as bootstrapping itself rather than causing an additional drain on national energy resources.

VI-APP-B-31

OTHER CONSUMABLES a. Water: As noted, water throughout the Southwest is a carefully managed resource. As soon as a Southwestern launch site is selected, coordinated planning with the appropriate State water agencies should be commenced, to assure that water will be available. Water-conservation practices should be designed into the facilities (e.g., recycled cooling water at the launch pads, LOX compressor cooling, industrial sewage reclamation, etc.) b. Electricity; Electrical power is readily available at all the candidate launch sites, except the Monitor Mountain site. Electrical power can be routed to launch sites for a cost of $100,000 per mile. A map of the existing and proposed electrical power distribution grid for the Southwestern states was obtained from the Western Systems Coordinating Council (See figure 11 ) . c. Industrial Fuels; Natural gas and LP gas are the only fuels in use, or available in significant quantities in the Southwest. Coal is mined for electrical production on-site in the Four Corners area, but no commercial distribution exists. Natural gas suppliers (e.g., El Paso Natural Gas) are reluctant to make commitments to new users, since they anticipate significant shortages within the next decade. If the fuel selected for the HLLV is propane, it is recommended that the launch and industrial areas be designed to use propane as an industrial fuel, and that the vaporization losses from the liquid propane on site be used as the plant boiler feed.

VI-APP-B-32

VII.

ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS A. MICROWAVE TRANSMISSION RECEPTION 1. Cumulative Side Lobe Effects

The peak power density levels in the far side-lobes of a 5GW SPS system were calculated to ascertain the expected radiation levels over the United States and Europe. Apparently the IMS (industrial medical, and scientific) band of 2450 MHz + 50 MHz is recognized only in the United States and certain portions of Europe. ^GWAn10db gaussian taPer antenna system, with error parameters of a - 10U, + idb, and 2% failures, was used for the analysis. The data f ^ - flgur?VII-A.l T n ? indicates an average peak level of l X 10 raw/cm^ in far fields. Grating lobe spikes will occur every 440Km for the 10 meter by 10 meter subarrays . However in order to reduce computer simulation time, the subarrays were increased to 18 meters thereby producing spikes every 245Km which were 10-12db higher than the surrounding peaks as shown in the figure. The radiation levels from one hundred, 10GW SPS stations will be approximately 4 X 10^ mw/cm2 in the far-fields .is shown by curve ( ) 1. Since this level is over two orders of magnitude lower than the USSR radiation standard of .01 mw/cm2 and five orders of magnitude lower than the present US standard, there should not be a problem in radiating with the 2400-2500 MHz power beams.
A

VII.A.I

Figure VII.A-l.

-Far-Field Radiation Levels for Individual and Multiple SPS Stations

22 10

U.S. RADIATION LIMIT PEAK POWER DENSITY LBT.L AS A FUNCTION OF RANGE FROM RECTENNA

CONDITIONS:
1.0
lOdB, GAUSSIAN TAPER ANTENNA <T= 10, +_ IdB, 21 (1) - AVERAGE PEAK LEVEL FOR ONE HUNDRED 10 GW SPS STATIONS (2) - AVERAGE PEAK LEVEL FOP ONE 5GW SPS STATION

.1

.01

USSR RADIATION LIMIT

2
io6 io7
IO8

*GRATING LOBE SPIKES OCCUR EVERY 245 Km FOR THE 18 METER SUBARRAYS USED ON SIMULATIONS, ALTHOUGH ONLY TWO GRATING LOBES ARE SHOWN. THE SPS 10 METER SUBARRAYS HAVE GRATING LOBES EVERY 440 Km.

1000
__

2000

I i \ 1 3000 4000 5000 6000 RADIUS FROM BORESIGHT (KM)

JL

7000

8000

9000

-L

_L

500

1000 1500

2000

2500 3000 VII.A-2

3500 4000

4500

5000

5800

RADIUS FROM BORESIGHT (MILES)

VTI.

A. 2

Ionospheric Tests

a. Heating Tests - by G. D. Arndt Introduction The SPS system sizing of a IKm 'transmit array with 5GW of DC power out of the rectenna is constrained by a maximum power density limitation in the ionosphere (Ref . 1) . A power density of ZSmw/on^ has been postulated as the threshold level for nonlinear interactions between the microwave power beam operating at 2450 MHz and the heated ionosphere (Ref . 2) . This threshold level places a maximum size on the antenna for a given power output at the rectenna, i.e., the IKm, 5GW system. However, there is not sufficient experimental or theoretical data available to accurately predict the exact threshold level. Since the maximum power density, or threshold level, is a critical parameter in sizing the SPS system, a program is now underway to study the microwave beam/ ionospheric interactions. Microwave Beam/Ionoshpere Interactions As the high power microwave beam passes through the ionosphere, a very small fraction of its energy is absorbed by the ions and electrons in the surrounding plasma. Although there are equal numbers of positive and negative charged particles, the electrons, because of their small mass, are dominant in interacting with the microwave beam. Energy is extracted from the microwave signal and adds to thermal energy of the electrons. The simplist type of energy transfer is ohmic heating which, for the 2450 MHz microwave signal, is written
Q=l/2aE2=l/2
mw

-%

=k P

X2

where E a P_ X k
v

- is the peak value of the microwave electric field - conductivity of the plasma - power density of microwave beam - wavelength of microwave beam - a constant containing electron density, mass, and charge _ collision frequency (dependent upon altitude)

For the typical SPS system, the associated heating level in the ionosphere will be PDX2 = 30 mw/cm2 (12.25)2 cm2 = 4.5 watts (2)

As the ionosphere is heated, the electron density decreases in the Fregion (150 - 300 Km) due to expansion of the plasma along the earth's magnetic field lines. Reductions in electron density of up to 40% of the ambient density have been calculated for the SPS beam passing through the F-region (Ref. 3) . This reduction is similar to that produced by a strong VII.A.3

magnetic storm. The heated electrons spiral outward up and down along the field lines and thus diffuse, conducting heat away. The increases in electron temperature produced by the SPS system have been calculated for a mid-day ionosphere over Arecibo, P.R. to be (Ref. 4): Height in Km 75 100 150 200 250 300 Ambient Electron Temp. (K) 200 300 1000 1700 1900 2000 Heated Electron Temp. (K) 2200 1600 1500 2500 2600 2600 The strong heating effects in the D-region (70-100Km) will produce an increase in electron density due to a reduced electron/ion recombination rate. The electron temperature will have a very large increase as shown in the previous chart. However, even though the electron temperature increases by an order of magnitude in the D-region the electron density is very small compared to the F-region density. These effects will be accompanied by changes in the chemical reaction rates for this region. In the F-region the changes in electron temperature and electron density will at some level become large enough to produce nonlinear instabilities such as thermal self-focusing. This thermal self-focusing can produce large-scale irregularities of the ionosphere, with the striations aligned with the magnetic field lines. That is, the regions of high electron density tend to focus the microwave beam into regions of lesser density. The power density then increases in the focal region, giving more energy to the electrons, furthering reducing their density and continuing the self-focusing process. These regions of high and low density are aligned with the magnetic field lines and flow outward. The following diagrams show the field aligned, thermal self-focusing phenomenon (Ref. 5) Since these high energy electrons produced by the thermal self-focusing move along the field lines, these disturbances or perturbations in the ionosphere may no longer be limited to the region around the high-power beam. The perturbations could possibly cover large geographic areas along the field lines. The main problems associated with nonlinear heating and density depletion are possible disruptions to existing communications and navigation systems due to fading, scattering, multipath, etc. Study Program A program to study the ionosphere/microwave beam interactions is now underway. Overall objectives of these programs include: o 1. Determine power density levels (mw/cm ) at which nonlinear interactions begin to occur. 2. Assess the effects of both ohnic and nonlinear heating on commerical communications and navigation systems. VII.A.4

Figure VII.A-2

-Thermal Self-Focusing at High Density Levels

EM Wave Focuses into Regions of Lesser Density

Density Perturbation

Density Flow Out of the "Hot" Regions

Higher Density 4-4-4 ^ .. * Lower Density

Incident EM Wave

Field-Aligned Plasma Density Striations

B
Incident EM Wave VII.A.5

3. Determine RFI effects on radio astronomy (scattering of microwave power beam and associated noise components by ionosphere). As the first step to achieve these goals, a contract was awarded in 1976 with the following specific objectives: 0 Determine analytically the threshold density levels for nonlinear interactions. 0 Develop a detailed test program for full-scale tests to measure these interactionsincludes parameter measurements, frequencies, facilities, and modification costs. 0 Using the existing Arecibo antenna facility, making S-band measurements at a density of 1-2 mw/cm2. 0 Investigate possibility of laboratory plasma experiments.

This work is headed by Prof. W. E. Gordon of Rice University, who has been the team leader for low-frequency heating experiments at the Arecibo Observatory; Prof. F. W. Perkins of Princeton University and the National Center for Atmospheric Research (MCAR) is performing theoretical analyses. The study tasks are proceeding on schedule. The theoretical work by Perkins and Roble at NCAR is producing contours of electron temperature (illustrating the distortion along the field lines) and electron density for several ionospheric conditions. The frequency scaling laws that should apply for ohmic heating of the ionosphere (which is straightforward), for thermal self-focusing, and for communication scattering cross-sections are also being completed. A working paper has been written on scaled laboratory testing. Arecibo Tests The heating tests using the existing Arecibo antenna facility are scheduled for June 2-15, 1977. The following equipment will be used in the tests: Transmitters
4-11 MHz, 200 KW 430 MHz, 2MW 2300 MHz, .5MW

Antenna
305m

2 This equipment will produce an S-band power-density of 1-2 mw/cm in the F-region. While this density is considerably lower than the 20-30 mw/cm2 expected for an SPS station, it will be a first step in reaching that level and provide valuable experimental data not now available.

VII.A.6

Other agencies cooperating in the tests are the Aeronomy Laboratory of NOAA at Boulder and the Institute du Globe at Paris. A 50 MHz diagnostic radar will be set up on Guadeloupe in the Leeward Islands by the Institute du Globe and operated by the NOAA staff. This station is located where the radar beam is perpendicular (for maximum reflection) to the magnetic field lines at 220 Km altitude over Arecibo. It is capable of observing field-aligned irregularities produced by thermal self-focusing from Arecibo. The thermal self-focusing will be attempted by all three transmitters as listed previously. The limited tests using the existing facilities at Arecibo were completed June 15, 1977. The results may be summarized as follows: Three heating frequencies were used - 4-11 mega hertz, 430 MHz, and 2300 MHz. The power2 density for the 430 MHz test at a height of 200 kilometers was .6 mW/cm , "which is 1/12 of the equivalent SPS level" in a 1 kilometer heated cross-sectional area; the corresponding density for the 2300 MHz S-band test was 1.1 mW/cm2, "which is 1/20 of the equivalent SPS level" in a 200 meter heated cross-sectional area. No non-linear heating effects were observed by the diagnostic radar at Guadeloupe for any of the heating frequencies. These negative results were as anticipated. These tests and analytical analysis will greatly enhance knowledge about the SPS microwave beam/ionosphere interactions. However, to fully resolve the ionosphere issues, the ionosphere must be heated from the ground to an equivalent SPS level. Preliminary costs estimates for modifying the Arecibo Observatory for full-scale testing is about $3M. The detailed costs for modifying Arecibo and the Platteville, Colorado facility will be included in the contractor report, scheduled for August 1977.
REFERENCES

1. Technical, Environmental, and Economic Evaluation of Space Solar Power Concepts - Vol. II, JSC 11443, July 15, 1976 2. "Microwave Power Transmission System Studies" NASA CR-134886, ER75-4368, Raytheon Company, December 16, 1976 3. Mid-Term Report, NAS , Raytheon Company, December 16, 1976

4. April Progress Report - NAS 9-15212, Rice University, April 1977 5. March Progress Report - NAS 9-15212, Rice University, March 1977

VII.A.7

R. H. Dietz Tracking and Communications Development Division VII. ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS A. Microwave Transmission Reception 2. Ionosphere Tests b. Communications

Once the effects of the MW beam on the isophere is determined, the immediate question is: "What effect will these ionospheric disturbances have on users of the ionosphere?" Users are defined as those who are dependent on communication, navigation, and radar systems which utilize the ionosphere as a transmission medium. Two areas of possible effects require investigation in order to answer the basic question. Ohmic heating effects on communications services will require investigation. These will occur primarily near the MW beam penetration of the ionosphere. Determination should be made of the extent and occurrence of disturbances, effect of electron density depletion caused by ohmic heating, and effect of scintillation and scatter. Another area requiring investigation is the nonlinear effects of the ionosphere on communication services. Primary here is the question of the geographical extent of nonlinear interactions. Determination should be made of extent and occurrence of the disturbances, as well as the geographical area affected. Communication affects caused by variations in election densities, scintillation and scatter also require definition. Definition of the above areas can be accomplished using both analytical and testing techniques. If testing continues to look desirable, the test program should be conducted in conjunction with the ionosphere heating tests discussed in section a. above. Communication Effects - lonosphonic disturbances and their effects on communication services are generally well known and documented in the literature. The more extensive disturbances which are known at this time and which are generally predictable are associated with solar flares and can be classified as ionospheric disturbances, storms, and polar region absorption. The disturbance takes the form of abnormally high absorption in the D layer, phase and amplitude changes, changes in the effective height of reflection and sudden frequency deviations. Ionospheric storms are accompanied by magnetic disturbances and are usually more intense in the auroral regions. These changes in the ionosphere can cause reduction of the critical frequency in the F2 region, and radio blackout due to absorption, enhancement of spread F and sporadic E. The less extensive disturbances are associated with electron configurations that move with time and are localized. They are not extensive because of their local nature. Anticipation of the ionospheric disturbances caused by one SPS MW beam may be localized, but has the possibility of spreading geographically along the magnetic lines if nonlinear effects are created.

VII.A.8

For a complete complement of over 100 SPS's, the "localized" effect will also spread geographically. It is for these reasons that a thorough understanding of ionospheric effects on communications services should be developed. Communications, Radar and Navigation Systems (COMMRAN) - The possible COMMRAN systems which may be affected by MW beam disturbances of the ionosphere are numerous. It will be extremely difficult to assess the affects on all the COMMRAN systems. Any program of this magnitude will require grouping into types for analytical investigations and possibly a further combining into groups for a possible test program. Basic types of systems include, but are not limited to: a. Long-haul communications - typical HF frequencies of 3-30 MHz which depend on ionospheric reflection for long range communications. Users include military, civilian and amateur. b. Commercial satellite communications - typical UHF to S-band frequencies of 1.2 - 4.0 GHz. c. Military satellite communications - typical VHF/UHF frequencies of 225 - 400 MHz for space-to-ground and space-to-aircraft communications. d. Military radars for large area surveillance - typical HF frequencies of 5 - 30 MHz which utilize the ionospheric reflection. e. Military radars for space tracking - typical frequencies are in the VHF-UHF bands. f. Satellite global positioning system - typical frequencies in UHF band are 1.2 and 1.6 GHz. g. Omega/Loran C navigation aids - typical frequencies in VLF band of 10 KHz require use of ionospheric reflection. Solar Power Satellite (SPS) Systems - Two systems on the SPS may be affected by ionospheric disturbances caused by the MW beam. These are the phase control system's pilot beam transmitted from the ground and the SPS antenna pointing control signal. As mentioned in the "Technology Advancement Report," JSC-12702, these two systems should be investigated further. Because of the criticality of antenna pointing and MW beam phasing, it is deemed necessary to test the effect of ionospheric heating on these systems. These tests would have to await either a LEO or GEO SPS test article. When these test articles are available, ionospheric heating should be done, simultaneous with the phase control and antenna pointing tests. Transmission of these control signals could then be directed through the heated portion of the ionosphere. Approach for Investigating COMMRAN System Effects - Because of the overwhelming number of communication service users who are affected by the ionosphere, a logical methodology of categorizing users and systems must be established. The approach outlined below intentionally omits SPS design

VII.A.9

and development activities and concentrates only on investigating ionospheric heating effects on the COMMRAN systems. The approach should include: a. Survey of all COMMRAN systems which depend on or are influenced by the ionosphere. b. Categorize systems into similar/related types.

c. Based on predicted changes in the ionosphere due to the MW beam, perform in-house and/or contract study to determine frequency bands affected, time, duration and extent of changes, etc. on the typical COMMRAN systems. d. If study warrants further investigations, establish the overall testing plan. e. f. Perform comprehensive selection of COMMRAN systems to be tested. Assimilate baseline test data on selected COMMRAN systems.

g. Determine optimum location of transmitters and receivers for the selected systems. h. Coordinate availability of selected systems with using agencies or suppliers. i. Coordinate availability of ionospheric heating facility.

3. Coordinate availability of transmitter/receiver locations with proper authorities. k. Develop testing procedures in coordination with COMMRAN system users and ionospheric heating test facility personnel. 1. Determine methods of real-time coordination during testing activiites. m. Determine test times and resources required to conduct test program. n. Assimilate necessary COMMRAN systems, attendant support equipment, and personnel. o. Coordinate test procedures with all affected parties.

p. Conduct baseline tests on selected COMMRAN systems without ionospheric heating, including appropriate day/night cycle conditions. q. levels. Conduct tests with inosphere heated to expected SPS operational

VII.A.10

Summary - The above discussion has focused on the need for determining how ohmic heating, non-linear thermal self-focusing and other ionospheric disturbances will affect communication users of the ionosphere. Although it is generally understood how the MW beam will affect the ionosphere, and individual users of communication services understand how ionospheric disturbances affect the service, it is recognized that an extensive investigation should begin to assure that the SPS MW system will not adversely affect worldwide communications dependent of the ionosphere. To this end, the above sections serve as an outline of issues to be investigated and approaches to be considered.

VII.A.H

VII. A. 3

MICROWAVE RADIATION BIOLOGICAL EFFECTS By D. S. Nachtwey, SD4

The Solar Power Satellite (SPS) microwave beam is potentially hazardous both in space and on the ground. Potential exposure situations to space workers could occur during power beam tests or SPS maintenance. In addition exposures to radars and communications transmitters are possible. Potential exposures of humans and other biota on the ground could occur at or near rectenna sites. In addition, very low level exposures of the public will occur over very large geographic areas from power beam side lobes (see Figure VII-A-1). This section discusses some of the biophysical characteristics of radio-frequency (RF) radiation in general, some of the potential biological effects (primarily numan effects), RF Radiation Exposure Standards, the philosophies underlying the standards, and areas requiring additional research. Biophysical aspects of RF radiation. Because the assessment of the biological impact of RF radiation is highly dependent upon the basic biophysical aspects of the interaction of the radiation with biological systems, a somewhat extensive discussion of these biophysical aspects may oe fruitful. RF radiation like all electromagnetic (EM) radiation consists of a stream of photons each possessing a discrete energy. The behavior of EM photons can be described by wave equations so the different types of EM radiation are designated either oy their energy, their wavelengths, or the frequency of the waves in cycles per second (Hertz or Hz). The energy of the pnoton, is directly related to its frequency and inversely related to its wavelength (see Figure VII-A-3). A biological effect of any EM radiation requires that tne photon interact with molecules within the organism and the energy of the pnoton be absorbed; without absorption of energy, there is no possibility for a biological effect. For high energy photons such as those in x- or gamma-rays, the photon's absorbed energy can cause ejection of an orbital electron, i.e. it can cause lonization and thus detrimental alteration of the molecule and possibly the organism. For lower energy photons such as ultraviolet radiation, the photon does not cause lonization but can raise an orbital electron in a molecule to an excited state which can then cause a detrimental chemical change in the molecule. As the frequency of the EM radiation decreases further the absorbed pnotons are not sufficiently energetic to excite orbital electrons, but they can affect the molecule by increasing its vibrational, rotational, or translational energy, i.e. increase its temperature. In general, RF photons

*The major source of information for this section is a review by S. M. Micnaelson (20), parts of which have been extracted verbatim.

VII-A-12

=- s- ?! =lllt^ ffejfsJf^i1
I

Ififtiff

= - O--E.

o
Of.

o
CM

08

o 8 < !oS
' ^\ * JL (^ C3 )

":

u. a: uj 0 = . ce
C O .-

O
< > UJ to

1
|0<0_<fOZ

-4

J t

^** S *^

P ^
p,

i j) . i> rM 1 ' 7
IM
t ^ C"

S 5^ . <J oc O
- O Z - M - Z O

U)

: 0 _ < ( OSr O Q- i ( _ > < _ i

X
N ^ 5
r-i

^ t

O
, v^

1 I
1
1

^^ ^
-r* i^^

-H +*
Oj

"75
S *"" c 0

1B
,f~
iS
I J *

ij

o
t

k.

^*
Q )

s
S
/

g-

C.

i
f3 *"^

!
1 1 2

S <c

2 a

? 2 I

- a> "2

5| ce

-o 1

2r 5

as

'i

3 >

ID fl

. IA A
V

^^
X

IA #,/ V^^
.. .^

V i i

"o
I
1
O

CJ 4) W
1
O

-p

O*

OO

fo*

^ > ^Toro ro To "o

'2

F g
LU ^

1 1 1 1 1 1 II l l 1 1 i
T evi ~^

2 'o o 11 1 i 1
CM cS

'^o^o't.

1
TJesj

, 1 1
1 1
r^ rsi
esj CNJ

' O

'-* ^-^ O ^

! "-

^<^ O

'"o t I
1
O

1
^

I
1
O

CO

io
X

io io T* ^ ' '
0

o CT"

CM

C =

'o 'CD 'o

'o

CM CD * 1 i iO *7" O o O

iO

r r r ?
E C e<

<
|
I-H

S
H* E i i

e
.3C

i i
ni
o
tl

1^ i i i i
^

1^
1
IA

E a. 1 1
--

>

1
vO

1
r^. OO

1 1
O^ CD

1 1

1 1
<M

o '^b ""o o " o 'o

frt

'o

o 'o 'o
r*^
^ tZ

'o 'o
*^
*^

2 ro
_

<^

fO

V S o "0 r- S
X > X

rr

rrt

r^

f%

INI

rs*

f\

**

c%

2s.

"">
CJ

E
<o
O

1
O

1
O

1
O

1
O

r-.

2 -b ~o

CD

VII-A-13

cannot ionize or excite orbital electrons no matter how many are absorbed: The necessary minimum energy for ionization of biological molecules is about 10 eV; for excitation, it is about 1 eV. In contrast, the energy values of RF photons all lie in the range 10 to 10" eV. Therefore, in biologic systems, absorbed RF energy does not cause direct chemical change, but is rapidly equilibrated among the degrees of freedom of the system with the net effect being only an increase in general or localized temperature of the tissue. Such heating results from both ionic conduction and vibration of the dipole molecules of water and proteins (10). If sufficiently great, heating can of course cause damage to molecules (e.g. denaturation of proteins), cells (e.g. membrane breakdown ), and organs. Radiofrequency radiation transmission, scattering, and absorption are usually considered at the macroscopic wave level rather than as photonic interactions. Thus, these EM waves are characterized by an electric field vector, E (V/m), a magnetic field vector, H (A/m), and a propagation vector k (m"1 ). Far from the wave source, the electric and magnetic field vectors are perpendicular to each other and both are perpendicular to the direction of propagation along k. This far-field EM radiation is planewave radiation. Close to electromagnetic sources and around electromagnetic scattering objects, different configurations and relative magnitudes of the E, H, and k vectors are possible. The total amount and the distribution of the adsorbed electromagnetic power in biological tissue exposed to electromagnetic fields is a function of many factors, including reflective loss, the magnitude of the electric field (E), magnitude of the magnetic field (H) that penetrates, the relative stored energy in the magnetic and electric fields, the polarization of the fields, the source and tissue configurations, the tissue composition, frequency, environmental factors, and others. In general, however, the penetration and absorption of RF energy is dependent upon the electrical properties of the absorbing medium, specifically, its dielectric constant and electrical conductivity, both of which properties change as the frequency of the applied RF field changes. Values of dielectric constant and electrical conductivity and depth of penetration have been determined for many tissues (see Table VII-A-1 ). The absorption of RF energy is high and therefore the depth of penetration is low in tissues of high water content such as muscle, brain tissue, internal organs, and skin, while the absorption is lower in tissues of low water content such as fat and bone. Reflections between interfaces separating tissues of high and low water content can produce standing waves accompanied by hot spots that can be maximum in either tissue, regardless of dielectric constant or conductivity. The degree of these reflections are also frequencydependent (Table VII-A-1). In considering the biologic effects of RF energy, the wavelength or frequency of the energy and its relationship to the physical dimensions of objects exposed to radiation become very important factors

VII-A-14

VH-A-1 - HCPnmtS OF RF RXDIATIOK ID BIOLOGICAL KmiA* () ttedla with hlrfi vater content

RF radiation Frequency, Hit Wave-en-.h In air. cm Dielectric coostact ,

C

Muscle, akin, and ttiaues Conductivity. B* Mo/* Wavelength, Depth of penetratlont cm Reflection coefficient , al r/rruscle interface
r

in rnedium
0 koO 625 .612 693

Reflection coefficient. ouscle/fat interface

r _

I 10 27 12 10 68 100 TOO 300 33

30 000 3 000 1 106 T3S 300

2000

.60
97 3
Tl 7

k36
1-5

1.3

889 1 28 1 37 1 3 1.5* 1.60

2 21 2.26 3 92 k 73

66 1 51 3
27

91 21 Ik 11 3 3 3 3

3 t 2 2 79 89 57 16 01

6 66

0 962 95f 925 ='-3

681

179 178 177 176 175 1*5 .75 175

0 651
652

-11 13
-10 21 -7 96

i
6.2 592 562 32 519

150
100

T50 915

69.3
0 32 B 20 12 2 10

56 5 5^ 53 52 51 9 17 16
kk 3 3 ko 39 9

16. 11 9 8 76 5 * 1 >6 2 81
1 76

au
25 603 779 772 76, 751. 751 71.9 71.6 7Uk 7"<3

176
177
*17T

-8 Ik -7 06 -5 69 - 32 -3 -3 -3 -k 66 88 20 95

-a 06

1 500
2 50 3 000 5 000

i rr

2 12 1 70
1 6.L

6
5 17

1 15
.89

5 800
8 000 10 000

.775
578 1.61.

788 720

177 178 177 177 176 176

.506 .500 95
502 502 513 518

-k 29

3 75 3

7 65 10.3
(D)

1.13 31.3

-6 65 -5 95

Media ltb low water content

RF radiation Frequency, HHl Wavelength

Tat, bone, and tlBBues Dielectric constant ,

'L _ _ 20 __ _ 10 9 to k3 2 12 6 to 52 8

In air.
CB

Conductivity,

Wavelength,

o. , ontoo/a

V CD
t*l

Depth at
penetration," cm

neoiavw

Peflectlon coefficient , ni r/ fat interface

r 4 _ _

ReflectioD coefficient. fat/auacl* interface

1 10 27 12 ko 68 100 200 300 ".33 750 915 1 500 2 50 3 000

30 000 3 000 1 106

_ _
Ski 187 106 59 7

_ _

r 0 651 652 650 612 592 562 532 519 506 500 k95 502 502 513 518

__ _

738 300

Ik 6 7 k5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 95 7 6 6 6 6 5 5 5 05

159 118
60 k 39 32 26 23 17 2 1 2 7

19 1 to 75 9 25 8 31 6 37 9 k9 8 55 6 to to to to to 9k 2 107 118 138 Ik7

_0 660 617 .511 k58

17k 173

168

169 170 172

172 172

150
100

69-3

ko

32 8 20 12 2 10

kl 28 8 16 8 13 7 8 kl
5 k 2 2 21 25 63 29

U38
-U27

168 169 170

173

173
*17k

-klj U17
k!2 ko6 k06

173
17k 176 175 176 176 176 175

176 176 176 177 175 +176 173 17k

70 8 to 171 96 k to 213
110 to 23k

13 9 11 2

; ooo
5 800

6 5.17 3 75 3

162 to 309 186 to 338 255 to k31 321. to 5k9

9 71. 6 67
5 2k k 61 3 39

.393 .388
371 363

8 ooo
10 000

k 7 k 5

1 73 1 kl

Vroa Johnson and Guy (rei <O)

VII-A-15

with major implications for the extrapolation of results of animal studies to effects on man. The absorption of energy radiating from a source into space depends upon the relative absorption cross section of the irradiated objects. Thus, the size of the object with relation to the wavelength of the incident field of photons plays a role. At very low frequencies (long wavelength), a biological specimen absorbs very little electromagnetic energy. Absorbed energy increases rapidly with frequency up to a resonance region where the animal body dimensions are approximately 0.4 of the wavelength in free-space. At frequencies greater than the resonance frequency, total absorbed energy slowly decreases. The orientation of the animal Dody with its variable dimensions (height, width, thickness) to the planes of the various fields also plays a role. Johnson et al (11) have calculated the absorbed energies for prolate spheroids approximating the dimensions of man and laboratory animals used in microwave research. Figure VII-A-4 shows the absorbed energies as a function of frequency and long-axis orientation of a man-sized prolate spheroid to the various field vectors. (Other studies are in progress using a more realistic simulated configuration, e.g. an ellipsoid.) It may be seen in Figure VII-A-4 that orientation to the E-field vector is an order of magnitude more effective than orientation to the other vectors at frequencies below the resonance point at ^ 7U MHz. Beyond this and up to and beyond about 2 GHz the orientation to the E-field and H-field vectors are about equally effective. In Figure VII-A-5, similar calculations for a small rat are presented. A comparison between the graphs for man and those for the rat shows that for a given power density at a given frequency the amount of absorbed energy in man can be orders of magnitude greater than that for the rat whereas, at higher frequencies, absorption can be orders ot magnitude greater for the rat than for man. Thus if some biological effect can be produced in a rat at say a power density of 100 mW/cmz , the power density required to produce the same amount of absorbed energy in man may be substantially different. Although these calculations using a simple model provide only approximations of energy absorption, they serve to illustrate the following points: a) The power density by itself is a poor indicator of absorbed energy. b) Because frequency is such an important factor in determining the absorbed energy from a given power density, assessment of risks and setting of exposure standards should be further broken down into smaller frequency bands. c) For humans, the frequencies near and beyond 70 MHz are the most important to consider because they are absorbed more readily. VII-A-16

T-l- -M-ti :t^: ! !; t

-L/

O ^tv)

-J

*<-

3:

UJ

-^.

.01

.oi

Uiitti [. 1.1

-M-

o ^,

X
LJ

a e=3 - S >
3

.01

01

.01

.01

.01

ot

VII-A-17

r 1 L
,01

ic 2

FREQUENCY

"V ti o
i. C

B O X

.SS-3
Z ^ " Jj "O a.

C > E . V

o^
^tvj

^i:.0

J2t

-d-

L
a - to

>
Jl

-H

ll

01

-01

s-01

,-l

..01

.01

VII-A-18

d) Extrapolation of results from animal studies, performed at some specific frequency and power density, to an expectation for effects on man exposed at the same frequency and power density may be grossly misleading. e) In setting exposure standards, the random orientation of persons to the various vectors of the beam snould be consiaered; the most critical orientation should set the limiting factor. For a more detailed discussion of the interaction of RF radiation with biological materials, Reference (9), by A. W. Guy and (11), by Johnson et al, may be consulted. Thermal effects on organisms. Body temperature increase during exposure to RF radiation depends on 1) the specific area of the body exposed and the efficiency of heat elimination; 2) intensity of field strength; 3) duration of exposure; 4) specific frequency or wavelength; and 5) thickness of skin and subcutaneous tissue. These variables determine the percentage of radiant energy absorbed by various tissues of the body (29, 30). In partial body exposure under normal conditions, the body acts as a cooling reservoir, which stabilizes the temperature of the exposed part. The stabilization is due to an equilibrium established between the energy absorbed by the exposed part of the body and the amount of heat carried away from it. This heat transport is due to increased olood flow to other parts of the body, which are maintained at normal temperature by heat-regulating mechanisms of the body such as heat loss due to sweat-evaporation, radiation, ana convection. If the amount of absorbed energy exceeds the optimal amount of heat energy which can be handled by the mechanisms of temperature regulation, the excess energy will cause continuous temperature rise with time. Fever, and under some circumstances, local tissue destruction can result (29, 30). Not all parts of the body are equally susceptible to temperature rise: different parts vary in the ability to sense thermal stimulation and respond by increasing blood flow. The degree of innervation and vascularization together determine the body's response. Thus, the most susceptible parts of the body are those that are not as well protected by these physiological phenomena. Such areas include the eye lens, testes, gall bladder, and parts of the gastrointestinal tract. It has been shown that damage to these tissues can occur without significant rise in oral or rectal temperature (14). Total body irradiation of organisms the size of humans may be considered in large measure to be partial body irradiation. As seen in Taole VII-A-1, the depth of penetration may be only a few centimeters for many RF radiation frequencies. Conveniently, as the frequency of the radiation and its associated photon energy increases, the depth of penetration decreases allowing the highly vascularized surface tissues to effectively dispose of the heat (33). VII-A-19

Non-thermal effects in organisms. There have been many reports of so-called non-thermal effects of RF radiation, especially by investigators in the Eastern European countries. The validity of the existence of true non-thermal effects of low levels of RF radiation has been challenged by American and Western European investigators. In part, the controversy reflects a difference of definition of non-thermal effects: The Eastern Europeans consider any biological effect of RF radiation which is not accompanied by a generalized heating of the organism to be a "non-thermal" effect. The definition used by Western country investigators allows for localized, hot-spot-type heating, even though unmeasurable because of technical difficulties. Given the very low energy of the photons of RF radiation, it is most likely that almost all observed biological effects can be attributed to thermal effects. It does not appear to be fruitful to dwell further on any distinction between thermal and non-thermal effects.
PHYSIOLOGICAL EFFECTS OF RADIO-FREQUENCY RADIATION

Systematic research on the biological effects of RF radiation was begun immediately after World War II (31). The results of these investigations are available in reports of the "Tri-Service Program" (17), reviews (5, 12, 16, 20, 21, 27), books (8, 15, 22, 23, 32), and symposia proceedings (4, 6, 19). Glaser (7) has recently prepared a comprehensive bibliography of the literature on RF and microwave bioeffects. Some reported effects are listed in Taole VII-A-Z (compiled from Reference 20). Extensive investigations into microwave bioeffects during the last quarter century show conclusively that, for frequencies between 1200 and 24,500 MHz, exposure to a power density of 100 mW/cm2 for 1 h or more, can produce pathophysiologic effects of a thermal nature. Such effects are characterized by temperature rise, which is a function of the thermal regulatory processes and active adaptation of the animal. The end result is either reversible or irreversible change, depending on the conditions of the irradiation and the physiologic state of the animal. At power densities below 100 mW/cm1 , however, evidence of pathological changes is nonexistent or equivocal (20). The literature on the biologic effects of radio- and low-frequency ( <30 MHz) electromagnetic radiation has been reviewed by several authors (2, 13, 15, 18, 22, 24). Bellinger (3) has reported on an extensive biomedical study of low-frequency RF radiation. Short-term (1 h) exposures of monkeys to 10.5, 19.3, and 26.6 MHz, under experimental conditions which employed 100 to 200 mW/cmz, did not produce discernible biologic effects. Michaelson (20) has reviewed in greater detail the results briefly listed in Table vlI-A-2. He has pointed out the limitations in some of the data which make it inapplicable for supporting the idea that exposures to low power densities cause pathological effects; for example, he VII-A-20

YIl-A-2 - SOKE BIOLOGICAL RESPONSESTO RF RADIATION

Response

Remarks 13 to 59 mW/cm 10 000 MHz) for U sec ( 3000 HHi and

Perception of heat Pain threshold Cataracts

1800 mW/cm 2 for 60 sec (3000 MJIz) Lens clouding vhen tenpernture ot lens increases by li K (U C) Accurulation of subclinical danage at, lov pcvpr densities for short, durations mny yield cataracts Evidence still equivocal.

Reproductive detriment Testes

Intrascrotal temperature rise of >1 K (>1 C) by RF radiation or an/ other means reduces viable sperm count, this effect is usually reversible Exposure to 2880 MHz at 5 mW/cn for an indefinite period is the "threshold" for evidence of testicular danage in the most sensitive dog out of 35 dogs tested. Exposure to 3000 Mhz at 8 mW/ cm did not affect mating of mice or rats.

Ovaries

No evidence that exposures to 10 mW/cm or even soirewhat greater interfere with reproduction

Visceral Effects Gastric ulcers Delay of gastric secretion and emptying Hematopoietic effects Leukocytosis, lymphocyte pen!a, eosinoper.^a, red blood cell life spar altsrtion, impaired ton? car-cv function, henogj.;D--. Decreases, platelet decrease, reticulocytosis, t'.f Cardiovascular effects Blood flov changes, blood pressure decrease, heart rate increase, etc Central nervous system
Agitation, drovsiness, muscular weakness, electroencephalogram (EEC) changes, avoidance behavior, altered conditioned response , decreased endurance , headache, etc.

HOO mW/cm

for >_ 10 min 2 0 05 to 1 mW/cm for 30 min

Reversible.

Generally, long exposures to >10 mW/cm are required to yield an e f f e c t . Efr e~t are ?e-,erally re/ersibl

Effects generally attributable to peripheral vasodilatio" and hemodilution in resporse to heat stress

Large number of studies, sone conflicting results Eastern Europeans clam effects at<10 mx/cn-f investigators in Western countries have not always observed these effects even at higher exposure levels This is the area of greatest controversy

Compiled from reference 2.0

VII-A-21

WPRODUCBILJTY OF THE ORIGINAL PAGE IS POOR

points out the lack of appropriate controls in some cases, other mitigating circumstances (e.g. concurrent exposure to ionizing radiation) that might be responsible for an effect, and the reversibility of most of the phenomena observable at low exposure levels. He indicates that many of the biological responses observed with exposures at power densities less than 100 mW/cmz are not to be considered pathological but reflect physiological adaptations and stress reactions. As regards effects on the human central nervous system produced by low levels of RF radiation, Michaelson (20) summarizes and discusses the reported effects as follows: "Effects in man referrable to CNS sensitivity have been described (5 references cited). Most of the reported effects are subjective, consisting of fatigability, headache, sleepiness, irritability, loss of appetite, and memory difficulties. Psychic changes that include unstable mooa, hypochondriasis, and anxiety have been observed. Compared to those in control groups, persons working in microwave fields of various intensities complain often of a heavy feeling in their heads, headaches, fatigue, drowsiness in the daytime, irritability, poor memory, and a pain in the heart, usually of the aching, stabbing type. Objective symptoms are bright red, diffuse, persistent dermographia, hyperhidrosis, unstable arterial pressure, and angiopathy of the retina. Autonomic vascular instability is reflected in changes in the electrocardiogram (braaycardia, disturbance in intraventricular conduction). Mental disorders such as anxiety, insecurity, hypochondria, suicidal thoughts, and at a later state, delirium, terror, visual and auditory hallucinations, combined with impairment of sleep have been reported (one reference cited). Most of the subjective symptoms are reversible, and pathological damage to neural structures is insignificant. Most of the reports are based on subjective rather than objective findings. It should be noted that individuals suffering from a variety of chronic diseases may exhibit the same dysfunctions of the central nervous and cardiovascular systems as those reported to be a result of exposure to microwaves." It is not clear whether the above reported subjective effects can be applied to a large fraction of the population or just to a small highly susceptible subpopulation or to a subpopulation concomitantly affected by other factors. These observations, nonetheless, indicate that RF radiation stress at low power densities may lead to performance decrements, perhaps similar to those occurring in hot environments.
PHYSIOLOGICAL LIMITS (STANDARDS)

Adequate protection of SPS workers from potential RF radiation hazards should be achieved by using the RF radiation exposure standards of the American National Standards Institute (ANSI) or the American Conference of Governmental and Industrial Hygienists (ACGIH) as criteria for design and/or operational procedures. These standards plus those of other agencies and countries are listed in Table VII-A-3.

VII-A-22

TAG,Lfc ZD--A-3- RECOMMENDED MAXIMUM PERMISSIBLE INTENSITIES FOR RADIOFREOUEHCY RADIATION 6

Maximum permissible intensity 10 mW/cm 2

Frequency, MHz
10 to 100 000

Country or source

Specifications
P 1 mWh/cm for each 0 mm 8-hr workday

AHSI 1966, Canada 1966 National Institute of of Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) Great Britain I960 US Army and US Air Force 1965 France (rdlitary) 1969

30 to 30 000 100 to 100 000

Daily exposure 10 mW/cm

2

continuous exposure

10 to 100 mW/cn 2 limited occupational exposure ^>v. he r calculated as

til L
6

(Xnrf/cm 2 ) American Conference of Governmental^ Industrial H/gienists (ACGIH) 10 nW/cra threshold limit value , 8 hr 10 to 25 niW/cm 2 , 10 min/hr 2 25 mW/cm , ceiling value Occupational

Sveden 196l German Fed. Republic 1962 Netherlands 1 mW/cm2

All

Sweden 196l France 1969 USSR 1965, Poland 1961

General public Prolonged occupational exposure 15 to 20 min/day (protective goggles required) 2 to 3 hr/day Continuous wave 8 hr/day (occupational) Workday Workday (pulsed) 8 hr/day (occupational)

>300

0.1 mW/cm2 0.025 mW/cm2

>300 >300

USSR 1965, Poland Ip6l Czechoslovakia 1968

0.01 mW/cm2

>300

USSR 1965 Poland 1961 Czechoslovakia 1968 USSR 1965 Czechoslovakia USSR 1965 1968

20 V/m E field 5 A/m H field

10 V/m 3 V/m

0.06 to 30
30 to 300 30 to 300

(pulsed) 8 hr/day (occupational)

references

VII-A-23

The value of 10 mW/cm2 listed as a maximum permissible intensity for continuous exposure reflects the simple physiological consideration that the amount of heat which the human body can transfer to the external environment is, under normal circumstances, about 10 mW/cmz of body surface which may be raised about tenfold under very favorable circumstances. This means that the human body's ability to absorb RF radiation energy without causing a continuous temperature rise is limited to a value somewhere between 10U ana 1000 W. These values may be compared to the metabolic energy produced by a 70 kg man: about 100 W at rest and about 300 W after heavy labor. Calculations indicate that for most frequencies only a fraction of the 10 mW/cmz to which a human might be exposed would actually be absorbed (Figure VII-A-4). These considerations plus a review of the extensive body of experimental data then available from the Tri-Service-sponsored studies (17), led a committee of the American National Standards Institute (ANSI) to recommend in 1966, the 10 nW/cm* value as the standard (25). They reaffirmed the standard in Ib73 (19). The basic standard reads as follows: "For normal environmental conditions and for incident electromagnetic energy of frequencies from 10 to 100,000 MBz the radiation protection guide is 10 mW/cmz as averaged over any possible 6.1 hour period." This standard aoes not set an upper intensity limit for very shortterm ( < 0.1 h) exposures but sets a maximum energy density of 1 mWh/cm* averaged over the 0.1-h period (a time weighted average). Tne ANSI standard permits indefinite exposure to a maximum power density of 10 mW/cmz. The guide applies whether the radiation is continuous or intermittent and is intended for the general public as well as workers. These guides and exposure levels in force today appear to be entirely safe. So far, there is no documented evidence of injury to military or industrial personnel, or the general public, from the operation and maintenance of radars ana other RF and microwave-emitting sources within the 10 mW/cm'2 limit of exposure (20). Despite the apparent safety of the ANSI standards, microwave standards are undergoing frequent review and more detailed specification. The most recent statement on microwave standards is in the 1976 ACGIH (1) Notice of Intent to Change Threshold Limit Values (TLV). The full text of the intended change is as follows: These Threshold Limit Values refer to microwave energy in the frequency range of 300 MHz to 300 GHz and represent conditions under which it is believed that nearly all workers may be repeatedly exposed without adverse effect. VII-A-24

Under conditions of moderate to severe heat stress the recommended values may need to be reduced.* Therefore, these values should be used as guides in the control of exposure to microwave energy and should not be regarded as a fine line between safe and dangerous levels. Recommended Values: The Threshold Limit Value for occupational exposure to microwave energy, where power density or field intensity is known and exposure time is controlled, is as follows: 1. For exposure to continuous wave (CW) sources, the power density level shall not exceed 10 milliwatts per square centimeter (mW/cm1 ) for continuous exposure and the total exposure time shall be limited to an 8-hour workday. This power density is approximately equivalent to a free-space electric field strength of 200 voltsper-meter rms (V/m) and a free-space magnetic field strength of 0.5 ampere-per-meter rms (A/m). 2. Exposures to CW power density levels greater than 10 mW/cmaare permissible up to a maximum of 25 row/on* based upon an average energy density of 1 milliwatthour per square centimeter (mWh/cmz ) averaged over any 0.1 hour period. For example, at 25 mW/cn^the permissible exposure duration is approximately 2.4 minutes in any 0.1 hour period. 3. For repetitively pulsed microwave sources, the average field strength or power density is calculated by multiplying the peak-pulse value by the duty cycle. The duty cycle is equal to the pulse duration in seconds times the pulse repetition rate in Hertz. Exposure during an 8-hour workday shall not exceed the following values which are averaged over any 0.1 hour period: Power Density Energy Density Mean Squared Electric Field Strength Mean Squared Magnetic Field Strength 10 mW/cmi 1 mWh/an240,000 Vz/mi 0.25 A^Vm*

4. Exposure is not permissible in CW or repetitively pulsed fields with an average power density in excess of 25 mW/cm* or approximate equivalent free-space field strengths of 300 V/m or 0.75 A/m. *Mumford, W. S. "Heat Stress Due to R. F. Radiation," Proceedings of IEEE, Vol. 57, No. 2, Feb. 1969, pp. 171-178. VII-A-25

These standards appear to be the appropriate ones for the physiological limits to consider in SPS design ana operations. The ACGIH Standards (1) only apply to the frequencies, 300 MHz-300 GHz; but the ACGIH has filed a notice of "Intent to Study" RF radiation from 10 MHz to 100 MHz and microwave radiation from 100 MHz to 300 MHz. The possibility exists that future standards may be more specific as to frequency (33). For example, Rogers and King (26) suggest that under plane-wave (far-fiela) conditions the body could endure an RF radiation power density greater than 10 mW/cma (E-field strength = 200 V/m) for frequencies in the HF band (3-30 MHz) and suggest that an electric field strength of 1000 V/m can be considered the safe limit for continuous daily exposure to RF radiation in the range below 30 MHz. Mention should be made of the lower standards established by the Eastern European countries (see Table VTI-A-3 ). These lower standards reflect the industrial hygiene philosophy of the USSR which, according to Magnuson et: al (14), basically consists of the following: (1) The maximum exposure is defined as that level at which daily work in that environment will not result in any_ deviation from the normal state, as well as not result in pathological effects. (2) Standards are based entirely on presence or absence of biological effects without regard to the feasibility of reaching such levels in practice. (3) The values are maximum exposures rather than time-weighted averages. (4) Regardless of the value set, the optimum value and goal is zero. USSR maximum permissible exposure (MPE) values are not rigid ceilings but, in fact, excursions above these values within reasonable limits are permitted and the MPE's represent desirable values for which to strive rather than absolute values to be used in practice. Thus the standards used in the U.S. and in the USSR are not as irreconcilable as they might appear (20).
RESEARCH NEEDS

The main areas of uncertainty in the application of the ANSI or ACGIH Standards as design and/or operations criteria are as follows: 1) Dosimetric methods ana models for studying the RF power densities or E and H field strengths at frequencies to be expected in various zones of the spacecraft or during EVA need to be developed to ascertain if the limits might be exceeded. Consideration should be given to the absorbed power from mixed fields produced by focusing and scattering effects within both the spacecraft and the bodies of spacecraft personnel. VII-A-26

2) The amount of heat which the human body can transfer to the environment in zero g, where natural 2 convection does not play a role, needs to be determined. The 10 mW/cm - value appropriate for Earth conditions may not be applicable in zero g. 3) The extent to which low power densities ( < 10 mW/cnV2") for extended periods will cause performance decrements by inducing headaches, fatigue, muscular weakness, irritability, etc., should be studied further. 4) The potential interactions of other environmental factors in space with the responses to RF radiation should be examined. For examples, RF heating effects on the biological responses to ionizing radiation neea further study; additive thermal loading problems by RF radiation at 10 mW/cm1 co-insulting with heat stress by partial failures of Environmental Control and Life Support Systems (ECLSS) or potential heat stress from heavy physical activity such as in EVA may cause a detrimental body temperature rise. 5) The direct impact on organisms and ecosystems in and near rectenna sites may not be significant, but the potential for a biospheric impact requires assessment. Organisms living under rectennas are likely to be sufficiently well shielded, but birds and insects flying slowly through the beam could be adversely affected with ramifying consequences to nearby ecosystems.

VII-A-27

REFERENCES

1. ACGIH (American Conference of Governmental and Industrial Hygienists). TLVsf Threshold Limit Values for Physical Agents Adopted by ACGIH for 1976. Cincinnati, 1976. 2. Behling, U. H. Biological Effects of Radio- and Low-Frequency Electromagnetic Radiation, pp. 1-7. Rockville, Md., U.S. Public Health Serv., Bur. Radiol. Health, Biol. Effects Div., April 1969. (Unpublished manuscript). 3. Bellinger, J. N. Detection and Evaluation of Radio-frequency Electromagnetic Radiation-Induced Biological Damage in Maccaca mulatta, Final Report, 38 pp. San Antonio, Texas, Southwest Res. Inst., 1^71. (Contr. No. F41609-70-C-0025, SWRI No. 05-2808-01). 4. Cleary, S., Ed. Biological Effects and Health Implications of Microwave Radiation, Symposium Proceedings, 265 pp. Rockville, Md., U.S. Public Health Serv., 1970, (BRH, DBE 70-2). 5. Cleary, S. F. Biological effects of microwave and radio-frequency radiation. CRC Crit. Rev. Environ. Control, pp. 257-306, June 1970. 6. (Bur. Radiol. Health). Electronic Product Radiation and the Health Physicist, 464 pp., Rockville, Md., U.S. Public Health Service, 1970. (BRH/DEP 70-26).

7. Glaser, Z. R. Bibliography of Reported Biological Phenomena ("Effects") and Clinical Manifestations Attributed to Microwaves and Radio-Frequency Radiation, 92 pp. Bethesda, Md., U.S. Nav. Med. Res. Inst., 1971. (Rep. No. 2). 8. Gorodetskiy, A. A., Ed. Biological Action of Ultrasound and SuperHigh Frequency Electromagnetic Oscillations, 120 pp. Kiev, Acad. Sci. 1964. (JPRS-30860). 9. Guy, A. W. Biophysicsenergy absorption and distrioution. In, NATQAGARD Lecture Series No. 78 on Radiation Hazards. (NATO Advisory Group for Aerospace Research and Development) AGARD-LS-78, pp 4-1 to 4-14, 1975. 10. Johnson, C. C. and A. W. Guy. Non-ionizing electro-magnetic wave effects in biological materials and systems. Proc. IEEE 60:692-718, 1972. 11. Johnson, C. C., C. H. Durney, P. W. Barber, H. Massoudi, S. J. Allen, and J. C. Mitchell. Radiofrequency Radiation Dosimetry Handbook. Report No. SAM-TR-76-35, Brooks AFB, Texas, 1976. 12. Kalant, H. Physiologic hazards of microwave radiation, survey of published literature. Can. Med. Assoc. J., 81:575-582, 1959.

VII-A-28

13. Kholodov, Yu. A. The Effect of Electromagnetic and Magnetic Fields on the Central Nervous System, 250 pp., Moscow, Acad. Sci., 1966. (NASA TT-F-465, 1967). 14. Magnuson, J. J., D. W. Fassett, H. W. Gararde, V. K. Rowe, H. F. Smyth, and H. E. Stokinger. Industrial toxicology in the Soviet Union theoretical and applied. Am. Ind. Hyg. Assoc. J., 25:185-197, 1964. 15. Marha, K., J. Musil, and H. Tuna. Electromagnetic Fields and the Living Environment, 138 pp., Prague, State Health Publ. House, 1968. (Transl. SEN 911302-13-7, San Francisco Pr., 142 pp., 1971). 16. Michaelson, S. M. Biological effects of microwave exposure. In, Cleary, S. F., Ed. Biological Effects and Health Implications of Microwave Radiation, Symposium Proceedings, pp. 35-58, Rockville, Md., U.S. Public Health Serv., 1970.(6RH/DBE 70-2) Non-Ioniz. Radiat. 1:169-176, 1970. 17. Michaelson, S. M. The tri-service program - a tribute to George M. Knauf USAF (MC). IEEE Trans. Microwave Theory and Techniques 19:131-146, 1971. 18. Michaelson, S. M. Human exposure to non-ionizing radiant energy potential hazards and safety standards. Proc. IEEE 60:389-421, 1972. 19. Michaelson, S. M. Protection guides and standards for microwave exposure. In, NATO AGARD Lecture Series No. 78 on Radiation Hazards. (NATO Advisory Group for Aerospace Research and Developpntent) AGARDLS-78, pp. 12-1 to 12-6, 1975. 20. Michaelson, S. M. Radio-frequency and microwave energies, magnetic and electric fields. In, Calvin, M. and Gazenko, 0. G. eds. Foundations of Space Biology and Medicine, Vol. II, Bk. 2, pp. 409-452, Scientific and Technical Information Office, NASA, Washington, DC, 1975. 21. Milroy, W. C. and S. M. Michaelson. Biological effects of microwave radiation. Health Phys. 20:567-575, 1971. 22. Novitskiy, Yu. I., Z. V. Gordon, A. S. Presman, and Yu. A. Kholodov. Radio frequencies and Microwaves. Magnetic and Electrical Fields, 176 pp. Washington, DC, NASA, 1971 (NASA TT-F-14021). 23. Petrov, I. R., Ed. Influence of Microwave Radiation on the Organism of Man and Animals, 226 pp., Leningrad, Med. Pr., 1970 (NASA TT-F-708). 24. Presman, A. S. Electromagnetic Fields and Life, 287 pp., Moscow, Izd-vo Nauk., 1968"! New York, Plenum, 332 pp., 1970. 25. (Radio Frequency Radiation Hazard Committee). Safety Level of Electromagnetic Radiation with Respect to Personnel Am. Nat. Stand. Inst., New York, 1966. (ANSI-C95.1). VII-A-29

26. Rogers, S. J. and R. S. King. Radio hazards in the m.f./h.f. band. Non-loniz. Radiat. 1:178-189, 1970. 27. Roth, E. M. Microwave radiation. In, Roth, E. M., Ed. Compendium of Human Responses to the Aerospace Environment, Vol. 1, Sec. 1, pp. 1-22. Washington, DC, 1968 (NASA CR-1205(1)). 28. Schwan, H. P. Microwave radiation: biophysical considerations and standards criteria. IEEE Trans. Biomed. Eng. 19:304-312, 1972. 29. Schwan, H. P., and G. M. Piersol. The absorption of electromagnetic energy in body tissues, a review and critical analysis. Part 1. Biophysical aspects. Am. J. Phys. Med. 33:371-404, 1954. 3U. Schwan, H. P., and G. M. Piersol. The absorption of electromagnetic energy in body tissues, a review and critical analysis. Part II. Physiological and clinical aspects. Am. J. Phys. Meet. 34:425-448, 1955. 31. Subbota, A. G. and R. I. Kovach. Introduction. In, Petrov, I. R., Ed. Influence of Microwave Radiation on the Organism of Man and Animals, 226 pp. Washington, DC, NASA, 1972. (NASA TT-F-708). 32. Tolgskaya, M. S. and Z. V. Gordon. Pathological Effects of Radio Waves. Moscow. Med. Pr., 1971. New York, Consultants Bureau, 1973. 33. Wellsand, J. A. Proposed Revisions to ANSI Standard C95.1 for Exposure to Radiofrequency and Microwave Radiations. Ph. D. Thesis. Final Report (AD-A020681; USAMC-ITC-02-0-76-410). Army Materiel Command, Texarkana, TX. (1975)

VII-A-30

VII

ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS A. MICROWAVE TRANSMISSION - RECEPTION

VII-A-4 Rectenna Heating Introduction

R.K. Siler Environmental Effects Office

Since the summer of 1975, NASA Johnson Space Center has been studying the concept of placing solar power satellites (SPS) in geosynchronous orbit around the Earth. These orbiting satellites would collect and convert solar energy into a microwave beam which would be received on the ground by rectifying antenna arrays called "rectennas". Before it can be ascertained that such a space power system is a viable energy alternative for the future all direct and indirect costs must be carefully examined. The SPS concept appears to offer the advantage of having a minimum impact on the Earth's environment, i.e. there will be no particulate or chemical emissions nor hazardous waste products generated by energy production utilizing this concept. The importation of energy using this system might have meteorological side effects due to interaction of the transmitting microwave beam with the Earth's atmosphere or by releasing waste heat at the receiving rectenna. The Environmental Effects Office at Johnson Space Center was requested to prepare a preliminary study of possible meteorological effects which the ground rectenna operation might create. The Environmental Effects Office technically coordinated with Lockheed Electronics Company, under support contract NAS 9-12200, to obtain the services of expert meteorologists, summarize the latest and most pertinent thinking in the area of weather modification, and prepare a preliminary study report. In addition to the three consultant groups selected to contribute to this effort, LEC solicited the opinion of several National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) experts working in fields related to the microwave transmission and heat island phenomena involved. The consulting organizations placed under contract were: 1. Aeromet Inc. P.O. Box FF Norman, Oklahoma 73070 Primary Consultant: D. Ray Booker, Ph.D. 2. Center for the Environment and Man, Inc. 275 Windsor Street Hartford, Connecticut 06120 Primary Consultant: G.D. Robinson, Ph.D. Contributing Consultants: M.A. Atwater, Ph.D. R.J. Ball VII-A-31

3. Simpson Weather Associates P.O. Drawer 5508 Charlottesville, Virginia 22903 Primary Consultant: Roger Pielke, Ph.D. Contributing Consultants: Michael Garstang, Ph.D. Joanne Simpson, Ph.D., CCM R.H. Simpson, Ph.D., CCM Contributing consultants working in related area:
1. F.A. Gifford, Director

Atmospheric Turbulence and Diffusion Laboratory NOAA P.O. Box E

Oak Ridge, Tennessee 37830 2. M.T. Decker, Chief Environmental Radiometry Wave Propagation Laboratory NOAA Boulder, Colorado 80302

Discussion Heat Sources The Earth continously absorbs approximately 1017 watts of energy from the sun's radiation. An overall Earth average temperature is maintained by this energy but fairly large seasonal and diurnal temperature variations are observed. These natural variations represent the input and loss of large amounts of energy and are the driving forces behind the "weather". Man's activities on the surface of the Earth which might have an impact on the weather be evaluated by comparing the energy released to that which normally flows in and out in the course of events. The environmental impact of the proposed rectennas can be evaluated by comparing the energy flux as a function of area and time with these existing sources and observing the consequent modification to the local weather pattern. Cities have long been recognized as heat islands. Landsberg (1974) 2 , reports values as high as 6C in a small town (Con/all is, Oregon). The urban heat island effect is maximum about 3 hours after sunset on clear, calm evenings when the temperature difference between the paved streets and masonry walls of a city and the grassy countryside is at a maximum. In most cases reported a far more typical heat island value is 1-3C warmer over the city. Bernstein (1968) 3 found an average heat island of 1.6C over New York City by using a low flying instrumented helicopter.

VII-A-32

Dettwiller and Changnon (1976)1* found the average heat island effect of Paris, France, Chicago and St. Louis at midday was 1-3C warmer than the surrounding rural areas and extended 500-1500m above the city. The 100 year precipitation records indicated an increase of 19-38 percent in warm season rainfall. No change in winter precipitation was evident. Harnack and Landsberg (1975)5 studied several cases where convective precipitation was touched off by the Washington, D.C. metropolitan area. The energetics of the convective clouds were found to be consistent with the heat island effect available from the Washington area. The urban effect of St. Louis has been studied in great detail by many research groups as a part of Project Metromex. Changnon, et. al. (1976)6 summarized the Metromex studies and urban studies of seven other large cities and proposed a hypothesis for urban rainfall anomalies. The six largest cities, including St. Louis, had 10-30 percent summer precipitation increases in and downwind of the city. An increase in thunderstorm and hail frequency was also noted. For smaller cities, such as Tulsa and Indianapolis, there were no detectable changes. They concluded that the larger cities have about 25 percent more summer rainfall in and downwind of the city with more thunderstorms and hail. They suggest this effect is due to the differential heating and roughness between the city and country side, leading to more clouds and a greater chance for cloud mergers. A part of the effect is due to the addition of condensation nuclei, leading to more efficient condensation-coalescence processes. They found no significant winter effect on precipitation amounts. Lindquist (1968)7, Potter (1961)8 and other have reported cases of urban-induced precipitation anomalies. It appears that the effect is most likely when significant winter precipitation is derived from instability showers, rather than large overrunning systems. Since most snow falls at temperatures near the freezing mark, an obvious effect of a heat island is to melt more snow, causing it to fall as rain or drizzle. Heating effects have been modeled and several studies have been conducted on how urban areas may effect the weather. The literature describing these studies seems to indicate the following: 1. Large metropolitan areas produce a heat island effect of nominal value between 1C and 3C but could increase to 10C under certain conditions. 2. These effects are responsible for up to 30 percent increases in warm season rainfall, more thunderstorms, and more hail. 3. Winter season precipitation amount changes were indicated but not firmly established. Any such effect is probably restricted to precipitation from instability showers. VII-A-33

4. Any effects are restricted to about 50 km downwind. 5. The most likely winter effect is to cause more snow to melt and fall as rain. 6. Part of the precipitation changes are due to microphysical changes not related to the heat island effect. 7. Smaller cities, such as Tulsa and Indianapolis, have not been found to have a significant effect on precipitation. Malkus (1963)9 reviewed several of her earlier studies of the heat island effect of small, flat tropical islands, which are frequently observed to produce afternoon convective clouds which often produce rain. While this effect is quite common and is easily observed, she pointed out that it is very dependent on wind speed and direction, atmospheric stability and other factors. She cast some doubt on the prospect of the same phenomenon occurring regularly over land. The effect is most likely to occur where convective cloud bases are low and stability is marginal. Mahrer and Pielke (1976)10 obtain values of energy released per second due to turbulent surface heat flux of up to 400 watts/m2 in their numerical simulation of the air flow over Barbados. This magnitude of heating causes a significant alteration of the low level wind and thermal profile, along with the development of convergence downwind from the Island. Black and Tarmy (1963)ll sought to prove that extensive areas coated with asphalt could be used to produce rain downwind and create arable land in certain desert coastlines. Their calculations indicated that balck strips of 15 to 80 km would be a cost effective means of producing an additional 50 mm of rainfall annually in some areas. Additional estimates of energy release are available from other sources. Rosenberg (1974)12 gives a daily average of 145 watts/m2 for the undepleted solar radiation (undepleted by atmospheric attenuation) received on a horizontal surface at 40N in January. Kaimal et.al. (1976)13 obtained energy release rates on the order of 100 watts/ m2 over northwest Minnesota during a typical day. Cities and urban areas are compared with other heat sources, estimated by Hanna and Swisher (1971J1" and Hanna and Gifford (1975;,15, in Table VII-A-4. The SPS rectenna waste heat is fairly small compared to these other sources.

VII-A-34

O)

i-

4_}
M

to

ra
r,-

4_) +j rt3
fN. "H

co

CO I*

CO 4-> 4->

ro ^ tfl ,_, O

ra
^ f-l -( p

o.
,_

to
4.3

4_)
jj_>

t/1
(t5

CO 4J 4->

4-^ 4-)

4-2 4-2

ro vt 0 ^_ X
Lf)

CO 4-) 4_>

4J 4>

to

4-) 4.)

to
ro

to
4-* 4^

ro
t-H f-H

ra
CM p-t

ro +j

O
r

'x co r-

X
LO ^_

o
X

ro

ro
rH
i-H

x
CO

c^

2 , ,i O

ra
r-4 i-H

2
C3

ra 2
CO

r-

O X

I-H -t

O rH

O
p

X CO 1 0

OsJ f

oo
S-

S3 O

to <u o

ro > S<D C
r-H

to
3

0)
^f r~

aJ ^^ f
ro S_ 3

0
3 C '

ro 3 ^ rO

4^ C

CO 3

CO 3
O

to

QJ

n.

en
LU

E _ h-

".J3
(T3
^-

to
y_
1

O 3 C
f"

o o

C O 0

c oo 4j o C c in O o ^ o o

O 3 C

o
3

CO 3

O 3 C C O
0

3 O 3 C
4_> C

to

ro

3 O 3 C
4J C

to

JCO

3 O 3 C
4J

O 0

O 0

oo
CM

-o

OJ

rO

ro ^ O
C ro

z: xx

oo
c?

^
00 \
r
f"

oo
ra

O C ro ro S3

ai s^^ r

a> O r X
f LO ^^ ^~

ro
rS4^

O T3 CD JO ra ^^
r-w

rO 0
r-

CL

>,

ro JO O
r

ro
O

ro c 0) c
I*

to

o
<N

3 C

^r
xX

tvj
^~

CM 04 CM

sX

CD

CD

c o o o

o o

^*
XX

yr oo

s: z: z: XX
O O

CM

CM

CM ^
XX

CM ^ XX

IH ^**^

o to
sO) Q.

o o o 0 o o

O O

O O

C (O JO t

i-

s_ OJ a.

C O CO r

>,
'co

CM ^" 2 . CM

z:
to Jj
ro CO LO
OO

CM CM

CM CO 4J

z: z: z:
to
+*

CM

CM

ro

Q.
O O

c
-

CO ^

*j
ro

CO

ra

I\

CO 4J

to
4J

CM 55c^ CM

CM 5T ^^ CO 4J

ro .?

CO
4_>

z:
4_> 4^

4J

ia

2 0 d.

tv

0 0

~
_C ifQ LU

o 2 2 o CO O o O O O o o f-~ 0 o o lo x o o *~ ~ in ~ "~
2

to

ro

ro

ra 2
O 0
r

to

.^

L^

in
c > aj

ro

XJ
CO

**

in ^
dO

oo r>
>^ f}

j_
O) 4^ O) 3T
4->

ro
O)

o O> a;
3 O

>k JO T3 OJ <*^ L. O

o
ra

2>

4* ^ O

^)

u ro a>
X
p^ 4J

o i_

oo

LU

CD ^^ iCV c

OJ JO
CO

o
O) Sr<*c~ 3 CO
^ OJ

S-

Q.
<_)

ro O)
"^

4~.)

(1)

<:
O) _ O) LU i>^

JO

to

so

JO < O^ SOJ LU
c_. rO
^ .

Sro O

C QJ i 3 JO

to

4->

jcu
to

c OJ o
^^ CD

O) 4-^
CO CM

(/)

>*J

C CO OJ C c O C i- O II 0)

d- to OJ ro

--> to

^^ <--

00

s-

1 to
r

oo
fO
,/")

0) T3
IO

PM

o
^~

ra

JO JO r- i.

to 10

o o c ca ra ^> f* r^o c c ra s- ro S+J

fO Q_ y^ QJ

03 r

LU

s_ c

t_ 4_}

ro <U i . ^^ c~ ro JO S3 o 3

ro 2 ro C
^_>

oo o.
00

o.

CO 3 TD C

C 0) 0 OJ

E
t,^.

Q. S- CO O 3 tV ro a; S- CL OJ O C O -M CvJ
O OJ

o $_

>, to
O) 0)

a>

S- tO

CD

'o "o
oo

00

CO

C CO 0)

(/)

3 40

3 ^

"o

>

oo

ra

3 00

$- 0) CD O) a. tra _J

f*-f
1

fV^

>^ CD ^ O)

4-> 3 ro 3 3 to O to OO <C

to E

0 SCD

s~ to

4->

to

oo
Q.

oo

OO

LU

VII-A-35

Orbit Dynamics At certain times of year the satellites will pass between the sun and earth, reducing temporarily the solar power reaching any point on the planet. To calculate the loss, it is necessary to look at some details of satellite construction and the nature of the orbit. The satellite will be in geostationary orbit, radius 42.2xl0 3 km. The earth's radius is taken as 6.4xl0 3 km. The solar collectors will rotate about a parallel to the earth's axis, but will not be rotated about an axis parallel to the plane of the ecliptic. Available solar power will thus vary as cos & , 6 being the sun's declination. If the mean solar power (the "solar constant") is I , the declination factor and the eccentricity of the earth's orbit result in the following variation in available power. Northern winter solstice Northern spring equinox Northern summer solstice Northern autumn equinox 0.948 I c

1.008 I ( 0.888 I o 0.994 I o

There is a smaller diurnal variation caused by eccentricity of the satellite orbit. The situation at solstice is shown in Fig. VII-A-6a. There is no shading of the earth at this epoch. The situation at equinox in the plane of the ecliptic is shown in Fig. VII-A-6b and that perpendicular to this plane is Fig. VII-A-Gc. A belt of satellites over 60 of longitude, and those within about 9 longitude of solar zenith lies between the earth and the sun at any one time. Solar power is reduced at a point on the equator for the period true solar noon (T.S.N.) 2h. The reduction is constant at its maximum value over the period approximately lh 24 m from T.S.N. The angular diameter of the sun is 9.3xlO~ 3 radians and the satellite about 3.6x10"* km from the earth's surface. The width of the penumbral band at the equator (Fig. &c) is therefore, about 325 km, roughly 3 of latitude. The situation at onset of occultation is shown in Fig. VII-A-7, which shows that there is some effect during the period when 5 = 8.9, about 21 days on either side of each equinox. This is the eclipse period of Fig. IV-17 of JSC-11568, but note that that diagram does not include the effect on available power of eccentricity of the earth's orbit. At the beginning of this period, there is occultation at latitude 81, at the end of the period the same effect 9 from the opposite pole. With the configuration, there is at any one time one satellite between any point in the penumbral belt and the sun's disc. The area of the satellite is 144 km 2 . The loss of solar power is VII-A-36

(a) Solstice SUN

(b) Equinox (Ecliptic Plane)

() c

Equinox (!Ecli>ttc)

"
SUN
0 32'

325km rL

Fiq

VII-A-6 Earth-Satellite Configuration

VII-A-37

144/(3.5xlO") 2

v 7r(4.65xlO- 3 ) 2 = 0.00173

Approximate integration over the day shows that a fraction 7.6x10"* of available solar power is lost in the penumbral belt. At latitude <)> the width of the penumbral band at occultation is about 325/cos <}> km, the fraction of available solar radiation removed at any location is the same as at the equator. The absolute loss of energy is the same, spread over the same area, but over a broader latitude band. The latitude of the center of the occulted belt is % cos'MS.S tan 6). The overall effect of occultation is that for about four hours around noon on two of about 80 days each year, the solar power outside the atmosphere at a point equatorward of 80 latitude is reduced by about 0.17 percent and rather less that 10 percent of this is released at the surface in the U.S.A. A steady decrease of 0.2 percent in the solar constant is about at the limit of detection by currently available methods, given integration periods of order one year. Detection of the same reduction on two days each year would call ofr integration times of order 100 years. Global meteorological effects of such a reduction would be lost in the "noise" of weather and climate variation. The appropriate method of investigation of systematic effects of any change in amount or distribution of incoming radiation is the general circulation model of the atmosphere (G.C.M.). Existing GCM's do not approach the precision and resolution required to handle changes of order 0.2 percent solar constants over limited areas and period. There is reason to speculate that such a model can never be constructed: certainly one will not be available for many years. Current knowledge of atmospheric processes suggest that environmental effects of occultation will be so small as to be neither unequivocable detectable nor calculable. In these circumstances, it will not be possible either to affirm or deny that any observed "anomaly" is attributable to occultation. Microwave Beam Description The 2.45 GHz microwave beam used to transfer the energy collected in orbit to the earth's surface is discussed in Section 4. of NASA publication JSC-11568, Volume 2. Previous studies of microwave transmission through the ionosphere indicate that nonlinear interactions begin to occur at some threshold power density level around 23 mW cm- 2 . The validity of this number needs to be well established because it has a large impact on the sizing and performance characteristic of the solar power system. The combination of this threshold level, an operating frequency of 2.45 GHz, a desired energy transfer of 5 GW, and the thermal limits described in the JSC report result in an antenna which has a diameter of approximately 10 km on the earth's surface. Latitude correction increases the major axis of the rectenna in a north/south direction. The microwave beam propagates through the atmosphere at an angle off-vertical slightly greater than the rectenna's latitude. VII-A-38

SUN

Onset of Occultation at

8.9e

VII-A- 39

Transmission of the earth's atmosphere at these frequencies is very efficient. The small amount of energy that is absorbed by the stratosphere and troposphere is negligible even if the beam power is substantially increased. The small amount of energy that is lost in the ionosphere presents some questions. A threshold level of approximately 23 mW cm~2 has been established to avoid nonlinear interactions with the ionosphere. This threshold has a very great influence on the size of the ground rectennas necessary to receive a fixed amount of energy from the orbiting satellites. It has been postulated that as this threshold level is approached heating will be high enough to reduce the electron/ion concentration. This "hole" will alter the ionosphere response to propagating radio frequencies and could disrupt HF, VHP communications systems, and VLF navigation systems due to the additional RFI and multipath degradations. It has been suggested that this altered ionos-> pheric path should be examined for possible alterations in the beam intensity distribution that arrives at the rectenna surface. The alterations which will occur in the ionosphere and their deleterious effects should be the subject of continuing studies because of the strong role that this threshold limit has in setting the overall scale of the transmitting/receiving geometry. Significant reductions in overall systems costs might result if the energy density can be increased and/or the microwave frequency be increased.

Rectenna Description
The rectenna site is envisfoned to be approximately 80,000 acres and located close to the user. The rectenna structure will cover between 30 percent and 40 percent of this area with the remainder being a buffer zone for the microwave energy density to decrease to a safe continuous power level. Several structural design approaches are being evaluated but all used in the present study utilize large reflective panels holding subassemblies which collect the microwave radiation and convert it to DC current. The reflectors in this case are envisioned to be expanded metal screen wire. Specifics of the design of these subelements depends on latitude, but the basic criteria is that they be far enough apart that they can easily reached for service/maintenance. The example calculated for Houston results in a structure of expanded metal panels 4.9 m long and 15 m on the hypotenuse and inclined at 36 placed end to end to produce long rows with the hypotenuse faces pointed in the direction of the satellites which serve the rectenna. The spacing between rows would be 6.4 m to allow access. Approximately 1000 rows would be needed for the rectenna which would have a major axis of M 2 km. The rectenna presented in NASA JSC-11568 uses a very simple structure and no attempt has been made to optimize the structure as to concept, weight, or cost. One design option is to series connect all the microwave rectifying subelements to generate a very high DC voltage over the antenna. If this method is used then the very high voltages will require that those on the higher voltage end of the string be insulated from ground. Adopting this high voltage technique may have a marked influence on the design concept utilized.

VII-A-40

Findings Beam Propagation Effects Absorption at 2.45 GHz is extremely small in the stratosphere and mesophere. Fractional absorption of the zenith path in a cloud-free atmosphere of a beam at about 2.5 GHz is about 0.01. About 1/10 of this occurs in the stratosphere and mesophere. The resultant mean heating rate for an SPS beam is about 10~ 2 C per day. The mean heating rate due to absorption of solar radiation is of order 10 C per day. The heating rate corresponding to absorption of the maximum microwave power, roughly four times the average over the beam, is 2x10~ 3 of the local average solar heating rate. As in the thermosphere, there is no possibility of direct photochemical interaction. The effect of the beam on the physical state of the mesosphere/stratosphere is not detectable by known techniques, This would be true for a beam of double or triple power. The heating of the troposphere by absorption of the microwave beam is of order 2x10 C per day. Direct heating by absorption of solar radiation is of order 2C per day on the average for the troposphere. In clear air the average effect of solar radiation is about 100 times that of the beam. The effect of the beam would be very difficult to separate from the noise of the solar effect due to normal atmospheric variability. The possible effect on atmospheric dynamics is neglibible. This would be true at doubled or tripled power. A tenfold power increase might justify reconsideration. Atmospheric absorption per unit area of the earth's surface is independent of the latitude fo the site, (except for the climatic variation of water content with latitude). Relationships between convective, conductive, 16 evaporative, and radiative processes in the atmosphere are complex. Absorption in cloud is greater than absorption in the clear atmosphere. To assess the possibility that absorption of the microwave beam might interfere with natural processes in clouds it is convenient transform the additional absorption exclusively into a rate of evaporation of water. For the stratus cloud, this if found to be about 0.0015 g.m.- 3 day1 over a height range of 3 km. In the absence of other processes, the cloud would be dispersed in about 20 days. This energy conversion rate is between 10~ 2 and 10~ 3 that associated with natural cloud-forming and dispersing processes. In the severe thunderstorm case, the peak power heating is sufficient to evaporate about 0.05 g.m." 3 day"1 over a 10 km layer, equivalent to about 10~ 3 of the natural energy conversion rate during the lifetime of a large storm. Existing models of convective cloud are not sufficiently detailed and precise to handle perturbations of this magnitude. Any actual effects of this perturbation could not be detected in the presence of the natural variance of cloud and storm phenoma. Doubling or tripling beam power would not affect these conclusions.

VII-A-41

Clean lower tropospheric air contains on average about 10 yg m-3 of particles with median radius comparable with the wavelength of visible light, about 0.5 ym. In polluted atmosphere the loading may be ten times greater, with scale heights about 1 km. The mass loading per unit area of surface is 10~2 to 10-1 g nr2. For 2.5 GHz radiation the particle radius is of order 5xlO=6 the wavelength of the radiation. Scattering by the particles, even in heavily polluted atmospheres, is quite negligible. The particles in the clean air situations are predominantly sulphuric acid or ammonium sulphate solutions. Polluted atmospheres caused directly or indirectly by combustion processes contain larger numbers of these particles with the addition of carbon, metal oxides, silicates, etc. Such particles absorb as well as scatter solar energy. On occasions, over large areas of the Midwestern U.S.A. and Europe, five percent or more of incident solar energy is absorbed. There is little firm knowledge about the absroptive properties of these materials for microwaves. For silica and alumina the absorption1 coefficient at 3 GHz is very small. The abount of material (10" gnr2) corresponds to a continuous screen only 2 to 5 ym thick. (Note that because there is no coherence in the interaction of radiation and the particles, this analogy, though reasonable for producing rough estimates of absorption, has no relevance to scattering and reflection.) Absorption of the 2.5 GHz radiation by atmospheric particles (other than water particles in cloud) will be negligible, both absolutely and in comparison with absorption of solar radiation. Effects on the atmosphere will not be detectable. Doubling or tripling the beam power will not affect this conclusion. Blake et.al., (1970)17 have calculated the relationship of microwave frequency to absorptivity as beam elevation angle is varied for an assumed oxygen and water vapor content troposphere. Bean et.al. (1970)18 have published measurement results which relate absorption to height above the surface for several frequencies. Results indicate that microwave frequency could be increased without great increases in microwave absorption in the atmosphere. Preliminary results of some ongoing studies currently being performed have suggested the beam diffraction and refraction effects may produce slight intensity variations across the microwave beam as it propagates through the atmosphere, but no strong focussing effects are expected which would invalidate the foregoing conclusions. Rectenna Effects Consideration here is limited to possible effects on weather and climate, local and global. Ecological consequences, directly due to land disturbance and change of usage, and indirectly due to microclimate change, are to be expected but are not considered in detail. Climatic perturbation may be subdivided into "active" -resulting from the heat release consequent on collection and conversion inefficiencies, and "passive" - resulting from changes in the surface radiation balance, consequent on land use change and the rectenna structure.

VII-A-42

Allowing for residential, commercial and one-third of the total per capita transportation usage, suburban power consumption in the U.S.A. in 1974 was about 5 KW per person.19 The rectenna's influence on weather and climate should be similar to that of a dormitory suburb of 150,000 people. It is important to consider this environmental effect in the context of the power-consumption scenario used in designing the solar power system. THe 750 MW dissipated at the rectenna site is the "waste heat" of a 5 GW power plant. The remainder of the 5 GW is released away from the rectenna site, most of it in areas with a higher surface density of energy conversion. The most marked environmental effects of the SPS will occur in the areas of usage. This does not make it any less important to investigate the environmental effects of the rectenna sites, but their significance should be judged in the context of the 2025 population and environment scenario, including the consequences of using alternative power sources. The required environmental impact is on the world of 2025, not that of 1975. It will be assumed that the excess heat is absorbed in the lower portion of the atmosphere, which is in contact with the earth. Judging by the surface roughness exhibited by the rectenna arrays, a depth of 100 m is a reasonable depth to assume as a sink for all of the excess heat. It is necessary to compute the amount of temperature rise in a cylinder of 5 km radius and 100 m height. It is reasonable to assume 900 mb (about 3,000 ft. altitude), 0C, and dry air. It is further assumed that the heating takes place at constant pressure and all of the energy is used to increase the air temperature (no work is done). The following equation applies:
AT =

dH

30-nprC vh where AT is the temperature rise (C) dH is the heat added (750 MW = 1.075xl0 10 cal min" 1 ) p is air density (1148 g m-3 at 900 mb, 0C) r is the radius of the array (5,000 m) C is the specific heat of iar at constant pressure (0.24 cal P g -ic-i v is wind speed (m s -1 )

h is the mixing depth (100 m) This simplifies to

Solving this for various wind speeds indicates the maximum amount of temperature rise expected in the lowest 100 m of the atmosphere as it passes over the rectenna. These values are plotted in Figure VII-A-8 . The corresponding curve for twice as much (1500 MW) heat dissipation is also shown.
VII-A-43

2.5

UJ

52

a:

ui oc < 1.5 a:
UJ UJ

a. 3S

0.5

WIND

10 15 SPEED, m s'1

20

Figure VII-A-8 Tenperature rise vs wind speed in the lowest 100 m of air crossing a rectenna site. VII-A-44

These data indicate that heating drops very rapidly as wind speed increases to %4 m s-1 and is of no consequence at faster speeds. The heating for slower speeds is possible significant. The amount of temperature rise is inversely proportional to the mixing depth. As the air near the surface gets warmer, it tends to rise and cool by adiabatic expansion. This increases the mixing depth and automatically reduces the amount of temperature rise. Under stable conditions, as on a clear, calm night, much more heating is required to get an increase of mixing depth than in the middle of a sunny, windy day, where unstable conditions prevail. Thus, the maximum temperature rise would occur under calm, stable conditions. These conditions are most likely to occur in a valley on a clear, calm night. On clear, calm nights, it is possible to get an inversion of as much as 20C per 100 m. Assuming a wind speed of 0.25 m s'1, we can solve equation (1) with AT and h as dependent variables, as follows:
AT AT = r
271

But, since the adiabatic lapse rate, which will be present in the heated air is AT = .OlOh, we can solve simultaneously the mixing depth and temperature by combining equations (3) and (4). This gives AT = 1.65C and h = 164 m. For the 1500MW waste heat case, this would be AT = 3.3C and h = 328 m. This is the maximum heat island effect under almost calm conditions. Standard methods of computing the dispersion of pollutant emissions provide an alternative computation of likely temperature rise. Using the "Gaussian plume" model with parameters recommended by the Environmental Protection Agency yields results consistene with the preceeding. In addition, it forecasts differential temperatures downwind from the rectenna. Considerably more detailed and complete model simulations need to be performed before a confident prediction could be made regarding impact the rectenna could have for a range of atmospheric conditions. From a meteorological standpoint, the rectenna as presently conceived does not appear "rough" in the same sense that topographic features or tall man-made buildings might aggravate turbulence flow near the ground. The roughness of the rectenna could possible be important when considering the structural design safety factors and influences in and around the structures per se. The rectennas could be located at almost any suitable location near the user in the continental United States. It has been concluded that this is primarily a function of convenience and suitability from the specific rectenna element structural design concept adopted. It may be found that a south facing mountain range front would offer some natural VII-A-45

advantages in that the rectenna might be smaller if located there. If the rectenna were on the windward side of a mountain range on such a slope, the waste heat from the rectenna might exaggerate the normal uplife of air crossing such a topographic feature. A site located in a warm humid climate might also increase clouds and rain showers in the usually unstable atmospheric conditions present. Any such effect would be difficult to demonstrate statistically because of the usual rainfall variability in such locations. The impact that the rectenna will have due to modification of the normal albedo to the absorption of solar radiation and the emission of thermal energy will probably be the greatest effect that the rectenna site will have on the site selected. These factors also have some degree of control from the standpoint of design, materials for construction, and preparation and utilization of the underlying soil. Other Effects The orbit dynamics disucssion in Section 2.2 described a very small decrease in the amount of solar energy available at the earth's surface. Changes in the earth's weather due to this occultation will not be detectable. The change in land use over to a rectenna site may produce changes in the ratio between energy losses to water evaporation and energy losses through convective processes which would affect local temperature, humidity, and the frequency of fog formation (as do the changes which follow urban development). There is the possibility of an effect on cloud populations. It is, therefore, necessary to consider the use of the ground below the rectenna elements. The natural evaporative pattern at the site area could probably be matched by a suitably chosen crop growing in the reduced light intensity below the rectenna elements. At the center of the site in the region of maximum microwave power, the flux of uncollected microwave radiation will be of order 10 Wm-2, which is the full intensity at the nominal edge of the beam, and one tenth the limiting power for exposure of human subjects under current practice in the U.S.A. The major discussion has been in terms of a 5 GW beam of 10 km diameter. With this system, the mean power dissipation over a site in the contiguous U.S. is at maximum about 10 percent of the natural net radiative flux. The site area is 100-105 km? In 1971 the estimate for a built-up area of the city of Cincinnati was a power conversion rate of2 26 WrrT2, 25 percent of the natural surface radiation balance. For 60 km of Manhattan Island, the estimate was 630 Wm"2, seven times the natural radiation balance. The climate of Manhattan Island and Cincinnati differs from that of their immediate surroundings but (apart from the irrelevant matter of air quality) no extensive climatic influence on the surroundings themselves has been noted. It is clear that from the point of view of climatic effects alone, the proposed dissipation at the rectenna sites could be greatly increased without disaster in the surroundings. Conventional fossil fuel plants producing 5 GW electrical power within the rectenna site would dissipate VII-A-46

7.5 GW "waste heat", ten times that of the rectenna dissipation considered. It would, however, be necessary to examine carefully the climatic effects of such large dissipation rates, (see recommendations). Contemporary experience of the effect of cities suggests that they would be tolerable but perhaps not desirable. Rectenna Construction In adapting the rectenna site to the environment, man has an opportunity to control the solar abosrption and thermal reradiation of energy from this site. The extreme case would be to deliberately cause it to absorb the maximum amount of solar radiation in the daytime and insolate against the loss of this energy during the night. The handling of the energy so it is trapped excites the imagination. It could be utilized directly to heat air in and around the rectenna or possibly be piped off, sotred in the soil, or be exported to another adjacent site to be utilized for constructive purposes. It might also be a solar energy converter if it is located in an area having little cloud cover. At the other extreme it could be made to reflect the majority of solar radiation during the day and emit the maximum amount of thermal energy and actually obtain a cold island effect on the earth's surface. At this time it is not clear what benefits could be achieved by controlling the radiative properties (passive features) of this facility. It is obvious that multi-functional utilization of such a large area as occupied by these rectenna sites is desirable. Consideration of these other activities is beyond the scope of this report, but when these considerations are made a farily detailed mesoscale weather model should be available for evaluating proposed designs. Conclusions Weather and climatic effects of the SPS system as outlined in JSC-11568 will be very small. If the power density of the beam is limited to about 250 Wm-2, no feature of the entire system has been identified in which possible weather or climate modification is a significant constraint. Power dissipation at a rectenna site is around 10 percent of the average "natural" energy conversion at the surface in the U.S.A. and is considerably less that that at present occurring in many cities of area comparable with a site. Changes in "natural" energy conversion consequent on albedo changes will be comparable with the power dissipation and there are possibilities of compensation by variation of construction details and surface finish. For this reason, there is little meteorological input into the question of choice of site, geographical, topographical and climatic, within the contiguous U.S.A. Engineering considerations and the direct ecological consequences of construction, operation and maintenance will carry much more weight. If increase in power density of the beam by a factor of five or more is contemplated, there will be no possibility of "passive" compensation for dissipation by adjusting the radiative properties of the artificial surfaces. Dissipation at the site will be comparable with VII-A-47

high-density population centers with some industrial activity. Meteorological considerations will become a factor in site choice, but still probably not a decisive one. Passage of the microwave beam through the mesosphere, stratosphere and troposphere will not produce disturbances of meteorological consequence, This would be true at power densities greater by a factor of ten than that porposed, but in this case absorption in heavy rain might become an undesirable economic factor to be considered with other economic factors in choice of sites. The SPS system has no specific features which render it likely to produce regional climatic modification (i.e., over the U.S.A. as a whole). This cannot be said so confidently of the general expansion of energy conversion which the SPS is designed to meet. The high thermodynamic efficiency of the surface components of the SPS gives it a definite advantage over fossil fuel and nuclear power generation from the point of view of climate modification. Recommendations Design alternatives for the SPS rectenna are available to control the capture of incident solar radiation. Some of these designs will dissipate large amounts of heat into the ambient air. These high heat dissipation designs along with the thermal and momentum effects of replacing the natural terrain with the rectenna, could have a substantial influence on local weather. In view of this it is recommended that plans be made to (1) develop the capability to mathematically model proposed designs and predict how they may affect various climatological/topographic situations at rectenna sites and (2) confirm the results, along with other aspects of the facility/installation, by building a prototype rectenna section and instrument it to measure the response to the solar/thermal radiation fields.

VII-A-48

Bibliography 1. Initial Technical, Environmental, and Economic Evaluation of Space Solar Pov/er Concepts, Vol. I Summary and Vol. II - Detailed Report, JSC-11568, Aug. 1976. Landsberg, Helmut: Inadvertent Atmospheric Modification Through Urbanization. Weather and Climate Modification, John Wiley & Sons, New York, 1974, pp. 726-763. Bornstein, Robert D.; Observations of the Urban Heat Island Effect in New York City. J. Appl. Meteor., 7, 1968, pp. 575-582. Dettwiller, J. and Changnon, S. A. Jr.; Possible Urban Effects on Maximum Daily Rainfall at Paris, St. Louis, and Chicago. J. Appl. Meteor., 15, 1976, pp. 517-519. Harnack, R. P. and Lundsberg, H. E. ; Selected Cases of Convective Precipitation Caused by the Metropolitan Area of Washington, D.C. 0. Appl. Meteor., 14, 1975, pp.,1050-1060. Changnon, S. A.; Semonin, R. G., and Huff, F. A.: A Hypothesis for Urban Rainfall Anomalies. J. Appl. Meteor., 15, 1976, pp. 544-560. Lindquist, S.; Studies on the Local Snowfall in Lund and its Environs. Lund Studies, Geogr. Ser. 0., 42, 1968, pp. 79-93 (secondary reference from Landsberg). Potter, J. G.; Areal Snowfall in Metropolitan Toronto. Meteor. Branch, Dept. of Transport, CIR-3431, Tec-342, 1961. (secondary reference from Landsberg). Malkus, Joanne S., Tropical Rain Induced by a Small Natural Heat Source. J. Appl. Meteor., 2, 1963, pp. 547-556. Mahrer, Y. and Pielke, R. A., Numerical Simulation of the Airflow Over Barbados. Hon. Wea. Rev., 104, 1976, pp. 13921402. __ Black, James F. and Tarmy, Barry L.; The Use of Asphalt Coatings to Increase Rainfall, J. Appl. Meteor., 2, 1963, pp. 557-564. Rosenberg, Norman J.; Microclimate: The Biological Environment; J. Wiley & Sons, New York, N . Y . , 1974. Kaimal, J. C.; Wyngaard, J. C.; Haugen, D. A.; Cote, O.R., Izumi, Y.; Caughey, S. J.; Readings, C. J.; Turbulent Structure in the Convective Boundary Layer, J. Atmos. Sci., 33, 1976, pp. 2152-2169.

2.

3. 4.

5.

6. 7.

8.

9. .10.

11. 12. 13.

VII-A-49

14.

Hanna, S. R. and Swisher, S. D.; Meteorological Effects of the Heat and Moisture Produced by Man. Nuclear Safety, 12, 1971, pp. 114-122. Hanna, S. R. and Gifford, F. A.; Meteorological Effects of Energy Dissipation at Large Power Parks. Bull. Amer. Meteor. Soc., 56, 1975, pp. 1069-1077. The Natural Stratosphere of 19741. CIAP Monograph 1 PB-246318 Sept. 1975, pp. 1-18 thru 1-22 and Chapter 4. Blake, L. V.; Prediction of Radar Range. Radar Handbook, McGrawHill Book Co., New York, 1970, Ch 2, pp. 1-73. Bean, B. R.; Dutton, E. J.; and Warner, B. D.; Weather Effects on Radar. Radar Handbook, McGraw-Hill Book Co., New York, 1970, Ch 24, pp. 1-40. Understanding the National Energy Dilemma; a Report of the Joint Cormiittee on Atomic Energy; published by the Center for Strategic and International Studies; Georgetown University. Washington, D.C.

15.

16. 17. 18.

19.

VII-ff-50

Related Bibliography Advances in Plasma Physics, Vol. 6, Interscience Series, Wiley & Sons, 1976. Atwater, Marshall A.; Thermal Changes Induced by Urbanization and PollQtants, 1975. Battan, L. J.; Radar Meteorology. The University of Chicago Press, Library of Congress No. 59-10422, pp. 161, 1959. Benech, B.; Experimental Study of an Artificial Plume Initiated from the Ground. J. Appl. Meteor., 15, pp. 127-137, 1976. Black, J. F.; Weather Control: Use of Asphalt Coating to Tap Solar Energy. Science, 139, pp. 226-227, 1963. Boatman, J. F. and Auer, A . M . , Fr.; Inadvertent Thunderstorm Modification by an Urban Area. Preprints 4th Conf. Weather Modification, Ft. Lauderdale, Amer. Meteor. Soc., pp. 366-373, 1974. Booker, D. Ray; Modification of Convective Storms. Meteor. Monog., Amer. Meteor. Soc., Boston, MA, 5, pp. 129-140, 1963. Bornstein, Robert D.; Two-Dimensional Non-Steady Numerical Simulation of Nightime Flow of a Stable Planetary Boundary Layer over a Rough Warm City. Proc. Conf. Urban Environment, Philadelphia, Amer. Meteor. Soc., pp. 89-94, 1972. Changnon, S. A., Fr.; The La Porte Weather AnomalyFact of Fiction? Bull. Amer. Meteor. Soc., 49, pp. 4-11, 1968. Changnon, S. A., Huff, F. A., and Semonin, R. G.; METROMEX: An Investigation of Inadvertent Weather Modification. Bull. Amer. Meteor. Soc., 52, pp. 958-967, 1971. Changnon, S. A.; Inadvertent Weather and Precipitation Modification by Urbanization. J. Irrigation Drainage Div., ASCE, 99, pp. 27-41, 1973. Changnon, S. A.; Hail Data and Results for 1973. Interim Report of METROMEX Studies: 1971-19-73,Jllinois State Water Survey, pp. 90-97, 1974a. Changnon, S. A.; Thunder Data and Results for 1973. Interim Report of METROMEX Studies, 1971-1973, Illinois State Water Survey, pp. 77-89, 1974b. Clarke, J. F.; Nocturnal Urban Boundary Layer over Cincinnati, Ohio. Mon. Wea. Rev., 97, pp. 582-589, 1969. Environmental Data Service; Climatic Change, Washington, D.C., 1976. Garstang, M., Tyson, P. D., and Emmitt, G. D.; The Structure of Heat Islands, Reviews of Geophysics and Space Physics, Vol. 13, No. ?, PP. 139-165, 1975. * Vll-A-51 -

Good Reference Works: Various Ionospheric Research Articles, Radio Science, Vol. 9, 1974. Howell, Wallace E.; Comment on "The Use of Asphalt Coatings to Increase Rainfall". J. Appl. Meteor., 3, pp. 642-643, 1964. Huff, F. A. and Changnon, S. A.; Precipitation Modification by Major Urban Areas. Bull. Amer. Meteor. Soc., 54, pp. 1220-1232, 1973. Huff, F. A. and Schickedanz, P. T.; METROMEX: Rainfall Analysis. Bull. Amer. Meteor. Soc., 55, pp. 90-92, 1974. Ionospheric Heating by Powerful Radio Waves, Radio Science, Vol. 9, No. II, pp. 1049-1063, 1974. Jones, D. M. A., and Schickedanz, P. T.; Surface Temperature, Moisture, and Wind Studies. Interim Report of METROMEX Studies 1971-1973, Illinois State Water Survey, pp. 98-120, 1974. METROMEX Update; Bull. Amer. Meteor. Soc., 57, pp. 304-308, 1976. Morris, D. G.; Initiation of Convective Clouds due to Static Firing of the Saturn 5 First Stage. Bull. Amer. Meteor. Soc., 49, pp. 10541058, 1968. Neiburger; Weather Modification and Smog Science, 126, pp. 637-645, 1957. Semonin, R. G., and Changnon, S. A.; METROMEX: Sumnary of 1971-1972 Results. Bull. Amer. Meteor. Soc., 55, pp. 95-100, 1974. Vukovich, F. M.; Theoretical Analysis of the Effect of Mean Wind and Stability on a Heat Island Circulation Characteristic of an Urban Complex. Mon. Wea. Rev., 99, pp. 919-926. Vukovich, F. M.; A Study of the Atmospheric Response due to a Diurnal Heating Function Characteristic of an Urban Complex. Mon. Wea. Rev., 101, pp. 467-474, 1973. Vukovich, F. M.; A Study of the Effect of Wind Shear on a Heat Island Circulation Characteristic of. an Urban Complex. Mon. Wea. Rev., 103, pp. 27-33, 1975. Vukovich, F. M., Dunn III, J. W., and Crissman, Bobby W.; A Theoretical Study of the St. Louis Heat Island: The Wind and Temperature Distribution. J. Appl. Meteor., 15, pp. 417-440, 1976.

VII-A-52

VII. ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS B. IN-SPACE OPERATIONS

A. Konradi S.-Y. SU

1. Radiation a. Environmental Description: Description of the Plasma Environment at Geosynchronous Altitude. Introduction: The sun is known to eject in a radial direction a continous stream of tenuous plasma consisting predominantly of ionized hydrogen gas. This plasma is called the solar wind and has a flow velocity about 400 km/sec and a density of the order of 10 ions/cm^ near the earth's orbit. When the solar wind particles impinge on the earth's magnetic field, the particle kinetic pressure is high enough to effectively bend the field lines. In turn the field lines deflect the incident charged particles by exerting a force on them (the Lorenz force). A cavity that excludes all the impinging plasma particles, called the magnetosphere, is thus created. Figure VII-B-1 shows the noon-midnight meridian profile of-the earth's magnetosphere. The geomagnetic field lines are seen to be distored greatly from a dipole field such that on the sunward side they no longer extend to infinity but are compressed. On the other hand, the field lines are stretched out along the solar wind flow direction in the night-side, forming the so-called magnetotail. From hydrodynamics we know that a detached shock wave will be formed in front of a blunt object obstructing a fluid flowing at hypersonic speed. In like fashion, a detached shock is found in front of the magnetosphere since the solar wind flows at a velocity considered to be hypersonic with respect to the propagation speed of hydromagnetic disturbances along the magnetic field lines (Alfven speed), which is about 35 km/sec. In the inner magnetosphere where the geomagnetic field lines do not deviate too much from the dipole field configuration, a charged particle will simultaneously execute three different kinds of motion, namely, a gyration around the magnetic field line, a latitudinal bounce motion along the field line, and a longitudinal drift motion around the earth. The particle trajectory in a magnetic d'ipole field is sketched in figure VII-B-2. Those electrons and ions that are not lost in collision with the earth's atmospheric neutral particles during the bounce motion and are able to make a complete drift motion around the earth, constitute the so-called trapped radiation. Satellite observations of long time averaged equatorial omni-directional electron and proton flux intensities measured above several different energy thresholds in the trapped radiation region are shown in figures VII-B-3 and VII-B-4, respectively. The horizontal axis in each figure is the approximate distance of the assumed undistored dipole field line at its intersection with the equatorial plane, L, in units of earth radii, Rr. The radial distance of the trapped radiation belt in the figures is shown up to L = 12 RF which is close to the average stand-off distance of the magnetosphere in the sunward direction. A Geo-Synchronous satellite is located at L = 6.6 Rr .

VII-B-1

DAIt

HO It NO.

pitt

AURORAL AND HAGNETOSPHERIC PHYSICS PROGRAM NASA-Lyndon B. Johnson Space C e n t e r

SUBJECT NtMC

Description of the Plasma Environment at Geosynchronous Altitude

S.-Y. Su - A. Konradi

BOW SHOCK SOLAR WIND AAAGNETOPAUSE

MAGNETOTAIL

.s- NEUTRAL SHEET

AAAGNETOSHEATH

TRAPPED RADIATION BELT PLASMASPHERE

POLAR CUSP SB81 PLASMA SHEET

The profile of the earth magnetosphere in the plane containing the earth dipole axis. A bow shock is created in front of the magnetosphen as the maqnetosphere obstructs the solar wind flow which is streaming away from the sun. The geomagnetic field lines are greatly distored by the solar wind impinqement such that thev are compressed in the sunward direction and are stretched out 1n the anti-sunward direction. Regions of large charged particle population observed inside the magnet osphere are indicated 1n the figure. Figure VII-B-1

VII-B-2
JSC Form 88 (Jul 73) NASA-JSC

Dili AURORAL AND HAGNETOSPHERIC PHYSICS PROGRAM NASA-Lyndon B. Johnson Space C e n t e r

NO 1C

MO

PSE

'Inscription of the Plasma Environment at Geosynchronous Altitude

NINE

S.-Y. Su - A. Konradi

Trajectory of trapped particle Mirror point (Pitch angle of helical trajectory-90 )

Magnetic field line

Motion of a charged particle in the earth's dipole field. The motion consists of (1) qyration around the field line, (2) latitudinal bounce motion back and forth along a field from one hemisphere to the other, and (3) longitudinal drift motion around the earth with electron drifting east and protons west, (after W. Hess, 1970).

Figure VII-B-2

VII-B-3

JSC Fora 88 ( J u l 73)

NASA-JSC

DAK

NOK NO.

rtct

AURORAL AND HAGNETOSPHERIC PHYSICS PROGRAM . NASA-Lyndon B. Johnson Space Center SUBJCCT

NiNC

Description of the Plasma Environment at Geosynchronous Altitude

S.-Y. Su - A. Konradi

2
I KMtH WWrt

ft

10 II

12

Time averaqed radial profiles of the omnidirectional electron flux Intensities with electron enerqles above several energy thresholds. The data were obtained near the earth's magnetic equatorial plane at all available longitudes and 1n the years close to solar minimum as shown 1n (a) or close to solar maximum 1n (b) (after D. J. Williams, 1972).

Figure VII-B-3

VII-B-4
JSC Form B8 (Jul 73) NASA-JSC

OATE AURORAL AND HAGNETOSPHERIC PHYSICS PROGRAM NASA-Lyndon B. J o h n s o n S p a c e C a n t e r SUBJ ECI

NOIE NO.

PACE

NAME

Description of the Plasma Environment at Geosynchronous Altitude

S.-Y. Su - A. Konradi

109 108

-1r

"I'T

E j^

g, io7
z 106 o io UJ . E 105
Q Z

3 0 < E p < 5 0 kev 1 6 < E p < 2 5 kev

104

| 103

13
10* 4 5 6 7 8 L. EARTH RADII 9

10

11

12

Time averaged radial profile of the integral equatorial omnidirectional proton flux intensities for several enerqy thresholds. The two shaded areas represent protons observed in two limited energy passbands, respectively. The Ep > 0.03 Mev curve is an estimate by using the 30 - 50 Kev and the > TOO Kev values (after D. J. Williams, 1972).

Figure VII-B-4

VII-B-5

JSC Form 88 (Jul 73)

NASA-JSC

Besides the high energy particles trapped in the magnetosphere, there are also large concentrations of plasma inside the plasmasphere near the earth, with energy between .1 and 10 ev, and large concentrations of plasma, with energy of~500 ev, in the plasma sheet located in the magnetotail (see figure VII-B-1). The plasma sheet has a thickness of -4 R_ and Its center is located at the neutral sheet, an interface between two antiparallel magnetic field regions in the magnetotail. The earthward extension of the plasma sheet along the geomagnetic field lines that are stretched out into the magnetotail reaches down to the auroral region (geomagnetic latitude 60 - 67, L = 4 - 6.6 RF). The equatorial extension of the plasma sheet in the earthward direction is shown in figure VII-B-5. Also shown in the figure is the shape of the plasraasphere in the equatorial plane. The azimuthal coordinate to which locations in the magnetosphere in the equatorial plane are referenced is called local time (LT). Since the shape of the magnetosphere is determined by the interaction of the solar wind with the earth's magnetic field, local time forms a convenient angular coordinate. Thus midnight, dawn, noon, and dusk correspond to local times of 0, 6, 12, and 18 hours respectively. Dynamic Behavior of the Plasmasphere: In the equatorial plane the inner edge of the plasma sheet coincides with the night-side boundary of the plasmasphere. The cross section of the plasmasphere in the equatorial plane is seen to resemble the cross section of a doughnut with a bulge. The orientation of the plasmasphere is more-or-less fixed in the magnetosphere. But the size of the plasmasphere changes in accordance with geomagnetic activity. During a geomagnetically quiet time a geosynchronous orbiting satellite can penetrate into the plasmasphere in the dark sector of the magnetosphere, and stay inside the plasmasphere for several hours as shown in figure VII-B-5 (a). The plasma density inside the plasmasphere decreases monotonically with L and at GEO may be 10-1000 particles/cm3. By contrast, the density of high energy particles in3 the trapped radiation belt or in the plasma sheet is about 1 particle/cm . Thus the geosynchronous satellite will frequently encounter two drastically different plasma environments near the dusk meridian. Figure VII-B-6 shows radial profiles of the plasma concentration observed by an elliptically orbiting satellite. Different degrees of geomagnetic activity are indicated by the planetary magnetic index Kp. It should be noted that this observed radial density profile is only appicable along the satellite trajectory shown in figure VII-B-5. The radial variation of the plasma density at other local times of the magnetosphere should be scaled according to the shape of the plasmasphere shown in figure VII-B-5. Clearly the size of the plasmasphere expands during quiet times (Kp<l+) and contracts as the geomagnetic activity increase (Kp"*4-5). The formation of the plasmasphere can be understood from the longitudinal drift motion of the very low energy particles. In addition to the magnetic field a quasi-steady state electric field, perpendicular to the magnetic field, also exists within the magnetosphere. The electric field is composed of an electric field,generated by the solar-wind interaction with VII-B-6

Dili AURORAL AND MAGHETOSPHERIC PHYSICS PROGRAM ' NASA-Lyndon B. J o h n s o n Space C e n t e r SU8JCCT

NO It NO.

Met

Nine

Description of the Plasma Environment at Geosynchronous Altitude

DAWN I

S.-Y. Su - A. Konradi

NOON

MAGNETOPAUSE

DUSK

QUIET TIME

NOON

MAGNETOPAUSE

I DUSK

DISTURBED TIME

Equatorial profile of the plasmasphere and the plasma sheet (hatched) regions. Note that the intrusion of the plasmasheet particles toward the earth and the shrinkage in the size of the plasmasphere during qeomagnetically disturbed times compared with the auiet times. The relative position of the plasmasheet and the plasmasphere with respect to a GEO satellite orbit is also shown in the figure. The OGO 5 satellite trajectory through which a radial profile of plasmasphere particle density was measured is also indicated.
Figure VII-B-5 VII-B-7
JSC Fora 88 ( J u l 73) NASA-JSC

Dill

NOU NO.

pet

AURORAL AND UAGNETOSPHERIC PHYSICS PROGRAM NASA-Lyndon B. Johnson Space Center

SUSIECT NtHC

Description of the Plasma Environment at Geosynchronous Altitude

S.-Y. Su - A. Konradi

19GS

12 Apnl-Kp<l* ~~~ 4 Apnl Kp=2 22Apnl-K].=3

10*

25Marih-Kp=4-5

10'

w
10'
Kp=4-5
10*

4 L

The density profiles of the H Ions as functions of radial distance L during different neonuxmetlc conditions observed alonq OGO 5 satellite tralectorv shown in Tlnure 5. Note that an extremely large density gradient exists at the boundary of the plasmasphere. The observation clearly Indicates that the size of plasmasphere expands during guiet times (Kp < 1"*") and contracts as geomagnetic activity Increases (Kp = 4-5) (after Chappel, Hannls and Sharp, 1970).

Figure VII-B-6

VII-B-8
JSC Form 88 (Jul 73) NASA-JSC

the magnetosphere and radially directed electric field induced from the motion of the geomagnetic field lines due to the rotation of the earth with respect to the magnetosphere. Figures VII-B-7 (a) and VII-B-7 (b) show the drift trajectories of the low energy particle during a geomagnetically quiet time (low Kp value) representative of a small electric field and during a geomagnetically active period (high Kp value) representative of a stronger electric field, respectively. The plasmasphere is then defined as the region where the very low energy particle drift paths are closed around the earth as shown in the figure. The size of plasmasphere is seen to be larger for a small electric field during the quiet time and becomes smaller for a larger electric field during the active period. The change in size of the plasmasphere is due to the fact that some particle drift paths which are originally closed become open when the electric field increases during geomagnetically active period. These open trajectory particles then drift away and out of the magnetosphere so that the plasmasphere becomes smaller. During the geomagnetically active period at the onset of a magnetospheric substorm a large enhancement of energetic particle flux intensity will suddenly occur along the interface between the plasmaspheric boundary and the inner eSdge of the plasma sheet. The next two sections shall be devoted to description of such phenomena. Description of Event Sequence during a Magnetospheric Substorm: A magnetospheric substorm involves a release of energy stored in the magnetosphere from the solar wind interaction with the magnetosphere. The mechanism required to trigger the energy releasing process is not completely known at the present time. It is, however, thought that the energy releasing process is nothing but a process to maintain thejdynamic equilibrium of the magnetosphere in the solar wind interaction with the magnetosphere: As more and more solar wind kinetic energy is converted and stored in the form of electric and magnetic energy inside the magnetosphere, the magnetosphere becomes overloaded in energy so that an instability occurs which causes magnetic field energy to be converted into the energy of plasma particles. Eventually the heated plasma particles dump their energy into the earth's atmpsphere which is dissipated away as heat. As long as the sloar wind keeps blowing against the earth's magnetic field, the cycle of slow but steady acquisition of energy and then the sudden energy release will keep repeating itself in the magnetosphere. An analogue of the magnetospheric substorm in the earth atmosphere may be considered the lightening discharge of a thundercloud. When the upward moving warm moist air collides with the downward moving cold dry air, friction causes a separation of electric charge inside the cloud. This charge separation process results in a net negative electric charge in the lower part of the thundercloud and a positive charge inJ:he in the upper part of the cloud. As more and ^orc charge is accumulated, the electric potential difference between the upper and lower parts of cloud or between the lower part of the cloud and the earth keeps increasing. When the potential build-up reaches a certain point, such that the insulation effect of the air between the two separated charge clouds or between the

VII-B- 9

OIK

NOTE

NO.

net

AURORAL AND HAGNETOSPHERIC PHYSICS PROGRAM NASA-Lyndon B. Johnson Space Cental

JUB1CCT
NAMC

Description of the Plasma Environment at Geosynchronous Altitude

S.-Y. Su - A. Konradi

SUN

DUSK

DUSX

The formation of plasmasphere from a theoretical calculation of the drift trajectories of very low energy particles in a model magnetosphere. The shaded region where the particle trajectories are closed around the earth represents the plasmasphere. The size of the plasmasphere in (a) is larger when the quasi-steady state electric field 1s relatively smaller during a geomagnetically auiet time; in (b) is smaller when the electric field increases during an active period (after Chappel, Harris and Sharp, 1971).

Figure VII-B-7

VII-B-10

ISC Form 88 (Jul 73)

NASA-JSC

thundercloud and the ground breaks down a sudden discharge process occurs (lightening stroke) between them neutralizing the charge. The sequence of slow build-up of energy (or charge) accompanied by a sudden release of the accumulated energy (or charge) is analogous in both the magnetospheric substorm energy releasing process and the atmospheric lightening discharge process. The magnetospheric substorm is best understood through its manifestation in the auroral subctorm and in the polar magnetic substorm. Figure VII-B-8 shows the schematic drawings of a typical development of an auroral substorm in a geomagnetic polar projection where the sun is at the top of the page. A pre-existing quiet, arc-like pattern of aurora exists during the period prior to the substorm onset at time T = 0. For a few minutes following the onset, the substorm is in the expansive phase (T = 0-5 minutes) during which there is a brightening or sudden formation of new auroras near the midnight meridian, followed by a rapid poleward motion. This motion results in a bulge around the midnight sector wherein the so-called auroral breadup occurs (T = 5-10 minutes). As the auroral substorm progresses, the bulge expands in all directions (T = 10-30 minutes). In the evening side of the expanding bulge, a large-scale folding appears which travels rapidly westward along the arc, called, the westward traveling surge. In the morning side of the bulge, arcs disintegrate into patches which drift eastward. When the expanding bulge attains its highest latitude, the recovery phase of the substorm begins (T = 30-60 minutes). The expanded bulge then starts to contract. The westward traveling surge may continue a westward motion and eventually degenerate into irregular bands. The eastward drifting patches on the morning side remain until the end of the recovery phase (T = 1-2 hour). At the end of the substorm, the auroral situation will be similar to that just before the onset of the substorm. During geomagnetically active periods the cycle of growth and decay of the auroral substorm can occur repeatedly many times in a 24-hour period in the night-side magnetosphere. During the auroral substorm, an intense electric current in the ionospheric E region is generated along the auroral oval, where the visible auroras are observed. This concentrated electric current called the auroral electrojet, can cause intense geomagnetic disturbances to be recorded on the magnetograms at ground stations near the auroral zone. Figure VII-B-9 shows an example of the horizontal magnetic field variations of five ground stations recorded around January 2, 1970. The horizontal time scale used in the figure is called universal time (UT) which is same as the Greenwich Mean Time. The local midnight at each station is marked with the letter M. The substorm onset is indicated by a sharp decrease of the horizontal field component on the magnetogram from a station near local midnight. The field recovers back to its original value at the end of the substorm. At least 8 substorms (indicated by Letter A to H) occurred during the period shown in figure VII-B-9.

VII-B-11

Dili

NOIC NO.

RISC

AURORAL AND MAGNETOSPHERIC PHYSICS PROGRAM NASA-Lyndon B. Johnson Space Center

SUBJCCI
N1MC

Description of the Plasma Environment at Altitude

Geosynchronous S.-Y. Su - A. Konradi

A. T0

a T-0~5MIN

T-30MIN-IHR

f,

T-I-3HR

Schematic diagrams to show the development of the aurora during a typical auroral substorm projected 1n the northern geomagnetic polar region. The sun 1s. located at the top of each diagram. Time T= 0 is the reference time for the quiet period. Time T= 0-5 Min is the beginning of the expansive phase of an auroral substorm, while time T= 30 Min-1 hr. indicates the beginning of the recovery phase (after Akasofu, 1969).

Figure VII-B-8 VII-B-12

JSC Faro 88 (Jul 73) NASA-JSC

01 It

n o t e HO

PACE

AURORAL AND HAGHETOSPHERIC PHYSICS PROGRAM NASA-Lyndon B. Johnson Space Center

JU6J C C T

'
NAMC

Description of the Plasma Environment at Geosynchronous Altitude

S.-Y. Su - A. Konradi

COLLEGE L*5.5

ABISKO L=5.7

LEIRVOGUR L6.5

GREAT WHALE RIVER L=6.9

MEANOOK L4.7

I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 15 18 21 24 03 06 09 12 15 18 21 I JAN 1970 2 JAN 1970

The variations of the horizontal component of the geomagnetic field from five ground stations near the auroral zone. The radial distance of the field line passing through each station and intersecting the equatorial plane is also Indicated by the value L. The local midnight of each station is indicated by the letter M. A sharp decrease in field strength from the ground station near local midnight is the indication of a substorm onset (letter A through H) (after DeForest and Mcllwain, 1971).

Figure VII-B-9 VII-B-13

JSC For* 68 (Jul 73)

NASA-JSC

Encounter of the Substorm Injected Protons and Electrons by a Geosynchronous Satellite;As mentioned earlier, the magnetospheric suDstorm Is a process that converts the energy stored in the electric and magnetic fields into particle energy. Therefore, a particle detector onboard a spacecraft should detect a large enhancement of particle flux intensity when the spacecraft encounters accelerated plasma particles during substoms. Figure VII-B-10 shows an example of such observation of high intensity proton and electron fluxes by a geosynchronous orbiting satellite, ATS-6, located at 94 W longitude. Plotted in the figure are the differential number flux intensities o^ protons or electrons versus the universal time at the spacecraft location. The local time of the spacecraft in the magnetosphere is LT = UT-6 hours. The differential number flux intensity is the particle flux intensity detected by a detector at a particular particle energy threshold. Only protons and electrons at energies E = 100, 1000, 10000, and 50000 ev are plotted in the figure. The overall particle observation for the day 201 of 1974 (20 July 1974) indicates that the electron fluxes have a greater variation than the proton fluxes. The sharp increases in electron flux intensities for various energy channels from 0300 to 0630 UT are associated with the encounter of the newly energized particles during substorm. For the purpose of identifying substorms from the flux increases observed at GEO a different display method has been shown to be more convenient, This display is known as the spectrogram and it shows the differential energy flux intensity displayed as a gray code versus time and non-linear energy scale as the x and y coordinates, respectively. White indicates the highest and black the lowest flux intensities. An example of the spectrogram for the same day as shown in figure VII-B-10 is displayed in figure VII-B-11. Although the spectrogram does not immediately reveal the actual flux levels observed, it does dramatically indicate the encounters with high intensity particle fluxes. For example, figure VII-B-11 shows that there are two clear white vertical streaks occurring simultaneously for both electrons and protons at 0440 UT and at 0630 UT, respectively. These are the signatures of substorms occurring at the position of the satellite and can be used to identify the substorm onset. There may be other substorm onsets occurring between the two mentioned substorms. However, they are not identified as easily as the two substorms in figure VII-B-il without examining the spectrogram on an expanded time scale. Other white cloud streaks are noticed in figure VII-B-11. These are signatures of substorms which occurred at places other than the location of the satellite. During a substorm particles are injected into a limited region of the magnetosphere and immediately begin to drift in azimuth as a result of electric fields and a non-homogeneous magnetic field. The drift velocity is roughly proportional to the particle's energy and thus a satellite encountering substorm injected particles would firtst.see those of highest energy with the lower energies appearing at later times. This explains why the white cloud streaks in figure VII-B-11 are observed at high energy first and then move progressively toward lower energies. An extensive study of spectrograms reveals that the energization of the plasma cloud during substorms occurs in a region which coincides with the spiral boundary of the doughnut shaped plasmasphere in the VII-B-14

DAT!

NOTE

NO.

mi

AURORAL AND HAGNETOSPHERIC PHYSICS PROGRAM NASA-Lyndon B. Johnson Space Center suejECT
NAME

Description of the Plasma Environment at Geosynchronous Altitude

S.-Y. Su - A. Konradi

IIIIIt1t

UT 0
. tt74

Line plots of differential number flux intensities from protons and electrons at E= 100, 1000, 10000, and 50000 ev observed by qeosynchronous satellite ATS-6 located at 94 W lonqitude. Some of the flux intensities have been multiplied by multiplication factors in'dicated in the figure so as to avoid the overlay of the line plots.

Figure VII-B-10 VII-B-15

JSC Faro 88 (Jul 73) NASA-JSC

OAU
AURORAL AND HAGNETOSPHERIC PHYSICS PROGRAM NASA-Lyndon B. Johnson Space Center

Description of the Plasma Environment at Geosynchronous Altitude

S.-Y. Su - A. Konradi

o -a s- i ai
O i
iCM ID 4-> O X 01 3 .C r 3 J_ U <4-

.c r- sQJ

C 4-

>
C O O

:. JpS^SS aa

B^ -<?

J-JVJJC

.3'
_OJ

'Li>

-to CM .r\j CN
;c\

"3 <l > c >-> a> CT - CO J3 ' C Ol 01 i

c 3; c 3 o <a
Or-

a to <a x
to

r= -.-t->

3 T3

to +-> snj 4->

.C 3

a> E en
Ol

.0 rsi
.en
.00

J O >, O i.

er to i- r <J i- - to JO O) c a. ai c ai O) T3 tO ai ~~
ii- r X CO 4-> ro 3 01 E C 10 r JC O

C (O O)

_r~.co

to ro

01

a> $- M- cr s_
S_ 01

!-<*-

fc^H -<-;-^>. &-' > V'^s-if: ,

-4**~ 1 r.f ! ^7""^*:? "T*

/ --

" -*,

-LO

f^-\<-->,-< _ '.-\l~fi-c-

.g:
-^O)
v v

<- C 1- O) T3 r- 3 O> -C O

ti- T- en

O) >

>,J=

oi

o
1->

fc . '

'?' i -

-M. o
_CNl

to Ol C 3 to >,

c +-> o

o 10 a> o) 10 o

<U f- Ol r Ol T3 ^= <U r >, C 4->

o >

S_ -C -4-J S01 I (O CT

.^g -an
-aa

lo>=

o o 01 c to > o> >>

(O

1O 1-

- r

c en o -C aj
0 C tn

i- +-> C3>,-!-> -i- l-

O t- 01 3 = *J 41 Q. Ol

a.

1- Ol Ol
01 rO

3T- ...-l ^ 1

-t" -to

s-

i- cr 01 ex
-r- -r-

T3 01

jr 01 to -o sM C-r- O

- (O

-in

r- X O n H-^- <0 01 >i U o o Cr n> O

E o fc-u. c +J ai
t-

-:
-ri -fN
I 0
O

<n c ai 01 < i re e ->

I. K- vOl to 01 4-> J- C 0 O O - ro 4-> 01 -C r- r Q.^</> to O 3 VI t^. T3 C C 4-> O

C U

cr 01 o c o jz M -i- to - >^

Ol O

o o

10)1 1 ^ 0

-o

g o E a
jj -<

RI5>RODUCIBa>lTY OF ORIGINAL PAGE IS POOR

VII-B-16
JSC Form 88 ( J u l 73)
NASA-JSC

night-side magnetosphere. This so-called injection boundary of energized plasma cloud varies with the geomagnetic conditions as shown in figure VII-B-12. During a substorm a EEO satellite is enveloped by a high flux intensity plasma cloud in the region beyond the injection boundary in the night-side magnetosphere. The origin of the high flux intensity, energetic plasma clouds is not know. However, it is possible that they are the energized plasmas originating from the depleted plasmasphere after the plasmasphere contracts during the substorm. Finally, a statistical summary of the particle measurement at the geosynchronous orbit is given in table VII-B-1. The result was obtained by the electrostatic analyzer onboard ATS-5 located at 105 W longitude. The particle spectrum was integrated from E = 50 to E = 50000 ev. The maximum value of flux intensity usually occurs during substorms. The protons are noted to undergo smaller changes than the electrons in fluctuation between the maximum and the minimum measured values. At most a factor of eight increase is noted for the protons between the minimum value and the maximum value. On the other hand, the electrons are seen to be highly variable in flux intensity or in number density. Increases of up to two orders of magnitude in flux intensity occur between a minimum and maximum value. Earth Magnetic Field at Geosynchronous Altitude and its Variation with Local Time~and Geomagnetic Activity: Although a geosynchronous orbiting satellite is anchored in the geographic equatorial plane it can be located off the geomagnetic equatorial plane because of the 11 tilt between the earth's rotation and magnetic dipole axes. For example, figure VII-B-13 (a) illustrates that the geosynchronous satellite ATS-1 is located very close to the geomagnetic equatorial plane since its geographic location is 150 W longitude, a place very close to the intersection of the geomagnetic and the geographic equatorial planes. On the other hand, ATS-6 is located at 94 W longitude but it is about 10 latitude north of the geomagnetic equatorial plane as seen in figure VII-B-13 (b). Because of the different geomagnetic latitudes of two satellites, the observed geomagnetic field orientations can be quite different. Figure VII-B-14 shows such observation on a geomagnetical ly quiet day in June. The field is measured in unit of y (1 gamma = 10~5 gauss) in a spacecraft coordinate system such that the y-axis points northward along the earth spin axis, the z-axis points radially outward along the earth-spacecraft line, and the x-axis points eastward to complete the right-hand Cartesian coordinate system. We first note that the actual observed field directions at the two geomagnetic latitudes confirm the field line orientations sketched in figure VII-B-13. However, the diurnal variations of the field magnitude in the three field components are very similar regardless of the spacecraft location at different geomagnetic latitudes. The total field strength (inferred from the dominant field component, By) is seen to be smaller in the night-side than in the dayside of the magnetosphere. The reason for this is that, as has been mentioned, the geomagnetic field lines are compressed from the solar wind bombardment on the dayside and are dragged out on the night-side. It is also evident that solar wind drag effect is noticeable at the flank of the magnetosphere from the maximum tilt of the field lines VII-B-17

01 IE

NOTE MO.

net

AURORAL AND MAGNETOSPHERIC PHYSICS PROGRAM NASA-Lyndon B. Johnson Space Canter

SUBJECT HAMt

Description of the Plasma Environment at Geosynchronous Altitude rDAWN

S.-Y. Su - A. Konradi

NOON

MIDNIGHT

\
ORBIT INJECTION BOUNDARY

. Kp:5
4'

. 122 - 10 Kp - LT-7.3
18sLTs24
L

DUSK

Empirical formula for the spiral Injection boundary at different qeomaanetlc activities. The Boundary moves closer to the earth durlnq a geomaqnetlcally active period so that a GEO satellite Intercepts the boundary at an earlier local time 1n maqnetosphere. A qreatly enhanced particle flux Intensity 1s observed beyond the Injection boundary durlnq a.substorm.

Figure VII-B-12 VII-B-18

)SC Form 68 (Jul 73)

NASA-JSC

AURORAL AND HAGNETOSPHERIC P H Y S I C S PROGRAM NASA-Lyndon B. J o h n s o n S p a c e C e n t e r SUBJECt NtMC

Table VII-B--1* 50-ev to 50,000-ev Spectral Integrals Electrons

0000 0300 0600 LT LT LT 1200 1800 2100 LT LT LT

Protons
0000 0300 060012001800 LT LT LT LT LT 2100 LT

Number Density, particles/cm3

Minimum Maximum Typical Minimum Maximum Typical Minimum Maximum Typical 0.07 0.22 0.17 0.06 8.3 4.8 2.9 1.2 2.0 2.0 1.2 0.4 0.02 0.04 1.9 4.4 0-.10 0.4
0.7 0.6 0.7 0.3 0.5 0.6 3.8 3.5 1.9 2.2 2.2 2.4 1.2 1.2 1.2 0.9 0.8 1.1

Energy Flux, erg/cm2 sec ster

0.21 0.38 0.42 0.26 0.04 0.10 9.4 15.2 14.6 2.3 1.01 7.2 3.0 3.0 1.5 1.0 0.40 0.5 15 37 1510 1020 300 300 32 832 200 15 122 70 2 162 30 9 864 60 0.16 0.13 0.05 0.13 0.14 0.14 0.61 0.47 0.47 0.76 0.63 0.85 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.22 0.30 0.30

Number flux, 106 particles/cm2 sec ster

6 25 12 4 17 10

4 16 8

2 15 7

4 23 8

5 25 10

Pressure, 10'10 dynes/cm2 Minimum 2.7 6 6 Maximum 190 266 173 Typical 50 60 30

4 0.4 25 14 12 7

1 128 8

66 51 25 31 54 56 235 196 169 242 255 327 140 120 90 80 90 120

*After Deforest and Mcllwain, 1970

VII-B-19
JSC Form 66 (Jul 73) NASA-JSC

otic
AURORAL AND HAGNETOSPHERIC PHYSICS PROGRAM NASA-Lyndon B. J o h n s o n Space C e n t e r
SUB) C C I

N O T E 10

PltE

NINE

Description of the Plasma Environment at Geosynchronous Altitude

S.-Y. Su - A. Konradi

GEOGRAPHIC " EQUATOR""

GEOGRAPHIC AXIS

GEOMAGNETIC AXIS

->-

)ATS6rZ

GEOGRAPHIC^ EQUATOR

GEOGRAPHIC AXIS

GEOMAGNETIC EQUATOR

Geomagnetic field configurations 1n the vicinity of the geosynchronous altitudes at two different longitudes, ATS 1 location (a) versus ATS 6 location (b). The 11 tilt of the geomagnetic axis with respect to the geographic axis puts ATS 6 satellite (located at 94 W longitude) 10 above the geomagnetic eguatorial plane.

Figure VII-B-13 VII-B-20

JSC Fora SB ( J u l 73) NASA-JSC

Dill AURORAL AND MAGNETOSPHERIC PHYSICS PROGRAM NASA-Lyndon B. J o h n s o n Spaco C e n t e r

SUBJECT

NOTE

NO.

USE

NIMC

Description of the Plasma Environment at Geosynchronous Altitude

i i I I I I i I I i

S.-Y. Su - A. Konradi
i I ATS I
ATS 6 J

60 50 40
y 30

20 10
0

10

A TYPICAL QUIET DAY IN JUNE

130 120 110 100

y 90
80 70 60 70

0 10
20 30 40

Bz

-50

40 70
80
90 100 110 120 -

_1_

19

20

22

24

10

12

16

18

1OCALT1ME

The geomagnetic field variations at the geosynchronous orbit during a geomagnetically quiet day in June. A much larger value in the radial field magnitude seen at ATS 6 orbit indicates a larger inclination angle of the geomagnetic field line as shown in Figure 13 (b).

Figure VII-B-14 VII-B-21

JSC Form 88 (jul 73) NASA-JSC

indicated by the deviations of the Bx component at the dawn and dusk meridians from the daily average of Bx value. A superposition of ATS-1 magnetograms for five days with substorms is shown in figure VII-B-15. The figure shows the tendency of By component to decrease and the tendency of Bz component to increase around the local midnight (indicated by a black dot on the top of the figure) during the substorm periods. It also indicates that the Bx component tends to increase before midnight and decrease after midnight. In comparison to the quiet day field, the field during periods of substorm activity exhibits a greater vaiability at all local times and a tendency for the By component to increase on the average over the day-side hemisphere. Furthermore, during geomagnetically disturbed periods, the field in the night sector is seen to be more active before midnight than after. Of course, such active variation of field before midnight is closesly related to the fact that the particle injection boundary during a substorm is primarily located before midnight. Unlike the particle measurement, the observed field variation at geosynchronous altitude is caused by changes in the near-by particle population as well as changes in the particle environment at a remote distance. The sequential variation of the field at different stages of a substorm activity is too complicated to determine. However, results of the montage compositions of the field configuration of the magnetosphere at quiet and disturbed geomagnetic conditions are available. Figure VII-B-16 (a) shows the noon-midnight meridian field configuration observed during a quiet time while figure VII-B-16 (b) shows the field configuration at an early stage of the substorm. Also shown in the figure are the changes in the shapes of the plasma sheet associated with the two configurations. It is seen that during a quiet period, the magnetosphere seems to be larger in size in the northsouth direction so that the field lines are less stretched to indicate a more dipole-like field configuration. Also note that the plasma sheet in the magnetotail is thicker and is located farther away from the earth in the equatorial plane (inferred result). On the other hand, at an, early stage of a substorm, the magnotosphere is seen to be compressed IP the northward direction. The plasma sheet becomes thinner and moves closer to the earth so that the northsouth field component near the earth is seen to decrease. Consequently, the field lines are seen to be stretched out further and become more tail-like. Since the field line configuration affects the particle drift paths, a geosynchronous orbiting satellite is capable of observing such particle variation accompanied by the field fluctuation. Figure VII-B-17 and Figure VII-B-18 show the correlated particle and field observations made by ATS-1 and ATS-6, respectively. Both figures indicate that a decrease in the north-south field component results in a decrease in the particle flux intensity. The reason for this is that when the field configuration changes because of the decrease in the north-south field component, the spacecraft, fixed in space, starts to intercept different particle trajectories so that a different population of the particles is now being detected. In the present case the spacecraft is equivalently moving to a VII-B-22

NOTE

NO.

AURORAL AND HAGNETOSPHERIC PHYSICS PROGRAM NASA-Lyndon B. J o h n s o n Space C a n t e r

NAME

Description of the Plasma Environment at Geosynchronous Altitude

S.-Y. Su - A. Konradi

II 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 ! 1 1 1 1 1 i *" ""-'" ^

1 1 1 1

l_

Bx=0

By
iorl

A^-S-V^"^*"
~*%*~x"./'"

"*

' ^f.'ifC"'

t^PS-w.*-'I

- ^.y*"

~t ^--"

- ~'~ ' "*''"

g^.-v o^Cw

-cr

Bz=0
By=0

1 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 I 1 ! 1 II

I 11

i Mi r
20 24

00

04

08 12 16 U T." ( H O U R S )

A superposition of ATS 1 niaqnetoqrams for five substorm days. December 24 and 25 of 1966, and January 6, 16, and 21 of 1967. The dot and the circle indicate the local midniqht and local noon, respectively, at satellite location (after Coleman and McPherron, 1969),

Figure VII-B-15 VII-B-23

JSC Form 88 (Jul 73) MASA-JSC

OIK

NOTE

NO.

PHE

AURORAL AND HAGNETOSPHERIC PHYSICS PROGRAM NASA-Lyndon B. J o h n s o n S p a c e C e n t e r suej tci

NAME

Description of the Plasma Environment at Geosynchronous Altitude

S.-Y. Su - A. Konradi

ta)

Geomagnetic field confidurations in the noon-midninht meridian plane drawn to illustrate the state of the maanetosohere during a ouiet post-substorm period as shown in (a) and durlnq a substorm onset 1n (b). The maanetosphere 1s seen to be more comoressed and the field lines are stretched out in the tailward direction during the early phase of a substorm The plasmasheet also becomes thinner during substorms. Note that the field lines near the maanetotail region relax toward the dipole field confiduration after the substorm. Such changes in field line configuration can be observed at the GEO altitud (after Fairfield and Ness, 1970).

Figure VII-B-16
JSC Fora 88 ( J u l 73)

VII

B 2/1
NASA-JSC

0 A 1

KO It NO.

piei

AURORAL AND UAGNETOSPHERIC PHYSICS PROGRAM NASA-Lyndon B. Johnson Space Center

SUBJtCl NIME

Description of the Plasma Environment at Geosynchronous Altitude

S.-Y. Su - A. Konradi

ISO* WMT

22

02

06

10

66 R EOUATCRI&L ELECTRONS DECEMBER 25. 1966

COLLEGE.ALASKA H-COMPONENT

03 12 16 UNIVERSAL TIME

24

Variations of electron fluxes at different energy levels and the north-south component (H component) of the field strength observed by ATS-1. The horizontal north-south field component from College, Alaska innijnetonrdiii is also shown In the fiaure. The onset of a substorm is indicated by the sharp decrease of the H component field from the ground mannetowam. Simultaneously a sharp increase of electron flux Intensity accompanied by the return (or increase) of the field strength is observed at fiEO altitude (after Lezniak, Arnoldy, Parks, and Wlnckler, 1968).

Figure VII-B-17 VII-B-25

JSC Form 88 (Jul 73)
NASA-JSC

AURORAL AND UAGNETOSPHERIC PHYSICS PROGRAM NASA-Lyndon B. J o h n s o n Space C e n t e r

TSes'tYiption of the Plasma Environment at Geosynchronous Altitude

NtME

S.-Y. Su - A. Konradi

02

03

04

63-160keV 160-514 keV

UT 01

02

04

05

06

07

08

09

10

11

Similar example as 1n Flqure 17 to show the correlation between the proton and electron flux Increases and the field strength increase observed by ATS-6 satellite during three substorms which occurred on August 5, 1974 (after Walker, Erlckson, Swanson, and Winckler).

Figure VII-B-18 VII-B-26

JSC Form 88 (Jul 73) NASA-JSC

large L value so that lesser flux intensity is observed (c.f., figures VII-B-2 and VII-B-3). During the field recovery, the particle fluxes are also seen to recover their intensities. Sometimes even higher flux levels are detected because of encounters with newly injected plasma occurring following substorms. Such one to one correspondence between the field and particle variations are very common in the dark magnetosphere during a substorm period. Appearance of High Energy Proton Fluxes during Solar Flare Associated Events:During the solar flare event, the sun emits an unusually large dose of high energy electrons and protons. The propagation of the high energy particles has been well investigated by solar high energy particle physists and the results can be found in the literature (see for example the review article by L. J. Lanzerotti, 1974). Here we will only recapitulate the result of the observation of the solar proton fluxes propagatin in interplanetary space. Figure VII-B-19 shows a schematic illustration of the proton flux observation at'the earth after a solar flare event. Part A of the figure indicates the modification of the lower energy protons when the flare produced interplanetary shock wave is propagating toward the earth, while part B shows the result without the shock wave. The satellite observations of the actual solar proton fluxes at geosynchronous altitude are shown in figure VII-B-20 where no shock wave is observed and accompanied by the interplanetary shock wave, in figure VII-B-21.

VII-B-27

OATC

NOTC

NO.

MSE

AURORAL AND HAGNETOSPHERIC PHYSICS PROGRAM NASA-Lyndon B. J o h n s o n Space C e n t e r

suJf ci

NiMC

Description of the Plasma Environment at Geosynchronous Altitude

S.-Y.

Su - A. Konradi

NEUTRON MONITOR PROMPT DECAY

ruE i

roneusx CCCDCASI
ADOM) SC

v_

NEUTRON MONITOR PROMPT RESPONSE PROUPT OCCAT

-100 MtV PROTONS PROUPT RESPONSC OCCAT ro AO<CROUNO UFORC SC

\
^.

PROMPT Response

-<OO UtV PROTONS

-" OtCAT TWC - T - 10 l

-ZO MtV PROTONS PKOWt RtiPOiSl SlOW OCCAT

PCRiun cvmexcc or
ESP CNHANCCUCMT -5 UtV PROTONS Pt RMAPS PKUPT KfSPONSC KCAT U&T 6C MASKED ftr CSP ENHANCEMENT WOC IN FLUK LEVELS AFTER SC -3OO ktV PROTONS PBOW9LC MLATCO MO &CCAT ESP PEA CNHA^CCMCMT CVICfftCE I* SnOC ASSUCIATCO KCELEftATONS DROP IN fLU.lJ AFTER U
I I I DATS AFHO PLARC

r- x ^_

- 2O MtV PROTONS PROMPT RESPONSE OeT TIME >IOO MtV OECAT TIME

r f

-3 MtV PROTONS PERHAPS PPCSiPT PSPONSC OCCAT TIME - zc *n >~K MtV PROTON OCCAT TIMC COMVCCTIVE EFFECTS IN OCCAT IMFCoruT

^v^ M*

- 9OO ttV PROTONS PCRMAPS PRO'PT PtSPONSC OCCAT Tivc 5 MtV PflCTON DECAT TIMC UCAUSC OF CONVCCTIVC EFFECTS

I J ) 0AM AFtEH FLAt

Idealized, schematic Illustration of the solar proton fluxes at various enemy levels measured near the earth orbit followinq a flare eruption In the sun's western hemisphere, (a) The flare-produced shock 1s also observed at the earth and (b) no shock 1s observed at the earth (after L. J. Laruerottl).

Figure VII-B-19

VII-B-28
JSC Form SB ( J u l 73) MASA-J5C

NO It NO.

AURORAL AND HAGNETOSPHERIC PHYSICS PROGRAM NASA-Lyndon B. Johnson Space C e n t e r

SUBJECT

NAME

Description of the Plasma Environment at Geosynchronous Altitude

S.-Y. Su - A. Konradi

28

29

JAN

JO ' 31 1967

' 2 FEB

The solar proton observations at the GEO orbit after 28 January 1967 flare event. No shock accompanied the flare in this event (after Blake, Paulikas, and Freden).

Figure VII-B-20

VII-B-29

JSC Fora 88 (Jul

73)

MASA-JSC

Otic

NOU

NO

pitt

AURORAL AND M A G N E T O S P H E R I C PHYSICS PROGRAM NASA-Lyndon B. J o h n s o n S p a c e Cental SUBJECT NAME

Description of the Plasma Environment at Geosynchronous Altitude

S.-Y.

Su - A

Konrach

1,0.
u iIS-1 * -%.* -. "v <

HtOTCKS Zt-mi

at-i

1C OUI

I O II . .1 UT. bl D-C-c){:-r?>3,

The solar proton observation at the GEO orbit on October 6, 1968. The >1.05 Mev radiation trapped electron flux is also plotted for reference. The larqe enhancement of the 5 - 2 1 Mev energetic solar protons are associated with the arrival of the interplanetary shock wave produced by the flare (after Paulikas and Blake).

Figure VII-B-21

VII-B-30
ISC Form 88 (lul 73)
NASA-JSC

DAIE

NOIE

NO.

p*cc

AURORAL AND MAGNETOSPHERIC PHYSICS PROGRAM ' NASA-Lyndon B. Johnson Space C e n t e r

"description of the Plasma Environment at Geosynchronous Altitude

NAME

S.-Y.

Su - A. Konradi

REFERENCES

Akasofu, S. I., Polar and Maqnetospheric Substorms, Springer - Verlag New York Inc., New York, P. 280, 1968. Blake, J. B., 6. A. Paulikas, and S. C. Freden, Observation of Solar Protons Aboard OV3-3 and ATS-1, in Solar Flares and Space Research, edited by C. De Jager and Z. Svestka, North-Holland Pub. Co., Amsterdam, pp. 419, 1969. Chappell, C. R., K. K. Harris, and G. W. Sharp, A study of the influence of magnetic activity on the location of plasmasphere as measured by (G) 5, J. Geophys. Res., 75, pp. 50, 1970. Chappell, C. R., K. K. Harris, and G. W. Sharp, Plasmasphere dynamics inferred from OGO 5 observations, paper presented at 14th meeting of COSPAR, Seattle, Washington, June 18 - July 2, 1971. Coleman, P. J., Jr., and R. L. McPherron, Fluctuations in the distant geomagnetic field during substorms: ATS 1, in Particles and Fields in the Magnetosphere, edited by B. M. McCormac, D. Reidel Pub. Co., Dordrecht-Holland, 171, 1969. DeForest, S. E. and C. E. Mcllwaln, Plasma clouds 1n the magnetosphere, J. Geophys Res., 76, 3587, 1971.

Fa1rf1eld, D. H. and N. F. Ness, Configuration of the geomagnetic tall during substorms, J. Geophys. Res., 75, 7032, 1970.
Hess, W. H., The Radiation Belt and Magnetosphere, Blaisdell Pub. Co., Waltham, Mass., pp. 548, 1968.

Lanzerotti, L. J., Observations of solar particle propagation, in Correlated

Interplanetary and Maanetosphere Observations, edited by D. E. Page, D. Reide'
JSC Form 88 (Jul 73) VII-B-31 NASA-JSC

0*H

NOU NO

PSC

AURORAL AND UAGNETOSPHERIC PHYSICS PROGRAM N A S A - L y n d o n B. Johnson S p a c e C e n t e r

SUIKCI

KiMC

Description of the Plasma Environment at Geosynchronous Altitude

S.-Y. Su - A. Konradi

Pub. Co., Dordrecht-Holland, 345, 1974. Lezniak, T. N., R. L. Arnoldy, G. K. Parks, and J. R. Winckler, Measurement and intensity of energetic electrons at the eouator at 6.6 R , Radio Sci., 3_,

710, 1968.
Paulikas, G. A. and J. B. Blake, Effects of sudden commencement on solar protons at synchronous orbit, J. Geophys. Res., 75, 734, 1970. Walker, R. J., K. N. Erickson, R. L. Swanson, and J. R. Winckler, Substorm associated particle boundary motion at synchronous orbit, J. Geophy. Res.,

81_, 5541 , 1976.

Williams, D. J., Sources, losses, and transport of maqnetospherically trapped particles, in Solar - Terrestrial Physics/1970, Part 3, general editor: E. R. Dyer, D. Reidel Pub. Co., Dordrecht-Holland 66, 1972.

,VII-B-32

JSC Fora 88 (Jul 73)

NASA-JSC

VII.

ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS B. IN-SPACE OPERATIONS 1. RADIATION

VII-B-1-b Biological Considerations to Establish Shielding Criteria A. C. Hardy Mission Planning & Analysis Div The radiation environment to be encountered by the Satellite Power System (SPS) varies with the different SPS phases. In low earth orbit and transit to synchronous altitude the primary radiation concern is related to the protons and electrons trapped in the earth's magnetic field (Van-Allen belts). At synchronous altitude, SPS will be exposed to the outer radiation belt electrons, galactic cosmic rays, and solar radiation (solar particle events'. The major impact to SPS from radiation is on EVA activities at both synchronous and low earth orbital altitudes. The current NASA biological radiation exposure limits are shown in table VII-B-2 Low Earth Orbit (LEO) SPS Construction Radiation exposure in low earth orbit is dependent upon the orbital altitude and inclination, the vehicle shielding, and the mission length. Table VII-B-3gives on-orbit stay times for different altitudes with 2.0 and 5.0 gm/cm2 of aluminum shielding. EVA in conventional space suits (Apollo and Skylab type) can reduce the table VII-B--3 stay times considerably. SPS LEO construction with continuous EVA (three 8-hour shifts) will result in a reduction of the 5 gm-30 stay times by about a factor of ten, i.e., 300 n.m stay time to 21 days, 400 to 10 days, and 500 to 4 days. This reduction assumes that dosage is evenly distributed among the three EVA shifts. Figure VII-B-22. _ shows the location of the South Atlantic anomaly (SAA) and also how the dose is received with time at an altitude of 240 nm. The anomaly increases in size and radiation intensity with increasing altitude resulting in an increasing duration and magnitude of the dose pulses received during SAA passes. Clearly, most of the dose is received during successive passes through the SAA. Conventional EVA suits can be utilized for LEO SPS construction with only minor reduction in the stay times listed in table VII-B-'3_ " if EVA activities are restricted to the 15 to 18 hour low dose periods between the SAA pass groups (figure VII-B3^- ). Transit to Synchronous Altitude The dose received during transit to synchronous altitude is dependent to some extent upon the shielding, but mostly upon the time spent in the radiation belts. For fast transit similar to Apollo, doses will be low (< 5.0 rem skin). For continuous acceleration slow transit, the dose to exposed equipment such as solar cells will be fairly high. Dose vs thickness for slow transit is shown in figure VII-B-23^" The slow transit mode should not be considered for crew transport. VII-B-1-33

Geosynchronous Earth Orbit (GEO) For the basic description of the GEO radiation sources and their effects> reference the attached Rockwell report. The geosynchronous radiation environment impact to SPS from knowledge currently available is summarized as follows. Galactic Cosmis Rays - Cosmic rays will give continuous low level exposure (25 to 36 mr/day). This exposure is relatively uneffected by shielding because of the high energies involved. Depending upon the outcome of the current controversy relative to the biological effect of high HZ particles, cosmic rays can be a significant factor for crew career exposure limitations. Outer Belt Electrons - Until a better understanding of the short term electron intensity variations with magnetic storm activity is achieved, all firm conclusions must be derived from the existing time averaged environment models. Since SPS represents the first serious consideration for manned synchronous activities, it poses the first real requirement for GEO short term environment modeling. GEO Crew Quarters Shielding - Since crew quarters shielding at synchronous altitude is a long term concern, use of the time averaged electron environment model is justified. Figure VII-B-24 shows the AE-4 electron model dose versus thickness at synchronous altitude. Since the primary electron dose increases very rapidly with decreasing thickness, the shielding objective should be to eliminate the primary dose.component from within the crew quarters. Between 2 and 3 gm/cm^ of equivalent aluminum shielding is sufficient to eliminate the primary electrons and result in an average Blood Forming Organ exposure of/^s 0.2 rem/day. This gives 175 day mission stay time excluding exposure from EVA and solar particle events. GEO EVA Shielding - SPS construction at synchronous altitude cannot be accomplished with unrestricted EVA in conventional space suits similar to those used during Apollo and Skylab. The time averaged electron model gives EVA shielding requirements of between 1.5 and 2.0 gm/cm2 of equivalent aluminum material. The objective is to select the optimum thickness which allows the skin and depth exposure limits to be approached at the same relative rate. For SPS GEO operations where EVA time selection may be less critical, it may be possible to utilize conventional suits. Even though the short term electron variations are not understood in detail, we do know a little about what goes on, Diurnal intensity changes are about a factor of 10 with minimum near local mignight. Magnetic storm activity causes changes in electron intensities of about a factor of 100 with increases that may persist for several days. Orbital positions and inclination can also influence the radiation exposure. (See Rockwell report) Soft suit EVA at synchronous altitude will be possible if the minimal exposure conditions can be utilized. The degree of conventional suit EVA restrictions can only be determined with detailed assessment of the short term environment conditions.

VII-B-34

Solar Particle Events at Synchronous Altitude - The degree of protection of the SPS crew from solar particle events is dependent upon the spacecraft shielding. There are two approaches for determing the shielding requirements. One is to assume long on-orbit stay times and evaluate the exposure conditions from multiple events. The other is to evaluate the exposure conditions related to a single large event. In either case, any conclusion and/or recommendations must come from studies of past solar particle event histories. The single large event approach seems to be best for the following reasons: (a) Large events do not usually occur during the same immediate timeframe. (figure VII-B- 28 of Rockwell report) (b) Protection from a large event automatically provides protection from several small ones, (c) Excessive exposure can be received from a single large event. (The August 1972 event produced almost as much radiation as the total of all other events thus far in the 20th Solar Cycle.) Table VII-B-1-IV shows a type of protection factor table for events that have occurred during ths past 20 years. The allowable exposure as a percentage assumes that some portion of the dose limit must be allocated for GEO electron and cosmic ray exposure. Protection of 100% (as shown in the table) will require very heavy shielding (^30 gm/cm2) which may be impractical or impossible to attain for SPS. The final SPS solar particle event shielding requirements must be determined from trade-off studies which consider such parameters as exposure constraints, vehicle design, weight limitations, risk vs gain rationale, etc.

VII-B-35

0) U

^ 0 u
*

01 01 14 1 Ol

w
U

pj
4J

m 4
0> 01

JJ

^ n co co o i-< t-H n o
CM

0
0

H B
^

*g S3 ^, O ^4 CO 4J C 01

w G
0
O
^4

m g
CO ^v* B

4j

to
-H

>-3 co

C 0 Vi JJ
09

n
C

}j jj
Q
*3

(3
E

co r^ CM CM o co m 1-1 o
-l vO

jj
CO

to

at

ai u
14 Ol
fvj

U Ol

iJ-l

O to

o
0) 4J P5

** g
t-l

m
ji *J

C
vO

o
vo m m m o
O
^^

C 0
T-l

o
JJ
,

- u

r>. O CM O

tO

C3

r-l CM^J CM

K^

J3

t-l

OJ

E 53 ^ o u
Jj u^

Ol

CVJ 1

1
u o
01
^4

m i i
^* U)

3 'E'
CM m m m o CM co r^. o o -d-

t-i o
0)

11

3 n O

fd ^ jj cd a
O

Vi
01 JJ
^

^ .^ '
J^ U

c 0) e
J^

PQ

% ^ H

o* JJ

01 T-l

CO 3

c
CO
^n

> E
JJ i-H

co jj ^4 Jj
*5

^^ X-N O -(

Pi O

3
0 fS 01 r-l

n om
C3

E C w
T-l

CO
c

J-l
^0

O 01
0 C

Ol
1 4

>-i to CM o E
U-l

Ol CO

o ?-,
jj cd jj
to C.
O T-l

3 X

a o a.

01 to

01

& H

Pi X^

JJ CO
1 ^

01

w o

60 T-I 3 -U to irl

JJ co in 01 C U o

Ol

J^ r-^

0
Cd

"* 6
01 O
01

r^

T3

E
3

T-l

o
CM)

e )_f jj
w C
0

tO 3 X D ej E d g
^
T-(

o -S E
g

jj
T-l

r-i to cfl 3 n o> o

>^ 01
Q)

r-l

.^1

o O
v^

CJ

0
_^

> a >. a T^ c3 E -< E ^

l-l

o
.

>, 01 >, p

JS ^

(d

Q)

to

n)

V 13 to to V
>> i 1 O

c3 4J 1-1 Ol CO <0 t-i 3 01 CO

J2
AJ ^1

T-l Pd

-i ro O" >-< C_>

VII-B-36

o o

CO Of

1 _J
II
CO

<

c vj o s: n
C_J

^ O

0 CM to
.

O' 0 C. O O "tO CM r*

o o
^^ _-> vo >
c^

"

y
*-^4

o o o o
U3 A IO A LO

O' *

3 0

CO

t-i O o; _l LULU
00
LU >LU

'
LU

z.

CO

O Z O . O
_! LU

C3

c5 i '
i/X sj
t 4

O .
*

*3- r

CM. r-r

CO

<*

J ^

d)

rc >- oo

s:
C5

^r
O .
'

.
O
O

' .
- ~ .

CM O

O Q LU CO LU
CJ X LU

^?^ 1-^

CD O

U3
U>

vo
3 O A

g- i

CVJ ^J-

O Z
CvJ

O O

LU rz
O LU

r IS
*"~-S.

0 '0

CM n

o o o o

r to

00

CM

VII-B-37

Z8Q

29O

JOO

310

J2O

SJO

140

J5O

MO

PROTON ISOFLUX PLOT - 240 NAUTICAL MILE ALT. (SOUTH ATLANTIC ANOMALY)

UJ

to o o
UJ

Ul C

10

24 SO TIME (hour*)

15

40

SO

RELATIVE PROTON DOSE RATE WITH TIME FOR 30-DEGREE, 240 NAUTICAL MILE ORBIT
Fi-gure VII-B : 22 .

VII-B-38

Figure VII-B33,.

Of

TR/rHS?~R

T/rtf

AS

.: .0__7._<2?.
_'. ' : '

- * ' (- ---. ______

_. | ,__ - i-

[-"-_,'__- Ii" . --/-{ " /. 1 .L

T

' '" --1 ' " [ - -

"vif-R-39

p
'0

' "-!-/ 1 '

/,tf

'' ~

! i

i
J".0

- r .-.._ij:r:_L.j >ji_L- "^;i. T j . - - - - - j - --! - - - { __ -_-- j

r.-j
1

^,3

2.0

7.

SH/fLD

THICKNcSS

REPRODUCIBIUTY OF THE ORIGINAL PAGE IS POOR

FOR SOLAR MAX I _ Figure VII-B-24 SYI.'CHPO'JOUS OMIT AVERAGE DAILY ELECTRO.'! DOSE VS. ALUMINUM SHELL THICKNESS (VETTE-GSfC AE4) CORRECTED:

BREMSSTRAHLUu'G
10

'ALUMINUM EQ. THICKNESS (g-cnf2)

VII-B-40

Table VII-B-4 '..

SOLAR PARTICLE EVENTS AT SYNCHRONOUS ALTITUDE

SHIELDING EFFECT FOR SOLAR CYCLES 19 AND 20 EVENTS (54 EVENTS 1956 - DATE WITH FLUX MORE THAN 106P/CM2 >30 MEV.)

PERCENTAGE Op" EVENTS WITH DOSAGE LESS THAN THE ALLOWABLE EXPOSURE SHIELDING (gm/cm2 OF AL) ALLOWABLE EXPOSURE % OF BFO QUARTERLY LIMIT (35 REM)
10 30 83 89 50 85 94

100
93 98

2.0

'69
80

10.0 30.0

.98

100

100

100

VII-B-41

Space Division Houston Office, Field Operations 1840 NASA Boulevard

Houston, Texas 77058

International

* D^^L-t A!) nOCKWell

January 18, 1977

TO:

A. C. Hardy, FM2

SUBJECT: SPS Radiation Environment The enclosed documentation is a brief report of work performed on the SPS radiation environment at geosynchronous altitude during the period 1 October through 31 December 1976.

E. R. Beever Project Engineer Shuttle Radiation Analysis Flight Operations, Houston

ERB/ag

cc: R. G. Rose, FA R. K. Swim, D/101

VH-B-42

SOLAR POWER SYSTEMS GEOSYNCHRONOUS RADIATION ENVIRONMENT

31 DECEMBER 1976

ROCKWELL INTERNATIONAL SPACE DIVISION HOUSTON OPERATIONS SHUTTLE RADIATION ANALYSIS

VII-B-.43

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Introduction Galactic Cosmic Rays Geomagnetically Trapped Radiation Local Time Variations Geomagnetic Storms Longitude Effects of Equatorial Orbits Solar Proton Events References

VH-B-44

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS

Figure VI 1-^25 VII-3-26 j

Title Normalized GCR Dose Rate vs. Shield Thickness Synchronous Orbit Average Daily Electron Dose vs. Aluminum Shell Thickness Differential Electron Flux vs. Local Time for Various Energies Synchronous Altitude Electron Dose vs. Aluminum Shell Thickness for Several Local Times Omnidirectional Flux of Electrons Greater Than 0.5 MeV as a Function of Time in the Outer Zone Map of AE-4 Electron Fluxes for Epoch 1964, Threshold Energy 1.0 MeV Plotted on the Geomagnetic and Geographic Coordinate Systems Event-integrated Proton Fluxes above 30 MeV for the Major Solar Events of the 19th and 20th Solar Cycles Dose per Proton >. 30 MeV as a Function of Thickness and Spectra Monthly Probability of a Proton Event vs. Event Size

t-'Zy ~

VII-B-28 J

VII-B- 29

VII-B- 30 ,

VII-B-,31

VII-B-,32 VII-B-k33

VII-B-45

LIST OF TABLES

Table

Title

VII-B-5

Total Estimated Solar Flare Doses by Event for Ten Shielding Configurations 20th Solar Cycle Event Doses (rad) Percentage of 19th Cycle and 20th Cycle Large Solar Proton Events Which Did Not Exceed Various Levels of Allowable Quarterly Dose to Blood Forming Organs

VII-B-6 VII-B-7

VII-B-46

SOLAR POWER SYSTEMS GEOSYNCHRONOUS RADIATION INTRODUCTION

ENVIRONMENT

The natural space radiation environment at geosynchronous altitude consists of the galactic cosmic rays, geomagnetically trapped particles, and occasional bursts of energetic particles from the sun (solar particle events). The environment is a severe one for manned operations, and shielding assessments are complicated by the temporal variations in the environment and the requirement to account for non-forecastable exposures due to increases in the trapped environment and the occurrence of solar particle events. The earliest shielding calculations of synchronous orbit radiation were performed by Burrell, et al (1) using the AE-3 model electron environment (2). The latest work'in the area is by Wilson and Denn (3) who have scaled Burrell's data upward to place it in better agreement with the higher energies of the current AE-4 electron model (4). These studies and other data from the literature have been used where applicable. All of the AE-4 calculations included here and the 20th cycle solar proton event doses were calculated as part of this study. The following sections review the synchronous radiation sources and their shielding implications for manned operations.
GALACTIC COSMIC RAYS

Galactic cosmic rays are composed of 87% protons, 12% alpha particles and 1% heavier nuclei.' Because of the secondary radiations produced in attenuating these very high energy particles, protecting against them is impractical. Figure VII-B25 indicates that the dose2 rate remains relatively constant for shield thicknesses up to about 50 g/cm . Fortunately, the galactic cosmic rays are not an intense source and, therefore, will produce a continuous low level exposure to the SPS crew and equipment. The lower energies of the GCR vary with the solar cycle. From Apollo experience (5), the geosynchronous exposure rates will range from approximately 24 mrad/day at solar maximum to about 36 mrad/day at solar minimum. Since there are unresolved questions about the interactions of high energy heavy particles with tissue (7), long term exposure to galactic cosmic rays may be a significant factor in career dose limitations.

VH-B-47-

GEQMAGNETICALLY TRAPPED RADIATION

The trapped radiation at synchronous altitude consists of both protons and electrons. The protons are low in energy and of small concern while the electrons have energies extending to several MeV and are quite penetrating. A dose versus thickness curve using the current electron model of the outer zone electrons, AE-4 (5), is shown in Figure VII-B-1-26. The current model does not account for changes due to the solar cycle at geosynchronous altitude although it is probable that higher electron fluxes are present during conditions of solar minimum (8). A new outer zone electron model, AE-7, is expected to be released soon (9). Although there are some unresolved problems with the higher energies of the new model, it is understood that it will be similar to AE-4 up to 2.0 or 2.5 MeV. From Figure VII-B-26 , it is apparent that aluminum shielding of 2.0 to 2.5 g/cnr will limit the crew radiation exposure to that received from the secondary x-rays (Bremsstrahlung) produced in the habitat walls. Local Time Variations ATS-1 measurements (10) showed that the electrons at geosynchronous altitude undergo significant diurnal changes in intensity, varying from a maximum about an nour before local noon to a minimum about an hour before local midnight. Figure VII-B-27 " shows how the differential spectrum changes during the day. Dose versus thickness curves for local times of 0400, 0800, 1100, and 2300 hours are shown in Figure VII-B- 2 . . There 8. is more than a factor of 10 difference at 1.5 g/cirr between local noon and local midnight. It may be necessary to forego EVA operations near local noon. The diurnal variations are sometimes masked by large increases due to geomagnetic storms which are described next. Geomagnetic Storms A severe and long-lasting magnetic disturbance that occurs worldwide is called a magnetic storm which is often accompanied by auroral displays and ionospheric disturbances which disrupt radio communications. Geomagnetic storms produce variations in the intensity of trapped electrons which are quite pronounced at the geosynchronous orbit. During intense storms electron intensities have been observed to increase by more than two orders of magnitude and to persist for a week or so. The intensities rise rapidly to a peak value and decay slowly. In Figure VII-B-,29. the Kp index is a ground-based measurement of geomagnetic activity. The higher the Kp index, the more intense the storm.

VII-B-48

The AE-4 electron model is time averaged so that lonq duration missions, and stay periods within a habitat which excludes primary electrons, are adequately accounted for. The model, however, does not account for the peak enhancement of the storms which could be important to lightly shielded cases such as EVA. Longitude Effects of Equatorial Orbits Because the earth's magnetic poles are offset from the earth's axis, the magnetic equator coincides with the geographical equator only at longitudes of about 10W and 150W. At synchronous altitude there is a dropoff of radiation with increasing magnetic latitude. ATS-6 measurements (8) at a magnetic latitude of 10 were about a factor two lower than ATS-1 measurements at the magnetic equator. Figure VII-B-30 illustrates the offset of the two equators at 70W longitude.
SOLAR PROTON EVENTS

The emission of high energy protons from the sun pose a hazard to man in space due to the damaging effects caused by the penetrating radiation. The problem is compounded by the fact that the time of occurrence, spectral shape, and intensity cannot be accurately forecasted. It was earlier thought that the earth's magnetic field and magnetosphere would impede or attenuate most of the incoming solar particles. For low altitude and small inclination, this is true. However, data from ATS-1 and other synchronous-orbiting satellites indicated that solar protons, for the most part, have direct access to the synchronous altitude region (10,11). Figure VII-B-31 shows the solar proton events that have occurred over the past two solar cycles (12). Burrell, et al, (1) have estimated the solar proton event (SPE) skin and blood-formina organs (BFO) doses for the 19th solar cycle as shown in Table VII-B- 5. We have computed the SPE skin and BFO doses for the 20th solar cycle. These are shown in Table VII-B- -. ;. In Figure VII-B- 32. we have plotted the normalized dose (dose/proton with energy>30 MeV) vs. shield thickness for several event characteristic rigidities, Po. Po is a measure of the spectral hardness. If one knows the total number of protons greater than 30 MeV/cm2, and the associated characteristic rigidity, then the dose for a given thickness can easily be determined from this figure. As mentioned above, solar proton event characteristics (spectral shape, event size, etc.) cannot be accurately predicted. More recent investigators (12, 13, 14) have determined probabilistic fluxes and doses as a function of mission duration and confidence level. In Figure VII-B-33'Burrell's (13) data has been reproduced depicting the monthly probability of obtaining a solar proton event of a given event size. These data were used in Table VII-B- 7 T to generate the percentage of 19th and 20th cycle

VII-B-49

solar proton events which did not exceed various levels of allowable quarterly BFO dose. These data were computed based on 54 ..vents with event size greater than 1C)6 protons/cm2 with E>.30 MeV. 2 This seems to indicate that a shield of 10 gn/cm will protect the crew against expected solar particle events.

VII-B-50

REFERENCES

1. Burrell, M. 0., Wright, J. J., and Watts, J. W., An Analysis of Energetic Space Radiation and Dose Rates, NASA TN D-4404, February 1968. 2. Vette, J. I., Lucero, A. B., and Wright, J. A., Models of the Trapped Radiation Environment, Volume III: Electrons at Synchronous Altitudes, NASA SP-3024, 1967. 3. Wilson, J. W. and Denn, F. W., Preliminary Analysis of the Implications of Natural Radiations on Geostationary Operations, NASA TN D-8290, September 1976. 4. Singley, G. W. and Vette, J. I., The AE-4 Model of the Outer Radiation Zone Electron' Environment, NSSDC 72-06, August 1972. 5. White, T. T., Robbins, D. E., and Hardy, A. C., Radiation Environment for the 1975-1985 Space Station Program. NASA MSC Document No. MSC-00183, October 9, 1969, p. 4. 6. Haffner, J. W., Radiation and Shielding in Space, Nuclear Science and Technology, Vol. 4, Academic Press, New York, 1967, p. 279. 7. Radiation Protection Guides and Constraints for Space-Mission and Vehicle-Design Studies including Nuclear Systems, National Academy of Sciences, Space Science Board, Radiobiological Advisory Panel, 1970, p. 18. 8. Paulikas, G. A. and Blake, J. B., Electron Radiation in the Synchronous Orbit, Aerospace Technical Memorandum, No. ATM 76(6260-20)-!, October 29, 1975, p. 5. 9. Teague, M. J. Private Communication. 10. Paulikas, G. A. and Blake, J. B., "The Particle Environment at the Synchronous Altitude," Models of the Trapped Radiation Environment. Vol. Ill: Long Term Variations. NASA SP-3024, 1971, pp. 49-67. 11. Blake, J. B., Martina, E. F., and Paulikas, G. A., "On the Access of Solar Protons to the Synchronous Altitude Region," Journal of Geophysical Research, Vol. 79, No. 10, April 1, 1974, pp. 1345-1348. 12. King, J. H., "Solar Proton Fluences as Observed during 1966-1972 and as Predicted for 1977-1983 Space Missions," NASA/GSFC Report X-601-73-324, October 1973.

VII-B- 51

13.

Burrell, M. 0., "The Risk of Solar Proton Events to Space Missions" in "Proceedings of the (Las Vegas, 1971) national Symposium on Natural and flanmade Radiation in Space," E. A. Warman, editor, NASA TM X-2440, January 1972, pp. 310-323 (printed separately as NASA TN D-6379, June 1971).

14. Yucker, W. B., "Solar Cosmic Ray Hazard to Interplanetary and Earth-Orbital Space Travel" in "Proceedings of the (Las Vegas, 1971) National Symposium on Natural and Manmade Radiation in Space," E. A. Warman, editor, MSA TM X-2440, January 1972, pp. 345-355.

VII-B-52

NORMALIZED GCR DOSE RATE VS. SHIELD THICKNESS*

r. ir~l~ri r

N .

o<

M iI

ho

ibi. 11
- i

; i

,-1

XTa ' i ii
3 4 5 6 7
3
4 5 ( 7

TTTl-

-TTT13 4 5 6 7

10'

10'

ALUMINUM SHIELD THICKNESS (GM/Cfr)

*FROI1 HArFIJER - NORMALIZED TO APOLLO RESLLTS VII-B-53

SYNCHRONOUS ORBIT AVERAGE DAILY ELFfTRnw DOSE VS. ALUMINUM SHELL THICKNESS (VETTE-GSFC AE4) CORRECTED.

4-

BREMSSTRAHL_U_NG
10

Figure VII-B-26. ALUMINUM EQ. THICKNESS (g-cnf2) VII-B-54

HbllKt V l l - K - l - ^ /

FL^CTROM FLUX

LOCAL TIME FOR VARIOUS EUCRGIES

o
QJ V)

OJ ^" I J L> O)

o o:
UJ LU

LU LI-

12

16
tin\

20

24

Figure VII-B-27
VII-B-55
I (VAI TTMC

IU

FIGURE V T T - R - 2 8

SYIJCHRONOUS ALTITUDE ELECTRO!! DOSE VS. ALUMII.L':! SHELL THICKiJESS FOR SEVERAL LOCAL TI.iES

LjJ <^)

. ^u
- -n

s
1
3

- ^
j

>

I i
i

i
J

|
! j

i
1 i

in-3

i i l

ALUMINUM SHELL THICHJESS ( g / c m ) VII-B-50

o
1

- {L

1 1 II 1 II J ill I I I ! ! / li ?\LJL^W/jU\^c^A<lAd^M^\>'*^^

II III

n M

1 I/I

10*

L ~ 5.0

.o7
To Si
CJ

B=B O

'

!'..

' \**> '** ' \ $ ' 'J ^M / \ , -6 _ % " ;. : -r f'fa %::' .' ^ *. \_ ;. f^. 10 y, *K \ '^ * ' '%. /; '<
%/. 1 - \ 1 1 ;*w I > 1 ^ 1

Iio5/|0c
o
tr>
SS.

n*

|0

LM'.O - B!!BO

ft %. April 18 \ X. ' i " 1 J %1 i*. i s

t

:<f

k\ V

"* io6 to
*'

June 16 " "1 1

^ ' V^

^ <r-i' ^.

*v ^

. j."S -vJ -^..'i *X

/ *J**

5
0

^ ^V ^

^*vV"
^.'K
1 .'' 1

*
1

50

100

150 '

200

DAY OF YEAR, 1965

lie ci<vrncnti h<ve tetn converted to th cquitorUI f l u i viluei Ihe 3-hour 9n(tU Indei. 'P. << 4t me to? of the Vrepd. Jntense rognetlc itomi occurred en April 16 <nd June It, I96S.

FIGURE V I I - B - 2 9 Omnidirectional Flux of FlPctrnns Breater than n S as a Function of Time in the Outer Zone (Taken from Mcllwain, 1966) VII-B-.57

VO

en o o
Q-

aa

OO

o
ts>

>oo

LU l-L <r X O"

<. xi \ v\V

i^X

l\

\ \ V\

LU LJ c;
Z
t

o o o *-^
Q- O <-)

I O I O

O > < O LU </) I <U C-

LU r: < i
LU <

** O CDOO_
>-

U. jj ci O)

r LU (_) O "^ I

LU <: o
S LU O """ I LU fO ^D """*

ro oo <r '"
I

O ^ O lit

es: O L_I

LU Oi

VII-B-58

11 i i ir

pi 11 i ini

|ii 11 i i ii

uii i i i ir

CNJ

co o
CM
I.O

in

in to

<ut; x o
c o
O (->

ro vo CM

i. cr>

IO

S- in

cr.

I/)
I CO I

to

CM

o o

o in

o o

o
LO

a:

'H38wnn
VII-B-59

FIGURE VII-B-'32

<s> o
Q

UJ

I
o

40 60

100

SHIELD THICKNESS (g/cm

Al)

DOSE PER PROTON i 30 MeV AS A FUNCTION OF THICKNESS AND SPECTRA

VII-B-60

O 1 111

c
CO

ro

Q. X

a: 5

O O

o; i i/o d. O = I cz. ^:
>- Q.

OO UJ

UU CQ

VII-B-61

in
CM

0 fCJ CM
t-j 0

TH

Tf TH

TH

r- in co
TH

CM CM 00

0 00 0
TH CO

in m

0 0 rtf

co in

CJ

TH CO
0

O CO
O TH

O O O

o oo0O o o
in
CO to TH
TH TH TH TH

CM * CM TJI

oo
TH

TJ<

in O CO Tj m o oo CO

tO CT 00
^^* ^rH 00

^ ^ 00 t- ^^

o co oo o

to co co cj O CO eo to
O TH

to o

O CO

o oo
eo rr to CM in TJ<
TH

O O

00

CO T-C
TH

* 2

CM

00
TH

o eo

-a

m
m

in in
t- CO CO O

O OO CM CO tO CM CO CO
O

o to in o to f- t- TH
CO TH CO O TH CM TH CM

0 0 T^ O TH CO TH CM

co o "o TH eo f
O CO
CJ

TH

TH TH

O O

oo
CO

CO TH

TH

s
to
C

in
CM

O TH

O CM
CO

f~ CM t^ in o TH
CM TH CM

in

TH

in 0 t> TH in m co in t> co eo eo o o o c- oo in to c> co co t~ CJ TH *

T^<

oo m CM to

0 CO O CJ
O TH

CM CO CO CO

m TH cj co TH m in CM
t> CO

CM CM TH CM

O TH

oo
TH

w w

5 o
bfl
CJ

0)

c o

m ""

oo cj
t> CO

CM eo co * co m
CO TH CM

o
00 00 -4<
^* J CM ^ ^

O TH

oo to to TH in in t>co
O TH

CO

Tj

o co oo co

c-- m

Tj<
O TH

m TH
O CM

tO

co

O CO CO

1-1
CO

o ttl o CM
0 C

O O O
CO TH fr

0 000

00o o O CO

o oo
000

ooooo
ooooo m eo *! in in CM CM O o o
O O 0 CJ in co

^ oo in too
CO

ooo m m CM in o o to t- o
TH

CO O
O Kj*

O CM

II X
CJ

3i

o
TH

O O CM O
O TH

co oo oo
O

Tfl

00 CO CO

oooo
CM CJ CM TH ~* 3 CM

O O

TH

TH

00 f- CM in TH CM CM CM

co o o o oo
00
Tj< tO

w
in

oo
OO CM TH CM

o CM TH eo o o oo ^^ ^^

o TJ< in o
CM CO

O 00O CO CM CJ CM
CJ CO

0000 cj m CJ tO

co

o
TH

O TH TH

in t-

in i>

CM m LO o in
00o CM to cj
t-- CJ

CO

TH

TH

CM

sO s bfl
cj bJs
C

oO o 0
CM

TH in co
00

o oo in TH co co m o
rj< CM
TH

oooO CJ
to
t"~ CO
CO co oo in in
Tj<

O
TH
CO

0OO 0
TH

in co oo en

o in
CJ

O 0 tf CM

TH CM

TH

TH

CM CM CM TH

o in
CM
TH

TH

oo * co
O 0

3
r->

rt 3

* ^

o in o oo co
CM

O O O O O0
CM f- CO CM t^ TH
TH

oooO 0 o o t- 0 O oo O CO in m in CM
TH TH

.o o o o 0 00 O

oo
TH CO

o o O CM in oo to co

0 O O 0 O CO CO VH CO t>
CO TH

c~ o m oo
CM CM
TH

CM

o 0 S 2 a w

3/23/58

co in co \ in rt co ^ Q CM CO
CJ CM CO

\\ o
TH CO TH

O CJ CM CM CM \

0 0 oo oo oo in in in m \ \ co CM CO
t*~ T-I

CJ CJ CJ CJ

m m in in \\
0 O

0 M

co co o o
TH CM
TH TH TH TH

CM <M

co \

t>-

OO

oo oo

m h-

VII-B-62

7/12/61 7/18/Gl

r t m \ in t-- m \\ o

00 O

Jp

o o r-> o o
OOOOO

t CM r ^-

cj- i in in oor-^o
OOOO

i O ^ C M C M VOCOCOCMO
OOC5CMO

co oo
O .

rr^
O

mi oo i^^om
t CD OO

in in

co co co in oo
O CM VO O O O O r- O O

* r CM tn vo Or o co '

inocor->-in cnincnTO

^jvo

r o

cn o

CMCO** coo^aCO

ooor- o

oooa-o

CM cooco

UJ

r>

<c

o
Cn

00 1 rCM

in
CM

r. in vo in in O in cn r r
O O CM O O

OOOVDVOr^. OOJOincO OOOCOO

CMCMCO*OO COl^r ^3-O r CD CM r. O

CO CT> O

i CM Z>O OO
-

OOi O r ^ O OOOOOOO 3-OinOsJCM

1f

o o t
z
LU UJ
11 I

UJ 00

oo

E o ^^
cn

"**

5 E

u
cn

in ,

cn r^ ro oo co CD PS. PS. CM r
O O CO O O

3-vocncno ocMOinin
OOO-3-O

ooor~-r--O incocoor
r O CM Cn O

r^ o
r

r CM incMincno oo r^ocooco
CDO inOVQO-3-

_l

"
on
^ oo -c
4-> O

o
.l_5

^ _J

CM

r VrC

cn

o o ~

in in co cn r
O CO CM O f O O CM O O

, in^j-om
Or OOOCMO

O VO CM

*! v o v o v o

r VO 3" CO O

co
O

1^.

mi votno

OOCMOOO

r O r i n O

OOO3-OOO 0

vo i

rl? ^
^~ _&_

cn c

CO

'cu
uo

o in

r CM cn in in v o c o o o o c o CM CM vo r^ co r in co r oo O CM r. o O . O O O O r
t

r^-CMcocoo CMoocMcncM
CMr r ^ V O O r-

CM CDr-^
Oi

3-co oo
OO

OOVOCMCOO COOOOCMOO
O O O r Or^ ri CO CM

>1
-H

>

UJ CO 1 1

o
CM

vo co vo cn .3unvo^vocM coovor^oo O O cn r CM cnincor--.cM cncM^-cMr-^ r vo cn ps. i r CM CM ^1- CO * CO r in

r CM

criCMOcnco i CMI r-~vo

O O-3-OOO

CMcn^-r-o vo*voooo
ps.
i O CO r O

3-

^ in

oo

o vo

v^_ ^*

o CM d- cn oo r vo CM o vo cn CM CM vo r~. i *3-oocMoo
CM 3- O CO CM

in r^ CM

cn vo r co in

i i C M

0-3-0000 covocnLnvo co in r vo r
CMi

cni c o c o v o CMinrv.i in r r-s. CD *3" CM

oo^-cno o c o i oo cn r r**. 3~ r
C n v O i

*3 C.i
rZ j U

u J -

vo vo r*. r~- r. vo vo vo vo vo i i i i i r^ CM co s- co
O O CM CM O

co co co co co cp ^.o ^-P LO v^3 cn co r co *^

i i * i i

> u.i

1 1 1 1 1 r- cn i in CM
OOOOr-

O CM OO r CD 1 1 1 1 1 VO CT> O r CM O O r r r-

cncncncno OOOOO ^-P ^o ^D ViO r*1^ r*** r*1^ r*** t**^ r*^ m CD CM c\j r vo cn oo ^- in

i i i i i

CM OO r O OO O CM CM i O 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 CM OO *3" r r CO CO r - ^ C O r r O O O r O OOOOr O

i i CMCM ^*^ r*^ t^* r^* ^^ ^~ vo r co ^3-

i i i i i

CMOOCMO 1 1 1 1 3" OI UO CO OOOO

VII-B-63

0 O CM
<SI

CO

en

en

CO

CSJ

=r

U_ O OO

CO e CD

o> to o
O)

o ^^
<s>
C
O O r CO

oo

T^

en

en

CO

en

4->

o: t _i
UJ

UJ 0

UJ

UJ

>
_l oo
11

ct: o
CD

.a
(0

o o $_

QL

5 O

O
Lf)

LO co

en co

^jen

VO O
r~

p^
^"^

_i <_> ><_>
sz
CO
4->

s
C.

<f.
UJ UJ

OL

>
Q

O U . Q O 0 1 CO

>> tS-

i
O *

-!->

cu
n3
3

in
CO

r~*
CO

<aCTi

o;

UJ

O CM Q r
* ct

o
X UJ

cr
O i.
I '

<t UJ
C.
CD CD

o
\~~

UJ

_i

UJ

g
Q i ( Q JC O 11

>jr

O O
4->

0 Q

oo
>GL

UJ

CO

lt-

co

co
CO

ur>
CO

en
CO

o
CO
*M

^^

en
r U . UJ CD

UJ (

-M C CD O
i~
.

A!

CM

o
CO

co
CO

r^
CO

-eJC

3
1

o:

o:
UJ

a.
en vo co r~r co

CD

i ii
l_ 1

3
OO UJ

o
ea:
UJ O UJ

r^ Z
UJ UJ

oo

B
__l
CO
O
f.

>.

^
el

>

UJ

01

o
H-

ex.

o o:
Q-

_l _l

3^
O
f^

en i
CM

C e -O <

CO

CM

LO

O
r

O UJ

r-

JZ OO

^ CD

<c CO

oo

VII-B-64

VII.

ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS B. IN-SPACE OPERATIONS

VII-B-2. Energetic Particle Precipitation Owen K. Garriott Space and Life Sciences Directorate Solar cell and reflector degradation from energetic electrons and protons trapped in the earth's magnetic field has been identified as a major source of power loss for the SPS. This is especially true when transferring through the highly populated Van Allen belts from LEO to GEO. Damage in transit can be minimized by temporarily reducing the population of energetic particles on the magnetic shell on which the SPS is currently located. This study contract has the objective of investigating how well energetic electrons can be scattered into their "loss cone" and thereby "precipitated" from the radiation belts. This scattering is produced by generating a very low frequency (VLF) radio wave which propagates along the magnetic field line in the "whistler" mode. This circularly polarized wave propagates only at a frequency below the local electron gyro frequency. When the radio wave encounters an energetic particle spiral ing along a magnetic field line in the opposite direction from the wave, the particle sees an upward Doppler shift of (V,,/A ) where v,, is the particle velocity along the field direction and A is the VLF wavelength in the plasma. For resonance to occur, the particle gyro frequency equals the Doppler-shifted wave frequency: fh = f+ (v.,Am) The study has already shown that this resonant condition can be readily achieved for most energetic particles, in fact, a single encounter of a VLF wave pulse with a reasonable distribution of energetic particles may scatter as much as 7% of the total population into the "loss" cone, after which they never return to high altitudes. The study will continue to explore optimum frequencies and time variations of frequency to use for precipitation, time constants for loss and replenishment, the desired amplitudes of VLF waves (effects are very non-linear), the degree to which the population of an entire shell of particles may be reduced, and possible ways to precipitate energetic protons. The work commenced in April, 1977, for one year on a $15,000 contract to the Radioscience Laboratory at Stanford University.

VII-B- 65

VII

ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS B. In-Space Operations VII-B-3 Space Collision Probabilities D.J. Kessler Environmental Effects Office

The NORAD radar is currently tracking about 4000 objects in orbit around the Earth. The smallest size that can currently reliably be tracked is about 10 cm in low Earth orbit (LEO) and several meters in geocentric orbit (GEO). Fig. VII-B-34 compares the collision frequency of the SPS from these 4000 satellites with the collision frequency from 1 gm meteoroids. The dashed line shown at GEO results from an attempt to predict the number of 10 cm objects in GEO. This figure is consistant with the results of a number of other calculations (references 1 and 2), and it can be concluded that the collision frequency from 4000 satellites is represented here to within a factor of 2. The uncertainty in the collision hazard results from two unknowns: (1) the number of orbiting objects of size 1 mm, and larger, in the year 1990 and later, (2) the consequence of the resulting collisions. The resolution of these two issues will then allow a proper trade-off between design constraints and operations directed toward minimizing the frequency of collision. Fig. VII-B-35 illustrates the uncertainty in the collision frequency in the year 2000 during the phases of SPS construction, transit, and operation, and is the result of a preliminary modelling effort (ref 3). The lower limits of 11, 6, and 5 during each phase assumes the number of satellites does not increase from its present number. However, during the last two years the number has been increasing at the rate of 510 per year. The "expected" number of impacts results from assuming that this trend continues, some collisional fragments have been generated from satellite collisions, and the current number of satellites is actually 50% more than detected by radar. The expected number in GEO is also the result of estimating the number of 10 cm objects at this distance. However, over the last 10 years, the number satellites has been increasing at the rate of 13% per year, and the upper limits 200, 100, and 900 for 10 cm impact during each phase are obtained. In addition, as the results of collisions between satellites, an even larger number of 1 cm and 1 mm fragments may be produced. An upper limit for their collision frequency is also shown. Thus, the uncertainty in collision frequency ranges over a 4 orders of magnitude in the year 2000. As the flux of even smaller fragments is estimated, and as the date of estimation increases, the uncertainty in the estimate also increases. The damage resulting from these impacts could be insignificant, if design precautions are taken. In LEO, the average collision velocity is about 10 km/sec. At this velocity, a 1 mm particle ( possibly even a .01 mm particle) can easily penetrate a solar cell. However, the area of solar collectors lost from 100,000 1 mm impacts could range from IxlO"7 % to IxlO"3 %, if the damage is confined to the immediate impact area. The area lost from 100 impacts of 10 cm and larger satellites would be larger, between lx!0~'*% and 1%, if the damage is confined. In GEO, the average collision velocity will be much less, probably about 0.1 km/sec. VII-B-66

The mechanics of collisions at this speed are much different than hyper-velocity impact mechanics, and will require a different analysis. The problem of minimizing the loss of solar collection area is also related to crew safety. The secondary ejecta from solar collector impacts can present a hazard to the crew. Thus another reason for minimizing the amount of this ejecta. However, most probably the primary hazard to the crew will either come from meteoroids or small ( 1mm to 1 cm) space debris from other satellites. The meteoroid flux is sufficiently well known that design precautions, similar to that used for Skylab, could now be defined; however, the definition of the debris flux in the year 1990 and later is uncertain and could exceed the meteoroid flux. To resolve these issues, the following tasks are required: 1. Construct a time dependent space debris model. This model would consider all sources and sinks of satellites, such as launch, explosive fragments, collision fragments, orbital decay, re-entry, and retrieval. This model would be used to predict the future debris environment, the uncertainty in the environment, and methods of altering the environment. 2. Improve the data base. Detection of satellites from ground based radar is essentially limited to objects larger than about 10 cm across (reference 4). This limit could be lowered to 1 cm by using a ground based optical system, and to 1 mm by using a space based optical system (reference 5). Other space based concepts which were developed to study meteoroids could also provide valuable data. However, just a close look at the size distributions resulting from explosions and collisions combined with the modelling efforts could do much toward reducing the uncertainty in the predicted flux of small debris. 3. Define the structures necessary to minimize the loss in SPS solar collection area. Much data has been collected on the consequences of hypervelocity and low velocity collisions, much of which can be applied to SPS/debris problems. This data indicates that thin solar collectors will minimize area loss. However, because of the uniqueness of the SPS design and the size of the space debris some testing will be required. 4. Define structure requirements for crew safety and other critical surfaces. Once the environment is defined, sufficient impact data probably already exists to define the shielding requirements for crew safety and other critical surfaces. 5. Consider the trade-offs between debris "clean-up" and design constraints. An early implementation of certain operational and design constraints on the current methods of space activities could lead to a significant reduction in the later debris flux. The later these constraints are implemented, the more difficult it may be to recover to a lower debris flux. Thus, the trade-offs between implementing these constraints and meeting more rigid design goals must be considered as early as practical in order to maintain all options. VII-B-67

References

1. Anon. "Solar Power Satellite: Analysis of Alternatives for Transporting Material to Geosynchronous Orbit", NASA Grant NGT 44-005-114, Oct. 15, 1976. pp 60-70. 2. Anom. "Solar Power Satellite, System Definition Study" Part I. Midterm briefing, March 9, 1977, NAS9-15196, Boeing Aerospace Company, pp. 444-459. 3. Kessler, D.J. "Collision Frequency of Artificial Satellites: The Creation of a Debris Belt", to be published, 1977. 4. Brooks, D.R., G.G. Gibson, and T.D. Bess, "Predicting the Probability that Earth-Orbiting Spacecraft will Collide with Man-made Objects in Space", in Space Rescue and Safety, AAS Publications Office, Tarzana, Califronia, pp 79-139, 1975. 5. Neste, S.L., R. K. Soberman, K. Lichtenfield, and L.R. Eaton, "The Sisyphus System-Evaluation, Suggested Improvements, and Applications to Measurements of Space Debris," by General Electric Company, Philadephia, PA 1976.

VII-B-68

o UJ CD

o
UJ C3

01

oi <o > u
fj 1 l 0
-Q CT>

O i

t- Q.

e* o o>
t- C IO -r-

at
S-

vi in

Ol (U

o /a to
4O

QJ QJ *J 4->

a>
t. QJ

c
f a>
4-> O lV> 4-> CX rO) O <C l-

(U f~

<a

-o -o fO C a: <o

CO CO

J9d SdS M^iw suoLSiitoo VII-B-69

to

3E 00

<_> ( uj

o *t 00

O I

. o o u. <

' 0. O

-i a:
<

oi
UJ

^"

Q CO

>- UJ O

I CO UJ _J Q-

a: <c

a. a:

uj _i a a. < o. oc a: => o

a O UJ t O

uj <; uj

O Of CM UJ t3 CH CC <

I
-

UJCQ

a: a: s: >- uj r> i

DC OQ UJ

a:
O_, o oo o
UJ Q. CO
C3 O*-

CO

CO Q_ CO

UJ UJ OQ

h-

UJ

-I}+

00 Q S ^

r o o o S u- o o h-un c\j

S2 o

C3 UJ

a: u_
o
CO

\~
o o o * o o o o o

i s: rs o: i o 2 oo tn >CJ

CJ $**

O I f
*f'~'

UJ

0003 yV3A NI

SdS HUM SNOISHIOD JO

i en

tn rr>

VII-B-70

VIII.

MANUFACTURING. NATURAL RESOURCES. TRANSPORTATION AND ENERGY CONSIDERATIONS INTRODUCTION

The primary purpose of the past year's work under the heading of Manufacturing, Natural Resources, Transportation and Energy Considerations has been to examine in more detail the following: o o a gallium o o Aluminum requirements primarily used in the rectenna. Gallium supply for potential replacement of silicon solar cell to arsenide solar ce1!. Surface transportation of fuel to launch site, Energy payback for SPS weight ranges.

Finally, a discussion on the energy payback and its relationship to fossil versus non-depletable fuel SPS electrical power plants is briefly discussed.
A. NATURAL RESOURCES

VIII-A-1. Rectenna Aluminum Materials Usage

Harmon L. Roberts Systems Evaluation Off.

During the past year a study has been conducted to review the structural design of the rectenna. One of the reasons for conducting this study was to reexamine the large quantity of aluminum required and determine if this quantity, resulting in a 7 percent demand for aluminum in the U. S. in the year 2000, could be reduced. This study is reported in Section IV-D-3. of the report. Aluminum is used in this design for power transmission in the rectenna and is an integral part of the structure. This power transmission requires a major portion of the aluminum demand for an SPS program; however, in the year 2000, assuming installation of four 5 Gw rectennas, the U. S. demand requirement would be reduced from 7 percent to 2 percent. VIII-A-2. Gallium Resource Supply
SUMMARY

Jerry C. Poradek Systems Evaluation Off.

Although gallium arsenide solar cell technology is in early stages of development, several potential advantages over silicon cells have been identified. These advantages are: higher electrical conversion efficiencies, shorter light absorption paths leading to thinner cells, and lower radiation damage potential. These advantages all tend toward smaller, lighter solar cell arrays. The single major known gallium arsenide cell disadvantage is the lack of gallium available for cell production. The following report VIII-A-1

addresses the amount of gallium required for the SPS program and the availability of gallium from the two major sources, aluminum ore and flyash. The amount of gallium needed for the SPS program and the amount available are highly dependent upon numerous supply and demand factors. Therefore, all conclusions on the number of satellites which can be supplied depend upon the following factors: Total number of SPS's proposed. Satellite output power. Solar cell efficiency. Overall satellite system efficiency. Supply source. a. Aluminum ore b. Gallium concentration in the ore c. Coal flyash d. Gallium concentration in the flyash 6. Projections on demand or availability of the various sources. 7. Collection efficiencies for the above sources. 8. Extraction efficiency for the various sources. The following table serves to illustrate the problem in choosing parameters and corresponding results. Amounts of aluminum ore and coal flyash are projected U. S. requirements. 10 25 100 100 30 40 25 30 4.6 ppm 6.6 ppm U.S. Average Eastern U.S. Coal Number of 10 Gw SPS 10 micrometer thick cell 22 55 Number of 10 Gw SPS 5 micrometer thick cell 44 110 Percent Percent Percent Percent Gallium
SUMMARY CONCLUSIONS

1. 2. 3. 4. 5.

extraction from aluminum ore of aluminum ore collected extraction from flyash of flyash collected concentration in coal

Several significant conclusions can be drawn from the investigations. 1. Widely varying amounts of available gallium can be projected based on differences in supply, extraction efficiency and collection efficiency. 2. If emphasis is placed on gallium recovery it appears that in excess of 100,000 MT of the metal can be produced from U. S. coal/flyash and U. S. required aluminum ore from friendly countries by 2025. VIII-A-2

3. GaAs solar cells must approach the 5 to 6 micrometer thickness level to allow for production of 112 satellites in the 10 Gw range with the gallium available above. GLOSSARY OF TERMS SATELLITE OUTPUT POWER: Power delivered to the national power grid by an SPS. SOLAR CELL EFFICIENCY: The fraction of energy converted from solar to electrical energy by a solar cell. EXTRACTION EFFICIENCY: The amount of gallium extracted from an ore source compared to that which was originally available in the source. COLLECTION EFFICIENCY: The amount of gallium source material collected for gallium extraction compared with the amount of source available in a given year; i.e., if 10 X 10 MT of flyash were scrubbed from stack gases of electric generation plants in a given year, but only 2 X 10 MT were collected and sent to a gallium extraction plant the, collection efficiency would be 20 percent.
GALLIUM RESOURCE SUPPLY 1.0 Introduction

The purpose of this study is twofold; first to define the magnitude of gallium demand for use in Solar Power Satellite (SPS) program when various parameters relating to gallium arsenide (GaAs) solar cells are Identified. Further, as a result of known demands, this study attempts to define the range of the amount of extractable gallium available to the United States from various sources. Specific topics covered include: a. Gallium demand with variations in efficiencies, cell thickness, solar concentration and satellite number. b. Gallium availability from zinc and aluminum production. c. Projected coal usage for electric power generation. d. Gallium available from coal usage. e. Projections of most probable factors in GaAs solar cell use in Solar Power Satellites. 2.0 General Background for SPS Gallium Demand In the analysis of the SPS, the weight of the satellite has a major effect on all other elements, such as fuel, number of launches, ground facilities, ground transportation, natural resources and pollution. The VIII-A-3

major weight element in the SPS as it is presently envisioned, is the solar cell array. Silicon solar cells are presently proposed as the leading candidate for the SPS array based on their current advanced state-of-development. Several drawbacks to the use of silicon include: (1) comparatively low electrical conversion efficiency; (2) low light absorption coefficient; (3) large cell thickness; (4) moderate sensitivity to proton and electron damage; and (5) large efficiency degradation at increased temperatures. A gallium arsenide solar cell, although in early stages of development and with several negative aspects of their own, shows potential improvements in the following areas: (1) Because the absorption coefficient is high, a thin crystal cell can produce a high conversion efficiency cell. (2) A thin crystal cell would significantly reduce array weight, even though GaAs has a high specific gravity of 5.34. (3) Because thin cells are practical, the potental damage from electron and proton damage is reduced. (4) Temperature effects which reduce electric conversion efficiency appear at this time to be much less severe in GaAs than in silicon cells. If in the next decade the GaAs cell can be developed to a degree approaching the expectations of some researchers, the only major problem confronting its incorporation in an SPS program would be the availability of the gallium to produce the GaAs solar cells. The availability problem is addressed in parametric form in the following section. 2.1 SPS Gallium Demand Factors The amount of gallium arsenide required in the SPS program is directly dependent on a number of factors which include: (1) Number of satellites required. (2) Thickness of GaAs required for the cells. (3) Efficiency of the photovoltaic conversion of the cell. (4) Efficiency of all the other operations in the power train such as: spacecraft power distribution, antenna power distribution, DC-RF conversion, phase control, mechanical alignment, atmospheric absorption, rectenna energy collection, RF-DC conversion, power interface and power conversion to the electrical grid. (5) The amount of solar concentration designed into the system. VIII-A-4

2.2 Gallium Demand Nomograph Because these factors cannot be defined at this time, and even the range of the numbers is open to conjecture, this paper introduces a nomograph to cover a wide range of possible variations in the independent variations in the independent variables. Cell Conversion Efficiency (Column 1) Cell electrical conversion efficiency is dependent upon various parameters such as cell material, thickness, purity, temperature and cell structure defects. Some of these factors are determined at the time of design and others during operation, the operating environment, and the operational lifetime. A definition of these factors cannot now be ascertained for GaAs cells in 1995 time frame, but in column 1 of the Nomograph VIII-A-1, any operational cell efficiency from one to 100 percent can be assumed. System Efficiency (Column 3) The various element efficiencies in the SPS affect the final overall efficiency directly. In column 3, the efficiency for all other SPS and ground units is identified. Again, any efficiency from one to 100 percent is available on the nomograph. Overall Efficiency (Column 2) By drawing a line connecting the cell (column 1) and satellite efficiencies (column 3), the overall efficiency is defined at the line intersected in column 2. This figure represents the percent of energy introduced to the power grid which is incident to the satellite cell surface. Satellite Cell Area. Column 4 and Cell Area Index. Column 5 Drawing a line horizontally from the overall efficiency, column 2 to column 4, will define the total area of cells required for a 10 Gw SPS with no solar concentration. For ease of calculation, the column figures are inverted and expanded to column 5, the solar area index. At this point the cell thickness in micrometers is determined and set in column 7. Connecting the desired thickness (column 7) with the cell area (column 5) the total cell weight in 1000's of metric tons as defined in column 6. Concentration Factor Moving to Graph VIII-A-1., with the weight of solar cells from Nomograph VIII-A-1., the total weight of cells can be determined based on concentration ratios. This determines the weight of GaAs required for one satellite. The equivalent weight of gallium is then found on Graph VIII-A2., which then defines the gallium demand per satellite. VIII-A-5

% CELL EFFIC IENCY 100

X OVERALL EFFIC:itflCY

100

% SYS EFFICIENCY MINUS SOLAR CELLS

SOLAR CELL AREA

SOLAR AREA

"

.If-!DEX

(10 V)

'

c (10 M 1000 IN 1(r

CELLJrfT CELL THICKNESS MT MICROMETERS

90 80 70 60 50

80
50403020-

90 80 70 60
50^ B

10-

900800700-

1000200

700500

20304050-

600 500400-

400300

40
10- ' I U / 9

< ' 40

200-

/ _

30-

/ 8"
/
y

30

/'

"
4-

-60 70- D 90- -^0 100- - \ \

1009080-

300100-

7060-

1 \ \ \
V

5 20
3
300200-

20

A;

200-

50-

5040, 30-

\ V
\

2'
10r

30
\
20-

400500 600

\
100-

1-

10
j 5

98-

8001000-

700

\ -90 \ ' -80 E ^

10Q 8 6 5
20-

76'

702000*

60-

54

2 1

^s?.

1
5040-

^xt
32-

5000 '

\ >
9; 8-.9 -.7 -.5

.
t

3-

30-

10.000'
*

1.
.8.6.4 .3.2'

"
6

'

2-

20-

54.

32.5-

1NOMOGRAPH VIII-A-1

. 10VIII-A-6

GRAPH VIII-A-1

lOO.OOOn

CONCENTRATION FACTOR
50,000^

^20,000
on
Of UJ

fc10,000

200

500

1000

2000

5000

10000

20000

50000

100,000

WEIGHT OF GaAs WITH NO CONCENTRATION

III MT

VIII-A-7

GRAPH V I I I - A - 2
r100,000

c 10

I/I

WEIGHT OF Ga-MT

VIII-A-8

3.0 General Background for SPS Gallium Supply The limiting factor in gallium arsenide production is the amount of economically producible gallium arsenide available. Gallium itself is plentiful, about 45 X 1CM 0 metric tons within the continental United States and another 7 X 109 metric tons in sea water; however, in general, the concentrations are too small to be economically retrievable. Estimates of gallium concentration in ocean water range up to about 5 ppb and continental crust concentration up to 18 ppm. Only in a few major ores is the concentration of Ga high enough to make extraction feasible and then the economics are valid only when the ore is mined for another primary metal such as Zinc Sulfide (Ga concentration^ 50 ppm) and Bauxite (Ga concentration^**!00 ppm, average). One other potential source has been identified, coal. The amount of Ga in coal itself is not high, ranging from about 3 to 7 ppm, but nearly all of the gallium is volatilized in the combustion process and is then recrystalized on the surface of the coal flyash as cooling takes place in the exhaust stack. Under normal circumstances, the average range of flyash gallium concentration is between 50 and 100 ppm. The concentration of gallium in coal decreases from east to west in the United States. This fact and the estimated amount of Ga potentially available from U. S. coal deposits is shown in Table VIII-A-1. Figure VIII-A-1 shows projected use of coal for electric power generation. 3.1 SPS Gallium Supply Factors The amount of gallium arsenide which can be supplied to the SPS program is directly dependent on the available gallium, which is dependent on several factors outlined below: (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) The The The The The amount of gallium potentially available from zinc ore. amount of gallium potentially available from aluminum ore. amount of gallium available from coal flyash. collection efficiency for gathering the ore tailings and flyash. recovery efficiency from the various extraction processes.

3.1.1 Gallium from Zinc and Aluminum (Zn and Al) Zn: Gallium can be extracted from the ores of both Zn and aluminum. Concentrations of gallium in Zn ores range from 0.001 to 0.02 percent and averages about 0.005 percent. The amount of gallium available is about 0.0022 percent that of the Zn available. Zn production in 1968 for the United States was about 1.6 X 106 MT. Thus, a theoretical yield of gallium would be 35 metric tons. By the turn of this century, Zn production should range between 2.23 X 106 MT and 4.27 X 106 metric tons, which could yield between 49 to 94 MT. Present known U. S. Zn reserves indicate a total of 700 MT of gallium is extractable and some 5000 MT total available from world Zn reserves. VIII-A-9

Table VIII-A-1

GALLIUM CONTENT OF UNITED STATES COAL

Eastern Province State Alabama E. Kentucky Maryland Ohio Pennsylvania Tennessee

Virginia

% Gallium in Ash
.0055 .0099 .0020 .0050 .0071 .0057 . 0085 .0077 . 0064 0071

% Ash
9.2 7.3 9.5 11.8 10.0 9.7 7.8 8.5 ~9TT" 9.3

ppm of Ga in Coal
5.06 7.22 1.90 5.90 7.10 5.52 6.63 6.54 5.73 6.60

W. Virginia Average Interior Province Arkansas Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Missouri
W. Kentucky

.0025 .0035 .0035 .0070 .0020 .0065 .0040 .0041

8.3 11.7 10.6 15.5 10.5 12.4 9.3 11.2

2.07 4.C9 3.71 . 10.85 2.10 8.06 3.72 4.59

Average Western States Arizona Colorado Montana New Mexico North Dakota Utah Washington Wyoming Averaqe

". . . .0039

10.5

4 09
1 W J

.0050 .0032 .0039 .0034 .OC20 .0030 .0059 .0017 .0035 '.., .0033

9.7 9.2 12.6 11.8 12.0 7.0 12.7 8.7 10.5 9.8

4.84 2.92 4.91 4.01 2.40 2. TO 7.49 1.47 3.67 3.23

National Average by State .0047 10.3 ' 4.66 National Average All Samples .0048 9.9 4.64 Average .0093 # of Ga/Tcn of Coal at 4.65 ppm Ga Concentration in Coal 107.53 tons of Coal/# Ga VIII-A-10

Al: The calculation of gallium from aluminum follows the same rationale", except that the ratio of gallium to aluminum is one to 4000 or 0.025 percent. A 1968 production rate of 4.0 million MT of aluminum would yield 1025 MT of gallium. By 2000, the aluminum demand will range from 20.4 to 40.4 million MT. Various projections on the amount of recycling indicate from 16.3 to 32.2 million tons will come from ore. This could yield between 4075 and 8075 MT of gallium per year. Total U. S. reserves of aluminum, however, are estimated at only 9 million MT and could yield no more than 2250 MT of domestic gallium. Considering estimated western world resources of some 875 million MT, the total yield of gallium is 218,750 MT if 100 percent recovery is assumed. 3.1.2 Gallium from Coal Gallium is found in trace amounts in all coals, but the amount found is not enough to warrent extraction from the coal. However, as the coal is burned, the gallium is volitalized and oxidized. As the gallium is converted to 63263, it begins to condense because the high oxide boiling point is greater than the combustion temperature. The 63203 condenses on the solid particles suspended in the gas stream and is trapped by the flyash condensing system. By collecting all the gallium in the flyash, the gallium in the cos! is concentrated from 20x to ss much as 150x, depending upon the type of coal and the type of firing system. Several techniques for extracting the gallium from the coal flyash have been devised. Tests to evaluate the amount of gallium available in U. S. coal deposits have been conducted. In general, the concentration of gallium decreases from east to west across the United States. Eastern coal averages about 6 ppm gallium; the interior section averages about 4 ppm, and about 3.25 ppm of gallium is found in western coal. The national average of 4.6 is used in this paper. Figure VIII-A-2 shows the amount of gallium recovery potential from the projected coal demand for electric generating plants between now and 2025. 4.0 Collection Efficiency in Accumulating Ore Tailings and Flyash for Gallium Processing This efficiency will vary with the source. The extraction of Zn and Al from ore is already done on a large scale at smelters. This means that gallium extraction can be done at the smelter also and nearly 100 percent of the gallium bearing ore should be available for the extraction process. In the case of coal flyash, however, only very large plants or groups of plants in close proximity to each other could support the cost of an efficient extraction plant. Thus, a large portion of the flyash will not be accumulated for extraction. VIII-A-11

FIGURE VIII-A-1 COAL DEMAND FOR ELECTRIC POWER GENERATIONS 2400-!

2200-

2000-

1800-

1600_l

1400-

1 120013

I
800 CL_

600-

400-

200-

0-

1970

1980

1990

2000

2010

2020

VIII-A-12

FIGURE VIII-A-2 GALLIUM AVAILABLE FROM COAL US ELECTRIC GENERATING PLANTS

10000-

9000-

8000-

7000-

<c
u_ o

6000csr fc

5000-

4000-

3000-

2000-1

1000-

1970

1980

1990

2000 YEARS

2010

2020

2030 VIII-A-13

5.0 Extraction Efficiency Extraction techniques vary widely in efficiency. Because such low concentrations of gallium are available in even the best cases, the extraction efficiency will not approach 100 percent. Low efficiencies can be expected initially with improvements made as experience is gained. Though large amounts of gallium are available from aluminum bearing ore, the extraction efficiency presently is low, being about 10 percent. Without a major processing breakthrough, this percentage should remain low although collection efficiency of the ore should approach 100 percent. However, new extraction techniques yielding efficiencies of over 20 percent are being developed at this time. Extraction from coal flyash is more efficient, about 30 percent, but the ability to economically collect high percentages of flyash is questionable. Present estimates of collection range from 10 to 40 percent efficiency in flyash collection. Collection efficiency is dependent upon the desire for the gallium and if rrore gallium was required the amount of flyash collected could be adjusted accordingly. 6.0 Gallium Supply Nomographs
Zn and Al

Nomograph VIII-A-2 shows the projected maximum amount of galliurn frcrr Al refining for the years to 2025. The curves can be neglected and column 6 used directly, if desired. Once the desired amount of maximum gallium potential is selected (column 6), proceed to column 1 and work to the right. Column 1 is the percentage of available ore that undergoes gallium extraction. Column 3 is the percentage of gallium that can be recovered by the extracting process. Column 2, between the two, is the overall recovery efficiency. Project that point to the efficiency index (column 4) line to the same numerical value. Draw a line from the efficiency index through column 5 to the maximum potential gallium supply point previously selected on column 6. The amount of recovered gallium read in column 5. Zinc ore will produce 35 to 90 MT per year, and is ignored for purposes of SPS gallium supply. It could be used to supply other gallium requirements. Coal Nomograph VIII-A-3 can be used to identify the amount of gallium available from coal for SPS usage knowing certain variables. A curve defining the projected use of coal for power plants is shown to the right of column 9. The amount of coal for any year is chosen by assuming a year and moving vertically to the line intercept. Moving left horizontally to column 9, defines the amount of coal available. In column 7, identify the ppm concentration of gallium in the coal. Column 8 intersection defines the amount of gallium in the coal. Define this amount on the gallium in coal index, column 6. At this point, proceed to column 1 and estimate the percent of coal flyash which is
VIII-A-14

PERCENT OF OVERALL .UUMl'iUH ORE COLLECTION

EFFICIENCY

EXTRACTION
EFFICIENCY 1001 90t
802 705 601

OVERALL GALLIUM HAX POTENTIAL EFFICIENCY AVAILABLE GALIUH

INDEX 100 FOR SPS rlOO.OOO SUPPLY 100.000 80.000 SO,000 40.000 30.000 MAX PROJECTIOfl-IIO RECYCLE60,COO

20X
40

OOS 0

50

50.000 20,000

HAX ALUMIHUM PRODUCTIOHAf!0 40t RECYCLE 40.000

40V

10;
30

30J

301

10,000

30.000

sx
20
4X 31

202

5000 4000

-20.000

21

10 9 8 7
6

-10X

10

1000

40C

5-

MEAN ALUMINUM PRODUCTION. 30S RECYCLE

3-

100

MINIMUM ALUMINUM PRODUCTION. 201 RECYCLE

2-

50 40

2000

30 20

GALLIUM FROM ALUMINUM PRODUCTION

MAXIilUM GALLIUM PRODUCTION FROM Zn CETWEEN 35 AflO 90 MT/YEAR

1000 1980

10

2000 YEAR

2020

2040

NOMOGRAPH VIII-A-2

VIII-A-15

l<

3
S

oo i

i I 1 I

"@

t o

*4 O 0 d

y a t^ J5 o

lO

a m

o
^T

X O CO

CVJ

>t o

S /

VIII-A-16

collected for processing of gallium and choose the percent extraction efficiency in column 3. Connecting these two points identifies the overall collection efficiency of column 2. Translate this value to the efficiency index line, column 4. The intersection of a line connecting the values in column 4 and 6 with column 5 will define the amount of gallium recovered from coal. 7.0 Gallium Stockpiling Table VIII-A-2 indicates the kind of gallium availability based on stockpiling of the gallium before the actual SPS requirements. The table shows the yearly and accumulated totals between 1980 and 2025 A.D. The supply is based on the collection extraction efficiencies of 10 percent from aluminum ore and 30 percent from coal flyash with collection efficiency of 100 percent for aluminum ore and 25 percent for coal flyash. Supply of ore and ash is based on coal use and aluminum demand. The nomographs project the minimum expected demand for the gallium source. It can be seen that the stockpiling of gallium in the 1980's does not have a significant effect on the overall amount collected. Only about 10 percent of the total is collected in this period because the projected demand is low compared to the post 1980's. 8.0 Example 8.1 Gallium Demand, Nomograph VIII-A-1 In this example, a cell efficiency of 20 percent is set in column 1, point A. A 50 percent remaining system efficiency is assumed in column 3, point B. Drawing a line between these points, crosses column 2 at point C. Moving from point C, horizontally to column 4, yields a solar cell area of 2 75 X 106m2 at point D. Next, translate D to column 5, point E at 75 X 106m . Assuming a cell thickness of 10 micrometers in column 7, point F, and connecting points E and F yields an answer of 4000 MT at point G, column 6. Moving to Graph VIII-A-1, and inputing 4000 tons on the horizontal line (point A) and moving up to the 2x diagonal line, define the GaAs required for a satellite with a concentration of 2 (point B). Moving laterally to the left margin yields a weight of 2000 MT at point C. Place the weight of GaAs on the left margin (point A) of Graph VIII-A-2, and move horizontally to the diagonal line (point B) and move vertically to the lower margin, point C and read the amount of Ga required; 950 MT per satellite. 8.2 Gallium Supply for Aluminum Production (Nomograph VIII-A-2) The maximum amount of gallium potential in 2000 is 6050 tons (point A). Move to column 6, point B. Identify the percentage of Al which has gallium collection incorporated, say 70 percent (point C, column 1), an extraction VIII-A-17

Table VIII-A-2

GALLIUM STOCKPILING Gallium from Gallium from Coal Total Ga 380 939 407 420 434 447 461 474 488 501 515 534 553 572 591 610 629 648 667 686 705 736 767 798 829 860 891 922 953 984 1015 1062

Cum.
Collect 380 773 1180 1600 2034 2481 2942 3916 3904 4405 4920 5454 6007 6579 7170 7780 8409 9057 9724 10410 11115 11851 12618 13416 14245 15105 15996 16918 17971 19855 19830 20932

Year

1980 1981
1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011

Al. 160 170 180 190

200 210 220 230 240 250 260 274 288 302 316 330 344 358 372 386 400 424 448 472 496 520 544 568 592 616 640 680

220
223 227 230 234 237 241 244 248 251 255 260 265 270 275 280 285 290 295 300 305 312 319 326 333 340 347 354 361 368 375 382

VIII-A-18

Table VIII-A-2 (cont'd) Gallium from

2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025

AT. 720 760 800 840

880 920 960 1000 1040 1092 1144 1196 1248 1300

Gallium from Coal

390
397 405 412 420 427 435 442 450 465 480 495 510 525

Total Ga 1110 1157 1205 1252 1300 1347 1395 1442 1490 1557 1624 1691 1758 1825

Cum.
Collect 22042 23199 24404 25656 26956 28303 29698 31140 32630 34187 35811 36502 39260 41085

VIII-A-19

efficiency of 35 percent can be expected in the early program and 45 percent by 2000 (column 3, point D). Read 31.5 percent on column 2, point E. Find 31.5 percent on index line, column 4, point F. Connect point B and F and read SPS available gallium in column 5, point 6 (1850 MT). 8.3 Gallium Supply from Coal (Nomograph VIII-A-3) The amount of coal forecast to be used in the year 2000 is shown in point A of graph. Moving horizontally to column 9 reads 915 X 106 tons at point B. Using the national average of 4.6 ppm (point C, column 7) indicates a maximum potential of 4200 MT for the year. Locate this value on the gallium in coal Index, column 6, point E. Proceed to column 1 and find the chosen value of 20 percent, point F. An extraction efficiency of 60 percent is chosen at point G, column 3. Column 2 indicates the overall efficiency of 12 percent at point H. Translate the 12 percent figure to point I in column 4, the efficiency index. Connecting points E and I locates point J, the tons of gallium produced from coal in column 5. This amounts to 510 MT of gallium. Taking the two hypothetical cases in Nomograph VIII-A-2 and VIII-A-3, the total gallium collected would be: Aluminum - 1850 MT Coal - 510 MT Total 2410 MT Matching the demand from Nomograph VIII-A-1, gallium SPS demand example would require 950 MT/satellite or 2400 MT = 2.5 satellites are available from the gallium supply.

VIII-A-20

9.0 Anticipated Limits By 2000 the various constraints on the use of gallium arsenide, which this paper addresses, will be fairly well defined. As projected at this time, those variables have the following limits. Demand Maximum
22 70

Cell

(%)

Minimum 12
40 4.8 3 2

Most Probable 18
58 10.4 5 2

System Efficiency other than Cells (%) Overall Efficiency (%) Solar Cell Thickness (micrometers) Concentration (X) Supply Aluminum Supply (10b MT) Percent Recycle (%) Collection Efficiency (%) Extraction Efficiency (%) Overall Collection Eff. (%)

15.4 20 10

40.4 50 100 90 90

20.4 10 10 5 0.5

30.4 30

100 30 30

Coal
200 Supply (106 Tons) Collection Eff. (%) 75 Extraction Efficiency (%) 90 Average Extraction Coal Gallium Concentration (ppm) 6.6 Overall Collection Efficiency (%) 67.5 600 10 10 3.2 1.0 912 30 40 4.5 12

VIII-A-21

10.0

Conclusions

The use of gallium arsenide solar cells in the SPS requires certain significant developments. o Advancement of GaAs solar cell technology to the point where 5 or 6 micrometer thick, 20 percent efficiency cells can be economically fabricated. o Improved efficiencies for the gallium extraction processes for both aluminum ore and flyash. o A carefully planned and operated system for the collection of a significant portion of the U. S. coal flyash, especially from the higher gallium content eastern coal. o Stockpiling of gallium should begin in the next few years so that the stockpile will lead satellite demand.

VIII-A-22

B. SURFACE TRANSPORTATION REQUIREMENTS

VIII-B-1. Continental U. S.

W. S. Beckham, Jr. Systems Evaluation Off.

The objective of the subject task was to define and determine the impact on the nation's industrial transportation and logistics systems caused by implementation of various SPS scenarios as postulated in the JSC study entitled "Initial Technical Environmental and Economic Evaluation of Space Solar Power Concepts," JSC-11568, dated August 31, 1976. The approach selected was to compare one of the proposed design concepts and implementation scenarios with the latest available data on U. S. commerce to determine, on a percentage basis, the relative magnitude of the task. The analysis focused on several discreet areas. which are discussed in detail subsequently, were: These areas,

a. Transportation of SPS hardware b. Ground equipment capacity to handle SPS payloads c. Propellant requirements and production methodology The elements and scenarios selected for the comparison included the column and cable SPS design, with a maximum launched weight of 124,292 metric tons (MT), the ballistic/ballistic heavy lift launch vehicle (HLLV) using a LOX/RP-1 first stage and a LOX/LH? upper stage with a nominal payload of 453 MT and a cargo orbital transfer vehicle (COTV) using LOX/H2 as the propellent. Scenario B was chosen for analysis. The two points of the scenario used for sizing were the initial years when the launch rate was one SPS per year and 2024, the busiest year when seven SPS's were launched and maintenance operations required flights equivalent to another 1.12 satellites. Surface Transportation U. S. surface transportation takes many forms. To provide the reader with a starting point, Table VIII-B-1 tabulates the cargo capacities of the most common forms of moving equipment available today. Table VIII-B-2 shows the required number of these elements to move the 124,292 MT SPS at the two launch rate extremes selected from scenario B. As can be seen from Table VIII-B-2, only if an all-aircraft system were chosen would there be any significant numbers of vehicles required. Since the actual launch site location is undefined, sea-borne transportation was chosen and a port was sized to handle the incoming hardware. Water-borne commerce was chosen since (1) it may be mandatory due to site location; (2) truck commerce data includes much short-haul, intercity movement; and (3) cargo sizes may be more compatible with large VIII-B-1

TABLE VIII-B-1 TYPICAL TRANSPORTATION CAPACITIES MODE

Truck Train (100-Car) Aircraft (747-200F) Ship Tanker (VLCC)

TABLE VIII-B-2

CAPACITY (MT) 36 5,000 121 45,000 450,000

TRANSPORTATION/LOGISTICS REQUIREMENT/SUPPORT 1 SPS/YEAR 7 SPS + MAINTENANCE

Truck Train Aircraft Ship

9.4/Day .067/Day 3/Day .0075/Day

TABLE VIII-B-3 SPS TRANSPORTATION/IMPACT

77/Day .55/Day 23/Day .06/Day

Port Sizing
o Total U. S. Water-borne Commerce (1974) 1583 X 106 MT

o Port of Houston (1974) o Port of Palm Beach, Florida (1974)

One SPS o Total SPS Tonnage* .124 X 106 MT SPS Percent of Total 0.0078%

80 X 106 MT 1.09 X 106 MT

7 SPS + Maint. 1.01 X 106 MT 0.06%

VIII-B-2

ships. Table VIII-B-3 shows a comparison of the total SPS hardware to total 1974 U. S. water-borne commerce. On a percentage basis, the SPS hardware represents an infinitesimal portion of 1974 cargo. For reference, the figures for two representative ports are also shown. The maximum SPS hardware rate is less than that handled by the port of Palm Beach, Florida. This port ranked 151st in capacity in the U.S. in 1974. Ground Handling Equipment As stated previously, the HLLV payload was selected to be 453 MT. At this time, no attempt has been made to establish the weight of the largest package which may make up this payload. There are in existence mobile cranes of extremely heavy lift capacity. The port of New Orleans, La., has a barge mounted crane capable of lifting 590 MT. All major ports have cranes in the 450 MT class. It is safe to assume that no major advancements are needed in this area to handle SPS components. Propel!ant Requirements and Production Methodology Using the chosen HLLV and satellite designs outlined previously, propellant requirements per satellite was established as follows:
RP-1 H2 LOX 1,173,829 MT 307,619 MT 4,896,248 MT

For purposes of this analysis, the RP-1 was examined because it utilizes a scarce resource and hydrogen because of its energy intensiveness in comparison to liquid oxygen.

RP-1
RP-1 requirements vary from 1.17 X 106 MT for one satellite up to 9.59 X 10 MT in 2024. To supply this amount of propellant requires a standard tanker every two weeks for the low rate. At the high rate, only the VLCC (very large crude carrier) class vessel seems practical and the high launch rate will require one of these vessels every 17 days. No U. S. ports can handle this class vessel, so an offshore terminal such as the proposed Seadock facility will be required. Hydrogen Hydrogen requirements for the two chosen launch rates are 841 MT per day and 6830 MT per day, respectively. Numerous methods are available to produce hydrogen. Table VIII-B-4 lists several of these processes and the approximate efficiencies associated with each. Although steam reforming and partial oxidation are the most efficient, they use feedstocks which are projected to be in short supply and, for VIII-B-3

this reason, were not considered. Coal gasification was examined initially since the U. S. has large resources of coal. Subsequently, electrolysis was examined with the idea of bootstrapping the production of hydrogen utilizing operational SPS units for power. The implications of the two approaches is discussed below.
HYDROGEN PRODUCTION METHODS METHOD STEAM REFORMING OF NATURAL GAS PARTIAL OXIDATION OF OIL COAL GASIFICATION NUCLEAR/ELECTROLYSIS NUCLEAR/THERMOCHEMICAL SOLAR/THERMAL/ELECTROLYSIS *ESTIMATED TABLE VIII-B-4 APPROXIMATE BASE-CASE PROCESS EFFICIENCY 0.75 0.65 0.55 0.33 0.33* 0.33*

Hydrogen Production by Coal Gasification The basic material and utility requirements for this process are 42 Ibs. of coke and 3 kwh of electrical power to produce 1000 scf of 97% hydrogen gas. Since coke production requires 1.43 Ib. coal per Ib. coke the relationship works out to be 10.78 Ib. coal/1bH2 gas. Liquification of hydrogen consumes 5.67 kwh/lbH2. Production of electricity requires approximately .99 Ib. coal per kwh. The total process requires approximately 16.88 Ib. coal/lbH2 liquid. Translating this into the daily demand of the two launch rates gives a coal requirement of 14,198 MT/day and 116,110 MT/day respectively. A logistics analysis was then performed, assuming a distance of 1500 miles between the mine and the launch site. The first approach analyzed was to place the gasification plant in the vicinity of the launch site since it seemed sensible to transport a stable commodity like coal rather than hydrogen. The transport energy, in terms of coal, worked out to 916 MT/day and 7,440 MT/day respectively. This brought the total coal consumption to 15,124 MT/day and 123,550 MT/day. In terms of rail movements, this amount of coal requires 2.8 and 23 100-car coal trains per day. Production of hydrogen at the mine site would reduce the coal input back to feedstock requirements only, but would necessitate a1500VIII-B-4

mile pipeline. Energy requirements for pipeline operation were not determined. Another major factor in this process is the requirement for process and cooling water, independent of site location. The process water requirements ranged from 17.8 X 106 to 144 X 10b gal/day. Cooling water requirements were given to be 359 ga.l/lbH2. If one assumes a 95% closed system (5% loss) the cooling water requirements are 33 X 106 gal/ b day and 260 X 106 gal/day, or a total water input of 50 X 10b to 404 X 10 gal/day average. For comparative purposes, the city of Houston consumes only 250 X 10b gal/day average. Location of the gasification plant might well be dictated by the water requirement rather than the coal supply logistics. Hydrogen by Electrolysis In an attempt to avoid the coal logistics problem, the production of hydrogen by electrolysis was examined. In this approach, a bootstrap operation was envisioned; that is, the electrical power for the process was assumed to come from an SPS dedicated for this purpose. The basic utility requirement for this process is given to be 140 to 160 kwh/1000 scf of 99.9% hydrogen gas. This translates to a requirement of 27 kwh/ lbH2 9as- Adding the liquification power of 5.67 kwh/lb. yields a requirement of 32.67 kwh/lbHg liquid. A single 10 GW satellite, operating at a 92% plapt factor produces 80.59 X 109 kwh/yr. sufficient to produce 11.2 X 10b MT/yr. of LH2. Hydrogen Production Summary Initial analysis indicates that hydrogen production, in the quantities required, will be a significant driver in the SPS program. Figure VIII-B-1 depicts a potential production method mix for scenario B. In this approach, a gasification plant, sized to support a launch rate of one SPS/yr., is installed. This plant is sufficient to carry the program through the first seven years. At that point, five operational satellites are on station. The plant will require 10% of installed SPS capacity. Electrolysis plants are sized to utilize SPS power in 5-gigawatt (1 rectenna) increments. The coal plant is used for peaking when required. This process if followed throughout the program. Since the operational SPS fleet is growing, the percentage of power diverted for production is a constantly decreasing portion of the power available. Cost As noted previously, the electrolysis operation requires 32.67 kwh/lb. of H2. If the nominal 59 mil/kwh generation cost is met, the process power cost by this method is $1.92/lb.H2. Adding $.12/lb for amortized capital cost, and $.08/lb for M & 0 costs, results in a total cost of $2.12/lb. VIII-B-5

COMBINED HYDROGEN SUPPLY SCENARIO

LEGEND 55)SATELLITES ON LINE

6 -

1.3*

COAL PLANT

XX?: - % OF SPS CAPACITY

4.3?

4 -

0 w%

m
1 SPS
1/2 SPS

1 1/2 SPS

2 -;

W.
2005 2010 2020 CALENDAR YEARS NOTE- ASSUMES MAINTENANCE ACTIVITIES DEMAND MET BY BY EXIbTlf'r, fAPAniY 2000 2025

Ftg- VIII-B-1

VIII-B-6

Conclusions and Recommendations The payloads required for SPS, even with high implementation rate and conservative weight estimates, represent a small percentage of 1974 water-borne commerce, keeping in mind that the time frame under consideration is 20-45 years hence and that the water-borne shipments are but a function of total commerce, it is probably safe to assume that their influence on the nation will be minimal. Handling of these payloads also appears to be no problem of significance. The significant problem associated with the SPS program, insofar as Its impact on the U. S. transportation, logistics, and industrial system, will be the production and movement of required propellants and the feedstocks necessary for production. Further investigations into this problem, optimizing the production methodology mix and examing the second order economics, is warranted at this time.

VIII-B-7

VIII-B-2.

Equatorial Launch Considerations

W. L. Gill Systems Evaluation Off.

A preliminary study of the advantages and disadvantages of an equatorial launch site has been made. Parametric Consideration; Plane change fuel saving based on delta-V considerations for an equatorial launch compared to a Cape Kennedy \ or White Sands launch is approximately 15 percent. Fuel saving is approximately inversely proportional to latitude. Design of a launch vehicle for a specific launch site may permit a second order fuel savings of a percent or so. The transport or material from the continental United States to an equatorial site by surface transportation can be thought of as a zero altitude plane change. A 15,000 ton container ship will deliver 150 ton miles/gallon of fuel consumed. A 100,000 ton super-tanker will deliver 950 tons miles/ gallon of fuel consumed. The nearest sites to the continental United States on or near the equator suitable for a launch site would appear to be located along the Brazilian coast from the north border to Recife. The distance to be traveled from Cape Kennedy to a launch site in this general area is around 2500 to 3000 miles. Using the delta from above indicates that a container ship will burn between 16.6 and 20 gallons of fuel per ton of cargo to transport supplies from Cape Kennedy to a launch site in Brazil, while a ship the size of a super-tanker would require from 2,6 to 3 gallons of fuel per ton of cargo for the same trip. A return trip in ballast would require about 80 per'cent of the fuel consumed when loaded, making the overall fuel expenditure per ton to an equatorial launch site between 30 and 36 gallons per ton for a container ship and between 4.7 and 5.4 gallons per ton for a super tanker. /C

VIII-B-8

For the nominal SPS without growth of mass 54,542 metric ton. The HLLV propellant requirement is 2.92 X 106 metric ton, and the propellant to GEO is 2.983 X 106 metric ton. Thus, 53,5 metric tons of propellant are required per metric ton of SPS on station. An equatorial launch which saves 15 percent of the HLLV propellant would save 8.05 metric ton propellent per ton of SPS on station, and at about 7 latitude, this saving would be 6.71 metric ton/SPS ton.

Cape Kennedy Launch Propel 1 ants for 1 SPS = 2.920 X 10 6.264 X 104 Non Consumables
TOTAL 2.983 X 106

Manufacturing Propel1 ants at the Equator with 15% Fuel Saving and Manufacturing from Coal
Material
Kennedy Fit Mass HLLV Equatorial Fit Mass (Kennedy X .85) MT

Tonne Coal to produce/ Tonne .4786 12.00 NA

MT
L0X y LH2 JP1
2.241 X 106
.1403 X 106

Cargo of Coal & Oil to be transported to equator MT

.912 X 106

1.905 X 106 1.193 X 106

.458 X 106

2.316 X 106
.458 X 106

.5384 X 106

TOTAL

2.919 X 10

2.556 X 10*

3.686 X 10

VIII-B-9

FUEL USAGE RATES/TRIP Surface Transport 15,000 Ton Cargo Ship Super Tanke Cargo Jet Round Trip Gal /Ton Cargo 2500 mi . 300C mi. Trip Trip Fuel Requirements Tonne Oil /Ton Cargo 2500 mi . 3000 mi . Trip Trip
1

Tonne Coal /Ton Cargo 2500 mi . 3000 mi Trip Trip

.163 .026 .910 .197 .029 1.10

30

36

.101 .016 .567

.122 .018
.68

4.68
167

5.49
200

For Comparison Purposes 1.616 Ton Coal = 1 Ton Oil Total Fuel Usage for 3.686 X 106MT of Coal and Oil + 6.264 X 104 Material or 3.748 X 10 MT in Coal Equivalents transported to or near the equator. Total Fuel Required 2500 mi. 3000 mi. Trip Trip 610,924 738,356

Surface Transport 15,000 Ton Cargo Ship Super Tanker Cargo Jet

97,448

108,692
4.122 X

3.42 X 106

COAL EQUIVALENT OF PROPELLANTS

LOX - .912 X 106 LH2 2.316 X 106 .740 X 10b * as equivalent Coal @ 1.616 Ton Coal/Ton Oil JP1

15% Fuel Saving (equatoriac) = 595,200 MT 12.5% Fuel Saving (7 Lat.) 496,000 MT Net fuel saving in propellants - surface transport fuel used for 1 SPS Transport 15,000 ton Cargo Super Tanker Cargo Jet 2500 mi. Trip/eq -15724 497752
-2.82 X 106

3000 mi. Trip/7Lat -242356 387308

-3.62 X 106

Thus to be profitable - very large cargo tankers should be used. VIII-B-10

The mass of ground launch facilities to support the operation which must be established at the equator will add to the transport cost, and the supplies required to support the launch facilities will also add to this burden. These include cargo handling facilities at the equatorial site, dedicated surface transport and possibly the expansion of U.S. port facilities to handle expanded surface traffic. These one-time logistical capital costs would indicate that the use of an equatorial launch site is more attractive when such costs can be spread over many SPS. Lead time for construction will also be an important consideration. Operation Advantages: Multiple launches to the same point in an orbit involves window considerations. If construction is undertaken in an inclined orbit or around 35, launched to the same point in an orbit would be spaced about 14 hours apart, or about 1.7 launches per day. Some improvement in launch frequency may be possible if the plane change to an equatorial orbit is made prior to construction. For an equatorial launch, windows should be spaced around 90 minutes apart or about 16 launches per day. The heavy launch vehicles being considered for SPS transport to lowearth orbit have payload capabilities of 450,700 and 900 metric tons. For the construction of a single SPS in one year, the launch frequency will be less than one-per-day even for the smallest vehicle so that window considerations should not strongly affect construction schedules. Near the end of Scenario B, the 450 metric ton pay load HLLV will require 16 launches per day to maintain schedule and the 900 metric ton payload HLLV requires 8 launches per day. At that time six SPS's will simultaneously be under construction, and maintenance payloads will account for one additional SPS. Assuming that the construction sites are equally spaced around the same orbit, then launch windows spaced 2 hours apart should supply material to each to meet construction schedules. The launch rate to any one construction site remains less than one-per-day. Construction of this magnitude being carried out at a high rate over a long period of time requires a high degree of flexibility in launch schedules. The equatorial launch site where rendezvous can be carried out about 1.5 hour has distinct advantages. Near equatorial launch sites may slightly reduce available launch opportunities, but should provide more flexibility than a higher latitude launching site. Based upon last year's report, personnel launches and recoveries are from two to four per cent of the total launches for SPS construction, and there would appear to be a distinct advantage to carrying such launches from a United States site, since there should be extensive medical screening and treatment facilities associated with these operations. Siting Considerations

If it is estimated that about 4 miles should be the exclusion area around a launch site for a 900 metric ton HLLV, and that around 10 such launch sites are required for maximum Scenario B operations. Launch sites would require around 200 square miles port facilities, payload integration, vehicle checkout and fuel processing living areas, recovery areas, etc., VIII-B-11

would bring overall area requirements to around 800 square miles. If ballistic vehicles are used, a down range recovery area, an'exclusion zone in the ocean will be required. The optimum location for such an equatorial launch site would be just north of the Amazon River in Brazil. Other sites in decreasing order of desirability would include: French Guiana, Surinam Guyana or the balance of the Brazilian coast from Bel em to Recife. Negotiations to obtain launching sites should be undertaken early in any full scale SPS scenario. Conclusions There is an appreciable saving which can be effected in fuel consumption by flight vehicles if large cargo ships are used launched from the equator, but transport of ground support equipment to the equator may negate such savings. An equatorial launch site will provide schedule flexibility compared to a continental U.S. site. Siting requirements for a South American country using a coastal launch would require approximately 200 square miles of land and an exclusion area in the adjacent sea.

VIII-B-12

VIII-C.

ENERGY PAYBACK

WillianrL. Gill

Systems Evaluation Off. (An Evaluation of Resource-Requirements and Energy Payback of the SPS) INTRODUCTION Energy Analysis: One method of determining the feasibility of a proposed energy generation is to calculate the dollar cost of producing a kilowatt hour of electricity. Variables such as taxes, debt financing, rate of return, etc., have large effects on the cost of energy thus produced. Comparison of studies of energy generation systems may be difficult to make because of variations in these financial parameters from study to study. Scientists and engineers engaged in finding new energy sources and conversion devices are more interested in the optimum use of energy. Minimizing depletion and insuring that energy sources are available. The medium of exchange for such determinations is energy, rather than dollars. Comparison of alternate systems borrows the financial parameter payback period and can develop an energy flow statement similar to the financial cash flow statement. If all variables could be properly weighed in both financial and energy payback analyses, then comparable results should be obtained from both systems. However, such complete definitions may be difficult, if not impossible, to achieve in early design studies. Comparison of financial and energy studies can provide considerable insight into the best approaches in refining designs. In the case of the SPS, a nondepletable energy resource is being exploited, hence a net energy return insures conservation of depletable resources. Resources; The construction and maintenance of a series of SPS's will require a considerable amount of raw materials. The questions which a design study must address are adequacy of resources and production capability. Approach: To answer the above questions, a computer program has been developed to provide a flexible tool for the rapid evaluation of alternate SPS systems. Program Concept: The program starts with an SPS on-station in synchronous orbit, together with the receiving rectennas on the ground. For this configuration, a series of matrices are input for each of the SPS subsystems (non-consumables). The rows of these matrices define individual components of the subsystem. The columns define the materials in the subsystem and the last three columns give the flight total mass, the ground total mass and the grand total mass in a particular subsystem component. The total amount of each material, the flight, ground and grand totals are then found by totaling the columns of these matrices. Next the vehicles, which are used to transport the SPS and personnel from the ground to geosynchronous orbit, are described. The nonconsumables making up each vehicle are arranged VIII-C-1

in a matrix in which the columns of materials are the same as those for the SPS system. A second set of data for consumables per pound of payload are input for each vehicle. These data include the estimated lifetime of the vehicle. Using the selected cargo orbiting transfer vehicle data, the number of trips, the number of vehicles worn out and the amounts of consumables required to transfer the SPS from low-earth orbit to geosynchronous orbit are calculated. The mass of these materials are then added to the SPS mass to establish the payloads which must be transported from the earth's surface to LEO. Similar calculations can be performed for assembly equipment, space manufacturing equipment, personnel and personnel support equipment. The transportation material expenditures for these equipment, depend on whether assembly and manufacture are perfomred in low-earth orbit or geosynchronous orbit. The results of these calculations are arranged in two matrices. The first matrix is a summary of nonconsumables. In this matrix, the columns are the major systems of the SPS, the SPS construction system and the personnel support system, the total flight mass, the total ground mass and the grand total mass of the system. The rows are the various nonconsumable materials used in construction and the total mass in each of the columns. Where the materials making up a particular system were not completely known, the estimated mass of these materials were indicated in the MUD (Material Undertmined) row. The second matrix summarizes the masses and number of flights for each vehicle, the consumables used and the total consumables of each type. The next section of the program looks at the payback period. Estimates of the energy required to produce various materials were made using a number of sources and will be discussed later in this section. The energy to produce a unit mass of a given material times the weight of the material when summed over all materials and divided by the power produced per year gives the payback period. The last item to be considered is the availability of specific materials in the construction of the SPS. Two criteria are input and used for this evaluation; the annual demand for a given resource nationally and world-wide and the fraction of the total resource available, both nationally and world-wide. Both demand and resources are known only within fairly broad limits, and therefore, high medium and low values for the year 2000 are used as data input to the program. Critical resources or demands are then established by showing that the material exceeds some percentage of one of the levels of demand or resource. A typical run for the nominal column and cable design without the growth factor as given in last year's JSC study is shown in Appendix VIII-C. Requirements: The inputs required to calculate the energy payback and the resources, demand loads consist of the following: VIII-C-2

1. SPS design information consisting of: a. The b. The system vehicles. c. The and assembly system. d. The and space stations. e. The spacecraft. design data for the SPS. materials used to construct the various transport materials used to construct the space manufacture materials used to construct the space logistic bases fuel consumption per flight of each of the various

2. Fabrication energy for the various materials used in the various systems listed below. 3. Resources data. SPS Design Information SPS: The SPS configuration was established in last year's Johnson Space Center's study. In this study there were nine possible satellite configurations varying in mass from 31,539 to 82,861 metric tons. Weight growth was estimated to add 50 percent to these weights resulting in satellite masses of 47,309 to 124,292 metric tons. The initial JSC study provided three possible areas which depended upon overall system efficiency. The weight of each of these three area configurations varied depending upon the components making up the system. The transportation requirements vary with the total mass to be transported to orbit, and the overall effect on payback time can be seen in Figure VIII-C-1. The various fractions making up the payback period for the two extremes are shown at the bottom of Figure VIII-C-1. Transport System Vehicles: Heavy-lift launch vehicles with payload capacities of from 195 to 900 metric tons to LEO, both winged and ballistic, were considered. Liquid hydrogen, propane and RP-1 were considered as fuels for these vehicles. Chemical propulsion using liquid hydrogen to GEO was used in this study. Ion propulsion or hybrid of ion and chemical propulsion data may be available at a later date. Personnel transfer vehicles have been defined and preliminary numbers of persons established. The energy required to construct these vehicles and to carry personnel to orbit are small and have been ignored in these first estimates. Space Manufacture and Assembly System: It is still in such preliminary form as to be unavailable for estimates. Again, the energy expenditure is small and has been ignored. Space Logistics and Bases and Space Stations: Same as above. VIII-C-3

, PAYBACK TIME VS AREA COLUMN & CABLE CONSTR. ONLY

i.2-r
* 477 PL WINGED - RP-1 -I+454 PL BALLISTIC - RP-1 ALUMINUM LIKE MATERIALS

1.1-

5
8
1.0-

.8-

.71 80

100

120

140

160

180

AREA (KMj)
0*

CM

5 UJ

CM

in

CO

a.

80H
t
CM ^_ r

*. z ^- in z <n uj ro <j
5
^*

UJ

1 60oe
a. vn
U)

^ fe 1 *
^^ CO

C9

o 2 ^^ < -

4020LU

u. a.

a: o oT

CD * ^^

^ 3c y ^*
^O />
l^J H-

to 5 z o
S
^ UJ ^* UJ

Ofc ^ "^ X

fc'

oc

_j

CO

ui tsj co

O O> (/> UJ

i i ^^ z 2 CM uj ce

>-

^2 ^O ^^ ^^ S^ i ^C U. (K -

S ^>

0.

et

^^ cvj|^^l
2 ^ I

z^

FIGURE VIII-C-1 VIII-C-4

Investigations of Fabrication Energy for Various Materials Aluminum: Aluminum used in the rectenna is the largest single material in the SPS. The data contained in Tables VIII-C-1 through VIII-C-3 summarize the energy requirements for production of this material. The results are in good agreement with the values used in earlier reports. Silicon Solar Cells are a key element in both cost and energy payback of an SPS. In the initial JSC study it was assumed that large-scale mass production would reduce the cost and energy requirements to produce solar cells. For this earlier study, a production energy of 24 KWH/Kg similar to that for aluminum was assumed possible by the time SPS was implemented. For this revision, a review of current production costs and ERDA research objectives were undertaken to assess the validity of this assumption. The fabrication energy for silicon cells cannot be easily separated from construction techniques, and impact the entire SPS design. A complete discussion of solar cell fabrication energy is given in the results section of this report. Liquid Oxygen is used in all transport systems proposed for SPS and liquification of air is the most efficient method of producing this product. The preparation of spacecraft for launch require large quantities of liquid nitrogen. Based upon consumption records at Cape Kennedy, the ratio of liquid oxygen used in flight to oxygen produced, losses were estimated at 50 percent. The ratio of nitrogen used to oxygen used was estimated at 1.25. The ratio of liquid nitrogen to liquid oxygen produced is about three to one; hence, an excess of liquid nitrogen exists. As shown in Figure VIII-C-2, this excess could be sold as a by-product, or the excess might be used to pre-cool incoming air, thus increasing the efficiency of the overall system. Oxygen might also be obtained as a by-product of the electrolysis of water to produce oxygen. Liquification would require .858 kw hour/kg under these conditions or 1.761 kw hour/kg to the spacecraft if launch site losses are considered. Conservation measures may reduce the historical launch site losses. The energy payback period for liquid oxygen is a fraction of a percent of the total SPS payback. A wide variation in its production energy will not significantly change the SPS payback period. Liquid Hydrogen: As presently configured, the SPS transport system uses hydrogen for the upper stage of the HLLV; the chemical OTV and personnel transfer vehicles. Six production method using natural gas, oil, coal, to nuclear and solar energy could be available. Of the available methods, steam reformation of natural gas is the most energy efficient method of producing hydrogen, followed by partial oxidation of oil and coal gasification, nuclear electric, nuclear thermal. Steam reformation of gas, oxidation of oil and solar thermal electric are not expected to be major contributors hydrogen supply. Coal gasification is about twice as efficient as electric means of producing hydrogen. Hence, any estimate of hydrogen payback time is uncertain by a factor of 2. Table VIII-C-4 shows the estimated year 2000 VIII-C-5

CO t UJ 3 O I O UJ UJ

Ol-l

8
"

r^ in*' r^ 0 f^ O1* VO

CM

CM

28
a. eo a.

CO

in

UJ

tn
UJ UJ

UJ UJ

ac

CM

g a. _j
o /: z
I Z Lf>

oca:
O />

UJ OS UJ r

^ o r
O
UJ /) UJ

ac uj DC < oo
X Z t
Ii UJ " OC <~ O,

- oc
UJ CO

a. o uj to

to

CM

co

CM

Bj
Po*"
UJ Q t/1 Z

</l UJ

UJ Z

X o

'<

tO
flO CM
*

s
i

00 CM

*O CM

oc uj _J z >- <
UJ
10- Z

UJ OC

UJ

UJ -J Z o. t

u-> 10 ir </> ac

zo
UJ UJ

oc _i
to

3O

a
Ul

UJ

UJ

02

ac

uj z ac o

. o o i/> oo tA
CM O

UJ

_ Z UJ ^C UJ C9

uj oc ac i uj o

ZOO

>- uj

< ac~ ac o o o Z a. ac

H-

H-

o a.
Z U.

^- z o jz oc go - .j x

(/) O I

cu

- VIII-C-6

s
A
CM

o Q. >-<<n
00
(_>KrUJ O

oe u>

in

CM

o. in

VI

HX
CM

I o

LU

~t

IX

*r -^

-*

fi

zd

S I

o o o
ooc

'8

UJ /)

S!E
>- - J

oo z ac

=>UJ

oc

o o.j

00 AA

VIII-C-7

5*
s

s
UJ

fM

8 .-

3,

in

8
m r-v

in

i
CD

oo I o i

P P

g * / *5 *ss 3

^
-

VIII-C-8

o a

g a.

is o a:

p
o
X

VIII-C-9

, HYDROGEN PRODUCTION MANUFACTURING BREAKDOWN

ENERGY REQ. THERMAL (KWHR/KG)

PRODUCTION METHOD STEAM REFORMING OF NATURAL GAS PARTIAL OXIDATION OF OIL

WEIGHTED PRODUCTION ESTIMATED YR 2000 ENERGY (KM/KG) PRODUCTION PERCENTAGE THERM

ELEC OUTPUT EQUIV KW/Kfi

53.059

5 5
45

2.653 3.0735 32.62

1.024
10.873

61.47
72.47 120.35 120.35 198.65

COAL GASSIFICATION
NUCLEAR ELECTRIC NUCLEAR THERMAL SOLAR THERMAL ELECTRIC EST YR. 2000 PRODUCTION ENERGY LIQUIFICATION ENERGY REF. 2
SUM

ftO

48.41
9.93

48.41
9.93

96.41 12.52
108.93
.9
121.0 150.4

71.11 12.52
83.63

LAUNCH SITE HANDLING EFF. EST. SHUTTLE-97 APOLLO ^70 TOTAL ENERGY UNCERTAINTIES IN GROUND TRANSPORT AND STORAGE EFF. ~ .8

92.91 116.13

REFERENCE fl): JAMES H. KELLEY, STUDY MANAGER: EUGENE A LAUMANN, DEPUTY MANAGER; HYDROGEN TOMORROW - DEMANDS AND TECHNOLOGY REQUIREMENTS - REPORT OF THE NASA ENERGY SYSTEMS TECHNOLOGY STUDY, JPL, DEC. 1975. REFERENCE (2): W. R. PARRISH, ETAL.; J. HORD, EDITOR; SELECTED TOPICS ON HYDROGEN FUEL, NBSIR - 75-803, CRYOGENICS DIVISION INSTITUTE OF BASIC STANDARDS, NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS, JANUARY 1975.
TABLE VIII-C-4

VIII-C-10

production energy to hydrogen based upon a weighted production percentage. In Figure VIII-C-3, the overall production scheme for liquid hydrogen is shown and in Table VIII-C-5 an estimate of storage and transportation losses have been applied. Some estimates of storage efficiency and boil-off losses are given in Table VIII-C-5. Liquid hydrogen has been estimated to require .16 year for energy payback. If coal gasification were used exclusively, then a reduction by nearly a factor of two might be possible; however, there would be some increase in energy requirement under these conditions to compensate for coal and water transport. Concrete: The JSC study of last year did not consider the structural concrete required for the rectenna. The energy of production was obtained from "Energy Conservation in the Cement Industry," Hoke M. Garrett and James A. Murray as published in "Energy Delta Supply vs. Demand," Vol. 35, Science and Technology, A Supplement to Advances in Astronautical Sciences" edited by George W. Morgenthall, Arron N. Silver. Proceedings of Energy Symposium of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, February 2527, 1974, San Francisco, California, AAS Publications Office, P. Box 746, Tarzana, California 93156. Although concrete ranks second by weight of materials used in the SPS, the energy required to produce it is low (.77 kw/ kg). It is estimated that concrete requires less than .02 years payback time. For the current payback calculations, the cost of transportation to the rectenna site, mixing, preparation of forms and pouring have been neglected pending more definitive designs. Requirements for reinforcing steel bars have also been neglected. Revisions to Last Year's Payback Times and Resource Requirements This assessment requires that several variables be considered simultaneously. First the SPS can be considered to be constructed of two different kinds of materials; those in which the amounts of material depend upon the overall system efficiency and those which are independent of system efficiency. In each of these kinds of material the energy to produce, transport and maintain them must be considered in establishing payback times. In the case of solar collection, the units are best considered in terms of intensity or per unit area. The following equation summarizes the relationship between payback time and the various material making up the solar power system.

VIII-C-11

<x

I I 25 >- a >- a
CO CO CO Of

CO

of

CM

of

o: o

CD ID
t-4

,
>_i CO LU
<C
CO 00

CO

o
CJ

u. .

t CO 3 ,. 1J

o
Ul t

z LLl

Ul 1

Of O

o
0-

Of ,o. ' 0 z
1
H4

(X

la u5
HCO
CO

co
CO CO

>tO

co e>
! M

2
a
Of

CO

o z c
t-t

Ul

Ul

u. o
Q

CO

'a
LU

co

o >-

ca

crw

<c

-4
OOf LU

z a:
01CO Of

QC,

Ul LU

C UJ Of

co co

,
ra

o
*-*

Of

o.

Ul O. C- CO

Of O

<f

UJ LU

et
1-4

co

O
U>

z o I!
o
=

E
CO CO CO CO CO CO
-

CO

|_

co

r-.
co
^^

j_

Lu
CO

jr

Of

co z.
O LU

=>

co co

g
a. E
s.
O

co

CJ Z

CO r>

i
*-"
<C

CO

I
t- Q.
O CO CO

ai
CO CO 3 CO Z
H4

_J
3= LU

Ul

cw

Lu O CO
Of

03

<t

_l

Of CD

Of I O CO
>- CO

,2 oe. o
ea
CO CO

n' to
>_>
Z
*.

Of
f

<c 1-1 g

Of Ul

i-4 Of

LU
rf

_J LU

_l

a. u

a.

DC

, a.
CO

CO

ul o
CO QCO CO

_J ui o of

2 ^
H

2 u.

a. u.

Of

o;
o co
O CO CO CO

O Of
^ CD * O Z CJ
11

LU HCO

S Of I

IS
Of

E ; j_
O

ii

r o.

ZCO <

S >

*f >CO CO

S co

C m

14 -

Ul

Of

uO

o
CD CO Of Z LU

2 >.
X

et n

c CD CO Ol Of CO Ul Ul rf > Z

OI >-

>- a.
CO CO

LU Of

5= O- .tt
O UJ

5 O.
LU CO Ul CO

2 i
^ -I Of Ul

g
u.

oe-

c u

--

z2
B

Ul CO

o:

CD Ul

z >UJ CO

z >-

^ S
Ul

co
CO

U.

2 II

IO

CL IO

O I^ O O CTM H- '

VIII-C-12

U. CM C9

- in 2

a: a c CD

i 2

oc

CO

S
0

g o
oe
o
DC
i_> Ul

CO

I o

is. -u.o*
ID - tL.

,
O
<M

a:

CM

I V)

tu . i/t
GO

E
Lkl O

3
a

iU

s i

tel

o _i

CJ

UJ C_J| -< OO OZ

I
VIII-C-13

HYDROGEN PRODUCTION STORAGE DATA STORAGE EFFICIENCY OF LIQUID HYDROGEN CONTAINERS (1) CAPACITY (GAL.)
900,000 500,000 28,000 13,000
260

USE
Stationary Stationary Rail Car Delivery Truck Delivery Mobile Mobile

BOIL-OFF (%/DAY)
.03 .05

.3 .5
1.0 2.0

40

ORTHO TO PARA CONVERSION OF LIQUID HYDROGEN^2* 609 BTU/# H2 CONVERTED CATALYST MAY BRING CONVERSION TO#87% COMPLETION BOIL-OFF LOSSES FOR CONVERSION
PARA CONCENTRATION BOIL-OFF LOSS PERCENT/DAY 0.019 0.119 0.48

98 95 90 80 70 60 50 40 25

1.9 4.3 7.6

11.9 17.2 26.8

Reference (1) Reference

Edward H. Dickson, John W. Ryan, Marilyn HI Shulyan They Nitrogen Economy - A Preliminary Technology Assessment, SRI Draft Report, SRI Project EGU-2838, July 1975. Ch. 51, ASHRAE Handbook and Project Directory 1974 Applications
TABLE VIII-C-5 VIII-C-14

Aluminum: Last year's energy resource analysis indicated that aluminum used in the rectenna was the dominant energy consuming material in the SPS. The amount of aluminum used in the design of the rectenna has been reduced by substituting structural iron in the rectenna design. The revised weights, fabrication energies and payback times for the rectenna of the JSC report and the revised antenna are shown in Table VIII-C-6 below.
TABLE VIII-C-6

5 GW Rectenna Masses and Payback Time Previous Rectenna

Item Structural
Aluminum*
C+ppIl o Ucc
i

Revised Rectenna
Mass Tonne. Payback Energy KWH

Mass Tonne.

Payback Energy KWH

.56 X 106

1.37 X 1010

.150 X 1 0 6

.37 X 1010

i . H3 A y U n . on v inU 1 AC; 1 i C.V A 1

1.36 X 106
.19 X 1010

Concrete*
1 a nH Pvana Y*a + ? nn^

1.43 X10 6

.16 X

1010

4 .HA X

1010 1 U
|

4 X 1C10

Electronics Di poles
----1.98 X 1010

1
.150 X 106
.37 X .53 X

1010 1010

Payback Time

.492

.381

*Page IV D-l-b-1. Vol. II. Detailed Report Initial Technical Evaluation and Economic Evaluation of Space Solar Power Concepts, August 31, 1976, NASA Lyndon B. Johnson Space Center, Houston, Texas.
+

4.025 X 10

kwh/year per Rectenna

VIII-C-15

CTi

in , oo *
^

VO

O CNJ

in
CO r

CO CT>

" 00

CO f^

I** 00

CO r

O i

CO

s I
o cc
o.

<c

CM CO CO ex en r>.

f^

co

CM

u>
CM

u>

r-

DC UJ

CO

en ro

CO

t^.

CM

us

CM

CM

CO

CO f>.

cr> ro

in

t^

CM

r^
Cf>

r*.
CM

^CO

CM
<*1

in
~

^~

Q
O QC CL

O
UJ O O

Of.
UJ Htf

^3 "_j

uj

O O

rac

CO

<

v>
HH

- o:
I<
UJ

_J

-UJ

oo

CO

CO

o o ex:
O.

o o co u.
-x.co
^

U_

->

uj

CO UJ

U.

2 - o co i

-j

uj

s: cu : <_>

t d

UJ

VIII-C-16

Silicon: The energy consumption for silicon solar cells was made low in last year's report, but achievement of this goal will require a considerable research effort. In the research being carried out by ERDA, there are three variables - energy required to produce a unit mass of material, conversion efficiency and cell thickness or weight per unit area. Conversion efficiency varies between ground and space. Figure VIII-C-4 shows the steps which must be taken to compare the payback values for the SPS used in the initial JSC report and those which would result if the ERDA research meets its goals. Table VIII-C-7 summarizes the objectives of the ERDA low-cost silicon solar array project. In "Potential Improvements in the Efficiency and Cost of Solar Cells," Proceedings, IEEE 10th Photovoltaic Conference, November 1973, page 8, and "Cost Goals for Silicon Solar Arrays for Large Scale Terrestrial Applications," 9th Photovoltaic Specialist Conference^ IEEE, May 2-4, 1972, page 346, M. Wolf estimated the fabrication energy for silicon solar cells. Seymour Baron in "Energy Cycles - Their Cost Interrelationship for Power Generation," Mechanical Engineering, June 1976, page 22-30, estimated the payback period for a terrestrial solar voltaic power plant as 48 years. Martin G. Gandel and Paul A. Dillard, in "Assessment of Large Scale Photovoltaic Materials Production," LMSC HREC-D496940, July 16, 1976, trace, in detail, the steps to produce solar cells and itemize both the materials and energies required in each step. Figure VIII-C-4 is a highly simplified flow diagram of the energy expenditure for solar cells, and demonstrates the considerable improvement which will result from the ERDA program. The efficiency of solar cells (13.5%) being developed by ERDA ground solar cell system are lower (4.2 to 8.0%) than those postulated in last year's JSC report. Assuming no other major solar cell development program, so that ERDA cells were used in space, what would be the effect on the SPS payback period? Last year's JSC report established a set of high/low and nominal solar cell efficiencies, and a corresponding set of overall system efficiencies. From these data, the set of efficiencies corresponding to all the SPS system except the solar cells can be established. The efficiency of a solar cell operating in space is different than one operating in a ground-based system. In Figure VIII-C-5, the effect of substituting the ERDA development solar cell for the cell described in last year's report is shown. The result lowers the overall efficiency of the SPS to the range of 2.72 to 4.6 percent. Last year's JSC report added 50 percent to the calculated mass of the satellite for growth. The reduction in solar cell efficiency described in the preceding paragraph will require that the area of the satellite be increased by about 50 percent. Table VIII-C-8 compares the JSC area with growth to the areas required if ERDA cells are used. Thus, the use of ERDA groundbased solar cells in the SPS system from an area standpoint would appear to fall within the growth envelope postulated in last year's JSC report. VIII-C-17

oo

_l Z _J 3C
O LU ^

OO UJ **
00 %

oo a: eg -.<:, z: _i < o vo u_ oo CNJ

^ o o z < ID en o >-

to a-

CO

ce.

Q ua 3:
LU O 3

I
CO CO J^

co a: i <t ro => co z _i ro>1-1 oco o: u. oo o o.

00

/>

>o oo

f-

I o I

cn on o

CO

o:
CM

a. x

CO r

25 i- u_ ui
DC

UJ

00

cc <c _i o

uj o <c oc
CD

o r> _j ^~ uj - es
>r

CO

o:

^O CO

f. o o <_>

o>

cr 1-1 o z => oo co 2
o i r uj ex UJ CK -> CM a. z: o >- ro
_l <C UJ O Q _J 00

s
on o
=3
Q O
Q Q-

oc

o < o i- 2 o
O PO Z
UJ Qi

Of

-H * U. _J

-J - , UJ OV

oo

oo
UJ

a:

I i
oo

oo

O - 1 i f^ CO > I

VIII-C-18

o c
X

() L / U Ul CC.

o c

in

o cr>

CM

o o>

g ce

iv.

CM

<T

CO

er
r-

f^

CT
CM

CO

a: Ul
oc.

0 0 I

O in
CM
OC i-"

<NI ^ * ^- rv. * *
TCM

CO

CB

^ f

C - M
^
00

g CO
UJ 3T UJ LU

oc a:

VIII-C-19

EFFICIENCY CONVERSION FROM GROUND TO SPACE POWER

SOLAR FLUX

O9 1

CELL
.95

.879

^ "AMI

{3

C)

.135

AMO

OVERALL GREEN BOOK EFFICIENCIES

SOLAR CELL EFFICIENCIES

BALANCE OF SYSTEM EFFICIENCY

(30C)

"AMI .95

I
n

.11292 0

REF

.054

i/njc

<KF)|
524

TEMPERATURE CORRELATION 30C-118C .59 .0666 0 =

"MM .8 00
^^16 5.1
, . *r- -

Ty

.042

.S
.103

.4077

sc

t
ERDA ERDA

GOAL SOLAR CELL EFFICIENCY .0666

REVISED GREEN BOOK OVERALL-EFFICIENCY FOR ERDA CELLS

F .0349

FIGURE VIII-C-5

VIII-C-20

Effects of Varying Cell Thickness In last year's JSC report, the solar cell thickness had a nominal value at 4 mils and weighed 0.4 kg/m2. The high and low area densities ranged from 0.31 kg/m2 to 0.46 kg/m2. The ERDA goals would develop a cell 10 mils thick. In Figure VIII-C-6 and VIII-C-7, the effects of various combinations of solar cell efficiencies and masses on SPS payback times are shown. Irrespective of the type of solar cell used, the microwave transmission system will require up to 0.75 of year to payback, and is independent of solar cell efficiency (non-energy dependent component). The solar cell array (energy dependent component) postulated in last year's report and the transportation system used to place it on-station when added to the non-energy dependent component raises the payback period from .8 to 1.2 years and ranges in area from 96.1 to 143.4 km2. If solar cells were obtained with the range of thickness specified in last years report, the total payback period would range from 1.1 years to 1.6 years and the corresponding areas would be between 193.7 to 249.1 km2. If cells of the thickness being developed by ERDA are used, the payback can be as high as 2.2 years. These results show that the research in solar cells is rapidly reducing their energy costs. The payback period will drop from 40 years to 2 years if all ERDA goals are met. If research is undertaken, the goals of a 16 percent (30C) efficient solar cell with an operating efficiency of 10.3 percent appear reasonable in the time period of the SPS. The second goal of 4 mil versus the ERDA 10 mil thickness would also appear achievable in the time periods of SPS construction. The solar cell fabrication energy can, however, rapidly increase the payback time, and research development efforts in this area with the objective of satisfying SPS requirements should receive high priority.

VIII-C-21

FIGURE VIII-C-6
EFFECT ON GREEN BOOK DESIGN OF ERDA PAYBACK ENERGY, EFFICIENCY AND THICKNESS

2.5-

ENERGY DEPENDENT + NONENER6Y DEPENDENT + RECTENNA + ERDA SOLAR CELL THICKNESS & PAYBACK, WINGED HLLV
Di LU >-

2.0-

a: D-

ENERGY DEPENDENT + NONENERGY DEPENDENT + RFCTENNA + ERDA SOLAR CELL THICKNESS & PAYBACK, BALLISTIC HLLV

1.5-

010

f
90

20 30 RECIPROCAL OF TOTAL SYSTEM EFFICIENCY i 150 200

I 38
250 290

AREA (KM )

VIII-C-22

FI6URE VIII-C-7 ENERGY PAYDACK COMPARISON OF GREEN GOOK DESIGN AND ERDA EFFICIENCY AND PAYBACK ENERGY

1.5-

tRDA PAYBACK 1990 GOALS

GRCEN BOOK WINGED GRFCN BOOK 1.0- BALLISTIC

o
cT CD

1 -ENERGY DEP + NONENERGY DhP ^ RECT, NASA SOLAR CLLL THICKfirbl. WINGED 454 VEHICLE ^-ENERGY DUP + NONENERGY DEP + REG I, NASA SOLAR CELL THICKNESS, BALLISTIC 454 VEHICLE ASSUMES 25 KUil FOR SOLAR CFLLS

.5-

-RECTENNA + NONEFF1CIENCY DEPENDENT MATERIAL, BALLISTIC VEHICLE u ~ RECTENNA + NONEFFICIENCY DEPENDENT MATERIAL, WINGED VEHICLE

RECTENMA

10

20 30 RECIPROCAL OF TOTAL SYSTEM EFFICIENCY 90

38

150
AREA (WT) VIII-C-23

200

250

290

VIII-D. SYSTEMS ENERGY BALANCE

Systems Evaluation Off.

William L. Gill

BACKGROUND Last year's report determined the construction energy and payback time for the SPS. Construction energy and payback time were considered equivalent to the capital investment for the plant, and comparison of SPS values to other power generating systems could provide an indication of the economic viability of the SPS based upon initial costs. In this year's report, the lifetime energy operating budget is examined. Conventional systems use depletable resources while generating power, while the SPS does not. When considered over the lifetime of power generation, it will be shown that the SPS can provide for more efficient use of depletable fuel resources and can substitute in part for such resources. In the initial part of this section, the energy flow through the U. S. economy is traced. The type of energy resources used, the reserves of these resources, and some estimates of their lifetimes and rates of extraction are made. Some of the effects of these supply-demand relationships on a conventional utility system are traced. Next lifetime energy costs are examined. Energy use by SPS, conventional systems and ground-based solar power systems are made.
ENERGY AVAILABILITY Flow In U. S. Economy

Figure VIII-D-1 shows the energy flow through the U. S. economy. Starting at the upper left, the total U. S. proven reserves which are available at current market prices of about $12/bbl of oil equivalent, are some 20,000 quad, and based upon the demand rate in 1972, should last some 280 years. Based upon President Carter's projected growth rate of 2 percent per year, would give an average demand to 1985 of about 78 quad, which means that proven reserves would last 262 years at that rate. When the individual demands for natural gas and petroleum are compared to their proven reserves, natural gas is available from U. S. sources for less than 10 years, depending upon its variation with time, and liquid petroleum is available less than 7 years, from proven U. S. reserves. As pointed out in "Resources in America's Future. Patterns of Requirements and Availabilities - 1960-2000," by Hans H. Landsberg, Leonard L. Fischman, and Joseph L. Fisher, Resources for the Future, Inc., by John Hopkins Press, 1963, the ratio of U. S. crude production to proven resources has varied narrowly between 11.5 and 13.6 for the period 1944 to 1960. By 1972, this number had dropped to 10.5. The amount of imported 011 has steadly risen, hence it is more meaningful at this point to compare demand to proven reserves, which is now about 7. The 1944-1960 ratio of about 12 to 1 was experienced in a "laisser faire" type economy with little or no regulation. It appeared to represent about the average lifetime of an oil well. VIII-D-1

t/l

c c <u *J

4->

C O

<1

CM

M UJ

tst > -a

IV t/*

U
r

CM

5 tO

to
TJ L. LU Q. 3 O 1 LU fQ

4-1

w 3 = 0. C-

O K

=J <_3 a*

n3 U O) r 4_ f

4-

wl

_J 2:

.e a; 3 i/i a. z

O '

I t S

1t /

. X / I 1O ^
O 0 O 41 3 0 I- O tr- O. CX >

QJ

CJ >

r3 (J

i-To-r-, **- "*^ "

.0 P 3 O

^ w QJ 0 4->
T3

C>

O CJ t- U*

-)

\o CM o% m ^^ mm
mc*

1
\

\^

O QJ trt (U

uj V

/ / /

\ \ ) /

QJ Cf "O D. "3 C 3

s-r rou^-

en >
CJ
~f

COO'

CM in - Ul CM
I. -

<- ..T.

L. Q.

U.

*
0
r Ol O> O CO CM ^ CM CM r CM

r-* in

CM

**"

CM

^ to

in en

VIII-D-2

New wells were drilled as required to satisfy demand. From 1960 to the present, the amount of foreign crude steadily increased to where it currently satisfies about 40 percent of demand, and it thus will extend our current proven reserves to about 11 years. The comparison with coal is striking; based upon current coal demand, there is sufficient coal to last 1400 years. The distribution of these demands are next traced through the economy. Simplistically at present, there is only one derived product from raw energy sources, electricity; but two others are indicated: synthetic natural gas and synthetic liquid fuel. The principal feed stock for these materials is coal, with conversion energy being supplied by either coal or electricity. Considerable conservation of depletable fossil fuel resources can be affected if nondepletable resources can be developed, or if nuclear fuels can be used. From the data in Figure VIII-D-1, it can be seen that light water reactor fuel reserves could supply all the electrical demand for less than 20 years. Of the nondepletable resources, only hydroelectric is currently available. This resource is essentially fully developed, and no new contribution can be expected. Of the nondepletable resources, the breeder reactor is closest to operation and is the energy source being pursued in Europe. The arrow pointed downward adjacent to this source indicates current government policy to not develop, based upon nuclear weapons and environmental considerations. The remaining nondepletable resources are fusion, solar and ocean delta-T. Fusion is actively being studied, but initial power production may be as much as 20 years away. Ocean delta-T requires a large energy investment and may produce no net energy. Wind and tide and ground-based solar all require some storage system in order to match electrical demand, with results in a marked reduction in net energy generated. The use in connection with synthetic fuel production may overcome this difficulty. Space solar power can give good direct baseline electrical service and appears to be technically feasible. At present, President Carter's energy policy is placing emphasis on conservation. As shown in Figure VIII-D-1, the use of natural gas and liquid fuels for electrical generation will be replaced by solid fuels. The current goal is to increase solid fuel consumption by about 60 percent by 1985. This goal, when achieved, would effectively decrease natural gas demands by about 18 percent and liquid fuels by 9 percent. In household and commercial end use, the use of solar energy and insulation under a government incentive plan would further reduce the total demand for natural gas and liquid petroleum. Electrical heating using space solar power as an energy source could be added as a future option. Good estimates of the total potential saving are not available, but as can be seen in Figure VIII-D-1, the total of natural gas and liquid fuels would not exceed 14 quad in 1972 figures or about 16.5 quad in 1985. VIII-D-3

In the industrial consumption area, the government seeks to reduce the amount of natural gas used for industrial heating; roughly estimated as about 4 quad. The balance is used in oil fields, pipeline transmission, chemical and fertilizers, refineries and carbon black manufacture; hence, are probably not reducable. In the transportation area, gasoline consumption is the principal target for conversion. The average consumption is targeted at 6.75 million barrels per day through 1985. A strong deterrent of taxes will be used to achieve this goal. This would roughly correspond to 1972 level of gasoline production or about 13 quads. Savings would be about 4 quad per year. In summary, the following savings are estimated to result from the President's proposed policy.
TABLE VIII-D-1 SAVINGS-QUADS/YEAR

Usage Electric Gen. Household and Commercial Transportation Totals

Natural Gas 4.1 5.0

9.0

Liquid Petroleum 3.1 5.0 4.0

12.1

Oil imports are to average around 15 quad per year from 77 to 85. Estimated domestic demands are given in Table VIII-D-2.
TABLE VIII-D-2 ESTIMATED DOMESTIC DEMANDS

Total Imported Oil Balance Coal Balance Hydro Balance Nuclear Balance Nat. Gas Domestic Oil

Average 77-85 Quad 85 15 70 16.4 53.6 4.0 49.6 1.6 48.0 16.0 32.0 VIII-D-4

Total Used
120

Percent Domestic Proven Reserve

N/A

131.2
32

0.73

100.00
0.73

12.8
127 256

59.00 113.00

The energy policy as currently conceived will leave us with some natural gas proven reserves by 1985, but crude oil proven reserves should be exhausted. The question of transition of ultimate reserves to proven in the case of petroleum will determine how far beyond 1985 petroleum will extend. The following items will contribute to this transition. (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) New discoveries Secondary Recovery Shale oil production Synthetic fuel production Electrification of transportation

New Discoveries: The east coast of the United States at Georges Bank, the Baltimore Canyon and the New Jersey shore all are relatively unexplored. Producing gas wells in Lake Eirie have been developed by the Canadians. Environmental considerations have thus far prevented exploration in this area. In the west, the Rocky Mountain Foot Hills hold promise, and further exploration of Wyoming, Mississippi, Alabama and Utah have possibilities. Off the Gulf Coast active drilling is underway in the deeper waters off Texas and Louisiana. This exploration is some of the deepest drilling yet attempted. The contribution to proven reserves from these sources cannot be estimated. The question of when this information might be available is also highly uncertain on the positive side the number of drilling rigs active in the United States has turned up sharply since the OPEC nations started price increases. Over 1900 rigs are currently in operation. On the negative side, environmental concerns and oil pricing regulations. Secondary Recovery; In known producing fields about 35 to 40 percent of the petroleum can be economically extracted. It has been estimated that about 60 percent of the remaining oil could be extracted by secondary recovery. Secondary recovery is achieved by flooding oil reservoirs with water, liquid gas, petroleum, carbon dioxide, or polymers. Fracturing the formation with explosives or by underground combustion to reduce viscosity of the oil, or stripping wells with low production rates may be considered as secondary recovery processes. Estimates of oil obtained from secondary recovery range from 360 to 510 quads of energy. Shale Oil might be considered as part of the secondary recovery group. In this case, it is currently cheaper to mine the formation rather than reduce the viscosity of the oil in the formation, but in situ retorting, which is similar to underground combustion practiced in secondary recovery, has also been explored. The thickness of oil sand deposits and the concentration of oil in the sands vary. The estimated amounts of shale oil deposits are shown in Table VIII-D-3. VIII-D-5

TABLE VIII-D-3

Potential Oil in Known Shale Oil Deposits 10 or more feet thick in Green River Formation Greater than or equal to 25 gal. per ton 10 to 25 gal. per ton 3600 quad 8580 quad

Total 12,180 quad The 3600 quad figure has been included in the proven reserves of Figure VIII-D-1. Thus, it is possible that secondary recovery of oil wells and shale oil could add up to 9090 quads of energy into proven reserve category. At 85 quad per year consumption, this would provide 107 years of energy supply at the average rate between 1977 and 1985. The rate at which secondary recovery and shale oil can contribute to national annual energy demands is not clear at present. The capital costs for new equipment, land reclamation, leasing of government lands together with increased operating costs and the price of oil will determine the rate at which these sources are brought into production. As has been shown in the earlier section on energy, the payback time, the equivalent of capital cost, and efficiency of production, and the equivalent of operating cost are higher for secondary recovery and shale oil operations. So that the number of years they could supply energy is considerably less than the 107 years estimated above. Synthetic Fuel Production: Synthetic natural gas and synthetic liquid fuel production are both technically feasible using coal as a feed stock. The Germans produced liquid fuels from coal to support their war machinery during World War II. In terms of energy, the conversion of coal to synthetic natural gas or synthetic natural gas or synthetic liquid fuels is about 50 percent efficient. Thus, to supply the 56.1 quads of natural gas and liquid petroleum products used in 1972 would require about 112.2 quads, which together with the solid fuels already in use would bring the total demand to 125 quads per year of solid fuel. The Carter Energy Plan calls for the increase in coal production by about 60 percent by 1985 which will yield about 20 quads per year of solid fuels by that time. Solid fuel production will have to expand by about a factor of 6 if a complete transition to solid fuel were to be affected. Transportation: Only one-tenth of one percent of the transportation energy expenditure is in the form of electricity. The electrification of railroads and possibly some intra-city transport systems might make some reduction in the liquid fuel demand, but at best, this contribution is estimated at less than 4 quad, about the same as the saving estimated for smaller autombiles. Overview: The unbalance in our energy demands is based on our heavy dependence on liquid and gaseous petroleum products. Using our proven reserves and supplies available from secondary recovery will probably result in a declining rate of supply. A reasonable scenario for the period around 1985 would VIII-D-6

be 90 to 95 quad per year. Total annual demand 40 to 43 quads will be in liquid petroleum and 20 to 25 quads of natural gas. Our production rate for these materials without major new discoveries will probably not exceed 15 quad each with some decline occurring each year, leaving a balance from 30 to 38 quad per year. Importing this much oil or gas does not appear feasible, but a reasonable estimate of shale oil production might be in the range of 10 quad per year. If the balance were to be obtained from coal, 20 to 28 quad of finished liquid products will be required. Hence, some 40 to 56 quad of coal must be mined to meet this demand. Solid fuel demands for electric power and industry will be at 28 to 30 quad per year indicating a total solid fuel demand of 68 to 86 quad. This would appear to exceed available production rates. Fuel Costs and Effects on Conventional Systems Fuel for conventional plants are expected to rise continuously as time goes on. In the case of the Texas Utilities Company, this is due to a change'from 100 percent oil and gas in 1971 to 68.5 percent oil and gas in 1976, with lignite being used for the remaining 31.5 percent. By 1985, coal, lignite and nuclear are expected to carry 75 percent of the load with gas and oil being used for the remaining 25 percent. The introduction of lignite and coal require precipitation to eliminate participate emissions from the stack. All these changes require significant capital investments for both generating plants and fuel storage facilities. The amount of profit on fuels influence the cost of generating power, but are not considered in energy payback. The National Petroleum Council, in 1971, estimated the capital investment cost for crude oil exploration at 0.84/bbl in 1970 and projected this cost to rise to 1.85/bbl by 1986, which is a rather conservative 5 percent increase per year fuel expense as published in the Texas Utilities Company Annual Report for 1976 are shown in Table VIII-D-4. In the 73 to 76 period fuel cost rose an average of 37 percent. TABLE VIII-D-4 Fuel Cost to Texas Utilities Company $/106 BTU
1976 1975 .730 1974 .435 1973 .309 .985 .131

% Increase/Year 73-76 %

Gas Oil Lignite Weighted Average

1.010 2.294
.288

48 32 30

1.910
.239

1.488
.181

.785

.611

.416

.304

37

The rate rise in fuel cost from 73 to 76 far exceeded the rate of increase estimates for exploration projected in 1971. The average price is also changing in a non-linear fashion due to changes in fuel, and these have a profound effect on power generating costs. For example, one can estimate that lignite supplies for Texas Utilities will last about 25 years. When VIII-D-7

lignite is exhausted, it is planned to substitue coal and nuclear with higher costs per heat unit. The extraction efficiency, transportation and exploration costs of all fuels will rise, and more complex generation system will reduce system overall efficiency; both of which result in higher electrical costs. There is a requirement for increased fuel facilities and expenditures to reserve fuel for future use. The planned capital expenditures of Texas Utilities gives some insight to this rising cost and is shown in Table VIII-D-5.
TABLE VIII-D-5

Planned Capital Expenditures Texas Utilities Co, * Millions of Dollars/*

t

Electrical Property Production

$
466
63 64
8

1976

$
552
73 65

1977

1978
%

68.2

66.5
8.8 7.8

$ 495
59 74

$
548
62 88

1979

67.3
8.0

66.0
7.5

Transmission Distribution
General Electrical Total Fuel Facilities
Gas

9.2 9.3 1 .2
87.9

10.0
1.0
86.3

10.6
1.0

7
697

8
636

8
706

601

83.9

85.1

12 59

1 .8 8.6 1 .6
12

14 78

li 7

19 35 10 35 99

2.6 4.8 1.4 4.8

8
41 20 55

1.0 4.9

Lignite Coal Fuel for Future Use Fuel Total Grand Total

"9.4
(

1 11
82
40

.2.4
6.6

4.8
16.0 100

133 830

13.6 100

124 830

14,9
100

683

100

735

VIII-D-8

The capital cost of generating equipment added to the system in this period remains fairly constant at about 85 percent, and the capital cost for fuel facilities is also fairly constant. However, the cost of reserving fuel for future use increases from 1.6 to 6.6 percent of the fuel capital expenditures. Fuel costs as a percent of operating costs as shown in Table VIII-D-6 also show a continuing growth for the period from 1972 to 1976 and correspond to a compound growth rate of 10 percent, a trend which would require only 3.5 years before fuel would require 100 percent of the operating budget. Comparison of Lifetime Energy Costs of the SPS to Other Electrical Generating Systems Background The energy payback thus far described in last year's report is the equivalent of the energy capital investment to construct the generating station. The preceding section demonstrates that the fuel used by a power generating station does not necessarily remain the same over the plant lifetime. This, inturn, requires an additional capital energy investment to take care of plant modificationsand fuel handling facilities. Maintenance requires additional energy throughout the plants lifetime. The exploration, extraction and transportation of fuel may also change with time and require additional consideration. Another way of viewing energy payback is to consider that it reduces the overall cycle efficiency and this concept will be explored in more depth in this section. Finally, the use of a nondepletable fuel conserves depletable fuel reserves and can make significant reductions in the rate of use of these materials. Efficiency Relationships: In Figure VIII-D-2 is shown a typical cycle involving only a generating plant. In this cycle the energy required to construct, maintain and modify the plant throughout its lifetime is seen to result in a decrease in plant efficiency.

VIII-D-9

^O
CO

t*"1"

O%

CM

CO CO CO

CD

&e

vo
l"~

co
^ "

LO

vo
VO

r*.

"
O *3CO Up
CO

o o

LO LO

~
O LO CO LO
LO
CVI CVJ

**

r-

00
00

se
LO

o oo .
sj

en cr> co
|^^

^~ vo

CO

^
LO

O CD O

^j!
(O

co
r LO CVI

CVI VO

cr> f

r^^

***

cvi

CVJ

u?

*d"

co sr

LO

oo vo

VO

&

1
CTt ,

V>

CVI T^*

LO

LO

O CD

i CO

oo
LO

,_!

**
LO CVI CVJ

CD
r

^1
LO

Cr>
j_/-)

r^
O

cvi
^-

cri
CO

CO CO

a:
oo LU oo

oo o:

"~~

CO ^~ LO

8
LJ_ o
co
cr> -to
"*$Q

O CVI CVI

LO "O CVI

O ("^

LO LO LO

LO ^f ^J

^x.

O CD

r^^ **

03

o
1

CD

CVI

cvi
CO

'

CVI LO CVI

CO 0 CVI
LO

"*
CO

LiJ QO

&
CVJ

CVI

r^ co

up ^r
CVI

vo vo

cr> 53LO

CD
LO "*

o o

^ "*

CTl

CVI

LO CVI

"~~

cvi

CO

en
CD

c o
0) Ol Q. X LU 0)
f 4-)

.Jj
0)
O

3
C (1) 4-^ C

u c
r^4_)

(O

to 1

(U

O 0)

C
ro S_

r~ 4-> fO i-

ro

i .

O) Q.

u-

<y 3

!(O

o 1
^_)

Q. O) 0 oO
CO fO

^ o hT3 C

4J

ta *->

CO 4->
c*" r +J OJ-iLJ_

O 3 <_) O

2:

Q. 0

r~

3 3

i .
CJ3

VIII-D-^TO

FIGURE VIII-D-2

GENERATING PLANT CYCLE

Where: = Fuel Rate, Kw = Plant utilization factor, dimensionless (involves both power level and time) = plant Conversion efficiency, dimensionless = Energy of indicated subscript = Plant lifetime = Time alteration goes on-line P = Power loss of indicated subscript. Subscripts: = Construction = Maintenance = Alteration

VIII-D-11

The factors PC/F, Pm/F and Pa/F or efficiency loss terms, designated In a conventional plant the overall cycle efficiency 1s further reduced because of the energy costs of extracting, processing, refining, and delivery of fuel as shown 1n Figure VIII-D-3.

FIGURE VIII-D-3

Tro P
Subscripts: e = Exploration ex= Extraction ** Refining t = Transportation

Resource usage rate, Kw Extraction efficiency, dlmenslonless Refining efficiency, dlmenslonless Transportation efficiency Power loss for indicated subscript, Kw

VIII-D-12

The first term in this equation is the efficiency of the fuel delivery cycle, Hf. The other terms are efficiency losses due to capital and operating energy expenditures to support the cycle. Hence:

For the solar power plant, the fuel delivery cycle is unity, but as has been shown in the discussion of costs of the Texas Utility Company, the fuel delivery cycle changes with time and decreases in efficiency due to changes in fuel type and exhaustion of some sources. Cycle Payback and Efficiency Values: Seymour Barren in "Energy Cycles - Tneir Cost Interrelationship for Power Generation," Mechanical Engineering, June 1976, has estimated both payback times and cycle efficiency for a number of power generating systems. Barron did not consider the effects of maintenance and alteration on efficiency and treated the fuel delivery cycle only sketchily. His relationship between electrical power per dollar and payback energy are given in Table VIII-D-7. The solar cell payback and equivalent electrical power per dollar are based upon M. Wolf's estimates in 1972 and 1973. ERDA goals for 1986 of $500 per peak kilowatt (1975 dollars), which have been instituted since 1972, would reduce the payback period of Table VIII-D-7 to 5 years or less for ground-based cells and the use of this same technology in space would further reduce the payback period to around 1.5 years for solar cells and 2 years for the entire system. Solar cells developed specifically to meet space requirements can further reduce the payback period for the SPS to around one year, which places it in a strong competitive position with alternate systems.

VIII-D-13

TABLE VIII-D-7 CAPITAL EXPENDITURES AND ELECTRICAL POWER REQUIREMENTS FOR ENERGY CYCLE PLANTS DELIVERED POWER 7.0 X 109 KWHR/YR

Plant Process or System Process Plants Refinery Stack Gas Clean Up Coal Gas (BI Gas)
02 + P.P.
Coal Liq. (SRC)

Electrical Power Requirements (Payback Energy) 109 KWHR

.3
.2

Approximate Capital Expenditures 1975 1985

.11 .10 .32 .08 .46 .04 .05 .06 .10 .03 .03 .16

Equivalent Electrical Power Per 1975 Dollars

2.7 2.0 3.4
2.5 3.3 2.5

.19 .17 .54 .14 .78

.07 .09

1.1
.2

1.5 0.1 1.0

.3 .8

02 + P.P.

LWR - Initial Core Fuel Cycle

LMFBR

20.0
5.0 8.0 6.6 3.3 5.0

0.10
.17 .05 .05 .27

Fuel Cycle Fusion - Fuel Cycle Liner Replacement Power Plants

Oil Coal
LWR LMFBR

.2 .1 .8

Fusion
Solar (Collectors) Solar (Cells Ground Based)

.6 .7 .7 1.1 1.7 54

.3 .33 .43 .57 .80 10 15

.51 .56 .73 .97 1.36 17

25

2.0 2.1 1.6 1.9 2.1 5.4

22

331

1
VIII-D-14

Conservation of Depletable Fuel Resources by Solar Power In this section, a first estimate of the amount of depletable fuel resources is made by comparing a space solar power system to a conventional system. A comparison is also made to a ground-based solar system and the effect of changing the construction scenario is made. The primary advantage of solar cycles is that the fuel requirement for operation is zero. The governments interest is in conserving depletable energy resources. A more meaningful comparison between conventional fuel plants and solar power plants than energy payback for capital expenditure, is the total amount of depletable fuels used to construct, operate and maintain a conventional plant over its lifetime, compared to the amount used for a solar plant, which outputs the same energy over its lifetime. A rough estimate of the amount of net depletable energy saved by a 5 Gw SPS over its lifetime is as follows:
i Transmission 1 '

' Delivered

+ <.&) ?* y

.&> *

27. 8E

.92

K !
\

Electrical Energy to System

Depletable Fuel Eff. ' 1/3 I Fossil Fuel Equiv. 100 E

I
i J i -1

E X 30 Cc nst. E XI Ma int. EX & I.2 E X 30 =

E = Delivered Energy/Year E = 10 X 107 Kw X .92 (plant factor) X 8760 hr/yr = 8.04 X 1010 KWhr/yr. Fossil fuel equivalent saved over plant lifetime is: 100 X E = 8.04 X 1012 Kwhr fossil fuel J6 = 2.74 X 10' BTU BBL Oil = 4.56 X
= 2.74 X 1013 SCF-Gas =10.98 X 108 Ton Coal

This estimate is slightly conservative in that the capital cost of fabrication and maintenance over the plant lifetime has been ignored. Efficiency of fossil fuel extraction will decrease with time and is not taken into account. VIII-D-15

If Scenario B of last year's JSC report were to be Implemented, the fuel demand reduction per year can be estimated as shown in Table VIII-D-8. From Table VIII-D-8, the cumulative energy supplied by implementing Scenario B is about 43 percent of the proved reserves of U. S. crude in 1975. Assuming that maintenance after the construction period was the equivalent of one SPS per year as in last year's report, the operation of the 112 SPS systems over the next 30 years (year 31-61) would yield about 42.3 X 1()9 equivalent barrels of oil or about 136 percent of the proven reserves in 1977. The effect of replacing a conventional plant, which is using fuel, by a space solar plant, which is producing fuel, is shown in Table VIII-D-9. Over the 31 years in Scenario B, the total savings is about 72 percent of the proven reserves of crude in 1977. A comparison to a ground-based solar plant which produces the same amount of energy per year is also of interest. For this comparisons, a space power plant has a payback between 1 and 2 years. Approximately 0.75 year is in the antenna/rectenna system, the balance is associated with solar cells. The ground-based system requires a pumped storage through which must pass about three-fourths of the total power produced with an expenditure of about 40 percent of the power passing through it, would deliver approximately twothirds of the power from the solar cells to the system. Its payback period is estimated at 0.43 years. Based upon peak flux, the ground-based solar cell system is about 1.65 times more efficient than the space system. The time averaged flux, however, is about one-fifth that received in space; hence to deliver the same energy in a year, the ground-based array would be about three times larger than a space system. If the thin solar cell proposed in the JSC report were used in space and a thick cell used on the ground, the mass of silicon in the ground array would be around 7.5 greater than in space. The payback period for the structure for the ground-based plant is estimated at 1.5 years. The total payback period for ground-based solar cell system is estimated at around 5 to 6 years. Neglecting maintenance and cell degradation, a comparison of net energy used or produced by space solar vs. ground solar cells implementation in Scenario B is shown in Table VIII-D-10. A payback period of 1,5 years is assumed for space and 5.5 years for ground solar power. For the ground solar array, it can be seen from the cumulative column that no energy is derived from the system until the 19th year, while for the space case, energy is derived from the fourth year on. These data also demonstrates the Importance of payback for space applications as the payback period increases, the less the contribution of energy to replace depletable fuels, and the longer the period before a positive energy flow 1s achieved. Scenario B of the preceding JSC report has a continuously increasing construction rate, if a constant construction rate as shown in Table VIII-D-11 were established. The net energy delivered by the system over 31 years is improved by 33 percent for the one year payback period. For the 5.5 payback period, a similar improvement is shown and the break-even time on cumulative energy is reduced from 19 th 15 years. VIII-D-16

TABLE VIII-D-8
DEPLETABLE FUEL SAVINGS BY IMPLEMENTING SCENARIO B OF JSC 1976 REPORT, ONE YEAR PAYBACK TIME E UNITS ARE 10 GW PLANT ENERGY OUTPUT/YEAR

OPERATING UNITS Year 1

CONST. COSTS E. Units

NET OUTPUT/YR.
BBL Oil , E Eguiv. X10' -.635

CUMULATIVE OUTPUT
Urn ts -.5 BBL Oil 7 Eguiv. X10' -.635

0 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 8 10 12 14 17 20 23 26 30 34 39 49 49 55 61 67 73 79 85 91 98
105 112

.5 .5 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 3 3 3 3 4 4 5 5 5 6 6 6 7 6 6 6 7 7 7

- .5 - .5 0 1 2 3 4 4 6 8 10 11 14 17 20 22 26 29 34 39 43 49 55 61 67 73 79 84 91 98
112

2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31

-.635
-1.0 1.27 2.54 3.81 5.07 5.07 7.62

-1.0 -1.0

-1.27 -1.27x

0 2 5 9 13 19 27 37 48 62 79 99
121 147 176 210 249 292 341 396 457 524 597 676 760 851 949 061

0
2.54

6.35x 11.43
16.5 24.1 34.3 47.0 61.0 78.7

10.14
12.7 14.0 17.8 21.5 25.4 27.9 33.0 36.8 43.2 40.5 54.6 62.2 69.9

100.3 125.0 153.0 186.7 223.5 266.7 316.2 370.8 433.1 502.9 580.4 665.5 758.2 858.5 965.2
1080 1205 1347

77.47
85.1

92.71 100.3
106 6

115.6 124.4 142.2

VIII-D-17

TABLE VIII-D-9
DEPLETABLE FUEL SAVINGS BY IMPLEMENTING SCENARIO B OF JSC 1976 REPORT. ONE YEAR PAYBACK TIME E UNITS ARE 10 CW PLANT ENERGY OUTPUT/YEAR

OPERATING UNITS Year

CONST. COSTS E. Units

NET OUTPUT/YR.

CUMULATIVE OUTPUT
BBL Oil , Eguiv. X10'

BBL 011 , E. Units Eginv. X10'

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31

0 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 8 10 12 14 17 20 23 26 30 34 39 49 49 55 61 67 73 79 85 91 98
105 112

.5 .5 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 3 3 3 3 4 4 5 5 5 6 6 6 7 6 6 6 7 7 7

- .5 - .5 0 1 2 3 4 4 6 8 10 11 14 17 20 22 26 29 34 39 43 49 55 61 67 73 79 84 91 98
112

-.635 -.635 -1.0 1.27 2.54 3.81 5.07 5.07 7.62 10.14 12.7 14.0 17.8 21.5 25.4 27.9 33.0 36.8 43.2 40.5 54.6 62.2 69.9 77.47 85.1 92.71 100.3 106.6 115.6 124.4 142.2

-.5

-.635 -1.27 -1.27x

-1.0 -1.0

0 2 5 9 13 19 27 37 48 62 79 99
121 147 176 210 249 292 341 396 457 524 597 676 760 851 949

0
2.54 6.35x 11.43 16.5 24.1 34.3 47.0 61.0 78.7 100.3 125.0 153.0 186.7 223.5 266.7 316.2 370.8 433.1 502.9 580.4 665.5 758.2 858.5 965.2 1080 1205 1347

1061

VIII-D-18

TABLE VIII-D-10
IMPLEMENTATION OF SCENARIO B. COMPARISONS OF SPS AND GROUND-BASED SOLAR SYSTEMS

SPACE YEAR CONST RATE OPERATION

GROUND NET CUM

DEL POWER

CONST

DEL POWER

CONST

NET

CUM

NET

CUM

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 3 3 3 3 4 4 5 5 5 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 7 7 7 0

5 5

0 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 8

0 0 1 2 3 4
5 6

75 75
1.5

- 75 - 75 - 5

- 75 -1 5

0 0 1 2 3
4

2 75 2 75

-2 75 -2 75 -4 5 -3 5

-2 75 -5 5
-10 -13 5

+2 +2 +4 +4 +4 +4 +4 +8 +8 +8 +8
+12 +12 +12 +12 +16 +16 +20 +20 +20 +24 +24 +24 +24 +24 +24 +24 +28 +28 +28

+2 +4 +8
+12 +16 +20 +24 +32 +40 +48 +48 +68 +80 +92
+ 104
+120 +139 +159 +179 +199

-2
-15

55 55 55 55 55 11 11 11 11
165

15
1.5 1.5
1.5 30

+5 +1 5
+25

0
+2.5

-2 5 -16 - 1 5 - 1 7 5
- 5 - 1 8 -5 -23

+ 3 5 + 6 + 3 0 + 9

5 6 8

3.0

+5 0 +7 +9 +9 5
+12 5 155

+14 +21 +30 +39 5

-3 -1 +1
-25

-26 -27 -26

10 12 14 17 20 23 26 30 34 39 44 49 55 61 67 73 79 85 91 98
105 112

10 12 14 17 20 23 26 30 34 39 44 49 55 61 67 73 79 85 91 98
105 112

30
3.0 4.5 4.5

10 12 14 17 20 23 26 30
34

12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31

-28.5
-28 -24 5 -18 -14

52 67 5 86
106 130 156 5 188 224 5 264 5 310 5 362 5 420 5 484 5 554 5 630 5 711 798 5 833
1CO5

16 5 16 5 16 5 22 22
27 5

+5
+35 +65

45 45
6 6
7.5

18 5 20 24 26 5 31 5 36 5 40 46 52 58 64 70 76 80 5
87.5

+4 +8 11 5 16 5 16 22 28 34 40 46 52 52 S 59 5
66.5

-9 +9 +25.5
+41 5 +63 5 +91 5 125.5 165 5 211 5 263 5 316 375 5 442 554

6 5 - 2 5

75
7.5

39 44 49 55 61 67 73 79 85 91 98
105 112

27 5 27 5 33 33 33 33 33 33 33 38 5 38 5 38 5
0

9 9 9 9 9 9 9 10 5

+223 +247
+271

+295
+319

+343 +367 +395 +423

+451 +451

10 5 10 5
0

94 5
112

112

VIII-D-19

TABLE vrn-D-n
CONSTANT CONSTRUCTION PATE SCENARIO COMPARING SPACE k GROUIID BASED SOLAR SYSTEMS GROUND (5 5 YEAR PAYBACK) NET CONST
5.5 5.5
-5.5 -4.5

YEAR

SCENARIO OPER

CONST | EEL P 1 0

SPACE (ONE YEAR PAYBACK) NET CONST

DIFF
CUM NET
-4.5

1 1 2 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4

-i
0 0 0

CuM -1

DEL

P " 0 1
2 4 8

GUI',

-5 5
-10 -19 -37 -51 -63 -71 -75 -75 -69 -59 -45 -27

-4 5
9
18-

2
3 4 5 6 7 8 9

1
2 4 8

1
2 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 0

1 2 4 8

-1 -1 -1 +3
+11 +23 +39 +59 +83 111 143 179 219 262 310 362 418 478 542 610 682 758 838 922
1010 1102 1198 1298 1402 1624

4.5

11 22 22 22 22 22 22 22 22 22 22 22 22 22 22 22 22 22 22 22 22 22 22 22 22 22 22 22
0

-9
-18 -14 -12

918 18 20 20 20 20 18 18 18 18 18 18 18 18 18 II H 18 18 18 18 18 18 IS 18 18 18 18 18 I!
0

36 54 74 94
114 134 152 170 188 206 224 241 259 277 295 313 331 349 367 385 403 421 439 457 475 493 511 621

+4 +8
+12 +16

12 16 20 24 28 32 36 40 44 48 -. 52 56 60 64 68 72 76 80 84 88 92 96
100 104 108 112

12 16 20 24 28 32 36 40 44 48 52 56 60 64 68 72 76 80 84 88 92 96
100 104 108 112

10 14 18 22 28 32 36 40 44 48 52 56 60 64 68 72 76 80 jj 84

-8 -4
0

20 24 28 32 36 40 44 48 52 56 60 64 68 72 76 80 84 88 92 96
100 104 112

10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31

+6
+10 +14 +18 +22

-5
+21 +51 +85 123 165 211 261 315 373 435 501 571 645 723 805 891
1003

E6 30 34 38 42 46 50 54 58 62 66 70 74 78 82 86
112

ea
92 96
100 104 108 112

JO

VIII-D-20

SPS Role The problem facing the government in the energy crisis is twofold. First, irreplaceable fossil fuels are being depleted, and if converted from solid form to liquid form, are depleted at even more rapid rate. Second, the required rates of production will require massive capital or energy outlays, further aggravating the energy situation. The rates of production required may not be achievable. The snythetic production facilities are not even in the planning stage. The SPS could play a key role in these facilities. Thus far, we have shown that the SPS is the only new nondepletable energy source which has reached sufficient technical maturity to be available for implementation in the 1985-1990 time frame work, which can be constructed with a sufficiently short enough payback period that it can make a net contribution to the energy requirements of the nation. Further, if the SPS can be incorporated into the synthetic fuel manufacturing cycle, it will lower the demand for depletable solid resources by providing a significant fraction of the energy required for conversion to liquid fuel. This inturn reduces the demand for solid depletable materials and stretches out these materials for a longer period of time. There is no other nondepletable energy source available which can meet this problem in the time frame work of 1990.

VIII-D-21

VIII-D.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

1. Mineral Facts and Problems, 1970 [Washington] U. S. Department of Interior, Bureau of Mines, 1970 (ITS Bulletin 650). 2. Minerals Yearbook 1972; Vol. 1, Metals, Minerals and Fuels; Staff Bureau of Mines, U. S. Government Printing Office, 1974. 3. Time Magazine, May 2 and May 9, 1977. 4. Dynamic Energy Analysis and Nuclear Power, Dr. John Price, December 18, 1974; Friends of Earth Ltd. For Earth Resources Research Ltd., 9 Poland Street, London WIV3DG, Press-On Printers (Herne Hill) Ltd., 6-7 Oak Place, East Hill, SW183QB. 5. Energy Cycles: Their Cost Interrelationships for Power Generation, Seymour Barron, Mechanical Engineering, June 1976. 6. Energy Implications of Materials Processing, Earl T. Hayes, Science, Vol. [9], February 20, 1976. 7. Bovay Engineers, Inc., Houston; presentation to JSC on Rectenna Structure. 8. LSSA Low Cost Silicon Solar Array Project; Initial and Quarterly Reports 1 and 2, Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology, NASA Contract NAS7-100 for ERDA. 9. Texas Utilities Company Annual Report, 1976. 10. Fuel Energy Systems, Conversion and Transport Efficiencies, Arthur E. Uhl, Gef Publishers. 11. Electricity Spurs Jobs, Productivity, Fremont Felix, Electrical World. December 15, 1976. 12. Resources in America's Future, Patterns of Requirements and Availabilities 1960-2000, Hans H. Landsberg, Leonard L. Fishman and Joseph L. Fisher, John Hopkins Press, 1963.

VIII-D-22

APPENDIX Section VIII-C

OUTPUT FROM ENERGY PAYBACK AND RESOURCE ANALYSIS PROGRAM FOR SPS

VIII-APP-1

^^

*vi r<f iii iii i 1 i 1

CM

OJ

f^

in rf>
r< >4 Ul
lit

on
--

C
fM
II I f

(M

11 J i1 i) > 1.

0-

(2

P4

CX (1 fL

IO
III 11

|S^ K>

in hft PI
lit in

IU iO

l*J (0

U l

lt i

1 9

1 3

iii 11
a.

^
;

II I 11

II I in

II I in

III 1 1
<1 * E

IU 'iii in 1 0

a.

a.

a.

a.

a. I

a.

ft

a.

a.

L. *.

^ ^ _J il

K? sr UJ f.
X ^ u

,
k

^2
c 5" ^ OL.
[3
"") rr^

'

^ 0ij -J
01

i/i
Z

/t
0

a co a
<* tmf -A rt .rt

Or ij Tfc

UJ

I/l

O 2

t^

* *

t
SC
Ul

ai*J
I/I

3 1*1
Up
!

'

o u.
rt t_ Z H-

^^
V/!

Ul

. ^
ul C, 4

UJ AJ UJ IS

tA b

-1 u
! *

> j i^ c I i <i i <> ii

ij <
!9C IUI
4X

_J

*
ul
O

. ;

^ 4(

o -J
^)

lA 1^4 I/I .

I'i
^ "

r/ 2: 5^ O

; <

tte >
3T
uJ

i/>
Ui
f4

3P

^J

4t "
2 ^

in _J ui a.
1-4

o
7
41

Ul
f4( 1 -

O
t/1

UJ

f>

_l
U

Ul

CJ

UJ

n.

n 1-1 t/i
Ml t^
t/l

C W
UJ ^
I/I

X Ul fe

I/I
III

a.
:

ui a.

I/I UJ
^ t/l 7
O

I
U

tr

uj
K**

-r
u.
/> >
il /
fc*

ex

t\t
n
7

^
UJ

f LJ 11 X
U4

u i-i nx iu u u.

la
U.

UJ

i
X

i/i
"X

a> o ij - t j.ja i a
J^

-I 3
O.

n a a
I/I

^ *c
yi

teJ X ft.*. -

-.

r>

u, <

n
0

7 2
i/l 0 7

u.
f. J

<u
Ul

itt
7

^ i/l 0 7 *
Ul

a* i^ *

1 M 4g ) f4 4K

ul
IU

se
X

UJ

IA
UJ

>.
0 ^

_l J
Ul

f>

I/I
k I/I **

4)
O
U l

f
0
II I

or f
Af
I/I l>l

UJ
f?
*

JT u l
til

X </)

7 O

V m
>-

ul
U
Ikl

ui
0
Ul

iii a

U Ul _l _l O

X U 7 3

o n.
7 I ^
f-

7 X 0 7

tc ( <3 i.
C

nr i j
41 1 t 1

a)
41

X T I ^M* 3 JO

fV

or l.a

t
(C

"

-J _
f4

a
-I

m
0 U l -Jj

l/>
I/I

'

ti a.
3
VI

-J
UJ

f-l

i/i !
1

." <
12 >

a i/i -i
/v
Ul

a UJ LO u i/i T t/l n -t l-l 3 n ui 1 0

"
UJ

Ul

* fft

O'

-JI

4riJ
(-41

i t^
7

^ . ~ UJ , 1

a,
0,

a a.
^p

o
3
07 ^l 7 <>

a.
.
fV" UJ

_l
^ -4

_l
0 l-l

ce

U l

U l

oe

x o .0 ne
Z 1 1

-J

-I 0

1 1* ' 1 ?

2 Z. -i ~* - *

ul

r-

_<

-a o
* *
t-i

a o * * 'ft ' o: ar t*I It 1 M X ^c * a. a. CJ !_. ul u> ( rj

.
~ "

k.

-a

2 Jt

7 7

m c t J rj ^ i j
7
f

^ :t
r i
Ji

: b rr
J4t

a.
k.
0

ft

K
U
II /

ft

fll rtc ' t oc f UJ* 1 ft.

f.1 I
4TI

1* LJ I M

JB UJ
UJ

K<

1 I/I ( f *
k- >
JU

'

'C

1r

ui
Ul

l/li 1
l/

11 i I/I i a
N . p 1 1 t < I 1

X *
Ul

~+

4-

ul

Ji

,4

in
A*
4f

^ ^

-^ A

nf
A

oe ft
A

or
t A

ft

f.

a v
$

A'

vt

>

V 1 .

KHPHODUCIBIUTY OF THE

PAGI is POOR

UlLiOdl^ICJ JCJ

->C-C C-ll . c c;rr

...Mb..

...1.^1.11.'

ul

1 c. oc_c _ t t. t- ,-C,C. O
iifirac: c r cjoo 1 J J J J.JO >u3 cc : r-' r.f^c-r f-| r1000o ^oo
t 3 13-3

I r.iroivc-c-cn^r ce >
1 Il4jljl

1: ir c c i. c c r i c r o

I I c c-c.i c~ t_ c^ i : _ rj.ao '300CHJOC30 4r t r r r r t c I c.c r. > n 1 J 1 tJ~l-3 i 3 n^ T

i

<c c i .t' ^" r^(~

IQi l3

ir^^in<

7SS2
JltlUJUJ !C^f3*^

i-iS^!

j_ir-r>
T>--> 3 T 3 J->

it3Cir<
1C. f^t

1OC-O< .<ClO>4 < ^C-LC 1

i
T 1 ID

^f-,^5!.nt^u.C.
30 J J

i 11 JC1_Jf3^33i n-<-3

i:^n jr><-1L300 Lrfnn*C anorii 1 ^ne r^i->ron

jr>oo<_)J

JJCJ

1
*

II

i it

Cl

<Mlfl

T ct t_. < *

-t

J <i "

UI M

VIII-APP-3

i
1

i i
i

4
o 3 c - o o o o c o a o ) c a a a a a c j o o Q
!
'
'

f: o
z
UJ

t4/1

o
1

'

o
*

/>

a.
>
f>

i/i in

>ar t

'

r f t j r - i o , r - r - c - > j r - ^ ' c j O o c : * * * - ! ! ^ f r. , c- '- r t-, ,4 r. u

' 1

' i

tC

i/i u.
-1
Si

o u,
</)
7

U1 -4

jr ./i
4>

X >-l

-x *. -ry> -a_IS -,

- j - J O - j 2 : 0 0 1 0 t " r r r r c . c - | e
- S - l C I - l - l - S ' . - a

4> C
.}>
f

t-

fiQ^ go.
ID -J Q<

3|

H.
C.

T-5
I/-

uj C
UJ

QC
UJ

u> m
O

I
'

i a a o . r i ~ o
UJ 3 Q.

t~ ui
C

'
,

c
J

n
T

r
J

r
3

c
n

i c
3

c
J

r
L

r
J

C
3

_,

'
i
"

'
' ,
1 1 ~ 3

f
T
* ^ J 3 " 3

cl.
,
i r

tO >-> tr * Y ~ J

f\ *

ts IL

iiji-i ter
r
i i i

Q
i

i n o r 1 n r i r - 4 i"r^r^^.-iT*-i.-* ^44
'

'r
> tLJ
K.

aj <
k.

rs, r-

-M cr
r

"u ro
r-. o

<.U t5 LJ

e- -> r

?3

r ^ ' N j "

~ i ^ j n n r
.. -i
-s. i

i^
rJ.'I

r M

-j
0

:
i-~ r1 T .-

i M

ui

i '

r !

c~ r-

r_- r

c.

f-

M l

>-

a <

ii
,

* -

'i ,
> !

HI 4 D

h* : 1

!
ui -5 CD uj
^ ^
rv
X

">
( /

S l

a '
T

' ] uj z t+ Or
to>
r"> *4/% rv

ce a. , r t-t tn i/ !
ar ^
U

| i

: C tto
4
O to

^
^

>
^

.
D

*T> LJ

|
i ' ' I

VIII-APP-4

W 04 E-1 C

&r

O u

LJ C.
II I

2
6"* fit]

1 u
e
3

ll

Ul

Ul

C. ^

fi

3%

o a

j j -
S3 t-

o ra

C -J

1 o c:
3

Q g ^* o

e t tii- e c r tMi-f^r^n ^ T n-> i !.- '3 j 10 c c c c c t-c c t r e e _j i_i u-i J .'DiJ'-'1 c. i_c oc or-c t.o nc^ciooc* r ~cr c c r ^-r: r i ,r c i i s - j j o a i r ^ T r*i ffr ir^r *ii r-l rir-iri.*n-i ^
i

b
OCO

J ->

r irt 4- -n_

-._,

r.oe c

J.-J J T-l.J

<-i r-i n n o 1-1 1^ .-i- n n r-i c JC"-J> iix

rtj

INJ

iu J

'/

'*

VIII-APP-5

."3
^ Ul

f c.& 3 C i CJ ) C 0 CA < U C J C p t - . l _ > C - . c > t _ C>

C

d-a

^ I.I

^ III

c~ c. u; <o c t_ p c> I -J3 J a- cj ^ <ti >: J c r d # c r cr t- i 1 J a a a i -a t} 0 < e r-> r i/ r r Hi n 1 i

c. C. C- C- c: > . i r a . n - 3 T

301

^ III

T I.I

^ Ul

^ ijl

tt i

-a

^ ' IU 1

CJ j < 1

o 1

c
J

ci
ij

MI tr
+
IU

c^
.J

c. e* rs i ^
3 n T

- 'J

"3 ij

i1

^*
.J

*
.1

^
I.J

v
||J

+ <
IU 1 J

C C - O - C C t - C C I 0 L3 0> ;j Cl _ '1 CJ C > c c - i r c c c. c.. c. 4. o c : i < T * a o c ! ' i c i o c r ^ e r c c o c. qj

CT

ii
n

~i i

jo, >

.-i

n
\

> <*i - ^< 1

f -~t & n n ru n -i n ro r-i n n n rnnifi " r- > r r ~ - i i ^ f - f ^ T i r ~ r tii*f^r"r-(Sr

U lit lull* IU!ljll!t~ IUI I'll* II^IILIIltUltll^JUI J"J l> IIDO 3 - J ^ 5 . J 1 1-311 }| 1 >O
,

t. -j-< ii_;w ^i T .^j tr cj _'j<na ir^-ori "j n anoi-icic n * > i ->r- < i o

tr> n a- 1 1 r > n n r r. NI r i o r > r > 1 1 o iT> o r .J 3- rj i_i j> j IT CT: c^ s ^ -. i ; c: i_j (| jn

c c -e s. r~c c c KII.I tTi .i_ir_irr^
i 1
l^- CTJCs.1 JLJCjC-f* 1 CJl'jC f"UJ!(_'O .-! >|-HTTI-tTirnT -1-1 n -< -JT1

'

O0_tl<-. -Oi-jf- CM.UC.-H.1OCJC3 -U1O 1 3 t J _ j : i - T 1 J 3 . 3 3 1 J 3 r-ir nr MC-IO- K>r-r nr.nrmo >> _<n. imcj'~- iwjrrj jo itjrjCJ^ cjf^no ro > on o <M r ^ricTOtDO 4io
* tTf^C 3 S1fcZJr~lt i- J f\l f Tt^>C*> tn CJ( ^ 4 J '^ t^

j 1

c jirjnrirt^ r incin -m/~-i^c ioniv* .jrs r-uj^>*-j -n n O-j-, j n'-< i ttJ~i.-> j{

;

i 1 1 ii
N - ' 0 K1

i i

II

i>

it

ii

it

j i
l
Ai fc.
A li

" i^fc.

.*4

O ti^i t/i 1J

w
ll

m -J

i r>
J 1U

*
<-l

ii^ <n
.( .K 1 <J

rn
1-

3P U

i l i 1 i !
1

1l
i

Mi\

VIII-APP-6

RlPRODUClBlLJTy OF THE ORfOINAL PAOF IS POOP

dS9

e o

0 0 0 O

a o o a o o
O 0

0 0

a o

0 0

1
* o
9

n n o ci rt n o o 0 O o o o a o o ci 0 O o o

QnM NINIUia

a a o a e o a a o o 0 O a o o a a o a o a

'

bl

i'

A M
. a
4

r>
L3 I .

'./ r n f. n o J U a o O Ci n LJ u n n 11

IV

n <
/ l/>

nr o
bi
n

- r

S
I I t

7
tr

a e
0

-,

133ls" 3litUVt3

n T

r ui r- -> C or n- t/i uj bl < r fr a o M o j -> a. 7 ea ^ a ui *

i i
r > 1
9

*
t

J o r- o
CM

C,

0 0 .1 3

C)

o aa ui
C3 1)

-j n r
Ul M

*
f3

>

o * .5

o ra i )
- T

a LJ z
Of Ul

i5O>i

>

! 'w < i t i i i i j

.:

I *

Hul O

,333

r r> n

C-

IT)

r*\

f^

r> f"i *-<

41 l/i

Ul

C3bS Itf

o
Ul

o a
O L3

a o
C. L.

a
ri f

u f\

i
n

1 a

rr
Ul

i 1 *

i
JPUSCdk.03

n * u

1^1
rt
ubnBn

tr o
V-

n ^.

_J

Ul X

u.
V

^ r Din .r>r>

rr

Ul 0

tl

VII1-/W-/

TJ.-.L-

ttOt

t-JO.J

C-..TCJ

I 4

4 *
IIIUIIil

+ * *
IIII.JI.J

> *
Itll.ll.l

-* * *
Illltllil I

IjlUII'l

IblUI
-3 3

c r c. .-i t

-in

(\i r L. o r e - I-C.LJ r. c.c_ < or mi < v i - j i -i -i n T in

13 t

--K-J3

-I T 1

t>3>

"j i _j j J j ca,ri a c ~ ,1 -40 ana r i r rurr

j- _) J o J - :U 3'1 r i r t ^ er/i e c c ct-r.tr> ^ TO T -> n o^n inrir r r-.in i">r-n f

c r tr
1-11 *

K-ICO
tllJ-l **

c err. c -f
C11J T J - > ** O'-3-J 3JO

c oc

ci>i-r>

.iJ,11 3.^-1 * 41*

ccc
c t_,c. Cjfjc; crc i J j r". r~r"
(L.J.1

cc.c
.m~J

e c - c _ C.LC c r.c
OJ3

cec

ai. ~. c c^c_ c <-tf c. or. *nc: doo or-fvi CK~>O - t i _ ccc c t t r cr at c } P\CI n -i o i i.j i j -< -i T j Jj-n 3 .^r^n r^*^n

n no
+ *
liJl.llil

n/^** * * i
UlLillil

r~i nr~
II|IUJ

rSno f *
LUUfUl

+
UlbJI

*
IUUIUI

O ^luj

rj T(

u_nt3 CT~>
C3

,T-J ; ;inu inoo n TCI r cicj -boa

.in *^--

()'->-1
. c.rg t,(_ f .

1 'J

It II. II kM.lltlt.il. i

t c^ -incjc3_

.-ij m 3 jjj

JD -ia J uu c r.rionrj j.^L3n..jo juioor*

r> n on r ^-> n <-> r> t-> rir. n c-i r > rr--.f-<ni-i ci a%o-> jr.T .1 3. T 3.J J.L. -10 Jt- T-J-: C.xl.-l
i i It

i1

11

t- !
f^^j
*A:

J*A|

i.
|n

->
i
J

'

r '

r J

r 1 P
r

I% *
ft

r-

VIII-APP-8

i O

</> i/> a i j IA 1/1

!>

i : . >*J ^

01

ro <-

O ,_j O

c. r
0
l_J

O
C-

c. * c\, ui jr

r> j c

^4 1

C5

a-

r
U C-

I M

1 lO

tn

t a
0

C>

i . c: i.1 i t-- c >

c. c-

:j
CJ

C.

i
(

rj

-4 c

ne o

-.
V

r r>

c* c. c n ~> a

n n

c. r
T O

c ">

j ^
C -3

) I 1)

3 C

> 1

: r> i t ra
1 rx O

| -> IX
w. I

4
C, O
t"1

Cl

u r1
L

> 1

.j

M
rj

3 a.
Lj

c-,
C3

er>

o n in n a i CJ 3 o o C C.

Ci 3 0

Cl _> O

a
CT

l> 1 P O ^ 1J

(M ^ t

i I ru i >
a <

**

I O

; s- " I "
1
(V Ul ' J
-,

n n it
f~ r"

-i 3 -J n r ~4 ^

"3

n t^ n ri

Cl

si

.--> t > n i

i rj n o ei n i

r
1

^"*

SS
*i in

r> Cj ci

n H n n *-

r> r

ii |lft

Ci :1 O 1r

r r>

i i

'^

cj c^

15
CJ

r? a o n
CJ C*
U Ul

1
O L (A
>-

^-"5

( j 1^

n
C

( t

n
C.

i
1

'

1.1 u line

JC
c 1 -
*A * 4M

s I j
1-1
* 0 (M
0

Ul

** ^ (j ^ n^ 1/1 ^
Q O

in

:J
4r

, y

>-l
^

-iJ

z
Ul
"^ *
w

ia
* *

t-

0 0 X
^0

-1
0

*-4 10

in

ar

vO i^ O

-1

C>

. n i> ' 1-1 C cJ fc* i uJ

CJ

I--

c c:

,r

!-

^ J o- i 1
O I

H* | 1j * < LJ 1

ts* i
Ul
l/l

. * 1"5
<

Ll

r>

Ul

i M O V 1*1

rv _J

tf ~e n r> X

ul

t o

*n < k ' %

LJ

VIII-APP-9


111 3 C
t->

.
* iji T

L.
* ll
~1

4k ij I 3 C L 1 r3
C CJ LbJ

* Ul
-3 C-l O 3 C' tl (^ i

* i.j
T C

C.. -J

O J 1

n a
.3

c
ri
3

3 T

r-

a"

rs -

trs u o c.
L3

c-i

fT J

1 3

tl

j ..j

i , iJ c
>

r j
UJ C3 J

0 O

C.

.3 IT. C r> n ^* '

C i_> C

a r3 c L i >

r) c -i Cl n r1 r- O 1 n n

C.

.J * r i> c

*l u c.

r
r

a c

.3 U

3 0

r%j f\j r^n .r r f 'r r r r-u it cic ri ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ * ^

U IU M. Ill JU I llll.Jllll. llj IUIt4l

_>ZJ ^a^-i-J J'JlIl TCI 3 Cli l1". J- J Jfl.JtJ -_iO ' i.>ij"i irii T i - > r j t jn jr>

i > JU,1 1 T-l irj ir> cj ~.->f ici. 3. inf.rano r--^ j^ sr r\t' r j

1.. -i

w i- ,

* * *

I"

"

in O
t.l

(V

VIII-APP-10

'

'
_J

'

is |
1 0
' IT UI
l/>

<

i I

a. 1/1 to
n
4

c/)

rs, o

<M
r

ra

1/1
Z O
1

a
3 X

(-
LJ
L

'

r c-

m i
i j r^

CJ 0 r *

r* i r
'

c.

-j

LJ

<

r\j <&

^)

Ct* . J

t i

ne o
./>

iSt */l 1^ . X

j
!

U.

J1

-.

-J

H-

r~*

cr

f*

"5 ",

t-J

Li 0

J3

C3

fS 2 1 f "5

1.0

* ^ r ut

-i ft
f O

X wj
Of
t~*

~K

* J

Kl

LJ

y
2

o
0_j tf ^i 'V UJ

-3

o A.

-B

(y^H- u _J**

7rr

f.

ci.
_3 O

o
-3

n
^

C.
J

C
0

r.
5

^ o n 3 3

- o
1 1 f * tJ ' 1

-^ 1 7. 1 O

o i f-i ! ^ n
A

rr i- vi
~
k.Tl

ftr ^

iT

T
ri

1 1
"

'3

11

+ a

O
LU
14 -

r i j i
nr*

?
UJ ^ tfi J
*_ X.

-,
LJ

.1 -

s*

rv
3U l HUJ Cl UI

ni T * ' * nr *- r i^ .* r
r >

1 UI

t-

r r.

T
,-i

rr~

rn

r-v ^
n ^

'

?
_J

ri

h-

r -t r
K

.^ i i "^ * + n ji T r* c_ a
,-r

r-

r
O -2 '"

ro ( ai l l * + * * rj r*- ^t-t

oo
H-

tu
^ CJ

"
1C

.n

ra

-^

r+

i
1

-
0 0 ^^ p

: j( -if *

1
'

.j

'
> UI X >3 ftr 1 * CJ Ttt
ft-

r .
Ll(

UI

rv rr -s 3 ^ ^~
2 <^ UJ CJ t3 ^

X <_> < > -

llJ ^ _J r >

rr ri i

i _* _J
I t *
1/t ^_

fc.
UJ

*i/i

wO

i/l
b

7 fc | feo rt rt

o a.
\
0

- * r * ^ -^ r r

'"

UI

-V ^ O -

..- .

~
i

i j

VIII-APP-11

IU

III

uj

III

IjJ

iU

>

UJ UJ

I*

II

II

II

II

II

r>

t>
t/t

^
^J

ft

jn

<v o <->
o

LH 1/1

VIII-APP-12

R1PRODCreiBn>ITY OF TBE OR1GINAI , PAC is POO R ;

6S
O C D 3 1 3 r> n N O O 0 r- O 0 a

a
0

a fi> o rii a r i

MUD

fi ^n o r> 0 0 a o o a o a o ri 0 O r^ o

S ? ii ~* t
4 4

ELTRNIK

o o a c a o a o
. lt,3*^>7 123-12
(M

a a a a

i
0 IM

i
O (M

a c1 a : o tJ
> t1

iti

i i n <j a
-4 LT

a t>

>

C, LJ O

O LI 0

LJ

1 t

nr o u.

- o re
fcO

S T S t U L

t/i 1.1
Ul

c-

o .1
C.

>

C'

t.

t~

>?

<

11
1

v
r"

S1CO Cj S3PHIU IWLTim T D 1 S )

*
-O

1j
J

nr

i-i

n o o
J f. C

c
U

o r

r. n i o ri c.

O Q C.

1, II (

4 | 11 1 J i Ol > Ul Z 4

UJ

<

'

a-I

&
fK

C*PS<

UJ fc_

O A

-t i

ret

OUJV Cl_l

rr o

e"> o

n n

r. n r^ f^

n n

r n

"'ii

i-

in
o
O

1 a
*A

0
r-i

0 n

a ci c- f j

^ ;

i/ti > u i ~> ,i i_>

L
D > Ml /^

H< 4 1 3>

)LE A I D FILTERS 1 .? >i

ll il

^ _l

lilt

*-l

CDMP3-FNf

nr

II /

fljcfj^lL

r > 4
i/t

5 5.
7 U.

LJ *in

%
4

ae

VIII-APP-13

>

S E C T I O N 1.5 IS SR3UN3 ECUIP1E.N IN) IN:LJDES 1.2 SROJIH FA

PT

rn^-fULUL

SJPP01T

.juu-i t -

itjiLniri'i

' ICtiNOa W 1 3 ? CM S' I <63it.

C 1

UJ t-

1-1 > x Q. o oc z CO
Of 4 X JT ^

1 -l

a 4^ o a a DO OD O sj a \fi a * * . , c. * o n ir. o
CJ J

ra * ao in 3. c 4. in
jr ^

a c1 a a 0 aI a u
1

a rI r> a o a c. - I "
1

r>
U

ai *n 01 n i
QC
O
I/I

^ i/t

LJ *

L-i *

A^^

Lj i^

^rt
>
Jl t *w

1
!
4/* > 3!

-4 O

3
1 O

r1
4 3

4^

LI -J

iv
X*
"3

^LiJ
X

^/>

o i An
i/1
./I

3!

c~ r ' ci c~> CJ T 1 fC3

-3

-3

* a

^ j-

c^ r
IM C-

>o

r>
h

Kl

1-

t-

or

(^

Uj

_> l

a
DO

er r
~1 tr. ' 3 ^

a*

N C^

^1 C
4

z - z

-J

r j t o r u ne i <t o *-

*UJ

h~ O -< ^J

C3

*< o

1 j c c 0
C3

t~^

^
r^4

r^ ^

a r1 n * 1
a- a r> r 1
o in
i
/\J

C>

f-

_j
^C

&
Ul

f\
f"5

fo INJ
C3

fi o

O
UJ 2P

fr uj
fcB

* o
^
UJ

* j ! ^i ,NI ^ - f~ i r^ ^^ ~i
m r^
* iA

4 A
#A

< nf
UJ

1*

*
rt

r>
CJ j
I*J

n
| ^1 I "*

tr an n
Vl/

af~> fi in * a
0

* UJ uJ

'^

J
UJ

n f^j o i(% r>

"
A 1 ^

4 >

H-'
1/1

' Lfl *

f-1

* it 3

a.
4C 2-

(^ ^

r. ra
O

, l rh

rJ3 *^

CJ
C.

f*
M

5
ii t i \ **

_J r

, Lrl

* 1*1 M *

* ro < rr >D ^-,

-

-< Q

i- *

3P

J*
^4

i
Z

\ i
t

r> 1-1 V-

a
H * UJ

2
to
1

_J

^/) <
0Ul
7

^ > * 13 _j
U

H4

a
b

- iu
*

3" 2

g
3

1 o | or
U> *

UJ

X
^

Z
1-1

0-

U-l _ t _ >

fc>~ r

i"^

-> o

u. >-

z
O

, a. jr
n \
CJ

- " ^ !r ^^ n LA ' * i ' - T i^fcwf^iA n sv- &

! fV

an ^ *cj */v

f -< 1

1 t ^ *r X tL ,,, r < _ i.i i. - o tz ' u>c_> r 1 ' *iki 1 ! '

t
*

VIII-APP-14

'

t~ o o

.
1

'

a.

t-

SB 7 f^ . S-^ ^T ft?

i ' '

' ' ' "*

or * *" "*

>, 52

~
i i/> i i.'
_l /n
r

Q O. ^J
O p^
J J *O

&J ftj Cj O -<

"^ u, i/i
i/ >-

Z o "'

Z O

- i/i

?N ^* / i

' |J|

n
*
0 0

i/i

uj
tr

1-1 1-1
T rr

_ ) ! / ) -

w5 acS
,

? o
z

'o uj *
o-
_l
0

^ 1

o z

Or
LJ i

1.1 a
a

rr

J i

UJ

* iTi ~
UJ UJ

>
'

,
'

rt

!^
UJ

JJ 1
^f

CM
^ ^

CM i l ^ rj

'
1

1 J Z

d lt
^1

(J

L:
L

r\j
s/1

. <
i

ar -J
O
|

*AJ "

(1 <~.

*, f\J
^5

r^. ^

t * i ^f

!_

f-5

rt

1
i

^ 1
0

r>

'
i 1 I 1 1 1 i

*- , -3

m ' ^
O

_, r *
< ^ 2 itl
kv HH

^
IU 1 ^

J^ t/i
h-1

; i

n . y n-

cO Ctr UJ -
V

2
1 3P

g
UJ Z

to
^4 _j

a i (~j
rr
1

1 *
1

0 CJ U.

7 <

i t-Q

5
|
*~z

T . fr

11i
-< 1
1 ~4

r rs i ->

t~

r*> *-

iA -y

7 Ul

0 1 ^ k- | n

ru -,

'

**rr **t^ D

- -

I . '

j * C C
VIII-APP-15

1 1 1
1

i
! !

rj

& 3 r

c-

c r. I

O^_3 L C C3

M ^ 5T tf> -* *> * ;r CJCvC^O C i*vt_(C_r

IQC^ C" C

QU UJCn

OC CJO C.C^ OCJ

f\JKfOl

Ij ||||L|||

~i "i c"

r ,.. 1
o

_i

nt rsrf j i 111 n-o* rvic-o

jj jx

c . c r r . tc LC. inn T .1 in T rjcicic-; trc.iiki tr<aocn ^. rt -f n u-vr..jrJJ 3 1 "IJ l

cic. c c c c- c c.c. ~>,T -n r> ir 3 It! oc nt ire cie; oooi oc

-n ,.- *-**-,

f^f"&f^. ~i ^ .rv

3n

w *^oror ^f ^ -n>n Mir^rfi

r>^>

cr

L3 J

cr- tc
<TT

O J

3J

t,r
nt

-3 "i

3d a c man
a-<r,

r f

Oil

r c- r,r-

O T

O'T

cm > i

c"c

c
'1C

tJ- ^
~ir~ fn

_il

C-

LJC C. r c i. C.C c C.OC- CJ

I"

C 'S

ft OJ-

->-(r:aur&i~vr 1 > / ~ > u 1 1 r >

tTCTlO

i r 3-c r r c i - c c . r r c t r r t c-t_c i~ .>->ii- n - > } > > ' i . T J T > > i j > i / ir IT nr i-ir-riein(-vi~ir*mini>

r>a-aTT-rr-<"0-rro-r-iri t- i-r-r or-T-i r r r{-r"> r '"f->r r-r r c~r.r rn-

3- -1-SI-. \I """> J "t

-<r- -1^1 n t J-. J ^ui-rr-.

<J

l^.-J-

-OKJ^J

>-<-<

^<

I I I I

| |

II

It

II ^_ (_>

ll

II

I I

I I

r
ot. <
^"W-

rt>
-4

H!^ *
l/n

^"
14

rv
^ . B

*"

*^
m

^y

-c-v

u.

frH

in

< > t .m "IT _J r i 3LQ

J_ "1 1J

i^

v
^ h-l A 4 J % *"

a n
IV

yt
9 v4

to

_J >_

4> p1
ar

9 t 0 C1 O 4> .* fI M C> J> - C) C3

'

ea

r
O M
JJ

3 4 f1

J O
0 CD fO

KI
0

r i in
C3

a
UJt/i
t-nr U.J..

o
!-.

- rit M rii i

r^ c J

tn

^> <o

!1

0 CSI

C> 4
fl

* o
f

0
^3 M

11 I'

*'

w1

Kt 0

tar
UJ Lu 2ar>
MAItl

3 K

5 o ctl

.' *;
1

e.
i

o C9 t. c . 1

c. u1
1

) C1

O f">

li

o tj

O O

1' II i

r>4 in

Ull/l

1/1 u>
.J

aa
f
OK)

n-tn

IM
- a a
^ y

-(-I-.

r>
hO i *-

C5 f>

U ': C C

i '

c. c

a v1

=1 .i
O ( CJ ' l i : :

a
0

a
n
f'

J
o

-i r 9 I
n

rj

<1 1

i a c o
ra

!^5 * I/ICIM
o u
Ult/l

r f^
3-

Ml.,**

r o | K
^L W

-u l l

rl

() c i r. > r3 fk>
C fLJ

^ n

n Si *
jj-

m o i)
>

f*-4 .

<t
L 1 t

C~> K O f M1

'

; z
Kl

ru a>
Kl

-Jin
_IU.

oxo

a f
t i n nj b
^A

c1
M

ir

_izn-

k- JMUJ

>

r>

*
Ijft

"1

r>

* ~

j^ n r^
f)
m

o
^M

or II I ul O

u>3 (J 1 |

'

*
. r

aim

_IW

^% -j
u.
UJ Z

O
c
^

D C
1

< <

1
(

fl

*i i

r> t > r f r^ f

>

o "

n r>
^

n i' o. f t en .
U)

Ul

*
Ul l ^ u
*f

' t1 it
>

'.
iI < >

-i a. u ^-i-j
W
*^l Iff

n u
4 -J
ttfl

7a
im

i a i) a i>

CJ

r> I 1 O i i C3 (> 0 rC

r*i

o
0

a
C

i) 1J

4t U\ 1-

rtrtrt
CJW

-JCK

'

y>
UJ

'

"

' *^

^ ^

2
I/I

or o
u
to

2 2
3 O

(A

o a
Ul

-I . 1

n * i
O i 1

i
Ul

91

_
UJ
II . I

, c
19 1 hi I -

i/> a
AQ

u a
KJ
4

j in
^M O

^!
r I

z _J
^

J UJ I t

,J , J
J 1I 4

r
I

z '

H4

tf

1k 1n
(

1t

.1 i r fc ft

0. J

n
\

KfOIVl^

A.

t*

r r
LJ

J--

r <

t nr 4^ -./_ ' u^
C -SJ
1o

z
V

l
U

^ t

u
tM

rr UJ
fsicX

-1

1j

1^

'~*~

'

VIII-APP-17

i 1
<4> jia-inw> j>r C L~0.3CJdtIUIUJ 1 1 J3 ' i > a

ticc e.cc. in > t fc_^i 3 ^U r i a i}>nr4 , c ^xcr>^ ar . 14IlAKt ^-OKTp-iXl-tK1

C

n j (^

^r

u injrC u>ino-in I'l JO cj.i.J

c c re c i JG^J^30.-JJ = c cnc j r^jcDC^ f a a c=t_ <>> T o >j n

1^\f^(tt

tt.>j,<.-in

C"?^'",

'^o

i'jrio!f

il^s

r- ~i y j j ri wO -* u >n *<n j>r^n

?|2^

r *>tnn Brir(->.">i !-.-> r><rf\

i 1 JLJIO. II.IU1UJ C 9 C3C3 CJ 3C3 JO.3Oi3p i r nof 1 i rt f*>/\m . (Nijr n
C

iS^S
in

J-.-O.M.<ro.-i.ar '

'
**J p t_. <>

'

>J

rv* 1

1 1 '

1
0>

; ^-

~ A ."

&

_" * "

(JT

'

>~

YTJI-APP-1;8]

OF TH ORIGINAL PAGE IS POOR

1

O
O ^

1 1

tt.
i i i i U
j

7 O 1

'

u
re
u

/
'

f "
J v*

! tt ii -j
/M

i.
t

B I
n4 Ul 13 X k.
</l

(A X O

K
3 (/) Z O

^ o
-l

'

a.

L J J 1.1 U t

tAj

a ,^

' i J
?>

i* ..i
r
bJ

a
".

L
5 4 r

1 *<

c
f*
tl Cl

"

O
/M

ri
IA

r>
o

tn

c> 1

ri

l!>

3 1

;
' ?

c?
*n
)

<

t^ > ir

n K ,

n '

f1 1

y a n i~i

-J
Ul 3T

ij k.

.
UJ

3
kk . I ^ 3

Ac

ta rr ^ k* u

w1 >t f1 i
]

t 1

ar
te-

*
v

a 7 - tn

k U UJ k O

I.I l-< Z bt

a. i -, Ul i/) 7 o a 1-1 1.1

UJ 1C

II /

OC

ui
O
-1

: i> .IT r ^

g.
j; ill ^^ i/t : i 1 i1 ;
UJ
k^ | ^

a.

i-1 i

>k

k|U

k (^ k* i

tSl '

O 7 X IV ^ k k lA xKlk-l ^t *l/ll ^ _l III

_i i 7 a UJ <<k<UJKAr J r n (v ui *

> kt

HU ll

7 Hj
M

1i

I/I

i
k. O

k.
k.

k-

K>> li -

U l * JD _t -J Jr e < t K4 J^k ~ k if. tf*t*\

ft.

1N

<

b* *

4 Q
M

4
J OI4

no

a*r k* ^Uuru. JIM,

ETUI

*r 1-I.-(V JIM

o o c
VIII-APP-19

'
m

c3
3 : F

O 0 J
.

-4 V ^, ac a. fi
L C fr-4 * U r>
*

^ 0 t

O M

& UJ C

J J

4r 1 n

if>

sr

^
^~

L3
-/I

I Z
-4 ^
-t

i/1
c ^* t) ^^ r-e ^ L.1 ar
4 I

n^

U-'
_J

t-
U1

l\l

1
O4T

/n ^ X

^J
UJ
J

f.
i^

Ul
1-3

c _

L> i4

7 O

a
3C LJ . r 3
4

3C 1J

O
UJ -1 UJ

=>
U.

r j

4X

UL_<

a. **
J

fi Jr

*~t

! 1 c^ ra r1
-t
1

O '1 T O <
fO
!.

-4 1j

o
i ^

r i ra

'j

r-4

CJ

n f~i
j ir.

-4

-4 O

(M 0

'V
O

(M
""I

ra

irt

n n

/
*^ p

o
r\jj

lA
v

rsj -4 *ikj

rvj r^,
fX

wB r4

U Hri

f r
f| 4

*.
*/i)

4j
r*j ir>

(M

-.

-^

rr

in /v " *

in
.

(U

at
^^

r~
irt

r^

o
41

tf>

rt

in

O. O

re
UJ

a.
< 1 ti f '* tL UJ

L I.I

i/l i.i t/i

tS>

UJ

a:
41
4/> X Itl
M
"*
tf

1r

i.u
V
^

a i

.O

aC in
h

,? ! i v>
Ul

Vrt

Cn

h*
r*

z :F? f^ <"*
l-l

i <n

in i 14 o
41 V. J

33
^> Or
t
->
jj.

CE
Q

t/\ o:
0 Q. ^
1/1

7* ^ \/i
/y a
(V <J ?k X 7

^f ^
X

1-4

in

2 r ^

Z Ul

<-, ( 5

l/>

-J

a.

~t
ff

i/* 1*1 1 C3

w 4

n v

n-

iii

:^

, u, ei ^
4

.vr

7 4
-J - 4f

ae u

-) u

Ul

o oe _j n

_l
41

J
tf

9C

III UJ I*J if 4 rrrt inft .OA ^ft

r> i o> i

r> i ei r

o -< U jr ar

/I .-f O Jf LL a f V J t l *

a-rr

tr

wo. rn-U.

f _|VU.

. | ^

VIII-APP-20

OF PAGE IS POOR

f f- c. c r c c_u ri o J~J > i <" o

it c-c~c acooo

C C CC-C C-C O

T=ICJO 3 JC KL: r c ciC-C

r -> -f r-r 013 **

I4IUII JtllUJUJUJUJ

iiriotjoiotao
OOOC1

Ifll.ll.llkJUIUIIUUJ

r~ i~r i/

-1 J 3

c
V4II-APP-21 !

o
~J

o.
X

o
1)
t

* or

>

l U l l

5 * f 'It
i/l
bl -J Hi' jl

* a*

i
1

c X

Jt
O

I
M*

fU

o f
W^
bbJ

o c
1fc" '

2O

JJ 13 4J

UJ

CJ 2T 1

4 ^ X i/> IXI

X
fL>

. ' ^

-1

r2 ^
*
ijL!

fl

~ ! X _i
^)

j j

ii
L

1 1 j ! t-\
^^ k

-^

PJ
ri

*\J

AJ

r*t

"^

*O

n
0
\c\

T o
2
~* '

'i i n
0
^^

r
m *. n **
** ~*

-i

^-1

__
*ici
in

0
rj
r+t

n
r** t*.

^ CT on

-4
0

PJ

*> 0

in
AO M

tV f1

c_ i Z*
-r
fO

'
, tf\

!
^*

rrt

<~i

i
1

"

i rj

f^

II /

It I

i =P
f^
UJ
HH HLJ

<-l -J
I.I -H

I-H >-

-J

r O.

|^ i/i >. i/t

C
II . 9

tt
1.1 ^

1
Ul ,

ft"
3

~n I/)

^ 0
M
f

I
*

r j

nrik; " 3 n e {

ht j

I
T K - 1

> - - ,
->

a
O

UJX ^O' ^t/i")iiui

_*
-

a.
j

*</i 1)0 y
U I ^ U J l

i|n ^
p

>

DC

<

irt 1 HI ir

i.i

> O

ul

ij>4

1/1 i|r v

< 1 _)

t mcui*TMji_ n _J 1*n U. lOH-Od" ma

inioh ir>ii i ir^u> irt-4i/^on

l/tmuj

mi-iip i tr CJiAtJinu. IA^ ir

r^ k- <
VIII-APP-22

!fcP*0DOCIBILITY OP THE ORIGINAL PAGE IS POOR

(A

UJ

i1 t 4 r

; C >

rt CT o r> rs I * i i ~

n ^ r> PI *
iA A

it

.A IA

i > '<

i3
'

"J O *

i 4 In .

s
rI 3

n
r~ i

i3 i
p

-0

.f

j>

> ft

m
A it

hi

*
i>i
|M

0 *.
i UJ

<
Lu 1 -

X
UJ

te i* 1/1
Ul

11 14 It itf 1%
I/I

' t
B C 1 ^ Z ^

i i

n j
C

J
it '4
1

14

a y
w X hn I

</ i/l

n i r

41

^
I/I

n
M

a </<
0
Z

ee

4/t
or
0

>

n in
U l

IA

]. 11
J

z
41 J ^

hi

* X
n

r < ^
W

fr
41

i f

<

:' r t <r * r

at a 4 a- 1tf

tn ti<3

'

1J
9

e ar
u Q
ul

^ J J M <a 1 0 1 kt i -1 i

-i
0

<

t 4

r
1

I
4T

> a
J
UJ

{ J

iP
i

"

. r> t r ^ 1
I/

l r

tni/ii >i/ima

inu.T>n>i lU-inn-

. if\_im k. m^in -in win .

j inin K

VIII-APP-23

i I 1
I

I 1

1
1
fXjfNj*/!*

i * * fSI UJltl + * j t & 1

cc J f~ii3 C 1 c- r>
1 3 .

nx *r *

>^
i*

1 * >j
.

(Nlk .
U l l IJ il*

1 1

an c f "I1 ' ora c a

J

on i J
j

ifirt Mo>

in r^

f
4

* >jnisj(sjK-!* lirtr^r^
if 4> *

i.ii.i * tj i
^.0 3 J C-r^

I 1

CD ti j t 1
3

I.II.DJ 1 I.H.I 0 JC 3 -i 3 . ^JJ f jnr1 f!f?l 3 OC1 O *J -

->

no

On
,

r> - Bl
h

c-t

oor > Or-n

"i

oo

lAWt
*& ^

'

t i

1 1 1 1 1 II

\
^f ^ (

^n " sr/l./l J"^_nV OlVI ft. _J j T^ ^rt rrt ^-i

k ^Jf^C^

2p

f^f/-><<"/>-J-J~J~

Joun 4 ft a a 6

Mh

>

c c

VIII-APP-^

'

'

5
t~

*-> 1

,
1

j?
/I
So
orut
|.1K

"?
a ft

i O

> >/ir> 7 in
tr

i r M
_l

> n ct r. i i r\ . a
(M
1*3

Kl

<h

II

1 *a u

;t
0 l-l

i n

^
n-.-g

i I
^ H KUJ

l> j
r a J

ftV

^ UJ UJ

t>-

> 1
F

Ui 1*
tj*

1 1

'

*l
kt
w <

n i
1 1

<

VIII-APP-25

Of

ui 1
I/I
0

o
CD UJ UJK

,
'

-><->

t-IX

! TO

QO
M_J tA.

.
Ui J

rv H&

on IT -a i/)

ooi va

C3 ^ -t |-^

, _l
U CO '^ JC tf

Ul_l

r- ^ * fi ty f-) m
Kl Ki II . Kl ^ l l

^ ^o

in r
n

rf

s
Z

UJ -I !/-

x za <. j
3 uJ

^^ _
A* t^ UI 9

-J* * ZUl
UJ I l / ll t

O
IV
hI J ^

ar O
l_
^ ^

7 < 2 cA O UJ

Or U I y ^

or 4>juj
UJ X 1^ X 1 9 *^

n _i
^T

fl

*f^.

r^<

*^ 3
*-

a M

UJ

u a

-4
^ UJ

ne UI
fc-

nr

<v
UJ K^4 .0

_j
^ nr
UJ

UJ

o o
fO

t
UI _!

(, C

VIII-APP-26

!"
o

UJUJ U.IA MIA

o U

ass

rf

'

"*

rtu,
.-

'

VIII-APP-27

c cr

***<>. 3tit t rs*<v ru f\t a-r~j *

a f ft

l.lltj .11.J I.I t c.r-1. c

1-43

<\. .-

r, *
C C.

*#j

c i r c-c r c oc
act r r t ^cc.

,|JI|J .J-.JI.JUJ .JUJIU .1 JCJ JljLJIJO

u c c c

r- e ' c t-

< r r i r >r iij-i^t **** |

Ult.lt.It.kl 1*

lIUIli HtJUll.llilUJliJ

U J

> J JL

Oil. 1 J _>i

T i n 11
>-T 4-1

C I

rili

......
I ll^lt.tt.ll. I . I I . ^III I II.II

, , + , | |
lHlljll.l lalull.ll.lll JI.J

c-z~.t-tr-c r t->c-icit~

U J J 2 1-1

rjr-r-ir-.TOnoCjin

-J

1 ^ 1 T J -JJC1 J

'I O

ef i n -^rf>r i m -<~i *r^

* j^^r-jr jr sf - r->*-! r 4 SJ J.NJ * JAJJ- *.

4. u -^_J^fc- ^T"_JI !U-U u. ^^ -

U "

TSSS'X'S^;^ "
t

t ; k

iJ
C

r
VIII-APP-28

ssssw*
-

i.

i *i i
>

ssr^sscs:
1

i> ii *< i <i

oc.c.cjq ncc-t j il- i -J.iocjr 1 c. r>cra Cuannc

Ui ir ir in M i ITXM C~- 1 JT^J1

IliiAttdittuiljtttttilh 4 3 3 1 5 |I a -jar

1 t

j li"5*3r^ v3 < * ** i*fIIU'.JUJ l*J c i CJC.C i moo r- fCtiti *r- 1

M j r. r ' i a t j. j'-* *r> a- 4 < 1 i 1

--S
,
1

?? 0 i . ? 0 hlUIMUl

t::: . . . L..1..L '

Ay w*A*>^rMtAv4*w4
*" ^ o J rr o J " J J ' i . t

!i
n

S
k

4 re

'

"CC-C'C C.t.C.1

t)'-3^3Ot^) U *N)<^| j

'

c re c. i-c- 1

r^-KKMK^-l

"

Ucirto
4Ljl h_ 4) T*T*A
i ^P^JPW

iJ
1T { j [ 1 1 1

i3

"3 J 1iJJd1tJd CkAtl^D ^jiDuJd^

O CJ
(^

fiio 1 3^1 <ls cir>rj <t> d*_, u-i- t*-'L- U. 'Xtur'-n-P-rt-H-r* i3

r-

."S O

ii

J C1 [^*n"l fir^^*%^^ i"^ > k ffr*if^n c^/^*^f^<

bllUlillilUII.IMII.IUII.I l-Jt.IUIUIbllik.IMI

: . r;;i;;[
*T ^ii
)or^riti) _3oo*dO tftmt/itA t^u>*Atj)C9Cl
^4 Vi ^>w ^t'j^.y **<f^
1 II I!

*-rur^rwi^rj|s*r<*<

ooonCsocjoii^i ^i^uw^oor^^idO
Y ^ p4AO*<*^ **#^^ft *^

in n H 1 II
\ j

II I!

t
ij

>j- r

to.

VTStttSSSSSsSf !' r ^Vr^4 ^'^ * 4^ 4^4 r

!(* <
**

i 1

5 MI

I/UJ _1

^ X to

_J tl o i
*

c.
tf

u >-

on ^ j

a. a rf>
LJ

r-. n
O >H I
r+:

o <n

o^ n ! o n I -i f-i

o n tUJ

OJ

(Vl/t

tj

J,^

S? i

"3 cj ui

-J uo u. ni ^

or

M|

UJ UJ

j: o
**IM I T

^" rf*" rM i

-ii^a. o

o cc t <r *x rr
a.

rr

r o

<--rrt.">i _< irv< i* k_

2 ri

<*

n O

VIII-APP-30

WRODOCBILiTY OF THE

PAGE is POOR

a a -i o
M

Or

^
i/i

(3

1*4 T -1 O m M

a i-

n
Ul
IM 1

a:

u.

a.

/ Uj -J
O M X kl

O 1

u :e a

1 i

O U.JJ

SJ
o u

!
o^oj -o

a Ul z ^
Ul

S SS
-!
\

.* *

Ul M

ro

o
at e*

"T
UJ* IB 1

* i _*
i/iu.

*~ j
IM3l.ESSFL.Ib4T | t T O

i/i

Ul

i/t
I/I r^ ta>
-1

t
or i.l

lA Ul ^ C4

' LIT LAUMI.4 VEHICL nt?-^EtEO--tl-t-1

2
in n ti
UJ 9

a. a
Ul

<

in

u-

at

Ui

^
III

C
M

SP

a.
uj
W Ul -J

U.

a
3

-i
-J

_l I U. . 1 2 Ul Ul

u.

1
Ul

UJ,JQ:
f tM.4

-i
vrrw i '

f. Xu .0, n n

o at rr

ri U

Ul

UJ
A

3 -l r t^ flV bl

i^ "^ uj
Ar

-J kl

^.

=1

9
JP

.
^

-_.
%

%
I 1

VIII- APP-31

i
: , i
o
UJ

: 1

| i i i

z
t

a
0

' i

"
^ i
0
i*J J

m r 3C

t * _J u.
I.J

X ti

; i t i i ;
a i

| i

Wl

CJ

*
4

.
-j

j i
o

!j *rtul

^T^T^
*^ J''^ ITMJ1

ftr
UJ
Trf ti

<a

Vy

<Jo

T u.

UJ i^

*-t > r n 1 Cl t "*

i3 a

Ul

a
ijj
rt

a
IT"

-<i
-1
<> -

i
en 2

U-lt-Q.

H>
>

<n

_rvm QO

o ;
*

i
i

y r"^ ^ Ul 17

I t1 |

^ 2 n ii i U ^ 1 i j a.
(1n
4

** i/t ^ n u
U0 J ll k. UJ ^-

J
4t i*4

wi in t-

Li
|_4

r~4

Cr j .
l/> ^ -1
U .

1*1 _J o flc !
JLJU. J J
*~4 MH ^

:u

- IU
*" !

x
1

se i
'

j) ** 3
3 1
aH -O

^B

1,1 fC1

I-X

V 4r r

l-l
* ^ ^1

f
l

_i
J ^

ET

lij O ^

t>

="-' 1
,
1

J -4

c$
l LJ 1 r J
3

1 UL H * J

to 1 c UJ uj u_ 1 r
_J t

1
IU

X X-l LJ LJ r

ij

J OLL.
J'-ii.i t"5

ul U

^ -:z
1 **^ (V
^ T i^J

_j
U.
^

:u.a. L
^

_J-Ji tf
_JII|||

en i-*J
1

wr i 1 -r >r^Zft i iu)"^ ,
4 tftrtlf^

<v
>4l A

er

UJ

4 Ct Ii 1

^ CC <I UJ a S <x r n^ i*r i^ tn . Uu r n i

(V ~3
flr I"

" r j
lAJ 3

CD LL. ^ thi
f 1

f*

l.l

-J

J'^IN
05 i -^

UJ ^' l/> :

f^ifv

2^

'

uj ^a

crt o _i o

<^

VIII-APP-32

OF TB
ORIGINAL PAGE IS POOR
1

0
iJ l

a
JC

k,
CJ

* P

t a K u u.
b| -1 U

a *
0

s -1
jh,.

,
4

a
UJ

A. bl ~Jt H* b l Ul

nm lltoO <no i< i^^n m i O> 1 i r>t^

rim *
Ok
y 7 C t 9

f (V Ul

at

* ii n
*- i

>

bj
O
UJ

in
VI

"*

to

"" 0 a. bitto U.

Wl

Bin

wt
^*

41h*

o<a z r n n H M K.1 ii Fn i* NO t-t Ul.Jb. at _ii L ti.i I i>i Miq r *

X
bl< -tA

h1 i1
in
4

j a. >H C 3 :C a k i 1.1 i n < 3r -i .

C3

III

lA W ^ O

. i

r\

r i ir ,|

UJ

^ 4J M X

j/J

*>^*
fc-

t t 5

X.sue

UlJUJ

u>
_J
U . to
MM
l-l

*f

wj

UJ

**1 ^

z .Eb.0.
%w j m:j
*

Uuoac L J 3rm.i 9r

l-l ' * Jl-i

iil ::;
*

ii
4

I
UJ Ik ^^ -J 1

3f
r

< ^

_J.JO
_Jfc.1
Ul<LM 74r 1 71 -/.

_l
19 C

TiVta.

iy i flc i r

(,

<

:i 2 ,
iL
J IK IV 1k i

J p ( UJ M

n
i 4 t *
k

r o f^
UJ

bl

'l

>

u>

a
or ^

k,

lit

n If to

bl X
k .

w a> o n

-I 0

VIII-APP-331

O UJ

\S\ > I

*X t>

OI

3 i/l

UJ

O'Ti-l O

-fvj n r-^-i f i I

ujdc
Lrt
I.I

li I

4/1
^

^^
i 1.1

-JO.

<l ^>

**

UJ

Ul

l
Ul

ry U.I A

r*iij A

O. 1.1 iv-

cr "3 k-

Fr .-> r

O<NI X
O_J

rfo
.
L)_J

VIII-APP-34

MEPRODUCIBnjTy OF THE ORIGINAL PAGE IS POOR.

]

UJ I

i
j

Lf\ I

r i k|>

ri '

u^ "3
-*

rr r r>

E i
Hin
^

a
fc^

_J

b. i
^* j TT

J'^"*

mui at. i
o-r: _j i* I
I ^fc.

z ^:u.a. no

o re i

< iv

uj i J3 ^ j pf

A , A

VIII-APP-35

3:

a a a a a c o a t ! i

O O

a)

fi

2:

o o o c o a o a> o c o c
a o

rs cI

o o o
Q

^ Ul

c
O
^

c
LO O
^

-J

n. o *
aro

rir
-4

.1 o ui a
LJ

c1 r
f>

C>

a01 KV

fl

J1

*
X
JC

j"i n

i/i r,

-f u"> r > r1 ii
>>

-O O

r^
^f
M

if
K1

>Of ^

tf\

;/)

in

o x

LTi

u~>

f >> ^1 oil > "

ro > * *

n
0

-5 i/l
I/I II . _l 0

n r> k

p~ in o n
Z o u*
-4

ifi r nJ Cl ^, ^
CSi

o*Ul

>

r, KI ix
J1

t>- o in arro K
-1 1 1

<M

K. J

ar

3 S

O
r-i
I M

I/I /l

'1

I/I

"
hT hfc n (V N1

UJ

n -

e
^ j
-*

"~

r^ <n
Ctl

rfi

r^
fO

m f 4

o
^ _J

UJ

I-*

-j
f*
M1

u
^ ** r
^~ iij
i/l

^< n

CM

a .. <
*

~ LA ;p ^-i f
1-1

/v

UJ kM UJ

0
UJ

I^

..I o y> ra d i^
t

n rT
:r
f

v,
b
M

>n

>

j
*Xf

i/1

> -o
! -4

_l J I.I

x
^v

r
W

o
H-

rv

m ^

tO i**

y ( n V *

N \

a. o
ff

"I
:

vn
UI .

a ^ f o ,.,
0

* S1 ^ ft. S (^ a Of

H-

0 l X
HH

y^ \

1 ' - */) t K 1 t

r .
i/l t-

'

ix

^ t>

lit

i/i \n * C

a. i
n

M2 uj
4/ ^

Vj
v.

^ *< 1

_j" ii ^h
n > - -j
_I.T_J >

l i 1

fl

^J

"'

^-<
\
^

1^ -<
E

_l
* trt
*
il l

1 w

T ^rtn 1

UJ

r
o

1 i 1 1

-^
V

N.
"*^ \ O
1

1 ^

VIII-APP-361

RfPRODUCtBILlTY OF TH$S PAGi IS POOR

a
_Z

3Jo!nTji^rir-r3n
.-rMC.K.C7!Gf-fMO-

'

', }
i

a ^i
Kl

>
i

rur\ii\j
l/>Nil>

(X

O ^O

^v < o- >___i

ooonoon

oo

nrjo

a- tn j r> o !
1

f JrH^
10O

II

O O

LJ Cl

>->.n 3^0^ j>rjrarj .-iiMajir^.^mc'fv.rv*

i

r-aj<o o Jon oo , r- <M j .-ir-ci CTC.OCJ n.c. , o> J3

a-r in
*3-

r-

in

4T ^>

*"^"7
Am

"^ "^

5 ^ >- /
fr
y>

'

r> o t

| a
O

>ii o~a~o t 3
a*4-i
C*^4^4

! aa

T13 t/)
II /
, J

r>
I&J 19

o ^

3 1 4) O ^
fSj 3 1 t-* ^

IVlfM

i
1*1

' **

, Of 1 l*J _
^

CD

tf

' O j
Ul

<*

i i i 1

^ 9 o ra ^ ^ 0 C3 c n f " * *

JO 1 1
(JUCJ

c it^.r
! j(Oas T?t"?

I3 fl j

Ci '
^

^
r^ t] 1

' ul

m ?
VI

VC

t t r t 1 > 1

o
t :?
1

>
^
1

r<-

i^ y

fi
J

fi
0

f'ltn it
'
i

* ^4 i 'i a i l
t
*

j ij

i
>Z

' 3- J
CC.C , > JO _1 ,

.a
C O

'1

"s. ^ - ^4 t c- a arn
" "*

1 1
TJ 3 1

1
f '

c ^J r r< J 1
"*"

in

o-

u*
U) OS
^

u
^

cr o

C")

*
1.1 Or

^!
!

' j

*> K U. i *^ *^ 1

IY

_J !

n ro
JC Ui
l/l

f
1

s
2

& T
(J

r
u.t

; * i , i
a0

>O

h-lM
111 1

ri
I

^
N4

uj
Q

nr> (
i-> no i

in
r> n )

' noori
i n -> i i , onfr"
. * .

K> -i m

r i in
*^
0! Ul

'ii
i Jr^>-^
|

^
-O

* O
(^i
ft

j re

: ( M U IM

ud
^

| ^ o
trt tJ

u,-r.-r

r"*or'i
* * *

I J O

\jrsi ^ < fl 3
'II irt 1 rj ( "^^ (T f~* 2

V*

(i I

U 1

O
1 r^j O

O
r> Jj tjj
'

>rf 14 H^ 2

r\j
IM
| (^

ra
O

'

rt ./)*
a-OQfr-*f"f*l 1

* r~>
0

* n
0-

j I

Ui

-rf LJ

. .1
K* r\i - T

CO

(0 rt j

nj f!]j^^<

Tl ~

'

a.
rr PO M - a- .-. inro->n
^

**"
I^JfSjfM

rvi (l

m i n

* * *f L
(M
<-'

fc-

_l
-4

* < """>
i
, Ul
_l

j-*-*^) ^ f\t *> i rt CJ *A rrt

X. ,

r- i -* jitUi^j^i -f^ ^-.^^u-.i-irvjr^

5/;i !i Ui
-n <
J L

ir, ) i zzz. ^<rj I n ^ . u .o^_f 4)

(
'^''^

< "^

-^

,
Ul

r i-

j ^ * tfi
> Ifl

_j ^ ui
T -

-J

IU

IU

"z^

-<
LJ UJ

-
f^f\ <^LJ

iu
Cl

n^=p
t-_J^-

/ V *-*

tfiu
"tO
1-1

_j

1.1^ Ten
3i c -_J 1
J_IO 1 ie 5>

**" , jr
)- _J i/l
4) O

^ l
k .

a*

c
^

o
-

VIII-APP-37

U l 3 Q # *

in

<

r> or
C5 *~

in cLO rj

m m i_ r;
in in

kO
O

in

in

C_

i-

aC

m
CJ

m 1
C

m c. r- o in o
(NJ

n r-i m
in
i>j

i>-

in <M

in rv

r-

a
10
*-<

j,
(M
Jt*

u t~ a in -r oj

nr i*l ui | , i
1

HH

cr
L*J

1 tf

x:

- r 1

fy o J*J

Jn

4/1 ^ II /

3
l/l .2 lH -

<n
C)

i-i

jf

-^

%f f

f\l X

a. n-

*~>

o LJ

UJ

*>J

_l

Ul

or

,
0 UJ

'

.n r* n jr
t\.

* n

fc.

in

in

in <n
in
f\l

>n

in

in

n .; 14
II I
' 2
UJ

o> to r *i KI r\i
*-> r-t

m tM

in
rsi

in
iNl

; ^
* rj h.
<M <M

fM

^ t-H
II /

O UJ

aa 1/1
^ v

O no

C/)

1
1 1

* O.
^ J> UJ gr
I4j

-J
v ^
1
Ivl

^^

it

n . W> i A ^~

t
LJ U.I .J

nr c> ft*

^
o
-4

z
r^ ^ u.
UJ

^ s o
kv ^

x:

iv

7
< 1

&.
tt

n
I M

r
VIII-APP-38

sa g*
^ -i -a if

C. C C. L-IJO ir'i_i->ri->r.r?or cit r-rir c c 1-1 v.j n T"J a.j i T-I; ir IIJ-JT-~TI-J-V->* f-^f on tr-c a-

g "<

s c r*
jh] f

;
,

,- .......................................................... ........
1 , J -.-, J-,-, >-, ^-, , U -, 1 J J3 T ,r, , , J-4 , -,^1

* n r>f j,' >

* *,:*, I,*,*, *,*, ' *i *,r//i * , * * / * * * * :,* : ' * ' * * ' /,*,**,*,*/,*r _
^^rXr^Ar^rV.rlr^^rir'r'ZAr^^. ^^^.^.^rV^rlrUuir" ., ^,
i
1 1

i '1-1 ^ j -
J .luj

:
1

^^

-,_.

__ _ ^ ^

_ _ _ , . --

_ L _ 1 _1

JrlfjS

r c^r. r^ac^a^ ,-^j-r^.^t i '^r-L,c^'

r r c L^ . -="_ i ' "^ - ^-c i^j.-"- r jf.i ,c r^o^iopgi

'i^H

j"J i'J^'3'^J j IS'i'J^'^i^i'i a" "'-^'^ ^^ l'~'

inr-

^l-^^S^r^o^^^r-'Sr'.or^nlol-'I'lr^^J-J^i-l^r.r;; -'^^"^ro'1'o^I-.r'oor"!;

.snL1

1
* 1

*fr
i

'

( 1

i
i I

VIII-APP-39

*I

Ull.lUl I h l 114 il

c c c c . C L - r f ; c . c j c _ r OL ^-i c,ce c.e-oc i t_ t r-oc cji-C r t r.c-C^C-c CTCJC tjc d-f t nc

I It I IMI.J i "5 11 3 - > - - > - 3 - > 1 0 3 - > T J 1 J 1 - J 1 T 3 - 0 3i3 1 ~ 3 111 J 3 1 3 1 3 - .V3 1 fS 1 1 3.ti 1 t *

cLjor;r_,r-c.r}C c ticrjc^rjcic r c rjnricrit 'r-tiorhCJCjr-r^cjoc-.eioc.DOr.ocicr a j > jt j<_, o_j j - j _ . j j_, T 3 j j j,j j ji_.i_j j- u'-i ao> a j j j j . i - i n _ i . . - 5 j 4 j - j j - 3 p i^anij jao J 30 /ir t - r r r u - r ~ r ^r r tr- < t r- i o- 'f>r r r t- -r nc Atf>i_c c r c c f c r c e c t t Crt t-M'f C c ^-v-ifx -t(T>*-tr ^ ^^*<^f~ rr rr r-iKir>.r'^~f*- *^- ru*M-lv-iVM f\^**^Mr- r r c*~r~vr^** r ^.tr>c p^rc-tvir^c^*

I I i * * I * I * <
r u c c - t - t c t r r c,'_

4-1 i 1*1 I I I I | * | I * I * *
..IUIILII.J tJUl UlUiiJlAJItllil (.HUlUl'lt^l *J II HJ|*J'J UJ UlUUJIUliI 4JI.JUJUJ ij'ilt

mo t L.V. f IL oc. c ^.c c.t-t c t>r-L c C-.L r,c c t c t ijc ^oc^c oe.t^c r fbr.ts

I I I * I 1 * 1 1l * * * * * l * * * l I I * * I I 1 * 1 1 l * * * * * * * * * l l
UUillUUJhJUJ !*JUILiliAju.lUIIUill4lt*.l UJI.I tclLilulltJl. IUIIIII.JI.JUI U 11. U*JI.IUIItJIIUJUJUJUIIJ lllUllUUJ UJ UJb IU Ifc. IIUUIUIU lUtttlUJ bi CJt->O T3T 1 TO > UJ.T 1 l~i J 3 !_; 3-J J.T in Trj.-3;ni"3t3n nCj>JT ^3 JJ5OCU O 3^1-1-30 .1 -JiJi ^3O

la a- ri._ic fc t-,c j trr*nn:r j3jj--^3-3-ai3-a c-OC.t-i_)Cji C-> f r-k.-*^*i^44~>rinn.-i~) i> i^4ri.i> j^*4^^tt 4'^<i4*ir^^<Mrtfi'~k ir*i ^^ii*jr3n .'i^4f 1* I I I | | * * * ( * I || i * * l I l * l l | * * * * i * * * | * .
r-"nr or^r^r r >r i i^ir 'nr-r-.r rjr r >c*r nc r r .rinrTiC nonncr-,f cio ^.i^iji "J.3 T vj niT-irjfjf i'Tvi t XTC j<-ificjd JT~J ooon-j.T ioor3t>:

* I
lvll.1

3_| .J

J ^ l J - - J J , - J ' l 3 T 3 - J . 1 >-}>.J3JJ.T>,.J J T 1 ^ . 1 J i r > T 3 3 j r J O D J T 3 ^ - D J T O v J J > U 3

riv UOLJCT..J jc^^j.io'jno'j(jnriocj^ii.^_ioocic.o_inot>s.JO_)L-c:.~ -Ji3cjnaoi3t_jo 33

locioi jr^o oraci sou oooi jrao

..3*4 lOrt

VIII-APP-40

REPRODUCZBfLJTY OP THE ORIGINAL PAGE IS POOR

l I

r _ C.E. uc,r c t c c c c - c c c * c. t<c c c.iic ~ r c _ - c r . c t c t. c t -i_ c f c r-c r-oc r^c-joc c_ t-i-r c tr c r _ c c - c - C " C ' t - ( - t - t - c r r " r > c c~t ft^nur r c-circr-r-.cr LTr-r*nc- r*r*r"c~r*c nr, at i r t - . c r r L C c & c e r c r t c t c c. c t ct t ti rvif~ rr
-OT-l 1^"3T J J J " - ^ . j J J J 3_J_ 3=LJ"J 3 1 - J j -)^ JJ J . T j J_jfc3U_i VJ T 3 -1-X-3 J4 . -JT in J^J 3 31 3O 1 J f l T 1 >" 3OU J 111 1 3O 3 1 1 1*^1-jn ^T i 131*-

3 J 3 131

J J

niT^-3'lJ

J 3 3 - 1 - I T - . 3

3 J "1 3 T T "3 J

1 3 3 1 3 3 J )

1 1 O 3"3

3~) *1 3 J~3 JO

r-r i r^t

a-rc OL rr
i

3 lJJ3^J-.

c t r * r c r t c r cccc>c~rz

r rr

r-. r f^r i ic r ;r*(~-f r ^ - r r i r t r*r*u *-r^r*-r*->^(v.i- ^-*- *-!-, -u > o-tH -^< r f f" r r>i* -

^-51 T - ^ O - 5 "3 T-T*-1-^-l *

T~) ~1 -H vTlil ** 3 T~l M 1 1O ^T

" J s O T T l a ^ l O "3*^ "1 1 "1 "> *n t

* * * * * * * * + 4 . + *| + * | * * | * * | * * ! * . 4 > * * * * + . * + * l | ||

1*1 1 1 * 1

I | | * * * * * * *

rrt

c <-~t c r c. c c c c r c t c c i r t t r t - c t t f rr t cri

c t c c c c. t <~c cc t r e e . c e c c . t r C-1 r t cr- C c~ c t c * r c . ^ r r r * e t c i _ c ic - f c t c t t c c c c

rt-'-Lcccuc-f

i. t_ '. t r c L i ~,t c 1= <. c _ i_t t i_ c c t_r c c c i. c : t r c _ c . c c j C J L . c : - i c t r - c r c o c .

3 131 3 Jrt > J - J J J T J O 3 1 3 1 J 1 1 3 T > J LJ J 3

C C T L C C Lcnc ci iccrrcf"ccrc-t
A 1 tririr

1 3 - 1 1 I T T T > - - > 3 T T 3 J J 3 J 3 1 J J 3 JTJ

-*r t r r r i
* I * * . * * * * * * ! UH <u IL.IU.tUJU I U Hi II ill,

r ( r r r r i^^i Jt. ^4f^M^**-tr-v-t'< r r c- ^ r-

iLlUtttlatU lU-JlJ L. I UH> (I J UJ It llj 1 1 1 tU I IjJIl I I*J It tU 1L* t 1*.lliJ U 1)4 I IU Ij I U I . U ILi ItLlU U < U 1U JUI IJ U1U I UI .T J-T t 1 . ^ 1 J r* T 1 Jt) *.*: J J ' A-* ^Jil 3 J J J C j ^ i - I ^ T O t J O -_3 1*3 J *C1CC3^J

1 3 11 1
^ 1'~2 i JL"3*~ * 1 jt *O J-* t *_^^^l^ l_ t_ _ - i

**

1 1 ->.-! -I

1 1 ~3 J'J

3 J

IMr-t n TlfiO -I'JtJiin h )- tD - *M r-t

no 'if*, tu jrir3raT>'"ic>n JTI ciQOr- -n i tJO'

r a-c _ j c L c rvrm : w>i

c?

LCIL

ce.

- uc *__.. j( 100 r
c^fTtir if i
JU4.1 1 J

t.lliJUIUJtill.1

J uooc.*nc f ir~r r >nri

_irir r r.r rir r

1 3J J 3 J

J>Di_J

r-riN-t nf id -^f^i ca^> nrincj j*-(T<irn i

. .

C
VIII-APP-41

f*

i
1

j jotnoa
-1C f ' "

J JLJ J(J

**-<r-Cii.

^S^J:-Oa-o-r- ^53- a- ar> ja-f ar a-ao jra-a-a-i jUCJOl >aa^j-iij:C j^^-r 1 1 i ill. 1 I *
. * * *
l J 1 w 3 1,J_i_j j_J JjO'JTlt ) )O-HI 33

J 'i T-i J-1 3 J . 1 T 3 J 0 ">1 i*^'^"' 1 30 J-i 1 1-3 Je3-1 c CILC c.nt r.c.c_i_ein.c C . C L C C i_c r c ne r,n>c r c^c/oc cc-i-i; c i-j > > -j i-it-j it-i i -s'-ir? -j 3:1 -ji -jo-"! i i i i<3.i. 300 i !- i- oi-a a in IL-J-IO ni r. ji-a n a t r c c r c - c t n i - c . rsc-r-CjC trfrr^ntJC r LcocDfrnc r-^5r-r%oc r'f-f^r-r-e. nr r:jr.Doncir riocao

i j -J 3 i :

> > i jJ-J n

1_3 J - D ^ j j a J 3 J _ > _ 3 S j r , ' J l O ^ j T 3 3 J

J J.3 'J.J j^a^JO } j

act

r. r,c r r L e C o i C - t r c r . r c r c c c t

c t c c i : - f - c i r *->i or c OJL r r e t r ^ c - c - t r r c r t iCifR

J-*" r r t _ r T f t . m C f)nc.acc-r.r aft

nn~ C c-c t^tzc->-^i4ri a rfna- aa-r* a a- a a CT2

T-. 1 >J JT I 1 T - 1 T-4 J 1 4 -J 1 -4O 3^< 3i J TO I l l J ' J i 111) -4^~4 < 1-4^4 <O -4 -4 '< T 1 4 - l + l l l * * l + # * l | II l*| 1 1 * 1 | I | * * * * * * * ull.lt.J .1'U .J (.tl.litl .JuJ Jl^llJl^l.*Jt.llUut .ll.lt*Jl&JIjl.tlkl>iJttJilltl ||U.UU UUJ *JiJt4lUJILII.tliti J bllU)*4liil*Aut

rfc

r c t r c c t cc.t-c r.c_c rt. r ^ r r c t c c e c_r r c c t t r c t c c c c t t e_e c 'j>jkjtt:uj^c.O'it:^2 JOo -1.JCJ 3o-j Jo.3t_!O _jT-iLi_; ^i j^-.,.T;j-3i_i jno JO 30.30:3 C . C C . C C C L I c . t c o c c _ w o - t . r t _ c c c . t , r , c c _ i . c c , i . c t c . r Cjoc-c _f c.cr.or e ocj (~tr>c3ao-iotr'Oc~cr>o.if~rtf-'Oi3 on t irjca. irsa mono e*nnn coo oc r c c r t r n j ci i c ~ c r c,c r t c r i_c t.t'C c c c t . c r r c r - 1 - r c r*c i t t t t ct ci t,c t c t-r 'f T3T 1 j -> 1 l-x 1 ITT l.jaoa J3 J30 1TJ 1 33 1 J.-'U JT J 1 J O 3 IT J J 1J

c r-r c t cr

>-r Ci r-ti-t n r i n
r- r> r i -< r
t-. ^-r r r
l * l * | II I I I I ******* UllLlUIUIItJUlUIU.IUJUtlLILilljlLjlLj.llAllklUIUI

- .:^mn-:_iw.i3'-i:Tjr>tr_c>4">ta_r.oj3 - --i . _t i J-T _r,

j i.j ,1 an i

T > I I - J i i J o r > - > -K T -i-i.'i ift TJ-J-I -j Jl-.i>,ao

f rfiC-C' r;t; c t ^ o f j J-OL-'ir crc- nf. c. a-ij J_a- 1 't,:CjO i T-I i.-i > ifa-^.iiin.-in^^ri i J - n,^rr>-4rv 1*******.*****l*****l**l*>-*

l | l * * | l 1*1I ! * * * * * *

nr rn nnr.oe-.oocir r>r, . ru-ir>r-oor rion ni->rir-ir-irif>ntorii

^^"r.oCC"^^ol2""CICC^"r)"?""'^""!!i""cj?"!r^^Ci!^'Co'^""
*

1f^*v*

I I

I I

II

u>

ff K.

a o

rt u

<

e
VIII-APP-421

r\ ^J

x2 &fa

8* %

ud

* * i it

i ii 11*
I I I l I l I I I I

t i * * * * * 4I MtMlll II II I lij

I I I I I I I I I

c t c o c t _ c t ic c_ ' c i -i j i 111 j 3i 11 11 ii n t nr c r^nc or*iiCjaocc. r j t a t . rr

1 5 J "> J 3-J CJ JO

I -3 3 31 3t) 511 111

S 1 J _J TO 3

c r r r . c c 9^ err- c r

Oi3.

a sh
C) -J

2 &3 'g

o-e. a

I ||

3 - p ~ a - j r c tf^a^L c r^c 4 ^H <-* - 1 A*-,~*,*~4 -4 4* J 1 "3 O 1 U

| 1*1 | l * | I |
**4>

c c r r r t cc rt

c t c c c c rccrrc-c no

i - t - ^ r c-t- 1 c t c .r^ r.orarjac- ooorT*fe c f t ~ c r c ~ r - LJC c-f

r-j" ( r r .-.^-.-.f-ir i *-..-,-.- - -1C *^r*no

! * - * * ! I t * * 4 I II I I I * * * * * * ilAtJUIU.IUlUlttJL.lUIU I Ull.lUIUJUIlUt IU*UIUJIJUIUJ

ri J -iJ3 ir-.i j^-J J icj^jtU T *o_j

iT. 3 C* J J J n -^ _. ~i v J ~J iJO

ijLit.

>n aciot > "ic 11 ooc nioo "j

- J tD J C C

r* rtr^.ri t.. r^-o* (

I * * * I | 4 I * * I I |*|
I H It. II ML|* 11,11

I !
II

II.JIlll.H Mtll.ll.lt

c:^. "/(-j wjfJc^-itTd- ouo*-j

r r-*/*,

to n i.i

bl

/^

^
VIII-APP-43

o t- o

* *+ orr>

i lI rjor

009

ooo oca

nrr> r-*nei

+* +

oooxn r>or

* *

i *
IM9

onia

y*

* *

i or-r

o-o-o

I I I oco ooo

* i i
ruoo

oaa

tT"?
mio + CJCC ooo t-a-vj **** ill OOO ooo croc oao

I
noc
(XT 03

l/ p

carj
OC90

orao * **

ooc. ooo

j one-. :*.+.

>J>-t> C3or

oca

ooo
000

I I I orao oao oaa oaa coc

-.< ;;

o>aa

o_> j
-t > > i
f

o 3rd
t">

a- l
ite. ->jri-^ tt t-i
C C-C
I T

11 (I
tf<C-.C. run

-t

-ii > T ;

C^L '

C.I C

J 3 >

r-cc -* -j

rt.-3 I O3 3 0.-3 3 Ceo <C~C

.MO J

rfO-

I
a u >-i i/\%s-nr
i/l>-< V

in

> J4j i c-.k- c. I

i ir-jo '

no n *->c n

ooa
r^JO

3 13

or, ri

<r. t.

00

i a ;rti
>C! CMC/C

oeo
OCJCi

QC3.J

tC ri

<fcno (poo . .00 i.no

j.*-

- ujr o j

r ii r i f\M (^ I *- rK

o-ooen JJ J tTori ' i *->" I .J^-n I

-i^

III oao *- c j 1

ART Oft OJ 3 *

^Krfl

rj'j 3

Kif K

inirih

* * orri
f>J < j

| Nj-< "^

I II
* * *
it C ' ,> 3

1-

4> n a

UJ 3

I/I

rj-->-j * * arjo , r i *OP>D

. 4OO

C.l-j -

,
ra J

i Ii

I ui o
o
*4

a nr ft.

<P <t

111

(Mnra
I > l o

10 -Ji

-.

nc-C1

O.TJJ

UlJ

noti
000

a j

-t-ll-l

r^'
OLJO

o * O O

4">
raao
noo oct_/IJCi

o r

-^

IMCJ J

ncio

* n. r> uO J itncj

ooo

<hi_ o iboo

TX-t

a:Jr

o.
n in

A*

<

ORIGIN AL
a-a-an rjcs l
+++

J'AUi?1

10

^ ^ I '

!
t

>
i '
O

ooo
i i, <CO
444

V4^4^ III

f"U ^ n +4 4

00"o^

rt

en CD en a^i
+* +

4>>a>a ooo
* + *

a ^ *44
III

v rs^ ^
+11

'

j ooo or ooo

OOO

ooo oof-j

OOO

Ol" 1^5

r~f *ci orJO ^**

O.T^> cioc>
vOi/>.3

rtn^ i i\j tf>* (

Ofl>i

^^^rt oor*
OiAfS

fn *^^i c*cro
OOO

^^rtj^i rtc^o
CTOO

Oco^>

(~^* i

c^oo>

ooo

moO

1
' O i

> ix _i -> ' m

*"*
lfX.

ui ^ * _i
' o

ooo* ooo in 3 occ ' ooo r-arg tj^ja

^"^sr w4M ooo ooo coc ooo

oc K (j) or3<r corj rjc30 & irjr*.

fwfwf^

' j ^ 3"

^>A^)

&"& &

rg *

orr^

ncio '

caon

** orso ooo oo-j

o^ ooo oaa ooa

c-oo ceo , ooo ooa u3sn^ > aaa aio-rj o aj^> t Oh-o

>

o
*-4

fr
V4 1

en i^,

3 k/t

* i3_3 J

^ *< 1
t_J 3

a-

j ^
OT3

en ^ 4,

4 1

, (i
UJ

_i
"^O
ZZ i

i-ncj
"i ^ 1
( C-t_

0 JO 0, irj

^c
iro JU

>"> r> c-t,c

- J D

i-* i *- i x^ ^

n- > " > i^crc

^ 3

r* i r~ ~*

JJ 1>^3 -JI-.JO

r"n ia

*J 1 _D

cit'jri

J*

> J

rTioo
*! 3'3 uit-t.. rtjf J t

c c cj
-*^

'303
J

ore

CLUJ
***&C^LJ

fr*/>
3

mom

a.

a j i-i r wn/i/y
/- x*
Zuj
<H-

-j>-

c.- Cj r>""5n "*r r

o aim
-* J J

"i JtJ

?f ?
fxaib
OC O
C10->1

js'D-J '

i"> D 1C.C ^0 7J

O 3 C C C ^.p T

re30
i i 33

rTOO
(^ C^C3
^"^-l

* H

:
ooa
d" C"
*C

th
C^O

*C5

J-H

"3

3^3

(> > 3

tf3

O)

ooo

ro

aoo
U.CJO *fc.Clt3 (SjT.C

a ~3J

or.d
"* Cl

i~4it
t*-f " Cl

inoo
O)CC

or>-i
C^

KiUftl l/VOC1 (Mt it.

"tffn_ IJT1O -C 4

C"
f

tfa-
-.*<

one *
ODl

fin

t*~ ^- *n
ri'lj

i Kf K
" on 3

inir u
"3Cj43

gf if tr
^* *!*

**^iC
OO -1

o II I z 04 " lu

LJ
0 UJ

u-i*

*\j o
_i
k*

r*on
I Lr

m>o
^fl

i O
, 4A^ ' -fcn

r>C C - C i-.*cc
j*

^rr-

o-r^a- i

rtoc

Ow c

c~t->C

m
crt
f-

^^ rti A^ ~m ^4r -f

^> ^t.-<<

rr.

"'": '"'""

^^^

rir>

" rcc

i?" "
UJ. 1 t-

lA 0

i >

*"*
Li -4
t/1
1

ui 3

j
!

ti or^
tJO'J

a*o> >k

axoco
J.-LJ
,v_

4)^0^
OC. w

r\j rjr<j
)

i/^ift .J^u*

* r a-H -

J
-C3J

430-*

i-.O.

2*^
a n0.

ri* *-
r^ i)
i i jo -r
i*^
41

in i/u

^ *fi

22 n

p"

^2^
j^ j4

O Q

1
' o
0 Olio

<*>

JT ^
o-i oOwj
riCi C* ^*.">Ci

Jn
O +> earars LJOO jDoa

rj 1-1
4> MOO

IA o
00 !
OOO
""3O

ff ^ 1

il

_l
j i A*

OOO
JOO

ft

rt n

i/r-.^j P~~I^T 1

<^rjo

irj

Aan
tllOtJ

J ^

O JO

a- >. i

ci.j^i
.>J. JCl

aoo
41

r>i_>-

-
M 1 *^

.
' f O ^

'
jr
ooo
"jO

,_ o
4>

o
+

>*

^1
4

IM

^ O 4>

Of ^f

ru c i
( >-> J3 .(V

i.. li0
O^O

' Irt j j _l j

W>

"* "* r^ft-!

T*-_l

Oi- > ^3 OOO

r-rv~ o ja

m ii no p
JTOC^

i / J(T o
O 30

ipi n ^ gw 0
^5 O

2o^i *_

/ TOO

1 T J

Tlt -1

r *_
** _ LJ

r_i

:*j

"

nt
10

!
i

^Y

i *

*"

<r

4/1

in

i>

VHI-APP-4b

r
1 1

f\

:
~*- .-I.-*.*
III III III

! i
~4<~i4 cr c^o dOco c-c-o K -H
III

non
+++

ooo
4-4-

C5 (W CS 't c
1

_j or o

n<nCj ono or o

(C^f^tp* OJ3C3 ooo

i^^^^ oc/fO or-o

f^i^scn t) KP 1^0

C"*c**ri oor* or--*

n -3n c\oo

JL it i i i
oao ooo
rv^o cine

ooo ooa

a u

c3
** H_J V 3 til OOO GC3O 4- 4r + III OOtC.OO r*Qf*> OOO

i
u-3III O!_ O QOQ

-D-O^O
***OOO OOO ^*i/O

r~r*-*~
**-* OC3O OOO oCt/l?

i ooa aao
OCCi

"I T
a1 ) J, >

**

>
H-

Coc. *OK o
<-QU O -^rvj

oc c
IQ

oc o

</>r OD cc.o

ooo aaa
C OO

Li'

CJO t-J

OEHftMjS.^JPPLHSf fcVJ VILBtJlL

3 1

, 9

o _l
we ui a
ire -a 3O
-! I . I

_JO-j ririn . e.c, -< i.-j

13-3

ja 3 r-^r(>
crcri^. 1. 1
Til

u_i } nnt 3
-J3 1 i c. jr -4,n J

a -4 ' i

JO -> 10 <"

*. ii

OOJ ntio

* _ *

-4 CJ:. 3

_._>_ , iino

11^ L t C -<i-< 3

0>->T 1 - > > ^C.C. >L_C -4.J 3 1 0 J

i i
. J

ni n3 1
C.1 3C. -4< 1(3

Ut r4

< >1

jr
~ 1

; '

^
M

a_
I I I

^< 1

O 4>
TC*.^ w^.^r j

I <j , *
, L3 3fJ i/U -

PSRT

M- .0
cn"i\jj i r

c icir'c't"^ ^-< r.

-i >r 1
ciC-i* . . it-i
"*

JO
O D3 < > -

1>

3
C"'J ' L
|--C4f

n
ra!^ ^O
=!

r-*"*-

-ir t_.

i rr. c

Mff

*-^^^

Z33J

t-t 3 O
1

Ill ooo

ill II oc"3 cirsr

oon

i_ 3d

t^oo

oat r c-i

11 '

iMmftLS

1 T 1 f i->| T

" i; i;t1,- ' :;"

i
. u

to

-4-1

at,^C3 r-t r.
O*

KJ 13.'

3 ^

EkSIC

;
3 * * * * l I

i
*
lit III

i :

n "I r j l^ <i >

4* * *

^%-^

rr< l 1

>4Jl *a

~^ T 1

f* 1(T

f:r J

a 3-n nrao

*prt rni^ji

iJ
1> i

;
i 1 on.T
C3*nO

i ui o
! +

j*-^

in O
*

*-

i
0 rr

o jo

'1 <^f-i >

f-J3O

or:a

1 r^'nf

T C wo. uJO C3 -3 *^ ^r^ri

O ' ^ C2 -j

OJ C^f^j f O ._' i^I m*-.-l

jQi_Di J j rvJvl O 1 j. n^

1 rr>. 3
>-> *^Oi
J J

n' 10 CIji JO 0, D.J

"*

in "*1

1 i c : j i

li

^
r *
jr
r\i

= 1 1
^
1 t/1

.-Cirj

Z-J^JO

r-_ L.~>
r> JDJ

r 01

* j-^
J^^O

* r~*
J^O^i

m n
K.-O ^

1
W-CJI

LJ C3^,

j i

oor ,-4r.n

H^I id f*.i -n

lAf^r* , . ^iiri

->_. nc_ii i
'

i1 2' >1^ j bj 3O 1 ril 0

r*t

i J
H--J
T1- I

J TL

l T-J TV -i o
A

-ru

XT

it r

H ^
n u

i
i tf\ t

u. uj t-

</l

VIII-APP-46 r

OF THE PAGE IS POOR

3 O 1

1
er ^
0 O

'

ooo

a- a III ror

a
III rsoo
1 1 1

i ii
1
->0n i -100

1 1 1 1 ,
ooo

O Z
X Ul

or o

nrflO

i3OO

do ^3 ooo or- c~.

o cno ooo c or-

ooo ooo

000 000

i i ooo noo ooo

""
r i ii ooo
300
C.OC

111
-. 4/1

' i ' 1

*" tl-l -1
1-4

*> -J =
O

Cnot

coa ooo , uoo

OCC

1 11

oo-o ones coo

OCJO

it ooc.
aoo c:ocorjo

QOO ccc ooc

r ** iii ooo

1 11 coo
000 C-C30 CJOO

nT
Of Cl
OOO

ill nnrs ooo ooo

coo oo n CC.C cjoo

COO

ooo ooo aoo

& -1

1
1
mi 4 "> "i

a0=5

tf-

I, .

4E

"3 .tl J 3 ->r it i -J '

I/-C,

1
1 >

i l-l_ .

i~"^rj n 3 r t-jC

ooo i Ti C.-C c-

"tirir^* b in c _r

13 Jl i
C-IL

IT 3
L-.C t -4O-J

C .-413

ti i

1 -J- l-l rw j
C.1

i
\

3?

_J(->

fe'

or

lA
1

fr

</> U1 * _l 0.

a.

OO /i Ul ari/i -3

Jr 14 1
1 IOC. ILJO
OC.O

1/1

! '
IT

ior* < t r

C t-C. or- -3

.= (_..->

i oors T-3 J

5 i
n- cj
r.oo
J3I3O

.
iracs
3 JO

raoo

r "* n^
.r.r

oc-ri
o

tr-oiti ^ * * 1 i rjrjei ac 10 u.** * DO U1fI^J CJf So t r

v" a
uj C.
*A -1

'
LJO J

..j.

U=| 3

r- i

i4 1
J to

ru
^

ra _l nr
c*)

i l l 1 roo 1 pt i nj i r*o
.

' i l l i c-oo

' r cr '-ii-i or r%

TO T

era f -J o i

oon t-e er * a

c"OCl r 'OCD
J

1 l
> 3

1 1 1 OOO
000

Ill
J11

III
> 1 3

hi i
i a

Z
tA

]
Ul

i>-

O
41

i j
1

ij ii1 r
j
4

CJ *-

kJ O

BAS

RtfMECIrO

'^1 T : ii.1 i 1 r> ^I-^

1 11
^>>A 1 ' itO 'Warp^

ir*f i i Ji.

r-*
, . 4

^" j

li li ( M 111 100 [

1 1 _

ooo

in ivn rxjiAr >1

-> ->!>
n< 30
*4

1j

4*4

i i
4

JS

r
4
1O**

en
4>

jr
4

ono

ior>

tSEl/"IV-md

3CJU J JO

i >on
^ JOLJ i 1UO 4 OfJ

noo

u on

LTIOO

orira UJOO
T3UJ
-4OO

OOI OO< 1
rxj;
)

Cl 20
#4

n >o
30

J r r

-^O(">

1 0

JS OU)

r ^
jCjr'
Jd_J Jf3O

on

1
0 0J
OC1O

0
4>

^ "* i
U1OU

j^ 4
1

orio

wr>
W100

j Jo ( iricj

nor,

1
1 J OOI ">
OCJ1

T 3O Cil
0. CJI
4I

ooo

go 0
1 0

ffl*C

ff J
t
^
N

EC J

T* -J

er j

ft* O

rw
t
.-1

M
1 1 >

Ui X

VIII-APR

c1
CO

c 1
PJ

C.
1 ao 1 QD

=rt
*

in
3

IM IM 0

^ ri rJ

iD 1 1 ff) O1 r> in r 3

c* i
L.

c; i
^>

c i
Ifl

n i
^O

^ in a

TJ

CM

r-

a9 -r,

a-

ut

c
Cl C3

ci n K r.3

a n o r" c^ *o

O C

O 0

tn

.n ir

a^ili
I<ICJ
*-*

_inr

~i

0* ^

O3

QO .3

^> J

j n n n n rr

4 *

n
>-

o.
a

x ii o

,
' UJ

n ^

r-

CM

AJ

AJ

AJ

(M
t D

C.

t-

AJ

10
/M

A,

AJ

Al

~ _

^ IM

rw

z. ~
^
rt

>

in
A.

rt

in
AJ

4
in

Ufl

irt

<M

AJ

^ ~

-4

~*

3 ' '

' ' " *

a, K ri in
J O-

o >

f J 3 ,

3"

in

r^

j r-

-r

'^J

s ^,

Ci ,j

a a

i">

''I

f 1

n ro

n o r-i n

n r

z
Or i J It ^t t*
/-I

U.

a. r

N-

_j
UJ Ml

u
rk U in A
TA> t/1

tt

t/i
tM

tJ
K^

i/i

It

IA

1 i in

r
VIII-APP-48

, ORK7INAI PAG F IS

REPRODtJCffilLJTY OP THF
POOP
C

^
1

'

4W
1^1

i H -4 O O

i
v

UJ ^ H</l
t

i/)

' T

Ol/>

if)

o* -n >-i>
n_
,

o ^ O r\l C-i rj
.

4X]^

rO

rj**-iJ i t> a *> J ^ p a c - . H 1

^' 1

~ /~\ ^ s.M' i }- i 1 \
> I
*

/^
> *j

x^ N \
.
^^,

fcl

C
j

-^*

s^
X^ ^*

C."

c.

i
IU

^ fc r> 1 j^~ ^ r* * t *

-( -i .

^ oc

I.I
r

.
T iji 0
4

* '

VI/
vH ^

z iii
h-

^ / *^

>.
<*M i i.io ya
1 J "JS

m > i/i o j?
,-j

1.1 r,i c.
n ,-j 1 ' r jr i^ I o in -* ' r< ru r^ ,.

-* !
y

*
,44

a ri o rr
1^O" A

LI

*J

ir

"S > t/i _J

_inr

4 ,

a
LJ5

*u, i oo *"'

" O
iV

J or
ill

y. -. / J

it f \
/ "J

i '

-j

-j

-<

+ en

cr
rr
0

-t ! r>

*i

i/>

c>
Ul p

c
rr LJ
7

i
i L -
>OU
'4 .-4

ill 1
.T>

ij
,^ O +

LQ Z

r
Uj
t> UJ O

o
.3 O

rr

Un

"^
">

>CT Trt
Tf

C n

a -*

rJ *~ ^ r I j
f

f~> ^

n T ^ c" r V - ^ r t INI rsi -

w
/^

L 5 m o
rt'

f
i
1

7
r1 in

or
O

**
I

UJ I-

U-

1 t*

(i
!
3-**

r>
J^

fx
J-

rK
1 f! "^ _

LJ r>
<4 - I LJ

j .i.
J'

rv

ir I
W

C 3 2 C
n " , !
t/i
>.

f\J

t I i |

?*

ri

r n ,n ;

t^
ill

" icF i
UJ O cj
T>

4Vl

^r 40 a I 1

i i
!

or
UJ

<
Uj

* Iri J *

J
*

r> *- I _, s
',

j
!

Q ^ ce 11

-^ f>j Cl fi Z ro Nr~ 11' ! t r> -jr a. r ^ ^ -J i it ^ i3

O )> iL

^ riii i ^ *"
\

1 sn
INJ ! rj r*. r i t*i ' *" -* ^ i - i ^
*\

-J

r
IV

,J
i 3

II

k-

in

<

<r

tf

VIII-APP-491

VIII-APP-50|

OK1VT"?'

^
U X

'

4 J ( N t O O Q O D O - C J ^ O O D C> 4

i
'
>.
_i l-l

LJ,

g
or

i
4-

i
| * ,

.
1 * * 1

3 o

< uj
J

o:

_j

o ) ) i n r - K > r - D a 4 / i t

u> ^ i/i n >D *o o *i) ^^ r*j c\j ^N *H (M ^

' . , ^, t/> m ca in i

* I I

Cl . 1

** 1
I

3 t t

ne
t~

u->*~

1
1 1 + 1

'

iO

h-l/> O

o j C j O o O w ^ o o ^ o *
+ 1 1 1
Kiinf-. c n V 4 U . C K i < v j O m ( S T i / > M . H ~ . - l e p K > . * K .

I ) i 1 >

bin /> Ol.l

i >-i
;

i I- SIS 3
a
O ,

tM ru o
"l
T H

'

-^ fM <vi
i
J

:
>
I I

> 1

i
1

i
1

.
,

f 1 . i i
1

Kl U 1

i t

T ,

>

(SI

ci r ) a 1

f1

'
i i i
1

a t -<
-4

a <I a i
.4

5.
f t - IX.

. 0

. . . . . . . . . . .
1
*/1

11
r

4/~

iv- ft- iO
y rvia Hrt x

^^

-^

^*

-J

c^

>J

r~

f*^ *^

*4

^O ^

ci

^4 *

^>4 1 4
JO iirCH*

. f

Z ^

c r C * n i * " r - C - * H i r c J ' C r* w o* o * i*n o in o ,9 n < 1 to.

1 1 1
(

-j

!
1 + 1 I
H

'
1

(mmjl3C 36 Cl SI N O I K k riu n.i.7n -atn niwiri f

w>Z

s ?
__ ^H ^ ' j^

^* i
TC

^ s i t s s -:.: i
Q i _-i '
fO ^fM 4^ >w- *-*
tJ1 *^ f^

r
*+

1- (
14

3H1 S 3 1 V 3 I G K I T t - C C

eiKtM^-na 3s c

'

yi

Cf a

O 'A o*

-^ ^ fv.

^^ i^ *

i-J f^ ^^

'^1 * 1**4 y 1 > rn ff1

7 <4
M ,0 1

,
iro

^ r^
c

u.
t/lf*!'

- t i * i - O 4 r > j p . a - * r > j <r

M

'

jr
0 1

*k

4-

1
&

.r t i

a- i i

1
i i
UJZ

ft-
|

i
1
A

JICJNI 3:trcs3M i.T_nr -.ITH

& r n .4 i

1/1

i
'
i

2 S *
J u o o u
ir O

r<

" ' ' ' ' '

43 a
<*i f^ r\J tn

ry
UJUi

*-/>
*^(^ Ov

Cj o
trt

i i
in *^

. , f <-)3 : x t a> i rv
r *

T Ul O 2 <

in *i *** ^ / t t A f > ^

rf ni

iu i.

i~

O Cl

i-

*
O 7

r i > -J i ii. i : 1C

IT

< / t u t n s i t 0 ( j p o i<

i* I1 I

! I

n U0

4 O

o
tA

JT UI

i- X

o c> n c) n r>

a
a
O

c>
C

r>

o c> o cJ ci r 1

4) ^ i a o ^4 * * i i i IM n. a c1 0 ( 1
0

-j

J>
M

O
4

CI

C 1

R1 ^ 4 *

'
u<
CJ

g
ru
i

er

3 O

41 UJ UJ u_t

Or

o
_j

C: o C > -j a r 1 o cj O C> D -3

ru n o - * i
CJ o 0 C3 f! > C. to O

in ra c3 !
W O <-4 4 1

l/> rO

O O

C3 C

r4 1 0 3

-4

.I I > f1 *4 . i

UJ

or

>1-1

o y
41

t>-/)
7

o
UI

_J
l-i

(lid

T-

m
*4
4C |

I/I

UliJ

o-H<

a cl a c> a c > n c3 0 C n k,> u ci Ja

CM 0

01

CO O

1>

P4 *4 1

j 1

a i

Z UIM

J
UJ

T~-3

oj tt
t n C r
L *

d
C.

*
-4 1

-4 *4 1

j I

0
4C

-1 -J
0

t-

i<.

C L.

-i

ii

irt

ui

-r
O

a.

** -II

y
rf

" 5 *
i i O -1

~ 1

-J
|
| '

n c> n c1 J

r>
0

r s o c i M *^ n f S C3 rj f- n ^4 ra ( n M ^. ri i f-J 3 -. nj

4.

4>

a i1 o <i ^4
*

Ti
*rt

y
fi 6.0

" r c
c^ cL

iT

a z c

. '

4t i j a z & ui -40 c /- i
V
ft*

r-

ei C >

UJ

0 uJ _l
rf

0 U. O

J "S J i.J t f c c

C * ^ *ft

ir.

O r1 1 PJ C D <J

t I. 3

i i cs -> ft

t :1 .
* U. O

j
n *
fv
**

e
,_ c 3rt: 4*nr
UJ UJ

*r

m ar
_> ^

~
UJ ^-

*
UJ O

ri r 1 c. ( . .

-> . 1

V t

" i <i : "\ '

_

n M 1 1
fi
*^

-i
C

'
^

> H!
M

ui
X

Cs. i * lJ
E O !-

u
bl

ft*

*~> u r> N- -i

IV

0
"_J

LD

2 J : L' j

_, n

[ n n < * * i i/> f j i. > n i ,

?J
*4 1 i

UJUIt 4

i/<m
<'

K (>. n

ii

n i

LJ"!

f^

" 1
r- n * in *n
;T

l/

WUJ

C-

(>

U--I

<-i/ -

n ^

1J

i-i n i 4
> Ll C

C*

<

> o
>

Ull.l OH-

r r t .1 r t

c^

O ari * i uA o : I K r~. f_
4*4

-I
4

MUJI
4

1
rO

n >
4

O f>

| t_ j| Jk^

1 AM ^H-

f f no' ^^

'

-ll H

o *

r> ^ 1 I
0
-4 C

^ i

4 1

u",2; i r
^*^M

'% ru. ^^

." f fi i i

r-.

1 ( i r i 1

tO

S 2 3e
tf4 r

-j j.l ^^i

i
f*
i H"/>

i i
1

r>^

? ^ *^rt

*'

i^ ( J n CJ n rT

U CI

i J LJ

iT

U ti O l "i 0 i1 t

r4 l 3 1 JT n ,m 'J f 11 < r\j * K c^ Cl t % r\j ^< m < -1 J

rf>

o o *>v >>

UJ

ac _ JUl ^ i a:
]

^. n ii z

O
Ft

^
s

c i,

^ I! w 'p ; ^ CJ '

r> r
J ^J

* i > ft* | J

UI

tJ

i
1

c o r

c
VIII APP-52

i
CM 1 O * Pu

Vrr

(SJ fM

X a1
O C3 c. cD

^
L

1
i/>
0
tt

i ' O

-i

O
Kl

O
O

o
-1

Gr-

rK

o r\i

+ i in iT O o >n a '

1 a
O

c3
C3

'V
Jr

rvi
O _l Q C/1O? UJ

1 en o t-i

-< rU
1 f- cD a- c3 r

(M + 3

f>l

3- X

-
Cs c3

^ 1

o ox; o M3
1
i/l **4 UJ

m ->

3>

+ t-l

10 r
1

I I I ! C-1 0

o t^ B
J C3

>
h' !* _l
t-t

o
' ^

i o
li-

CM a * a^

i
i

Ck
f 4-P

ui

a- M rM .H o c3 i i O / w > t en r-i

IM

^
1

' V !. Jr
O * ^4 *4

u V
^4

'S* i

in ru iT rin i
i

c3

1 a c

I O C
l

gas
%*> o .DO
& to

"
1 i !

(?"i z

x
| J J

or

<1

'B
o

Ul C\

t
II

n 1 *
> V,

n l

i_ u) . i * +
a 4 f^

k ,

S i

- -4 _J 1

"

5 ^
d - 1 rti

; > * i

_ji/i

d * a CQ r*Wo->

" ui m -i

->-

a- r
Ci I

,
i n rj

t>I/I

r<
UJ

gg

&i

Q< o

* -

-i

*o

ra in

rt

* in r~

= - 1 * * n i i"i M (_j i n r>

'V

"X Lr r3 1 . r hn r

V* v* c
1 rj c
V

-*

< 4

1 n t

UJU.

Of 1-1

* V^

^^

o ra

5
i e *
u.

'

i S

* h-

1 C

* r-

f v.

cv

f' c

l r.
J

* P.

t I r > c n -VI J . r
: T

^- . i t. c C3 .3 U \* V ir 5l
i rt

rr
K
1

U ,

12

i/>
"% i
*/

J
*V

.<

- l i
0 (T

r ,
1

ri
4-

M .
1

O ^ *

-i ** u) m i

i 1 > r> '~>

.

.a
M i K

UJ

'
<

l nr
i/i

1/1

M -

^ !f ^

u
-4

C- .
1 1 1
*/*

fr<*

\^

irt . u.

uj

1 r r

* > ^^ tn

';> o

1
3

i
1

UtUtt

i
[ -i
-*

kV ..P

til' l

^^*VriM ("HUil

ii

J;
q * ^

> -

c-.

t> _J (f i^ or i. in n

<M

1
<-

1
rj

l i i

r.

ai ^
^.
M

i
-i

i
<r

i
o

n 1

*H 1
1"^

^^

<

i "I

[ t-\

!.!(

1 DO.- Ht 0 t"

',! V
(?

a-.

ir u.
!

ar
i/i ->

(\j

"J

-I

' Vv O J^
f>C.i

T
r

v>,t
ri
i

tiCS
^i.l -.>
fY l l. .l l
Tl-l

2
^ <J
3

i HI ^_

* !L'

ir to
C 1

r~ rj

jr tl

af 0

(!M , j

- ir a ci

J tl

->

u)

_)

^")

n
UJ O '

>

31/1

Jui

Q:

<! -a
j t-

2 j

-i

(M

1*1

'

>3

V *i *

*y) u

n ( <v n .r n c^

',

! i if

b 1

LJ ^

> rr

TEFLDS

[ ">
b .

LJ i

rt

VIII-APP-53

i
> '

'

, '

a x

^K B
*4 1

o _l i

o o o o o O M t a o e a t s i1 O O C o O O O O O O ( I o o o n n o v 4 *4 O 4 1
> 1

4 1

J 1 1

:
I/I
' ' Ul CJ
l/*O O-_l

i
| O ' ' I CM Cl 4-

V
O O O O O C - 4 CI O O O 4 1 O O a o a O l N J O O O O :a
*. 4 1
^ 1

-I r-l
1

4 11

, 1

Or 3

un- ui OX

I/)

-4

, i

>t-

or.

-i

M _

a o a- u
i/>

j
Jt
1

V
rsi "j H a -

4 1 1

*
*
4 1

>

sr

1-1 o o o o t j L S u i o o o a i i o ra LI ii !_. Ci T O C j o o t D i -J

'

en

:3

:r> r

>4

-4

-4

1>

-4

5
*

'

'IS

to

,
1

V,
'M > "* M W4

;
4

Ul 3

t Ul

o
r
i/
' U*

-a-H _j
o .ji/>

o l r " ) ' t * i r a i i _J ' I S O J J - l - i . o a ^ n J L _ l u i C . c . c . * ' t - a - < iN

1 i i o f > > i i

i l t-i rti n i 1

\,,
O <

!
!

* ^ <-l"34?

in ( 1-4 ' _ .-a. i

Q. U.

4T t/v uj Hf _i JE.-S
4f UJljl

1 ~

^3 C* n
C

rti
O t

r>
-

T ; r i * f3
C a l S

* i r>
C l

^4
1

rt
C j

n
O

<t
l1

,3 o

>

a*

1/1

<->
1-4

rv
,U2

i.-

t15

A r* '

'-s -t

C
%

,\ " '
4

r
l

H. r

*-

s
,

x i c

, |

1/1

* Z ' O O O n C J - 3 ^ 3 C > > ~ l - > O ia M c, cj c . R r~ L a j1 4 1, rl .

t

- \i{

e.

u. o
H-

i
lit
4T

,4/1 , _l

'
0

W4
1

V* C X 1
.1 I

o
y. J1 M *r4 ft-

U l

jr
*4 1

4 *4 1

<4

^4^
1

^ r> z

-4
IV
'Ul

"^
_J

t/>rK
HO
t / ) 3 I

n \ < T > " l r ^ l c>

f ' _ C f. C- S
O l t l O r f j t T i r

O ^

r>

rt

i
!
4

f J L- " 4 4 r - * l v 3 * H

Ul
"T

U l ( 3t"
|j^J

^ er

1/1

1 '

^, ^** ^ itl ' ^f IV) .

[ k ^ r4 *^ r4 i4
1
H-2P

ti i^

SS yui
1

1^1
^

i^ 1 '

o tj rt> _J . c: | Ci i n ,-j rj QuJ

t r _ . it."

^ o

fc r 'A

tra " im

r>

.'

oi 3

4fF4l]

to

i * ' '

l ""

r-i Cu u 31 " " '4

: "
| n

;
<-i
n - ' * o O C J O O C : rt r> ri n r. c-i c.
-J ' " ~\
^

i>i
Crtsi
O

v J I a
^4 *4

v>

OT" "|CW MCL *| f^i( |

yv-<

1-Hjll

i
,
1

mn

c j < i > c < t ) U i i 1 CT ij-> n IM ra i 1

n i l
*4 *4
1

Ol -z

r-4

rr>
-i-

4lill J^4
O

&-LA"B,

l " l l * 1 l r ^ | - l * l - 4 * * 4 - 4 f * > 4 . 14

00: er
4OT

1%r

nr a u.
. ! i i '
1

(
<^
1

^0

V
r
, 14

C3 i r > < t > O C >

H r>

ci

c*< c-> t c,
c

'*$* i i r* i i . r
n l i ,1

1*1^4 i 44T
JJ
4T4T 1

0 (/I . ru
* 1

O
*-*

*J
1*1

ci i i fl it
4 . >4

1UI

1-1 .i o

ir o

-i ^ <x

nr
^K

'

.j
u
n

-1 11

u>
-J * ' 1

<

1
-II

!
r>

- ci
cj

r l

r-i o

rt o

c*
o

<i
j

13

<r dj
M
uft

'J

J
^ t

-<

3^1
JliJ

ci
P*

U l

(IX

i~-> f-j

ry jr .N

CJ r>
CJ

h O

IJ

*i
\

X "
j

^ *"

>.> ^

w ^

< k,
C J

~
A IV

91

J i^

^** J

'*

1 1 _

i i

c o r

r ^ VIII-APP-54

i t 1

, i i I i' i i ' . j ] i

i ['

o >^ w ^o

nr

:
i
|^ or w:

BJ
Sz Q 2F C
M Ol

a
eo

!
i '

t-o

UJ

r,

T -t
U

"^
n*
i/U j

Hw UJI
C_!
41
O

-" _uj **
^- ^"

rx
LO

-J I

i
^
^

^IJ
' tJO 1 A '
_JI_J ^ *l* If) * . >T1 L f*

'
1

2
UJ

o.-i

a. _iu. * +
b. ^ m <^ XMK i_jr-j> r~i^

2 >,*, _i c t
u. +*
i-*" ; f* 'aT ^ & & u i i

t,
O

Cf

r IJT

IJM

* *

C^ r^

* *

t - t ' p 3C
O
i/*

Cf\j !Tma> HJ- tA *

C-CJ C Jv << rt jj i <~) b i * *

M
j

it ^ rxt

k ^B

t^ u* =<v x

v^

"* "" ' ' u. U_

r>o

* wMrf

'

Lrt <c
U-it/^U t/xnr * t

t f i O I I

1/1

- _j

H t- OOLull

^ i^

>.
, i-t

t-j ii
*^

<I

I
'

x *i A_ <V

vf
^ u

uj

11 I

_i m

1 _

^ ^ . H O I

^ a

V4

11 %

5^
1
/!

' 2s ' "

^jr^'rl'.') i ' 2"??-?

(-llw

10 I l* i

'" _ 1

-^ ^^ ^
^ t^ 7 -**

i^ *C ^* 3T
"3* 'tJH ^ Jl

-J n ^ ^ 3T
^ U.1 '"I ^ ^

A
i

^l ft* ^ T
4 t^ bO

-J ^* T
<X 1^ vA

T j_ ,, n .-.-., o

ui _J J

J *^

v J

A ** t^ ^ j t-U'-x-^ _i

i 4 it jrr* N^ j , -4.- 11^. un.j _ia r

U -^ LD

iiu.1 . UT i-<__>
S. L i_l l*j V

d * +. u. -in.-.v
. >uj *T

i
lu

era. .
^^h-

-.1-11. HOT
HM- ^

10 T
.ii LO

rJ i LD
~KUI

' h ) U. pf^ IO

*
MH4

u*> ~3 -^ ** k^l

*r*/i(/i
,

i i
"

t/i "i u_ i > i H

ir^ni.i^*

r *^nni* t*^
O J| 1 It 1 ~W ll 1

1 \i^mi^
_JIl~Mltl

C~)H*^ini/1V

~1 .In- !?*"

!C ri-r -?

ViTli-a

LTI 1 l~Clal

*T" t~rl ^it- *

i *>-^_ *
Cl UJ U. |L 1 Ui

S C'ssjEsj S i,.,^ ? ^ri;: ;5^'2

! i - r f ^/i^r^ .1 ^ -.--. ^ .i^^-r ->, i^^-r

wi . ^ ^ 4 1*1 ^^ _J

^^'fiiz ^* -j jpj ^ "^sL-i

-Jrsitiu.
It- ^j I.I
if)

0
[

O.

i->-LuiLaui.-

t J^ IT .y^^ <v 3

<"<-<->

1 mo<"3
/*^r >_l^*

rforxp
u it i _J^ ^*

r-iciortno
*^ ^
1 4

A n w ip ^ ro O ft n

i 777

|V
jj

a
i
tf

_!*--

IO r
1 U1 t

'

ae *~

^ > 13 C

t_ t/1

rsi

'
1

.J

i
\

>
,

C=a

'
r
VIII-APP-55

^ -^ 4^ - i

%*
1) 1J
t

1
o
^
Ul

1J

u
^1 Or

i 1 >^ i^ U 1 < -t-Od.

1
1

1 * *.

1
3e
ji J

sr

f\.

n -T
rf> -r
(M M 11 rw

(VI

a- cti-i ra

SJ

> tn

_>

J** I i iie . ^dnrj\jr fl n

i j ->

L. Ik-

Ul

*
n

nn>x^>^n
"
01]3

I1
t
L

>v&

i m M n 01
M
4I

^y o
tt>
tL /t

tt

Ul

J>

I t

LJ.^ H 1 9 **f^

rc

c-f 1
i/>- Tn^%fK

- 0 _l
Hr*

m
0 J

u.
T *>
1^41

-9 1i

r>r->r c Mf

* 4 ^ >-l i*V II Ill-It

r ctn

*^ >-H
r>r n

yr"jr^<^* i r> li U^--

3 . l r i I Ji ' LUI
1 J ^-

J->

i- *a,n *>. L mj ^.# *-e

fl-i-sa;
K
LSI

J C3

I> b 3 :
^

t >

f>

I/I ^

M ^3

in
!3

flr r
^

TP

nn
u.
CA

l/>

- . J

UJL

-1UI in*. - ro:>

ui
>~
4/1

&i 1^ Wl/ln-x *-l-i2(tt

4/l<

1/1 or- l(\'O>t/u or 1 flK t"Vnt 4f * ^ Jiniur^u^j " r

M 1 -^>4- ar"Ul'JOl*1 * * M 0
Or*i-<Lnf\iUn
^

u-> c jiy nrr

u.z.

e i
.0

i i
,

C ^

Ul
^ X

AS'

A /*r
l/

11

>-

o -:ir
^
-4l

> 1 -J. J n T1 1

l.Ktf >--

iij

ui

t_ n < > r^4, rt n ^4 r ^_ />

* ^ u

-i-jxc 0.< :rui

ft->

o t j>
r

JO I\ f 1

a'.O H Tt (i

' J i11V

;3

:r

\\.
M T p

a.ui o
r
, U
J

a *
Ul

o
_l

-.
C-t
. J

(MO _!

r> j

tt _i

mv

M y

rs
in ji->. i4
ta-dOTi nI I.JIVk-t

a.

i
T

C"1QklA <l

Q.
in at
Ul y
I.J

ir/\(n<r> -

] i_j IIny jr> Vfr4 4h* 1ir r

<1j

_l i -

ir

*^^ rt

7O

a
3P y r

UIO

iiUI

'
1

i ll nr <J U i ii i r r 1 l.

r M
>
1 t

M
UI_J

M Z Ul LJJ

IA7

in

4T

in

XI

l/>

m r4
UJJt
^^.

nr

I4j

a.

n^

U2 i.^

rr

E U*

ro
o
A

r>
M

(3
1n

>a ! j i !

VIII-APP-56

1
c:
'3

Pc

g
>,S2

1 Ok
___

JO

'

< So.

_, o X "i i

_\

it
1

9
KO

' ^

e
3* rv 1.1 n '> m nK ./ rU
f k.

O UJ

K-.

1 "
t. *j

K-.

n tn

-.

U, . <

r -
^\
vrf

K* r SJ 4

>

n f > r. i ) 1 1
f^

ll>
ru

l; *, '
in IA

^ u
or k* i/ n
1/1 a.

u
^
nt

rn

f1 t
"

|2
0

"

<* o -. ^

e% rr
1 *

<b
x

/* 1/t < 1 ^

'5
J

>

> ./i f" a

tn
,

t/>
H

i iP
11

u1 tJ
bJ

I M l-l f -

*4 1 * ru

I/I a
1A

^ 7
Ul

-"v

i > > .
i>
4

IM

r^ +

i/1

!,:

u a*
UJ

m
9

UIO? Ol, 1

UiCC

k^
lilUJ
i |

or O

a.

-v o
U ! f

a. or
^0

u.
4/1 UJ

s i ^
fK UJ

0-0-

or o
S
^

M
T

n
-J

f
-. 1 1

j _i

i1 t

tl _l

( .

'i ^ i
j r

fin-

20 k^^

r^
ittO
i,i'
Clf K
UJ_I

tn ui o: ^ 2 ui
LJ

. 11

I/I

^ ^

te^'v
1^5

yS
LJ-t

rr
UJ

J ^ H*

j ^ M rr
UJ

UIQ 1.17
K
UJ_J

en 1*1 or
pm ^

t 4/> 1 -

C 4 'r

n t*j _ r *"

j J * ' **

o it

*-

E 1 r
1

<1 < t
A

UJ

- ' r
" ' l

M < >
A .
J

\f\JP
-JO

k.

1^

' "

/* i<jj a.

*-. * r

f1
k

0 X

u
ft* UJ

t/17

a.

-JO

'*

rr

O-

r r

. r i *

It

UIZ 4 k 1

o
Cl

TO

i \

=*

_
1 t

;
J

riT.flc

r1

P-K7

05

on o

L _

O "* VIII-APP-59

<*

i i

i i i i

(V

en
0-

w>
*l
iA

f
tf

e?
l ^
O

_j i
VJ UJ

[2 5 "*
^
c.
05 A ** f

fu

^^

o r* *
C1

1 U UJ

r>
Of

r. r ri
UJ

<~. r c c^ i-i

T^J

afi PJ
i i

IM
n

-"

a.

LO
t. *
NB|

t
~fl

_
l

* y 1-^

i-

en

Kl . L

k. ** -! _j
*A 0

T
U

X _l Ifl

r\

Ol
Kl

^
4-\J

on
^4

^ i
A J> ^ O f*. * lA 9 ^
^

O ^

' ^ ^ 7
M ro
-t

1/1 O

&n r"> -> ~+

nT u
J ^
A ^^ ^j

^. i_J

IA ^^ ^ d ] ^ II /

tk
^

^ o ci
ri _J

" '3 n ri a n
~ tl

|^

JF

n UJ

M ^ _J

\^
^ Z o

n( 1, tf
^i

^ r^ r. ^ -f 1 *^ I
W/ .1

-* ^. r LJ nn

i i
1/1 a.

tn ^\ ^ r uj n
.
ts* ui in

o ^

*^

_j

jr

-.

Ul ~

rv

>4

O f* O VIII-APP-60t

^MKiMPO*oinraoi^*n^N^NiK**OK>nnror^*oMfO

poonKiroKtroPOrorofOfOfO

ooc arsoc rtoonoc-oct-c oroc cracior crc ocncrooot-otrc_.r~i rittc.c oc*ct c r.oc r noac >i>r>-o*c>f>>f><?<*^r>*>^ft>n*o*t*c>o*rt<>r>r>c>^r>c>c>r>rKr*r>oof><^ cccccrcror cn(Tfi><ron(r>tf>en(cenor.<r)CDcncncc<rt(r cooccrcron cocccnaOGncncpcooDoQcncrancr>ener>cr oner cnaicDcncrcna^crcnarercccocncncrcDaDcnan
^

im ir*rvirurvir\.r\jrjr\j(\irvjr\!<S(rjrNjrMcsirvirjr*o^i\irjrgr\i<Njrxjr\jrvtr\,cvf^^ io r PO i*> KI ri io >*> ro r*> ro M-n f*>-o fo r<1 M-o r* m r*> w *> to rrr*r>r r ooc-c^c- ooc r eroaf->e:je<cic:r.ocicrr cetDcoacoccO'XjaD CDff>ao 50 coac 000001000007 coco 00000000accocoeocoenaocoajrocococooo0000000000

xl os
rt * r

>,S3

r*n

c "-ric-i .d

32

^ tm 3 O

">i n i n r n rt i

in

n * n n - n o n j * t nn

* * r c f ^ r r c r - r r - r r r r r t c ^ r ^ r c r r r r r r t r ^ t c r r ^ r r c c ^

c c r

cr rr <r*r c t i. r or r <
<rera. o->iranvffic . r~ ^ r~ r- r K. . r. r f
a j-a s- T -3 a-j-i ^ ^ro^r^

ru r- 1 CM f^ rv

rjrvir.tr*. r\

i i ' t c . ' T T f C ~ t i ' n_c r r t_t r r r t

re rr c 'j

t" nr r <CIL. r t c nr r-r c rsr r-i ot r

V A. AJ A* AJArf Arf

K oc ui

- .001

jr rr-iiji inrr-r e ^.O'"-M .u Oi i via t- t? aa a.u 41Ckffic^l

>mfo im/>-) *o

IX. PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT PLAN

A.

Harold Benson Systeirs Evaluation

NASA/ERDA SPS CONCEPT DEVELOPMENT AND EVALUATION PROGRAM PLAN 1977-1980

A joint plan has been developed between NASA and ERDA. The basic objectives of this plan are to develop sufficient understanding of the technical requirements, economic practicability, and social and environmental acceptability of the satellite power system concept to enable a preliminary program continuation decision to be made in calender year 1979 and a final decision to be made in calendar year 1980 to either continue with the program at a level of effort to be determined or to phase it out. The basic elements of this plan are studies relating to: (1). Systems Definition (2). Space Related Technology (3). Environmental Factors (4). Impact and Benefits (5). Comparative Evaluations. The major milestones, schedule, and funding levels of these activities are shown in figure IX-A-1. NASA will manage the Systems Definition and Space Related Technology Studies and ERDA will have responsibility of Environmental Factors, Impact and Benefits, and Comparative Evaluations Studies. At the Johnson Space Center, the Systems Definition Studies will be the primary funded activity in support of the Space Solar Power boncept. Additional activities will include transportation, operations, and selected environmental studies. It is recognized that a strong interaction is required with these studies as well as the studies primarily managed by ERDA and other elements of NASA. Figure IX-A-2 is an organizational structure of how JSC will manage Solar Power Satellite Concept Evaluation. Key individual contacts are identified within this organizational chart. The JSC milestones will duplicate the joint NASA/ERDA plan and precede the joint plan by several months. The following dates will be the milestones for the four major program elements. Preferred Concept(s) Selection Preliminary Program Recommendations Updated Program Recommendations Final Program Recommendations October 1978 May 1979 January 1980 June 1980

IX-A-1

CO CD CD
J

^ " " ^

^^^M J | .

to
LT>

ur
.^

CD
CD

LO
rH

en
i1

LO

cC Q I
1 "

I LU ^

CD =3 s:
1 ^*^ f

^ ^

^^

^fy

^tf^

^/^

^^

cn H_-|
^1 *

___. _ _ _ ^ . . _
sC Srv* CD
CD CD I C <C. ~Zi

CD OO LU

cu n> o

<C H- CD LU
-.

1 i CO

oo
^rw

oo
^rr

r-.
t-H
^^T"

en
^fr

UD
^^T

CM

t/J-

>-

cr:

CD

ii
hO
-H
^ff

CD
5^ ^^

i cu
CD

hx. p> LU

S sr =5
5Z <C z:
*^< Oc^ >^ 1 CD I

CM i 1
^^T

CD CM
^^T

LO

OO

oo
LO

^^T

^)O

trt-

UJ CD s: OS Oi CD cu cu <_>

~
CD
=C =3

^.
LU LU
0

rH 1 OO

s:
cr: cu
CD CD

^C LU
t LU <-j

LU co ca
1 1 1 III t

>-

Oi 1 LU OC CU 1
\

r^s.
-H

cx>
t-H

fv.
t-H

un

cr

t-H

x
LU

LU C_> LU LU 2T 1

</

tLp(

a:

CU C_> CO

ce: CD LU

<c ca CK:
LU
<L

CD

u.

CD IHI

<__) ^x

i oo ,ir~

/-.

oo s: Q. S
LU UJ 2S
tj ^ ^^ ^^

OO r1

fv.

CD
-

CM

t-H

=r
hO

00. S2T LU >-'CD LU OO t_> (Za

y^

CD
>

CD 1
,-x U_ CM

C_> i LU 1

(_> <C LU

aa oo

^i
f-__^

LU
f 3

LU ^

<c
1

LU 1

ca

s:
^^J

<C I

ii ^ ^3 ^ LU 1 Oi LU <C III LU CQ
y^

LU LU >
hH

ca
<C

LU OQ
1

CO

<c

co LU si Luca 1 =3
001
>-00

CO

LU

00

<CCD CU Z 00

ct: >~ cz* LUC c_>_i

2!

>CD ^J LU

2: CD ce:oo i oi

i G a:

CU 2: .

SI CDI C_>

^ <c DC: oo <c:e CUCD 1

fe

IX-A-2

2= uj ^ o ts:

CO a: o o <:

a: o:

: co
co i >- z:
CO >CO
i-H

CO ii

CO
>-

co

o oo
a. o

o co
CO

o tt

LU O . LU

O CO

CM

i
CO DCO CO

a: o a. co to >I

=3 CD

a:

CO

o. n:

I
<t

UJ h-

co

CO

CO >-

IX-A-3

IX. PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT PLAN B. TECHNOLOGY ADVANCEMENT PLAN 1980-1987

1. Technology Advancement Requirements L. E. Livingston Spacecraft Design Division Previous SPS studies have produced a wide variety of configurational approaches, but have had at least one conclusion in common: although the program appears feasible, substantial advances will be necessary in many technical areas before an SPS program can be initiated with a reasonable degree of confidence. As a follow-on to JSC 11568 (the "green book"), a three-month effort was initiated to establish (1) a comprehensive list of these critical technology areas and (2) a preliminary definition of an integrated technology advancement program, the purpose of which would be to resolve the critical technology issues to the extent necessary for a rational decision to initiate an SPS development program. The results of this effort have been reported as "Preliminary Assessment of Technology Advancement Requirements for Space Solar Power", March 1977 (JSC-12702), which should be consulted for details. The following is a summary of the report. For this technical problem tation decision. such questions as 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. study, "critical technology area" was defined as any that must be resolved prior to an SPS program implemenThe definition was intentionally broad and encompassed the following:

Feasibility of system and component design concepts Component performance and efficiency Component producibility in required quantities Properties of materials Understanding of natural phenomena Verification of analyses

Development of the SPS itself was not included in this definition. Where the state of the art was such that a problem was reasonably assured of solution during a normal development program, that problem was not considered a "critical technology area". However, the existence or anticipated existence of a solution to a problem did not rule out the inclusion in the program of other possible solutions offering significant potential improvements in weight, cost, etc.

IX-B-1

The general guidelines used in JSC-11568 were adopted for this study. In addition, the following guidelines were used: 1. Scenario B of the in-house study will be assumed (112 10-GW satellites placed in operation during the period 1995 to 2025). 2. Photovoltaic and thermal energy conversion systems will be given equal consideration. 3. The transportation system and depot functions of the construction base will not be considered. 4. The technology advancement program will span the period 1979 to 1987. Data to support an implementation decision for the technology advancement program must be available by December 1978. Data from this program to support an SPS program implementation decision must be available by December 1986. Critical technology areas have been identified for most of the subsystems and disciplines within the scope of this study. In a few cases, little or no work has been done because of shuttle support requirements. These include thermal energy conversion (brief discussion) and attitude control and antenna pointing (no discussion). It is planned that these omissions be remedied as soon as manpower becomes available. The critical areas identified during this study are listed in table IX-B-1 by discipline. In several cases, a similar or identical problem was mentioned in connection with more than one discipline. These duplications or partial duplications are cross-referenced in the table. The listing within each discipline follows the order of the discussions in the detailed report and does not necessarily reflect any ranking in terms of importance, criticality, etc. The test programs proposed to resolve these problems are summarized in schedule form in figure IX-B-1. As in table IX-B-1, the order follows that of the detailed report. The estimated cost of all proposed tests is summarized in figure IX-B-2 on an annual basis. Where more than one discipline proposed substantially identical tests, the lower cost estimate was omitted from the compilation; there were very few such duplications. In each case, the cost was assumed to be uniformly distributed over the schedule given for that test. Cost estimates could not be provided for thermal energy conversion, antenna pointing, and attitude control because of priority shuttle support commitments. All other test requirements are included.

IX-B-2

Figure IX-B-2 categorizes cost estimates in two ways. The first distinguishes between (1) ground tests, (2) flight tests of components and subsystems, and (3) integrated system flight tests, including those tests which would logically be incorporated into an integrated program, whether or not such incorporation was necessary to the individual test. The second categorization distinguishes between shuttle and construction base supported test activities. "Component and subsystem tests" is intended to encompass all tests not directly applicable to or appropriately included in an integrated systems test which is part of the technology advancement program. Specifically, it is taken here to include full-scale structural fabrication tests, the products of which would be of little use in a sub-scale systems test configuration. This item represents most of the cost in the construction base subsystem test category. The total of all cost estimates is $754 million. The two major contributors are construction (67%) and structures (19%), due primarily to the impracticality of ground testing and the limited validity of subscale construction operations. Note, however, that the solar cell development program proposes to make extensive use of other currently planned work for both terrestrial and space applications; otherwise, solar cell development costs could have been much higher. Thermal cycle conversion, for which estimates were not available, will require substantial efforts. Some part of the attitude control problem is included under structure, but not all of it. Hence, it is not unreasonable to anticipate a total cost of one billion dollars.

IX-B-3

TABLE IX-B-1 - CRITICAL TECHNOLOGY AREAS

Note: Where an identical or similar area was identified under more than one discipline, the other disciplines are crossreferenced in parentheses. A. Photovoltaic Energy Conversion
7

Solar cell blankets: Thermal cycling Electron/proton and ultraviolet radiation effects Fabrication techniques Solar concentrators (reflectors): (B, M) Radiation effects Micrometeoroid effects Electrical and mechanical performance of very large arrays High voltage/plasma interactions (M, N)

B. Thermal Energy Conversion Radiator fabrication techniques (T) Fluid-tight joints Thin-film concentrator materials (A, M) High-temperature heat exchanger materials Superconducting generators and power cables Leak detection and repair
C. Microwave System Analysis

Ionosphere power density limits (D) Microwave generator development (E) Phase control techniques (G) Slotted waveguide antenna designs (F, M) Rectenna development (H) D. Microwave System Transmission frequency Ionosphere power density limits (C) Heat dissipation from microwave generators and antenna (L) Transmitting antenna construction and operation Interfaces with transmitting antenna Microwave system-level problems Microwave effects on other areas IX-B-4

TABLE IX-B-1 - CRITICAL TECHNOLOGY AREAS (CONTINUED)

E. Microwave Generation (C) Efficiency Reliability Low noise Low weight Stability F. Antenna Subarrays Efficiency Power level effects Manufacturing techniques (C, M) G. Phase Control (C) Phase noise Interference rejection High-power phase stability Atmospheric phase perturbation Phase reference/control Phase control accuracy Fiber optics H. Microwave Reception (C) Collection efficiency RF-DC conversion efficiency Factors influencing rectenna size Low-cost rectenna elements Sensitivity to beam power density and grid loads Pilot beam interfaces Maintenance J. Distribution Grid Interface (No critical technology areas) K. Structural Design

Solar collector structure/attitude control interactions (Q) Antenna stiffness/pointing accuracy/attitude control interactions (P, Antenna subarray chassis/thermal control (L) Structural elements for space construction (T) Numerical characterization of SPS structural performance Similitude modeling for subscale testing Eclipse response (L) IX-B-5

TABLE IX-B-1 - CRITICAL TECHNOLOGY AREAS (CONTINUED) L. Thermal Control Microwave generator thermal design (D) MPTS thermal control (D, K) Thermal design of rotary joint Thermal control of power distribution system Transient response of structure during eclipse (K) M. Materials Availability of graphite for SPS construction Graphite composite lifetime Graphite composite cables Tension cable lifetime Application of vapor-deposited coatings in orbit Solar concentrator film lifetime (A, B) Thermal control surface lifetime Joining techniques and properties (T) Waveguide materials and fabrication techniques (C, F) Electrostatic charging phenomena (A, N) N. Power Distribution Thin sheet conductors Power bus insulation (A, M) Power switching System verification 0. Communications and Instrumentation (No critical technology areas) P. Antenna Pointing Control (K) (No data available) Q. Stabilization and Control (K) (No data available) R. Propulsion and Reaction Control MPD arc-jet thruster 100-cm ion thruster

IX-B-6

TABLE IX-B-1 - CRITICAL TECHNOLOGY AREAS (CONTINUED) S. Rotary Joint

Slip rings and brushes T. Orbital Construction Automatic fabrication of elemental truss (K, M) Assembly of elemental trusses into long truss (K) Large space radiator construction (B) Deployment and attachment of solar cell blankets Deployment and attachment of planar concentrator membrane Deployment and attachment of contoured concentrator membrane Space installation of power distribution cables Handling and berthing large modules Integrity verification of space-fabricated structures Assembly of jigs and fixtures for orbital construction Fabrication of large pressure vessel in orbit

IX-B-7

FIGURE IX-B-1 - TEST PROGRAM SCHEDULE SUMMARY CY |77'78!79180|81!82'831 84 85|86|87 A. PHOTOVOLTAIC ENERGY CONVERSION 1. Solar Blanket 1.1 Environmental Effects 1.2 Fabrication Techniques 2. Reflector/Concentrator 2.1 Environmental Effects 3. System Characteristics 3.1 Concept Performance Investigations (small flight arrays) 3.2 System Demo, (large arrays) 3.3 High Voltage/Plasma Interactions B. THERMAL ENERGY CONVERSION C. MICROWAVE SYSTEM ANALYSIS 1. Ionosphere Tests 2. Subsystem Development/Test 3. LEO-LEO Tests 4. GEO-Ground Tests D. MICROWAVE SYSTEM 1. Microwave Generation 2. Antenna Subarrays 3. Phase Control 4. Microwave Reception & Conversion E. MICROWAVE GENERATION 1. Klystron 2. Amplitron 3. Solid State Devices F. ANTENNA SUBARRAYS 1. Design and Efficiency Tests 2. Manufacturing Techniques 2.1 Ground 2.2 GEO Evaluation G. PHASE CONTROL 1. System Definition Study/Sim. 2. Hardware Design 3. Laboratory Feasibility 4. Space-Qual. Hdwe. Dev. (sub-scale) 5. Space-Qual. Components Envir. Test 6. Integ. Fit. System Feasibility Model 7. Flight System Test 8. Space Base Feasibility Sys. Devel.
IX-B-8

(Ijlo data available)

FIGURE IX-B-1 - TEST PROGRAM SCHEDULE SUMMARY (CONTINUED) CY I 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85',86 87 H. MICROWAVE RECEPTION & CONVERSION

1. Rectenna Studies 2. Rectenna Development 3. Rectenna Integration

J. DISTRIBUTION GRID INTERFACE K. STRUCTURAL DESIGN

T
(No requirements)

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5.

Solar Coll./Att. Cont. Interaction Antenna/Pointing/Att. Cont. Inter. Subarray Chassis/Thermal Control Structural Elements Structural Performance Analysis Similitude Modeling Eclipse Response Microwave Generator Microwave Antenna Rotary Joint Power Distribution Eclipse Response Graphite Availability Graphite Composite Lifetime Graphite Composite Cables Tension Tie Cables Vapor-Deposited Coatings Solar Reflector Films Thermal Control Surfaces Joining Techniques/Properties Waveguide Matl. & Fab. Techniques Electrostatic Charging Conductor Development Insulator Development Power Controllers Technology Breadboard Flight Demonstration

L. THERMAL CONTROL

M. MATERIALS

f- GROUND

m
n
' ^

s FLIGHT

iT^^^:^: i i i i .

N. POWER DISTRIBUTION

1
(No i (No i (No

/ ,

1 l_

0. COMMUNICATIONS/INSTRUMENTATION P. ANTENNA POINTING CONTROL Q. STABILIZATION AND CONTROL IX-B-9

rjeqgirementsi i ' , ' % data available) I i I ' data available)

FIGURE IX-B-1 - TEST PROGRAM SCHEDULE SUMMARY (CONTINUED) CY R. PROPULSION AND REACTION CONTROL 77!78179J80:81182,83184185, 86. 87

1. 2. 3. 4.

Model Thruster Research (MPD) Flight Performance Verification Thruster Scale-Up Flight Prototype Thruster

S. ROTARY JOINT

1. Concept Verification 2. Space Environment Exposure 3. Brush/Siipring Development

T. ORBITAL CONSTRUCTION

1. Automated Fabrication of Elemental Truss 2. Truss Element Assembly 3. Large Space Radiator 4. Deploy and Attach Solar Blankets 5. Deploy and Attach Planar Concentrators 6. Deploy and Attach Contoured Concentrator 7. Power Cable Installation 8. Handle/Berth Large Modules 9. Inspection & Non-Destructive Testing 10. On-orbit Assembly of Jigs and Fixtures 11. On-orbit Fabrication of Large Pressure Vessel

IX-B-10

Integrated
150

Construction Base
i !

Shuttle Construction Base

Component, subsystem
Ground

UJ
*/

100

UD O

co
O O

co

50

76

77

78

79 80

81

82 83

84

85 86

87

CALENDAR YEAR

FIGURE IX-B-2 - ESTIMATED ANNUAL COST OF TEST PROCEDURES

IX-B-11

R. H. Dietz Tracking and Communications Development Division

IX. PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT PLAN

B.

Tcchnoloyy Advancement Plan 1980-1987 2. Ground Activities

Microwave system testing, a scenario for ground testing of the SPS microwave system has been developed which expands on the work documented in JSC-12702, "Preliminary Assessment of Technology Advancement Requirements for Space Solar Power," dated March 1977, and discussed in the above sections. Groundrules established were: (1) System-level tests are required on the microwave system. (2) Ground tests will be performed in preference to space tests, where valid results can be obtained, recognizing that physical size will be a limiting factor. (3) Existing facilities will be used insofar as practical. (4) System tests will be phased to take advantage of the microwave component development tests, both from the standpoint of test results and equipment availability. With the above groundrules in mind, a group of ground tests have been formulated which are system-level tests of the MW system and which utilize, as much as possible, existing facilities. The following facilities have been considered: a. Anechoic Chamber - used for testing large antennas, and antennas on large objects. Antenna patterns, antenna efficiencies, and electromagnetic interference measurements can be made. The anechoic chamber is configured and designed as a modified flaredwaveguide horn of all metal construction with RF absorbing material on the inner surfaces. The chamber has a clear working height and width of 50 feet and an overall length of 150 feet. The electromagnetic shielding is a minimum of -100 dB from 10 KHz to 10,000 MHz. b. Antenna Test Range - used for making measurements of antenna radiation patterns. This facility is a combination ground-reflecting/free-space antenna range 1000 or 2000 feet long. The receiver/transmitter heights are 35 feet and 0-75 feet. It also consists of a heavy-duty 2-axis positioner capable of supporting test objects up to 20,000 pounds. All motions and data control or readout are performed remotely from a central control room. The frequency range covered by the facility is 200 MHz to 26,500 MHz. c. Microwave and Laser Laboratory - used for checking microwave systems, laser/electro-optical systems, component subsystems, and techniques. Complete evaluation of visible to infrared laser systems as

IX.B. 12

well as active and passive Ku-band systems can be conducted. A mechanically stable platform for very accurate laser transmitter and receiver work is provided together with a cylindrical vacuum tube 80m long by 4m in diameter. Temperature over the entire length of the tube may be controlled within 2F. d. Thermal-Vacuum Test Chamber A - used for manned and unmanned development and qualification testing of complete spacecraft or major system hardware in high-fidelity simulated thermal-vacuum space environments. The 19.8m diameter x 36.6m high stainless steel vacuum vessel provides a working volume within a 90K heat sink shroud of approximately 16.8m x 27.4m. After component development of SPS MW System laboratory models, such as the antenna subarray/waveguides, microwave generators, and the phase control system, early tests should be performed which integrate these elements into a portion or part of the MW system. Total integrated system performance should be determined to the maximum extent possible. A scenario of possible tests on the MW system is described below. Measurement of Subarray Efficiencies - antenna/subarray/waveguide efficiencies can be measured utilizing the antenna range and anechoic chamber. RF radiation would be at low power from a 10m x 10m subarray. Radiated energy would be collected through a cross-section of the solid angle extended by the MW beam. The phase control system would not be turned on. Optimum gap spacing between waveguides/subarray elements can be determined by adjusting waveguide spacing, and element spacing within the 10m x 10m subarray and making pattern/efficiency measurements. Power Beam/Phase Control Shielding - a critical area requiring early testing is the isolation between the relatively weak uplink phase control signal and the strong downlink power beam. Assuming for test purposes that phase control is to each MW generator; two MW generators, two conjugation circuits, and the ground phase control circuitry would be required. Spacing of each MW generator, together with its attendant conjugation circuits could be varied and system isolation measurements could be made. RF shielding between received and transmitted signals may be required as well as signal data processing schemes. Tests would be conducted in the anechoic chamber. Effectiveness of Phase Control System - using a 10m x 10m subarray and appropriate phase control drive signal ports, pattern measurements can be made which will determine effectiveness of the phase control system. These measurements would include peak gain, side lobe, depth of first null, side lobe smearing, phase stability and accuracy. Mechanical variations could be introduced into the subarray, and parametric variations of the phase control system could also be made. All measurements would be made with phase control drive signals radiating into the antenna subarray. IX.B.13

Antenna Pointing - Using a 10m x 10m subarray, appropriate phase control system, and antenna pointing system, antenna search, acquisition and tracking performance can be determined. The measurements would be made utilizing the anechoic chamber and antenna range and would include search and acquisition times, tendency for side-lobe acquisition and dynamic tracking capability. Mechanical Alignment - Tests of the mechanical alignment system (required for initial alignment and subsequent alignment checks of the subarray mounted on the antenna structure) would be made for aligning waveguide elements within the subarray for the above tests. The microwave and laser laboratory would be used for refining alignment techniques and for actual alignment checks on the test subarray elements/waveguides. Electromagnetic Interference - These tests would be accomplished in the anechoic chamber by testing the radiation characteristics of the microwave generators as integrated into the MW transmitting antenna. Harmonic and spurious noise content of the radiated spectrum would be checked as functions of voltage and current variations from the prime source. Frequency drift, RF amplitude variations and phase stability would also be checked together with isolation characteristics between the MW beam and the pointing and phase control systems. Thermal-Vacuum Operation - Dissipation efficiency of waste heat from the integrated antenna would be measured in the thermal-vacuum chamber. This would include dissipation capability of the microwave generator passive radiators as well as the subarray waveguides and structure. Simulated GEO/LEO thermal cycling would be introduced onto the 10m x 10m subarray. In addition to the thermal tests, another important area to be checked is the voltage breakdown characteristics of the microwave generators and subarray waveguides. Multipacting, corona discharge, and possibly plasma interactions would be checked. Environment in the immediate vicinity of the SPS transmitting antenna would be simulated to the maximum extent feasible. Other parametric measurements on the operating subarray would be made where advisable after further study. In addition to the above tests on the SPS MW System, power distribution tests of some degree may be able to be included. A general requirement, inherent in all the above tests with the microwave generators, is the additional prime power needed at the test facilities. This requirement could be met with either modifications to supplement prime power capability or by means of portable power units. The latter seems to be attractive from the cost and flexibility standpoints. Early ground tests will be required to aid in development of a data base for the SPS programmatic decision points. The above MW System tests are required to provide a data base in this area. Subsequent study will better define the ground tests as outlined above.

IX.B.14

IX. PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT PLAN B. TECHNOLOGY ADVANCEMENT PLAN 1980-1987

3. Flight Activities

Clarke Covington Spacecraft Design Division

The Technology Advancement Requirements Study (JSC-12702) identified critical technology areas and categorized the concomitant test requirements into ground tests, flight experiments (components and subsystems), and flight projects (integrated system flight tests requiring the interaction of two or more subsystems). The following sections present descriptions of flight experiments and flight projects necessary in the development program for an SPS, and an analysis of the scale factors involved in deriving meaningful test requirements for testing the SPS structure in low earth orbit. a. Flight Experiments Figure IX-B-3 typifies the range of experiments which require going into space for SPS technology advancement. The simpler end of the range involves "suitcase" or package-size experiments which can be flown along with other payloads and accomplished by the crew in the space environment. An example is space welding which is critical to the automated fabrication process. Ultrasonic welding techniques developed on the ground would be applied with development equipment to candidate structural materials in space with the test articles returned to the ground for evaluation. Experiments of this type would begin in 1980 in the early operational period of the shuttle. The GEO environment/materials experiment would use an Interim Upper Stage (IUS) to put a satellite in GEO to sense the SPS operational environmental parameters and telemeter them to the ground for verifying and improving analytical models. Environmental effects upon materials critical to the achievement of satellite design lifetime would be evaluated. Subsystem experiments would be beyond the component level and involve significant pieces of or entire subsystems. A pertinent example of a subsystem experiment is a test of an entire scaled antenna subarray where microwave energy transmission could be made to sensors extended out on the shuttle remote manipulator system (RMS). Operating in a space environment allows operational evaluation of power generator and antenna efficiencies, heat rejection, and transmission efficiency. Subsystem experiments would be required in the 1981-1984 period.

IX-B-15

CO

=c

21 ce: 2: UJ O D_

cr:

o or z: o
o
UJ

O CC ZC

I H-. CO

UJ

o.
X

CQ

oo
Q>I CO CQ X

LU Of.

oo
Q_ X

Q_ X

oo
LU t OO

oo
=2 oo
CQ

oo

IX-B-16

The Space Fabrication Experiment is the first flight test in the development of a new disciplinespace construction. An automated fabrication module (or "beam builder"), a rudimentary construction facility (or "jig"), and a construction crew (extra-vehicular orbiter crew) would operate together in this experiment. A test structure would be constructed for evaluation of the beam builder, construction processes and techniques, and would stay attached to the orbiter during the load tests. This experiment would be required in about 1982 and represents close to the upper limit in scope of single-shuttle flight experiments. The results of an initial in-house study of an automated space construction experiment are given in the following paragraphs on the next page.

IX-B-17

Automated Space Construction Experiment

J. C. Jones Spacecraft Design Division

In-house concept design studies have been made of a beam builder that is compatible with the orbiter, and a construction experiment that could be conducted using the orbiter as a construction base. The results of the study indicate that such an experiment could, in a cost effective manner, explore many of the fundamental issues and technical problems associated with construction in space. The study also indicates that the orbiter, from the configuration standpoint, is a remarkably versatile payload carrier and operational spacecraft. Beam Builder - The beam builder concept depicted in figure IX-B-4 continuously and automatically fabricates a triangular cross-section truss (dimensions on the order of 1.5 meters on the side) of practically any desired length, from strip material stored on reels. The strip material is processed and wound onto the reels as an earth-based operation, and the beam builder may be "reloaded" with material as often as desired. A likely material is graphite fiber reinforced thermoplastic (such as polysulfone), as is used in this design. The truss consists of three cap members (one at each corner of the triangle) plus side members which interconnect the caps to complete the truss. In operation, a cap is formed as follows. Strip material unwinds from the reel and travels through a heating module where it is heated by radiant electric heaters, for example, to its plastic, or forming, temperature (about 320C). Then it travels through a series of matched rollers which form it from a flat strip to a flanged, triangular shape. As it leaves the last of the forming rollers, it enters a cooling section where it is cooled to the "rigid" state (about 135C) by radiation to cold plates, for example. Now it is a finished cap, moving through the beam builder to be joined to the side members. The side members are fabricated as follows. Material is processed at earth-based facilities into a flat, patterned sheet, as indicated on the illustration, and wound onto a reel (three identical reels of material for the three sides). The material is unwound from the reel, heated in the same manner as the caps, and stiffening beads (the "beads" are not shown in the illustration) are formed into the crossmember portions by a press forming mechanism (which momentarily translates the forming dies to match the velocity of the strip material as it moves through the beam builder). The material is then cooled (radiation to cold plates) and is positioned onto the caps where it is joined by ultrasonic spot welders. (Ultrasonic vibration produces melting of the thermoplastic at the faying surface with subsequent fusion of the surfaces.) Precise coordination of the velocity of all members is required to fabricate a "straight" truss member and to avoid "buckling" of a cap member, for example, in case that cap is being driven through the forming rollers faster than the other caps.
IX-B-18

IX-B-19

A "closed-loop" type control system employing appropriate sensors, electronics and servo-mechanisms will be employed to control and coordinate the machine operations. The rate of fabrication may be relatively slow, by commercial standards, to reduce power demands and minimize the weight and size of the beam builder. A fabrication rate of about one and one-half meters per minute is considered to be appropriate. However, at this slow rate, the machine could fabricate a one kilometer long truss in less than 12 hours. The reel sizes indicated on the drawing are sufficient to fabricate a length of truss in excess of one kilometer, without reloading the beam builder. Figure IX-B-5 depicts, schematically, several process options that are representative of those that may be utilized by the beam builder to fabricate a truss beam. A primary objective of initial design studies of the beam builder will be to select the appropriate processes, considering the beam configuration to be fabricated, the material to be used for the beam, and the relative merits of the various fabrication processes. As indicated by the illustration, the cap material stock is likely to be strip which is stored on reels, either multiple reels supplying thin strips which are "laminated" or consolidated into a single, thicker, strip by the beam builder, or a single reel of strip material of the desired thickness. The choice will depend on the desired final thickness and material type and characteristics. For graphite fiber reinforced thermoplastic material, for example, a single reel is a likely choice. In this case, multiple strips of "pre-preg" tape - each with appropriate fiber orientation - are consolidated into a single composite strip on earth. Three possible cap-forming processes, as indicated, are "spiral tubeform", "roll-form", and "pultrusion". These basic processes are in regular commercial use today. The spiral tubeform process can form a tubular cap member of relatively large diameter from narrow strip by spirally winding the strip and continuously joining the overlapping edges. A fundamental problem with this process for use in the beam builder, however, is that the forming mechanism plus the material supply reel must rotate about the longitudinal axis of the tube. The roll-form process uses mating rollers to continuously bend the flat strip into shape as it passes between the rollers. Multiple rollers, arranged in series so as to form progressively in "stages" are used for complex shapes, each stage of rollers forming a portion of the final shape. Almost any shape, including a closed section such as a tube, can be roll formed. The pultrusion process uses dies (similar to extrusion dies) through which the flat strip is "pulled" to form the shape. The pultrusion process is most appropriate for thermosetting plastic where heated forming dies produce the formed shape and supply heat to provide the final thermal "cure" of the material. IX-B-20

2 : o o. o
CO CO

CO

o C
a.

a: LU o

CO

I
LO CO

x i
LU

Z3 CD

o:

IX-B-21

The side members of the truss beam (cross members and diagonals) may also be formed from strip, using the roll-form or pultrusion process. A continuously formed section would be periodically cut to the appropriate member length to span between the caps, and a mechanism would position each member for fastening to the caps. Side members could also be preformed on earth and stored in "clips", from which they would be removed sequentially and assembled into the truss beam by automated mechanisms. The shape of the pre-forms would be selected so that they would stack together, as indicated, in a dense package. The side members (cross members and diagonals) could be integrated in the form of a pre-cut sheet as shown in the illustration. Instead of cutting from a large sheet, the material could be fabricated in the pattern shown, using automated composite material lay-up machinery similar to that currently used for aircraft structure. Then, during beam builder operation, the sheet is unrolled from its supply reel, stiffening beads or flanges are formed in the appropriate members, and the sheet is joined to the caps. An entirely different process from those previously described for fabrication of truss side members involves spirally wrapping tape around the caps from six reels, as indicated. The tape would be a thermosetting composite which would be designed to thermally cure to a curved cross section shape as indicated, thus being capable of compression loading. Tension diagonals (X-members) may simply be cables or wires fed from supply reels in the spiral wrap manner, or the reels may be fixed and additional mechanisms employed to install the wires in a "back and forth" action between compression cross members. For fastening the side members to the caps, three appropriate techniques are bonding, welding, and punch tab. The punch tab technique would only be considered for metals, such as aluminum, and involves shearing a small tab from the pieces to be joined and bending it over to form a joint somewhat like a hollow rivet. Welding would likely be resistance spot welding for metals and ultrasonic spot welding for thermoplastics. Bonding would involve the application of a tape, activated by heat, between the faying surfaces to be joined. The use of rivets or bolts is not contemplated because of the problem of debris from punched or drilled holes. Construction Experiment - The construction experiment, utilizing the shuttle as the launch vehicle and the construction base, has the basic objective of initiating development of the technology of construction in space of large, low density structural systems. The basic approach is to construct a large structural assembly, or platform, in orbit, from strip stock material. A single shuttle mission is adequate, requiring a four-man crew and about seven days mission duration. Certain basic engineering tests would be performed on the structure, and appropriate scientific experiment equipment could be added as a secondary mission benefit. A second shuttle mission could revisit the platform and perform installation of additional equipment. IX-B-22

Figure IX-B-6 indicates a possible structural platform configuration, and figure IX-B-7 indicates the basic beam configuration that would be fabricated by the beam builder. The launch configuration with the structure fabrication system installed in the orbiter is shown in figure IX-B-8. This figure shows that the fabrication system is deployed 90 for operation in orbit. The structure fabrication system consists primarily of an assembly jig, a beam builder (previously described), and a beam builder positioning mechanism. Figure IX-B-9 illustrates the system in operation. The beam builder is positioned to fabricate, in sequence, four longitudinal truss members, each 1.5 meters wide and about 200 meters long, and each being fabricated "in situ", such that when completed and cut off from the beam builder, the assembly jig will grip the beams through a system of rollers, maintaining their relative positions. In the illustration of figure IX-B-9, the beam builder has just commenced fabrication of the fourth longitudinal. By repositioning the beam builder to fabricate the longitudinals in their proper relative positions, the problem of repositioning the long members, with their very high mass moments of inertia about a transverse axis plus their flexibility, is avoided. In the illustration of figure IX-B-10, the beam builder is in position to fabricate the 10.5 meter long cross members, in situ, with the first cross member nearing completion. When the first cross member is completed, it will be cut off from the beam builder and gripped by the assembly jig rollers. Crewmen will then exit from the orbiter through its airlock and attach the cross member to the longitudinals by using handheld ultrasonic welders to join two caps of the triangular cross member truss to the caps of each longitudinal where they cross (four places at each longitudinal). After the first cross member is attached, the structural assembly will be moved through the jig by driving appropriate rollers to a position for installation of another cross member about 20 meters from the first. This operation is repeated until nine cross members are installed, to complete the structural platform (about 10.5 meters wide by 200 meters long). The crew would be utilized (in extravehicular activities) to attach the cross members, inspect the fabrication process close-up, and aid in assembly jig set-up. Complete automation could be achieved. However, the value of using the crew in the fabrication operations for maximum cost effectiveness is an important part of the experiment. A summary of the sequence of fabrication of the structural platform, shown schematically in figure IX-B-11, is as follows. The beam builder is first positioned relative to the assembly jig as shown in the left hand view by a positioning mechanism on the jig. It fabricates the first longitudinal beam, to the proper length, and stops operation. The beam is "gripped11 by rollers on the assembly jig and the beam builder cuts off the longitudinal beam. Then the beam builder is moved along a track on the side of the assembly jig until it is in position to fabricate the second longitudinal, adjacent and parallel to the first longitudinal, in1 the same operational manner. This sequence is repeated until the fourth longitudinal is completed. IX-B-23

IX-B-24

O O

03

CO X

CD

IX-B-25

cr> o
X

UD

oc
CD ii

u,
o
o

z.

<t _l
CO CO X II UJ CD

IX-B-26

i/t

IX-B-27

o:
UJ CO

o o o

CO CO

=c
CO

i a:

CJ

CO

cs
K CM

UJ CD

o
O u ft*
II | C
^

UJ

cr
UJ

IP

oo

at u

<c o
IH -

=c

cs: CQ

^^

a:
UJ
Q.

1 l

',==

1
O

OO

u
CD I-

QQ

I X

t5 ^ 3

to
/) Q

u
IX-B-29

< V7 u. 5

The beam builder is then rotated into the position to fabricate the first cross member. After it is completed, the cross member is joined to the longitudinals by an orbiter crewman using a portable ultrasonic spotwelder (16 places - where the cross member and longitudinal beam cap members cross each other). The partially constructed platform is then driven "across" the assembly jig by the retaining rollers until the longitudinals are in position relative to the beam builder for fabrication and attachment of the second cross member in the same manner as the first. These events are repeated until installation of the last cross member, which completes the construction of the platform. After completion of the platform, various engineering tests and experiments would be performed while it is attached to the orbiter, and a myriad of subsequent mission options are possible. The platform would, finally, be released from the jig and the jig and beam builder returned to earth in the orbiter. Figure IX-B-12 shows a concept for fittings to join the longitudinals and cross members of the structural platform. An identical fitting is attached to the cross member and the longitudinal where the caps of each cross at 90, These fittings might be installed by ultrasonic welding during fabrication of the beams, either automatically by the beam builder or manually by EVA crewmen. Then crewmen would join the fittings using handheld ultrasonic welders. The fittings provide appropriate load introduction and distribution. Instead of fittings, it may be adequate to simply weld the caps together where they cross. Figure IX-B-13 illustrates the installation of subsystems to the structural platform. Modularized equipment assemblies would be carried in the orbiter payload bay and installed onto the platform, using the orbiter's remote manipulator system (RMS) to move the equipment assemblies into position, and an orbiter crewman to make the structural and electrical connections. Representative subsystems include reaction control (RCS), solar cells and batteries, communications equipment, experiment equipment and data recorders. Development of the techniques and design features necessary for equipment installation in space is an important objective of the construction experiment. Figure IX-B-14 indicates possible significant mission events superimposed on a plot of platform altitude versus time resulting from normal orbital decay (without application of orbit-keeping propulsion). Because of its high drag area relative to its mass, the platform should be constructed at an orbital altitude of approximately 550 kilometers (300 nm) to insure that it has adequate orbital lifetime for reasonable utilization of its experiment potentialities. IX-B-30

co
CO

o -D
a: o
CO UJ >

i a:

o.
LU CJ

2 : o o I
CM CD X UJ 01
CD

IX-B-31

<C
CO

co
CO CO

co
CO

co I

IX-B-32


D-

o
II

to

I
CQ

I X

a:
Z3 CO

O 35

I
O O O

e<4

<Z
IX-B-33

The platform can be constructed, and important structural engineering tests can be performed, utilizing a single shuttle flight of seven days duration. The platform would be separated from the orbiter at the end of the seven days and the orbiter returned to earth. Subsequently, the platform would be tracked by radar from earth to determine its actual orbital decay rate. The platform would be in a free-drift attitude mode after separation from the orbiter, but would tend to align itself along a radius toward the earth's center due to gravity gradient forces. A second shuttle flight is contemplated about six weeks later, wherein the platform is reattached to the assembly jig that was used to construct it on the first flight. The development of the technique and equipment to "dock" the orbiter to the large, lightweight structural platform is an important mission objective of the second flight - being a requirement for full utilization of space construction. A wide range of subsequent accomplishments are possible on the second flight. For example, solar cell "blankets" could be installed on the platform to create a space solar power test bed capable of producing on the order of 300 kilowatts of electrical power from the sun. Reaction control systems could be added, to investigate the technology of attitude control and propulsion of large, relatively flexible structural assemblies. Special equipment could be installed to perform experiments utilizing the unique, large size of the platform, and its rapid orbital decay rate. The mission profile indicates two such experimental possibilities, the geodynamics and atmospheric composition experiments. For the geodynamics experiment, the platform's orbital parameters are very accurately tracked from the ground and a satellite in synchronous orbit, resulting in more accurate knowledge of the earth's mass distribution. For the atmospheric composition experiment, a laser emitter and reflector are installed at opposite ends of the platform and the platform is set into rotation by the reaction control system. During the subsequent orbital decay period, the laser device obtains data that allows determination of the atmospheric composition from that initial altitude until entry into the lower atmosphere. During atmospheric entry, the platform will be entirely "burned", constituting no hazard to the earth's surface.

IX-B-34

IX. PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT PLAN B. TECHNOLOGY ADVANCEMENT PLAN 1980-1987

3. Flight Activities

Clarke Covington Spacecraft Design Division

b. Flight Projects - In the SPS technology advancement program, each of the development objectives would be met with the simplest test format which could satisfy that test objective. As much testing as possible would be done on the ground, with only those experiments requiring the unique environment of space being forced to orbit for accomplishment. Some of the requirements for space experiments need the operation of two or more subsystem elements, and initial evaluation indicates that all of these experiment requirements can be satisfied by grouping them conceptually into three flight projects which would use the shuttle in the 1984-1987 time frame. Figure IX-B-15 shows these three flight project concepts which have been identified to satisfy the system development requirements of a reference 1995 operational SPS system. The first is a Microwave Energy Transmission Test Project which can satisfy experiment and development objectives in the following four primary areas: 1) Microwave Power Transmission System Investigation of thermal effects on the transmitting antenna t Test and evaluation of phase control system o Power transmission efficiency 2) Photovoltaic Power Generation High voltage DC utilization and switching Investigation of high-voltage power loss to surrounding plasma 3) System Construction Test and Evaluation Automated fabrication process 0 Large element assembly c Large structures deployment 4) Space Structures o Investigate ultra-lightweight large structures t Investigate structure-control system interaction

IX-B-35

o
UJ

-3 O

o: o.

in
CO X
H-t

UJ Q

ra

CI3

In this flight project concept, a large power module capable of generating D.C. power in the 200-500 range supplies electrical power across a rotating interface joint to a test transmitting antenna made up of several 3m x 3m subarrays. The antenna could be operated in two separate test configurations for thermal and phase control tests. The center subarray would contain four Klystron microwave power generators, and the other surrounding subarrays would each have one. Operating the four center Klystrons at full power and the others near half-power would approximate the thermal conditions on an operational 1-Km diameter antenna. Power would be transmitted to a space test rectenna which could be a structural frame with rectenna element sensors mounted at strategic points and a phase control transmitter in the center. Transmission would be made at a range of about 500m for near-field tests and 16.5-Km for farfield tests, as shown in figure IX-B-16. The objective of the microwave transmission tests are oriented toward a total microwave system performance evaluation using suitable test instrumentation, not the collection of a large amount of the transmitted power. The system operation could be modified slightly to provide intermittent power to the ground for a few minutes each orbit where a 300m-diameter rectenna could collect about 500 W peak from 300 nautical miles. As shown in figure IX-B-17, the large power module could be constructed in space using the beam builder and techniques developed in the space fabrication experiment utilizing the shuttle as a construction base. Antenna subarrays would be assembled on-orbit into the test antenna configuration using the shuttle RMS. The assembly jig is left attached to the power module during construction, and it contains all the necessary subsystems for orbital operations of the power generating system, and a docking or berthing system to allow subsequent shuttle return flights. The space rectenna can be deployed from the orbiter in orbit using a structure specially designed for folding into the payload bay in highdensity form. Construction of the microwave test project could be accomplished within four shuttle flights and would begin about 1984 with tests occuring in 1985. After completion of the project objectives, the large power module would be placed into service as a space utility power system for other objectives and applications. The second flight project is a Phase Control/Ionosphere Test which is needed to evaluate the MPTS phase control system from GEO and involves the placement of a deployable crossed-array transmitting antenna and a power supply in GEO using the shuttle and the IDS orbital transfer vehicle. Phase control evaluation tests would be performed at low power levels using high-gain receiving antennas on the ground. The tests would also be run in conjunction with ionosphere heating tests using the Arecibo (or Platville) facility in order to investigate phase control signal/ ionosphere interaction. The Arecibo ionosphere test is described in detail in Section VII-A-2. These tests would be scheduled in the 1986-87 time period and would probably be preceded by LEO-to-LEO transmission tests using the same crossed-array configuration. IX-B-37

O LU

3 a:
D_

CO

cr:
o
cc
=C c;

oo to

oo

OL

oi

<c.

O O LU OO Q_

cx:

CJ

vo i
CO X

CQ Ci O

IX-B-38

LU -D O

o
O.

cc.

o
IH -

CO

err LU

o ce o

I X

CQ

LU

IX-B-39

r
The third project, the Scaled Integrated System Flight Project, accomplishes the final proof-of-construction concept test using the same construction facility concepts and construction processes and techniques planned for a full-scale operational SPS. Whereas previous construction experiments and projects utilized the orbiter as a construction base and extra-vehicular crewmen in the fabrication process, this flight project uses the shuttle as a logistics vehicle only and requires a construction facility and automated fabrication equipment. The resulting scaled-SPS test article provides an end-to-end operational test of the construction and operation of a space power system and provides the design verification and confidence to proceed to a GEO commercial demonstrator or operational SPS. The scope of this flight project is dependent largely on subsequent development planning, but would likely provide peak intermittent power in the 2 to 10 megawatt range to a ground rectenna from low earth orbit. Sections IX-B-S-b-(l) and (2) detail some of the alternative approaches to the microwave testing currently under study.

IX-B-40

G. D. Arndt Avionics Systems Engineering Division

b. Flight Projects (1) Concept for LEO-to-LEO Microwave System Tests A low-earth orbit (LEO) to LEO test program for the 1983-1985 time period could provide end-to-end testing of the microwave hardware subsystems-from a pilot beam transmitter to the phased array antenna with the resulting power beam focused upon abeam mapping rectenna. These tests could verify the retrodirective phased array concept and investigate thermal effects within the transmit array. After the microwave subsystems have been developed and tested on the ground, end-to-end system tests are needed. The performance of the power tubes in a space environment at temperatures up to 485K need to be measured. The tubes operating in the basic subarray geometry, with the resulting microwave beam measured in the far-field can determine the phase stability of the total array configuration. Losses and the resulting efficiencies of the subsystems can be monitored. The transmission path from LEO-to-LEO, rather than LEO-to-ground, provides a better representation of the dynamics of a full SPS system operating from GEO-to-ground. The intent of the LEO-LEO test program is not to demonstrate a large transfer of microwave power, but rather to test and evaluate the overall system performance. Objectives: The objectives of the LEO-LEO microwave tests are: (1) Thermal Effects Within Antenna Phase control degradations due to thermal distortion of waveguides and subarray structure. (a) thermal bowing of unsupported waveguides (b) expansions within the reference phase distribution system from the center subarray element Power tube operation and cooling

(2) Phase Control End-to-end verification tests for a retrodirective phased array t Verify achievable beam transfer efficiency by beam mapping in near field (300 meters) Antenna performance versus phase errors and noise correlation regions by beam mapping in far-fields (16 - 32 Km) 0 Evaluate RFI Effects

IX.B.41

Approach Summary; This test program involves the construction of a large solar array, transmit array, and beam mapping satellite in low-earth orbit using the shuttle for transportation. One possible configuration has a 4,000m2 solar array, a transmit array of 189m2 consisting of 21 - 3m X 3m subarrays fed by klystrons or 128m^ (64-lm X 2m) of subarrays fed by amplitrons, and a large open-face-satellite with a 360 meter diameter. This satellite has the pilot-beam transmitter and power sensors to measure the microwave beam pattern. It is co-planar with the solar array/transmit array system and separated by 16,500 meters to be in the far-field. The total RF power radiated from this particular configuration is about 370 Kw. It is anticipated that 4-5 shuttle flights would be needed to construct the entire system, with a time schedule of 1983-1985. The data from this program would be used in defining the configurations for later testing in geosynchronous orbit. A diagram of a possible configuration for the LEO-LEO test is shown in figure IX-B-18 The microwave antenna as shown in figure IX-B-19 has two operational configurations: one for thermal tests and the other for phase control tests. This particular antenna has klystrons for the power tubes; a similar antenna implemented with amplitrons is shown in figure IX-B-20. The operational sequence for microwave testing with the klystron tubes is as follows: Thermal Tests 9m X 9m antenna (9 subarrays) One klystron for each outer subarray: four klystrons in center subarray for maximum heating Radiated RF power - 368 KW

Phase Control/Beam Mapping Tests 3m X 45m antenna (15 subarrays) Each subarray has individual phase control system One klystron per subarray - 23 KW output each Radiated RF power - 345 KW

Range - Antenna to Rectenna Co-planar orbits 16 - 32 KM separation Measurements of 4 - 7 beam sidelobes

A similar test plan could be used with the amplitron tubes.

IX.B.42

>- I

^ V
/ /
LA O - O OO N"> CXI

'

1,
' ' . '

r^ *-i, rT" ^. i

1 cecsi ^~

-.

*'

I/ o ag
,

r ^

/ i

H 1 CZ3 <_> CD -3-

cc

Qi O

<C 0
00

a UJ

1 'I
IX.B.43 .wpBODUCiBtLlTY OF THB OR1GWAI PAGE IS POOR

0) 4J

ctf c

u_
.-.

CD
GO UJ

6 en
H

LT\

cn
O 0

cfl M
0) &

tn

O H
PL,

G O

W CO

1
I

CD y <C CD C_>

or

(1)

> x; to rJ o eo
CJ -H H W S P

>-

>-. <c
U_ S: ZE CL.

M c
I

cn ^i
PQ

=r 0
QtZ.

GO UJ

<=T

x'
01 VJ

oa CD
GO LU CD 0 GO

IX.B.44

Figure IX-B-20

-Transmitting Antenna Using Amplitrons

SOLAR ARRAY

Amplitron

Thermal Test Configuration

Phase Control Test Configuration

BE
IX.B.45

r
SYSTEM PARAMETERS

1.

Solar array characteristics: For sizing the microwave system, it is assumed that a shuttle construction base could build an entire solar array (structure, solar cell blankets, etc) with a 4000m2 area usjng one shuttle flight. The array shape is approximately 20 meters X 200 meters. p The DC power generated by the 4000meter array is calculated assuming a 9.6% energy conversion efficiency refered to AMO (air mass zero) with a flux density of 1353 w/m2; thus, the DC power generated2 per meter2 of solar cell blanket is calculated to 2 be 130 watts/m . Thus the total DC power generated by the 4000 m solar array is 520 KW.

2.

Microwave system efficiencies and power radiation: The efficiencies within the experimental microwave system are assumed to be the same as for a full-scale SPS system. Those efficiencies pertinent to the test-configuration are solar array DC power distribution antenna phase waveguide DC-RF DC power control losses power distribution losses conversion .96 X .99 X .87

Efficiency = .92 X .98 X X .97 = .7158 mechanical alignment

PRF = PDC

The total available RF power within the antenna is

X Eff = (.7158) (520) = 372 KW
2

3.

Antenna characteristics using klystrons: The antenna shall operate at the minimum power density (2.6 KW/m ) and the maximum density (20.9 KW/m2) as given for a representative full-scale SPS system (JSC report; #11442, Vol. II, pp IV.A.213). It is assumed that the high power (45-50KW) klystron tubes can operate at power levels reduced to about 23 KW while maintaining the full 87% DC-RF conversion efficiency. Since the total RF power available in the antenna is limited to 372 KW and the number of subarrays should be maximized for the phase control tests, the minimum power density subarrays will have only one klystron. The

IX.B. 46

subarray size is therefore Subarray area = 23 KW

2.6 KW/m
2

= 8.8 m

This subarray size must be compatible with one klystron feeding the .1225 meter slotted waveguides for the minimum density configuration and also be able to accommodate a maximum density configuration (where four 46 KW klystrons feed the subarray). Representative subarray layouts for these minimum and maximum density conditions are given in reference 1. The dimension for the subarrays equipped with klystrons is 2.94 m X 3.0 m. The power radiated for the maximum density configuration is
Pr radiated = 8.8 m2 X 20.9 KW/m2 = 184 KW RF which is provided by four 46 KW klystrons. These tubes have a 1.74 meter diameter passive thermal radiator attached on the backside of the subarray. The 2.94m X 3.0m subarray does have sufficient area to accommodate the four radiators.

For these phase control tests, the maximum density subarray will operate at 1/8 of its total power. Three of the four klystrons will be switched off; the fourth klystron will operate at 23 KW and will feed the entire subarray structure. The uplink pilot beam phasing signal is received through the radiated slotted waveguides and then isolated by means of a diplexer and narrowband filter from the downlink power beam. The thermal distortion tests will operate in a configuration with the maximum density subarray surrounded by eight minimum density subarrays. The phase control tests will operate all subarrays at a minimum power density to maximize the number of phase control elements, i.e., subarrays. These configurations are shown in figure IX-B-19. The total RF power radiated for the thermal distortation tests is center subarray
TOTAL =
184 KW

8 low-density subarrays
8 (23 KW/subarrayJ. = 368 KW

Likewise the total RF power radiated for the phase control tests is
TOTAL =

23 KW/subarray X 15 subarrays - 345 KW

IX.B.47

The mechanical alignment requirement for the 3 meter subarrays is determine by the 3% loss allotted for off-axis gain. This loss corresponds to a + 13 minute tilt for each subarray. The antenna can be constructed on the ground with the power tubes attached to the structure and waveguides. It is then transported to low-earth orbit in one shuttle flight. One possible transport configuration is to divide the antenna
M I 2 |3
|7 18

I 41 5 |6
10

|9|

1 n

12

13 1 14 1 15] I 20 I 21 j 15 ft

L16 | 17 I 18 1119

60 ft

Transportation Configuration for Antenna with Klystrons into five sections to be stowed in the 15 X 60 payload bay. It may be necessary to detach the three klystrons in subarrays 1, 2, and 3 to be compatible with the payload bay. 4. Antenna characteristics using amplitrons: The subarray size for the amplitron-configured antenna has more constraints, due to differences in the feedguides between the tubes and the radiating antenna and to the differences in output power levels, i.e., 5 KW of radiating power and 1.25 KW of drive power for the next amplitron tube. The subarray size is determined by the maximu-density subarray configuration, used in the thermal distortion tests. For the maximum density of 20.9 KW/m^. the 5 KW of output power is radiated out through a .23 m2 area of slotted waveguides. For a .1225 meter waveguide width, the corresponding length is 1.92 meters. Since the passive thermal radiators have a diameter of 48cm (reference 2), there will be a four-waveguide width under each 48cm thermal radiator. The subarray should therefore go in multiples of four amplitrons lengthwise. The reference subarray configuration using 5 KW amplitrons is .98 meter X 1.92 meters (see reference 1 for details). There are 8 amplitrons being driven in cascade for the maximum density subarrays. There would be a cluster of four maximum density subarrays surrounded by twelve minimum density subarrays for the thermal distortion tests. For the phase control tests the four maximum

IX.B.48

density subarrays could be reconfigured for minimum density by switching off seven of the amplitrons. The one remaining tube then feeds the entire subarray. The full 6.25 KW of RF power from the tube will be radiated through the slotted waveguides. Since the minimum density subarray has a 1.25 KW driver for each amplitron, there will be no cascading of the tubes. The power density for this subarray is
6.25 KW density = 1.92m X .98m

=3.32 KW/m

which is slightly larger than the minimum density of 2.6KW/m2 associated with the full SPS system. The antenna configuration for the thermal distortion and phase control tests is shown in figure IX.B.2-3. The total RF power radiated for the thermal distortion tests is 4 center subarrays TOTAL = 4 8 Amp X 5 KW/Amp + 1.25 KW (driver)
12 low-density subarrays + 12 5 KW/Amp + 1.25 KW (driver)l
= 165 KW + 75 KW = 240 KW

The total RF power radiated for the phase control tests is

P

TOTAL

= 6

- 25 KW/subarray X 56 subarrays = 350 KW

The mechanical alignment for the 1.92 meter subarrays is determined by the 3% loss in off-axis gain, which corresponds to a + 20.4 minute tilt for each subarray. The entire microwave antenna can be constructed on the ground and transported into orbit with one shuttle flight. One possible packing configuration compatible with the 15 feet by 60 feet shuttle pay1oad bay is as shown:

77T-

t* * " f

" .c

r
F \
\ \
_

-Transportation Configuration for Antenna with IX.B..49

Amplitrons

5. Receiving Satellites for Mapping Microwave Beam: A separate satellite is used to provide the pilot signal to the transmit array and to map the resulting microwave beam. This mapping satellite, which has the same orbit plane as the transmit array, is located in the far-field of the antenna. This satellite can be a long, narrow boom with receiving elements at discrete increments for measuring the power levels or any combination of long booms attached together.
For the microwave antenna using klystrons where the maximum length is 45 meters (see figure IX-B-19 )> the Fresnel region distance is D2/A = (45)2/.1225, or 16,500 meters.

The corresponding null points in the antenna pattern in the Fresnel region is X/D radians, or .1225 X 57.3 = .156 degrees from boresight.
45

The radial distance from boresight to the first null, at a range of 16,500 meters from the antenna is, to the first approximation, .1225 radial distance = range X 6 null = 16,500m X 45 = 45 meters The antenna pattern to be mapped by the satellite is

-/So

-'35

-*

-^ BORESIGHT J f j u t ^ t g * Beam Pattern for Antenna with Klystrons

/35

I8o

By having a long-boomed antenna with a pilot Receiving Elements

/v

\/x

Pilot Beam Transmitter

-180m

Beam Mapping Satellite for both the Klystron and Amplitron-configured Antenna beam transmitter located at the center, the first three sidelobes can be mapped on both sides of boresight simultaneously. Activating a similar pilot beam transmitter at either end of the boom allows seven sidelobes to be mapped. This mapping should be sufficient IX.B.50

for ascertaining the performance of the phase control system. For the antenna using amplitrons where the maximum length is 56 meters (see figure IX-B-20 ), the Fresnel distance is (56)<V-1225 25,600 meters. The antenna pattern null point is .1225 X 57.3 56 = .125 degrees from boresight, and a corresponding distance of 25.600 X .1225 = 56 meters. The antenna pattern at a range of 56 25,600 meters is as shown:

BORESIGHT **"* Beam Pattern for Antenna with Amplitrons The beam-mapping satellite shown in figure 12 will be able to measure a maximum of five sidelobes on either side of the main beam. This satellite could be a conventional parabolic antenna with a diameter of 300 meters or greater, rather than a long boom. The microwave beam will be fan-shaped, with the narrow dimension perpendicular to the long axis of the transmit antenna. The additional receiving antenna area can provide information on the broadside of the beam. 6. Sizing Summary In reviewing how the sizing of this LEO test article evolved, the constraints included: (1) for a klystron-configured antenna, operate at least one subarray at the maximum power density of 20.9 KW/m2 (2) operate simultaneously, minimum-density subarrays 2.6 KW/m2) surrounding the single maximum density array, and 3) assume the 46 KW klystron could still operate at maximum efficiency at the half-rated power level (23 KW). Therefore the subarray size is fixed at 8.8m2; the minimum density subarrays each radiate 23 KW of RF power; and the maximum density subarray radiates 184 KW, which is four fully-rated klystrons. The total RF radiated power is 368 KW for the thermal tests. The phase-control tests maximize the number of individuallycontrolled subarrays in one dimension (direction). This allows maximum focusing of the beam at the space rectenna thereby providing the best sensitivity to phase errors and perturbations. The maximum number of subarrays should be an odd number to keep the antenna symmetrical with respect to the central subarray. Thus 15 minimum density subarrays radiating a total of 345 KW power is used for the phase control tests. IX.B.51

A similar antenna equipped with ampHtrons was then designed to be compatible with the DC power available from the same solar array. If it is desired to reduce the size and power of the LEO solar array and microwave system, a smaller klystron tube is needed. The output power rating of the klystron tube is the single most Important sizing parameter, assuming the testing constraints given previously still apply.

IX.B.52

IX. PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT PLAN B. TECHNOLOGY ADVANCEMENT PLAN 1980-1987 3. Flight Activities Louis Leopold

Tracking & Communications Development Division b. Flight Projects (2) Alternative Concepts for Microwave Space Tests - The following microwave test descriptions are alternative concepts for accomplishing space testing of the microwave system. (a) Low Earth Orbit LEO-LEO Transmission 25 kW RF Power Transmitted. This experiment would evaluate: o o o o o o o Arcing of DC-microwave converters Arcing at tube-waveguide feed (20 kV and 40 kV levels) Multipacting at the slots Limited phase control testing in LEO to LEO transmission Operation of amplitrons in LEO Operation of 1 kW to 5 kW klystrons for LEO evaluation Operation of 9x15 meter array (15 subarrays at 3m x 3m per subarray) limited phase control testing utilizing the 9x15 meter array o Antenna pattern tests in far field (4 km) (b) Low Earth Orbit LEO-LEO Transmission 57 kW RF Power Transmission. This would employ a crossed linear array antenna and could evaluate: o o o o o o Leakage current at solar cells Amplitrons in LEO Low wattage klystrons in LEO Arcing of tube at 20 and 40 kV in LEO Antenna pattern verification Verification of the theoretical sidelobe distribution predictions by means of LEO measurements. Sidelobe measurements would be performed on the horizontal array. The antenna is rotated around the yaw axis 5 to allow IX-B-53

investigation of the antenna pattern out to the first subarray pattern sidelobe peak. The sensitivity of the antenna to power tube-induced temperature variations, mechanical distortions and sidelobe changes introduced by frequency changes (in the pilot or source frequency) would be measured. Also, sidelobe variations as a function of amplitron input voltage variations would be evaluated. o The dynamic retro-directive steering capability [pilot beam steering) of the crossed array. o RFI effects due to voltage level regulation and switching (c) Low Earth Orbit LEO-LEO Transmission 440 kW RF Power Transmission This will consist of a 9x15 meter array with 15 meter extensions attached to each end of the array as seen in Figure IX-B-21.

ff n
r*-

Figure IX-B-21

The 9X15 meter array (3x3 meter subarray) will transfer 440 kW of RF power to another receive satellite which will be located in the near field. The center subarray will radiate 21 kW per square meter for a total of 189 kW. The other 14 subarrays will each radiate approximately 2 kW per square meter adding up to 251 kW. This will produce 440 kW of RF power radiated under thermal conditions which simulate the SPS at GEO. The configuration will also allow for 15 subarrays extending 45 meters to transmit during LEO-LEO. In this case, the power density will be 2 kW per square meter (15 subarrays) for a total radiated power of 270 kW.
IX-B-54

The 45 meter array will be used for phase control and beam mapping in the far field. Grating and side lobes will be measured to determine possible effects on RFI as well as determine the efficiency of the SPS antenna. Data for error sources and their distribution will supply required data to aid in the development of the SPS operational antenna at GEO. The receiver will consist of a rectenna with the dimensions of 9x15 meters or larger. This antenna, when receiving in the near field, will collect approximately 99% of the RF energy. (d) Low Earth Orbit LEO-Ground Transmission 440 kW RF Power Transmission The same satellite 9x15 meter array which would transmit in LEO-LEO could be used to transmit from low earth orbit to earth. The function of this experiment would be to evaluate the phase control from low earth orbit to the earth's receiving station. A test of this type would also be a visible demonstration of power transmission from space to ground. Using a rectenna on the ground to receive the power, a rectenna aperture diameter of 300 meters could receive approximately 310 watts from a 300 n.mi. altitude for a short period of time during close orbital passes. In addition, the possibility of using the Arecibo antenna as a receiver from LEO has been evaluated. The Arecibo dish of 100 meters diameter and a rectenna size of 45.7 meters in diameter at the receive feed could produce about 480 watts from a 300 n.mi. altitude. If the altitude during low earth orbit were 200 n.mi., the Arecibo antenna could receive about 1.2 kW. (e) Geosynchronous Orbit GEO-Ground Transmission 57 kW RF Power Transmission A similar crossed linear array which was first evaluated at LEO would be operated at GEO. The principal function is to verify the phase control capability from GEO to ground under the conditions of a heated ionosphere. This test would include a high frequency (HF) high power heating beam and a low power pilot signal (uplink) and a 57 kW (RF) beam of 2.45 GHz retrodirected (downlink). An HF ground based transmitter can provide the same heating effect as the 2.45 GHz, 5 GW SPS beam at GEO, but with less power, (power requirement scales inversely with frequency) The pilot frequency, as yet undetermined, is generated on the ground near the rectenna. This will pass through the heated region and provide the means of "recording" the phase deformation imposed on passing wavefronts. At the spaceborne transmitter, a retrodirective system uses this information to provide a downgoing beam with exactly the opposite deformation so that upon transit through the ionosphere the deformation is IX-B-55

removed and a compensated beam results. The retrodirective system provides automatic beam steering and always points at the pilot transmitter. The crossed array would operate in the proper environment in which the operational SPS would later perform. This phase control signal is phase locked on the ground. The linear crossed array is commanded to slow roll and by means of optics the angular position of the array is correlated with the electrical signal received from the array. This process of beam steering will determine the errors created by ionospheric heating. (3) Antenna Array-Subarray The sizes of the subarrays for the tests being considered are 3m x 3m. The lengths of the crossed array will vary from 2.4m to 28.7m to produce a tapered beam. Except in the case of the crossed linear array, the subarrays will be attached to each other by flexible metallic supports and each subarray will be attached to its supporting structure at three points. In the case of both the 25 kW and 57 kW antenna system candidates, there exists a solar array system peak load capability. With a 200 kW solar array power supply, the microwave system can use 100 kW DC for 75 minutes, or consume 300 kW DC for 17 minutes or 500 kW DC for 10 minutes in low earth orbit using a storage system + array for short power bursts. Each subarray has a small antenna for receiving the pilot beam phasing signal.
Antenna Subarrays

Design of subarrays for the 9x15 meter array. LEO operation. (a) Minimum power density subarray = 2.2 kW per square meter. The high efficiency power tube is an amplitron generating 5 kW RF. Each tube feeds 15 waveguides (10 cms wide) making up a 1.5m x 1.5m element. The slots are approximately 6 cms in length and spaced 6 cms apart.

IX-B-56

AMPLITRON

-HAN I FOLD

Figure IX-B-22:

Minimum Power Density Subarray with Amplitrons

(b) Minimum power density subarray = 2.2 kW per square meter. The tube is a 50 kW klystron operating at less than half power, 20 kW per tube. Each tube feeds 30 waveguides, 1 subarray.

KLYSTRON

f'ANI FOLD

WAVEGUIDE

Fiaure IX-B-23:

Minimum Power Density Subarray with Klystron IX-B-57

(c) Maximum power density subarray = 20 kW per square meter. Amplitron feeds 5 waveguides, each section being 50 x 50 cms. Each subarray transmits 180 kW RF.
WAVEGUIDE MANIFOLD

AMPLITRON

Figure IX-B-24:

Maximum Power Density Suuarray with Amplitrons

(d) Maximum power density subarray = 20 kW per square meter. Klystron feeds 15 waveguides. Each klystron generates 45 kW.

MANIFOLD

KLYSTRON

Figure IX-B-25:

Maximum Power Density Subarray with Klystrons IX-B-58

IX. PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT PLAN

Ried

B. Technology Advancement Plan 1980-1987 Structures & Mechanics Div. 3. Flight Activities c. Scaling considerations for a structural test of the S.P.S. As currently envisioned, the SPS (Solar Power Satellite) structure will be designed for stiffness as required for maintaining shape and relative orientation. This can be achieved with efficient, lightweight structural concepts which are adequate for space application, yet not capable of supporting their own weight under terrestrial gravity. This precludes ground testing and points to the need for space testing for structural performance, fabrication precision, control /structure interactions and potential* thermal /structural interactions. Although geo-synchronous orbit (GSO, designated by subscript G) is unique from the standpoint of the overall system kinematics and power transmission, it appears that low earth orbit (LEO, designated by subscript L) offers many significant advantages for a scale model structural test of the system and/or its components. The basic objective of a scale model structural test would be to verify our capability to analytically predict the structural performance of the scale model system and, thereby, the full-scale SPS structure and associated systems. A scale model test in LEO should be preceeded by numerous small component tests (compression elements, cables, joints, assemblies, subarrays, etc.) as required to build our level of understanding and confidence. The engineering confidence obtained through a scale model test will be proportional to the degree of similitude achieved. The following treatment of various scaling relations and practical considerations is not a rigorous similitude analysis, but rather a point of departure for trading structural test considerations against other system test requirements. Table IX-B-2 summarizes a scale test approach and general scale system characteristics.
EXCITATION FREQUENCIES

Most of the SPS excitations and interactions occur with a frequency which is proportional to the orbital frequency or angular velocity (CD). This includes gravity gradient, rotary joint cycles, MPTS/solar cycle, orbital perterbations and magnetic field fluctuations. Due to an orbital balance of centrifugal and gravitational acceleration, the angular velocity is related to the orbital radius (r) by

Since the earth's radius is 6.4 X 103 km and rQ is 42 X 103 km, the angular velocity or orbital frequency ratio for three LEO altitudes are:

*A design approach to minimize thermal/structural interactions would be the use of materials and/or geometric arrangements which virtually eliminate thermal distortions.

IX-B-59

a). s = = G

16.2 for 200 Km (108 n mi) 15 for 500 Km (270 n mi) 13.6 for 1000 Km (540 n mi)

For discussion and numerical simplicity, events in LEO are about 15 times faster than at GSO.
CONTROL SYSTEM

The control system logic and update or correction frequencies are yet to be determined; however, it is logical to assume that a control system in LEO will operate s times faster than in GSO for the same angular orientation requirements. Angular orientations are dimensionless and will be assumed to be the same for a scale model test as for the full scale SPS. In addition, the control system technology development requirements for the SPS are in the direction of low frequencies and, therefore, a faster system seems reasonable for an earlier scale model test.
STRUCTURAL NATURAL FREQUENCIES

Antenna Structure:

By eauating the maximum kinetic energy to the maximum potential energy of a uniform free circular plate undergoing a harmonic oscillation, the plate natural frequency (n) can be derived

" where:

5.3 V ,hx Eh R R' V12 $

R is the circular plate radius h is the circular plate thickness

E is Young's modulus of the plate material

B is the mass per unit area of the plate

v is Poisson's ratio for the plate material

The SPS antenna can be modeled in a similar fashion by properly accounting for the potential energy associated with a primary structure deformation. The resulting MPTS structural natural frequency (n.) can A be expressed hv /I _ 5.3 ,hv /I /Ex 2 es e s1 W \/ 2 V 5" e^ where : /E\ is the Young's modulus to mass density ratio of the structural *' material (material specific potential strain energy) _ prime structural mass/unit area total system mass/unit area IX-B-60 ^'
Q2

/2\ is a prime structure mass factor for a tetrahedral planer truss ^5; (structural mass in top or bottom surface/total prime structural mass, neglecting joints and diagonals) v1 is the Poisson ratio for the truss arrangement. This relation assumes a circular antenna with a uniform mass distribution (no taper). Note that for a given structural material the natural frequency is controlled by the geometry and the mass fraction, not the absolute mass. Assuming the structural frequencies to be one order of magnitude above the control correction or excitation frequencies and a compliant control system,
"S or

= s

If one assumes the same structural material (E/p), geometric similarity (h/R)L = h/R)G) and similar mass fractions, then Rr Rr R L = -T ~- if * 33 m If full scale hardware (waveguides, Klystrons or Amplitrons, etc.) are employed, the scale model antenna mass is on the order of 3 X TO4 kg or the equivalent of one Shuttle payload. On the other hand, a non-operating lower mass per unit area system would suffice for this simulation alone. It should be noted that our current reference MPTS structural system contains secondary structures which are roughly 1/8 scale prime structures. A 1/15 scale prime structure with 140, 5 meter subarrays mounted on it would be somewhat similar to a portion of the full scale system. It might be possible to devise a test arrangement where the same test model could be used, both as a scale test of the full scale system, and also as a component test of the full scale system.*

A scale subarray waveguide system would require s times higher frequency or 36.8 GHZ and suitably scaled microwave amplifiers. This would entail considerable hardware development effort and many practical problems; hov/ever, if such a system were possible it would provide a significant power beam from GSO. IX-B-61

Photovoltaic Array Structure: The truss structure for the photovoltaic array can be modeled as a beam such that the natural frequency of the structural system (ns) is:
^s
=

IT"

3.6

where: L is the maximum length of the beam E is Young's modulus I is the beam moment of inertia BT is the system mass per unit area w is the width of the beam Inserting the proper moment of inertia of our reference truss configuration, this can be expressed in the form

- a p y y 37
1 /hi //Ex

where: h is the depth of the truss s _ prime structure mass/unit area ^ BT ~ total system mass/unit area
Q5

The scaling logic for the photovoltaic array structure follows precisely the same logic as the antenna. A 1/15 scale system in LEO would be desirable. The total system mass (assume full scale hardware or the same mass per unit area) would be on the order of 3.5 X 105 kg or about twelve Shuttle payloads. It would have a length of about 1.8 km (^ 1 n mi) and would be rated as a 45 MW bus bar system. Blanket Structure: The column cable system would follow a similar scaling ratio for frequency simulation; however, the natural frequency of a membrane or cable depends on the stress level as opposed to Young's modulus. Specifically, the natural frequency of a membrane such as a solar cell blanket or reflector is

*It should be noted that a tetrahedral truss structure would have a 40 percent higher frequency (considering only bending) for about half the structural weight, but this would not readily accommodate a two-to-one concentration ratio. IX-B-62

where: n is the blanket system natural frequency B a is a characteristic length of the blanket as is the stress in the blanket structural substrate ps is the mass density of the structural substrate material g is the structural substrate mass per unit area BR is the total blanket mass per unit area Note that the same linear scaling applies to the solar cell blankets, reflectors, and cables whether they are elements of the truss configuration or the long expanses of the column cable configuration. It should also be noted that the blanket membrane tension must be sufficient to overcome the natural environment (eg. gravity gradient), as well as control system corrections, but the structure must be even stiffer to restrain the blanket dynamics. The structure plays the role of a mast supporting a sail. The main significance of the membrane tension aspect of scale modeling of the SPS is that the full scale SPS is incorporating minimum gauge structural substrate support of the blankets. Thus, although the natural frequencies involve only the ratio of structural mass to total mass, one is forced to use full scale mass per unit areas or to accept void areas.
STRUCTURAL GEOMETRY

In consideration of frequency scaling, one is led to global geometric similitude and numerically equal mass per unit areas. This is inconsistent for the structural members per se since the structural mass under geometric similitude should scale as the volume or length cubed. If, however, the structural gauge is maintained constant then the structural mass per unit area will be constant. This is consistent with minimum gauge structure, blanket substrates, reflectors, waveguides and much of the SPS hardware. It does not alter the structural member natural frequencies or column buckling margins, but it does afford a considerable margin for crimpling or local buckling. It is recommended that structural member lengths and widths (or diameters) be scaled, but the gauge or thickness remain constant. To maintain the same stress per structural member (for similar strains and buckling margins) implies the force per member be reduced by the scale factor (s). Since the number of members is unchanged by geometric similitude, all forces should be reduced by the scale factor s(15). This implies that all moments should be reduced by the square of the scale factor (s2 or 225).
GRAVITY GRADIENT TORQUES

For a given orientation, the gravity gradient torque is proportional to the differences in moments of inertia and inversely proportional to IX-B-63

the cube of the orbit radius.

Thus,

1= !
G b b b

where:

N B R s Since

is is is is

the gravity gradient torque the mass per unit area of the system a characteristic dimension of the system the scale factor (15)

r3
~ } r

and

scaling is satisfied for gravity gradient torques, given global geometric similitude and constant masses per unit areas. The applied control forces to overcome gravity gradient torques on the scale model test would be 1/15 of the full scale SPS control system.
CURRENT INTERACTION FORCES

The forces between conductors, which are most significant in the vicinity of the joint, are proportional to the square of the current and inversely proportional to the distance between conductors. Scaling is maintained if the currents (i) are proportional to the scale factor

1
therefore,

16

s
=

1 - _L
15

^G L

"S

Since the power (voltage times current) is proportional to the system area, the voltage (V) is also proportional to the scale factor \ VQ
=

1 0_ 2,700 volts s " eg> 40,000 volts IX-B-64

This structural requirement has the advantage of lower operating voltages in LEO and the potential for a geometrically similar wiring pattern. If the power distribution conductors are scaled in the same fashion as the structural members, (1/15 length, 1/15 width or diameter, thickness or gauge is held constant and the same material is used) then scaling is maintained in these conductors. They operate at full scale current densities, have a full scale resistivity (PC) and generate the same heat per unit surface area. c _ voltage drop X cross sectional area current X conductor length

The conductor resistance (Rc) is the same for the scale model as for the full scale system
D

_ pc X length c cross sectional area

The resistance losses for the conductors are in the same proportion as the system power,

V i /L

V i /G

Also, since the resistance losses for the conductors per unit of conductor surface area is the same for the scale model as for the full scale SPS, they would both operate at the same temperature. This is a significant point since thermal control of the power distribution system is an important aspect of that system.
MAGNETIC LOOP TORQUES

Current loops on the SPS could interact with the earth's magnetic field and potentially produce torques about two axis (not the North-South axis or field lines). Assuming the earth's magnetic field to be represented by a single dipole, a magnetic loop torque (M) ratio is

M i R2 3 It _ Vl rG = 1 M G " Vf^ "s

where R is a characteristic system dimension.

IX-B-65

This is inconsistent with the proposed scaling. Moments and torques should be proportional to the scale factor squared. Thus, magnetic loop torques would be more powerful for the scale model test in LEO than to the full scale SPS in GSO.
SOLAR PRESSURE

The solar pressure is the same in LEO and in GSO. Since the proposed scaling involves equal mass per unit area, the potential acceleration due to solar pressure is the same for both the scale model and the full scale system. This is not consistent with the proposed scaling where acceleration (a) should scale such that

Also, the force in a given structural member due to solar pressure on the scale model would be 1/s2 times the full scale system as opposed to the desired 1/s.
AERODYNAMIC DRAG

Aerodynamic drag is virtually zero in GSO; however, in LEO it is a significant factor in orbital decay. If one flew a scale model SPS in the worst orientation (into the 5wind), it would experience decelerations of roughly 4 X 10~3 g's and 10" g's at altitudes of 200 km and 500 km, respectively. These do not appear to be prohibitive since the scale model can withstand a scale factor (15) times the maximum acceleration capability of the full scale SPS. For reference, the MPTS axial acceleration, which would completely consume the 10"4 radian mechanical2 distortion budget, is only 6 X 10'3 g's for the full scale SPS and 9 X 10" g's for the scale model. Since the solar radiation pressure does not follow an appropriate scale up for a LEO test, one could conceive of an experiment where the aerodynamic pressure was used to simulate a scaled up solar pressure. This could be performed by flying the solar array into the wind at approximately 400 km altitude.
ACHIEVABLE FLATNESS

The factors governing achievable flatness for an SPS antenna structure, either through construction, assembly or deployment, have yet to be studied. Intuitively, one can visualize full scale components being used for a verification of achievable flatness; however, this might well be independent of a scale model test.
DAMPING

Structural and overall system damping characteristics have yet to be studied for both the full scale SPS and for desired scaling characteristics
I'X-B- 66

An isometric stress imposed to reduce joint "slop" and associated nonlinear deflection characteristics would tend to minimize the damping associated with joints.
THERMAL/STRUCTURAL INTERACTION

The thermal/structural interactions in a scale model LEO test affords an excellent opportunity to verify analysis capability for temperature levels, temperature distributions, thermal distortions and transient behavior. For structural scaling, one would desire each scale model structural member to operate at the same temperature and temperature distribution as its full scale counterpart. Also, it would be desirable to have thermal transients occur a scale factor (s) faster. In GSO, the thermal environment consists of thermal radiation from the sun and from waste heat rejection. In LEO, the earth's albedo (up to 36 percent of the solar flux) and the earth's thermal emission (17 percent of the solar flux, but in the infrared) are also significant. The resulting temperatures in LEO and GSO depend on relative orientations and surface properties; however, as a general rule, the differences are small for the higher temperature structures (center of antenna where waste heat dominates) and greatest for the low temperature extremes (LEO night > GSO eclipse). For example, for an antenna pointed away from earth, a structural member (as/e = .1) in the center of the antenna which operated at 450K (350F) in GSO would reach about 466K (380F) in LEO. During an eclipse at GSO, however, this member would drop to a temperature as low as 100K (-280F), while in LEO the earth's emission would maintain this member above 250K (-10F). On the other hand, for an antenna pointed to the earth, this structural member would achieve a reasonable thermal simulation. The full scale MPTS has a potential for thermal distortion of the prime structure as a result of its daily rotation relative to the sun. The angular distortion or warping, due to a temperature difference through the depth of the prime structure, is 0 * 2 a A T () TO"4 radians where: e is the angular distortion a is the coefficient of thermal expansion for the prime structure members AT is the temperature difference between the front and back prime structure member relative to the temperatures associated with a flat antenna R/h is the radius to depth ratio of the antenna prime structure It should be noted that for a = 10~6/K (typical of graphite composite without preferential orientation) the allowable temperature difference AT is less than 10K. On the other hand, if the a is reduced by an order of magnitude through preferential ply orientation or alternate techniques, IX-B-67

then, the allowable temperature difference increases proportionately. This distortion is readily scaled in an LEO test by the use of geometric similarity, full scale materials and comparable temperature differences (solar orientations). The thermal distortion simulation of individual structural members requires geometric similarity, the same material (coefficient of thermal expansion, emissivity, absortivity, conductivity, density and specific heat) and a similar environment. This is probably best achieved through full scale component testing to obtain data on all types of distortion. The significance of an LEO scale model which incorporates full scale gauge material depends on the element configuration. If the structural element is relatively open or essentially opaque to thermal radiation, then the increased relative importance of conduction will not be significant for the scale model structural element. The characteristic time governing the initial cool down rate for a structural member as it undergoes an eclipse is

3 e a T03

where: p is the material density Cp is the material specific heat t is the material thickness a is the Stephan-Boltzmann constant TQ is the initial temperature e is the surface emittance Therefore, the LEO scale model test and the full scale SPS structural members will have the same characteristic thermal response times (about 10 minutes for graphite composite, 10 mil thick, e = .85). It would be desirable to have a scale factor (s) faster thermal response time to simulate potential dynamic motions associated with cooling down or warming up. The penumbra passage is about 18 times faster in LEO than in GEO; therefore, the onset and termination of an eclipse is reasonably well simulated. If thermal/structural coupling is not virtually eliminated by selective basic structural elements, then it is possible that the antenna would be built in a cold warped form which would flatten out as the system is powered up. This could also be simulated in a scale test for verification of the technique.
MEASUREMENT

The measurement of an area which remains to determination of overall a necessary measurement. beam and efficient power tural performance.

structural performance in a scale model test is be investigated. It is noted, however, that a system performance, although not sufficient, is For example, a proper focusing of the microwave transmission requires an acceptable MPTS strucIX-B-68

Table IX-B-2 Scaling Factors for Scale Model LEO Structural Test of GSO SPS (s ^ 15)
GSO LEO

Parameter Configuration length width depth Mass Mass/surface area Power

Power Distribution System

Comments on Scale Model

s s s

% 1.8 km (1 n mi) 66 m diameter antenna

*> 3.5 X 105 kg (12 Shuttle payloads) full scale hardware eg. solar cells ^ 1/225

lengths widths (or diameter) thickness voltage current resistance operating temperature Structural Members length width or diameter thickness stress strain angular distortion
E/P Excitation Frequencies Control Frequencies Natural Frequencies

s s

1 1

s s

2,700 volts

s s

1 1 1 1

similar buckling criteria minimum gauge

1/s 1/s

same material relative to orbital frequencies

Structure antenna truss col/cable Array Forces (s desired) control gravity gradient

1/s 1/s 1/s 1/s

s s
IX-B-59

current interactions solar radiation aerodynamic drag Moments (s2 desired) control gravity gradient magnetic loop interaction Accelerations linear 1/s2 angular 1/s Thermal high temperatures %l-.8 ^l-.3 low temperatures penumbra transit time 1.2s ^1 characteristic thermal response time Achievable Flatness ? Damping Measurement

X Does not scale appropriately X Does not scale appropriately but might be used to simulate solar radiation

X Does not scale appropriately

X Does not scale appropriately

IX-B-70

IX. PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT PLAN B. TECHNOLOGY ADVANCEMENT PLAN IX-B-4. Space Transportation H. P. Davis Future Programs Office

The purpose of the space transportation technology plan is to outline the advanced technology for the overall system, subsystem and mission planning technology required for the Solar Power Satellite transportation systems. The space transportation system is comprised of two major elements: the heavy lift launch vehicle (HLLV) and the orbital transfer vehicle (OTV). The objective and tasks for the HLLV and the OTV are as follows: 1. Primary HLLV Definition Objectives o Select primary launch vehicle configuration utilizing advanced technology and entailing a moderate level of uncertainty of program schedule and cost. o Develop preliminary level II HLLV program definition and requirements documentation. Tasks o Survey technology capabilities expected in the 1980's development period, rate potential and feasibility and determine the launch vehicle technology levels to be used for primary HLLV conceptual planning. o Select primary HLLV configuration concept based on parametric study of options and selection criteria. o Define selected primary HLLV configuration, fleet size, inventory, GSE and launch facility requirements. o Prepare development and programmatic plans.

o Prepare the preliminary HLLV level II Program Definition and Requirements Document. 2. Backup HLLV Definition Objectives o Select backup launch vehicle configuration for level I requirements utilizing current or assured near-term technology to minimize the uncertainties of program schedule and costs. IX-B-71

o Develop preliminary level II HLLV program definition and requirements documentation. Tasks o Survey technology capabilities expected in the 1980's development period, rate potential and feasibility and determine the launch vehicle technology levels to be used for backup HLLV conceptual planning. o Select backup HLLV configuration concept (based on parametric study of options and selection criteria). o Define selected backup HLLV configuration, fleet size, inventory, GSE and launch facility requirements. o Prepare development and programmatic plans. o Prepare the preliminary backup HLLV level II Program Definition and Requirements Document. 3. Personnel/High Priority Cargo Launch Vehicle Requirements Definition (Shuttle Derivative) Objectives o Define the possible evolutionary growth paths of the Space Shuttle system to provide the transportation of personnel and high priority cargo to LEO, the capability of return to Earth of selected SPS operational program hardware, and to support the orbital technology verification and potential subscale "pilot plant" projects. Tasks o Conduct study to determine what SPS operational requirements may be fulfilled by (1) the STS, (2) uprated STS, and (3) STS derived launch vehicles more cost effectively than baselined HLLV. o Define preliminary design requirements and mission models for candidate systems. o Define design requirements, mission model and programmatic requirements for personnel and high priority cargo launch vehicle based upon STS. 4. Flight and Ground Operations Definition Objectives o Develop operational program requirements. o Identify programmatic issues and requirements. IX-B-72

Tasks o Determine operational requirements for ground and flight activities supporting the transportation requirements of the power station including its operation, maintenance and servicing. o Analyze organization and managerial requirements, identify present capability and delta requirements, and recommend new or evolutionary concepts. o Prepare program plan for acquiring necessary flight and ground operations capability with schedule and costing requirements identified. 5. Launch Vehicle Environmental Effects Data Development Objectives o Determine the altitude profile (quantity, species, velocity) of exhaust emissions consequent to launch vehicle operations, the launch vehicle projects consumption of terrestrial energy and consumption of scarce materials for each candidate HLLV and Shuttle-derived launch vehicle. These data will be provided to the environmental Effects Area for impact assessment and analysis. Tasks

o Develop computer program to obtain altitude profile of exhaust emissions (quantity, species, velocity) for launch vehicles under consideration. o Develop data bank of energy requirements for materials production and fabrication. o Establish scarce materials roster and procedures for recording and analyzing usage by launch vehicle configuration concepts under evaluation. o Document results of exhaust emission, energy and materials procedures in launch evaluation process. 6. OTV Supporting Research and Technology Objectives o Develop new propulsion technologies and hardware, software, and system elements in support of all OTV design activities.

IX-B-73

Tasks o Develop and test an electric-thruster meeting performance and program requirements suitable for incorporation into the primary OTV low thrust propulsion system. o Develop a control system and associated software capable of supporting the primary OTV low thrust propulsion system and operational or interface limitations of the SPS. o Develop on-orbit basing techniques for high thrust OTV. This includes on-orbit fueling, refurbishment, maintenance, inspection, and turnaround. o Define the beneficial influence of advanced technology on the elements of the manned OTV crew modules/compartments. 7. Orbitel Transfer Vehicle Requipments Objectives o Establish preliminary OTV performance and programmatic requirements. o Integrate, expand, and revise these requirements as required throughout the OTV design activities. Tasks

o For both low thrust and high thrust propulsion systems, establish the following: - SPS orbital transfer performance requirements, including maximum thrust limitations, thrust profiles, thrust distribution and vectoring, and SPS mass and C. G. characteristics, including active stabilization needs. - Subsystem support available from the SPS payload element to the OTV's. - SPS interfaces, including hardware, software, functional and operational factors - GSE requirements - Vehicle and propellent safety and environmental compatibility. - Operational requirements and constraints. - Develop parametric systems data on high and low thrust propulsion systems for manned and unmanned SPS hardware elements; i.e., what elements need what propulsion systems.
IX-B-74

- Define propulsion requirements which allow comparison of high and low thrust systems for orbit to orbit transfer. - Define vehicle and system element inventory required for orbit to orbit transfer. - Develop backup and redundancy requirements - Determine the mission plan for ground and flight operation, including preliminary timelines and equipment, facility inventory. - Define natural and induced flight environments. - Develop ground and flight operation outline and total equipment inventory and detailed timelines. o Provide system requirements documents for the OTV's. 8. Backup - OTV Definition Objectives o Define backup Orbital Transfer Vehicle configuration, program plan and costs, utilizing assured technology and minimum schedule/cost uncertainties. o Establish in detail program cost data for the recommended, backup OTV. o Identify and assess the impact of critical design and programmatic factors. Tasks o Develop candidate low thrust and high thrust designs to demonstrate compatibility with performance and program requirements, and to establish relative sutiability to perform the required functions. This is accomplished in close correlation with, and partially as part of, the parametric design activity of the primary OTV. o Select the backup OTV vehicle design and carry the design to the detailed subsystem and component level. This effort includes complete and detailed optimization for minimum costs within the defined OTV and program requirements and consists of a detailed functional analysis and definition of major hardware, software, and program elements.

IX-B-75

o Integrate flight and GSE propulsion system elements with each other and with their appropriate SPS or program interfacing elements. This is a detailed effort to be carried to the Interface Control Document (ICD) and System Function Document level. o Identify and assess critical technical and programmatic problem areas requiring early resolution. This effort includes analytical or laboratory feasibility demonstration of the primary OTV design and detailed support of the critical problem area assessments. o Develop a program plan for implementation of all phases and facets of the backup OTV program. 10. Manned OTV Configuration Definition Objectives o Define manned OTV configurations to support manned activities related to the construction and maintenance of satellite power stations. Tasks o Define mission scenarios/modes and related manned OTV concepts involved in support of manned activity in the construction and maintenance of satellite power stations. The OTV concepts will be defined in terms of crew module, propulsive elements, and support systems and synthesized into total manned OTV designs. o Select primary and backup manned OTV configurations pertaining to particular mission scenarios/modes. o Provide systems definition for configurations. This includes general arrangement layouts, equipment lists, weight statements, and performance definition. o Define the nonflight elements of the manned OTV configurations including facility, GSE, software, simulation, recovery systems, etc. Define requirements imposed upon other elements of the STS, including vehicles, space facilities, etc. by the manned OTV configurations. o Derive preliminary program plans and costs estimates for the manned OTV configurations.

IX-B-76

IX. PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT PLAN C. RELATED ACTIVITIES

Harold E. Benson

Systems Evaluation Off. Two studies have been conducted outside specific SPS concept evaluation studies which provide material pertinent to the SPS. One study was the "Space Station Systems Analysis Study" and the other was an "Orbital Construction Demonstration Study." These studies are particularly applicable to space projects which might be conducted during a technology advancement phase of an SPS program. They deal primarily with the construction in space of SPS test articles and the development of techniques and technologies involved in such space construction activities. Space Station Systems Analysis Study: This study was conducted in parallel with the release of two contracts; one with the McDonnell Douglas Astronautics Company, managed by the Johnson Space Center (contract #NAS9-14958) and the other, the Grumman Aerospace Corporation, managed by the Marshall Space Flight Center (contract #NAS8-31993). These studies were completed in June 1977. Their objective was to develop cost effective options for orderly developmental growth from shuttle sortie flight to a permanently manned space facility. Such a facility would perform construction of sub-scale SPS test articles which would test and verify construction, performance and operational aspects of an SPS program. In addition, it would be capable of assemblying large communications and radiametry antennas to serve a variety of earth needs. It would provide a platform for conducting investigations of space processing as well as other applications and pure science activities. Orbital Construction Demonstration Study: This study, conducted by the Grumman Aerospace Corporation under contract NAS9-14916, provided a baseline concept for developing and verifying space construction technologies. The major emphasis of this study was to build a platform or factory floor in space tended by the Shuttle. Such a platform could enhance the Shuttle capability by providing a large platform for mounting construction experiments and large quantities of power for running experiments and increasing Shuttle orbit stay times.

IX-C-1

X. PROGRAM COST A. COST SENSITIVITY STUDIES

Richard C. Wadle Systems Evaluation Off.

Parametric studies have been performed using the COPS (Costing of Power from Satellites) computer program. Unless otherwise indicated, the implementation scenario used for analysis is Scenario B of JSC Report No. 11568, page III-3. The satellite is the truss configuration for geosynchronous orbit assembly. 1. Sensitivity Analysis Cost and mass parameters of transportation, satellite, assembly and ground systems were individually reduced by 50 percent from the baseline values. The impact of these reductions on cost of power was assessed and a priority ranking of the top 25 parameters was developed as shown in Figure X-A-1. The definition of each parameter is shown in Table X-A-1 along with the baseline value. The most significant parameter was HLLV per flight cost with solar blanket mass a close second. The priority ranking of Figure X-A-1 gives an indication of the parameters upon which to concentrate to achieve significant cost reductions. Solar blanket mass and solar blanket cost are included in the top 5 parameters, therefore, a closer examination has merit. 2. Solar Cell Mass. Cost and Efficiency In order to assess the impact of solar cell parameters on the cost of power, the effect of reducing solar cell mass, cost and efficiency was evaluated. The analysis was performed for a concentration ratio of two. A nominal solar cell cost of $72/m2 (approximately $300/Kw at 10.3 percent efficiency) was assumed with a minimum cost of $5/m2. The solar cell efficiency was varied from 5 to 20 percent. At 10 percent solar cell ' efficiency and baseline mass, the cost of power can be reduced by 9 mills/kwh from the baseline by using the $5/m^ cell cost. As a point of comparison, a gallium arsenide cell with concentration ratio of one and 17.5 percent efficiency results in a cost of 54.5 mills/kwh compared to 60 mills/kwh for a 10 percent efficient silicon cell with baseline mass. Figure X-A-2 displays the above results and also indicates that reduction of solar cell mass by incremental amounts significantly reduces the cost of power. Data for silicon solar cells with concentration ratio of one is shown in Figure X-A-3. The cost of power increases from 60 mills/kwh to 79 mills/kwh when concentration ratio is changed from two to one for a 10 percent efficient cell with the baseline mass. 3. Satellite Implementation Rate To assess the impact of implementation rate on cost of power, a scenario with a constant implementation rate of four satellites per year was examined. For this case, the cost of power was 54 mills/kwh as compared

X-A-1

Figure X-A-1
SPS SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS

* ^ N

,
_J

to to

0 BASELINE PARAMETERS ARE THE 81 ,000 MT GREEN BOOK SATELLITE o' COST SENSITIVITIES WERE DETERMINED BY REDUCING EACH PARAMETER BY 50% AND NOTING THE EFFECT ON POWER COST

.x\

5 CQ to
ee

.*-

1 O to

O LU HW CJ Z to 43 aC
=
_

.,.
.

<V

_|
UM

0
(^ P^

in

t S cr 3: a: o
*

tO ^^ LU

a. z a. * to /> Ko LU O o :*: LU z u t _i z o ta >-i

cc
*.

p^ LU

QC ^^B C3 1> O.

to s O LU o z ->
i/?
fci.

tO

to

CO

g
to to
UJ

to
0 1 ^?

v^-

e to o to

tn
UJ
t

_1

LU

to a: cc <C LU LU _j _i zr > h CT Cr z S <C LU S _to 3 2 t- 0^ LU LU O OS e fy fvf LU O z - ** 0 U ec TE. z

"

t t

t LU LU ts* *v </i 21 - 1 ( O LU ^4

fe o
t
LU

to to

z to
O 5T 3 U S CO

io u z

i- to to \n

u cc

O C9

_J

5
LU

o 1 1 <: cc.
\
LU

o
CO

= ?
LU O "i OC tO UJ

=z
3

1 cc 1
to
0

u t a:

cc

3 z

o f P-4

=
LU

o 1 1 <_>
_J LU

LU

cc to k O to o

to oo SZ
t*r

oo to to z o o

t
O t Lu

3 O

o 1
B LU
^^

-^

i
\

f <: < - LU O ^^ > c_> UJ to LU _J i^ a. o <c LU o ec ^* a: 3C ac to cc _i _j

LU

a.

^3 1

ZJ

t ^^ cc =2 2 to to ( ca LU rv^ oe. cc z ec LU LU LU LU a. t t _) r>^

**
^H

CD o o o LU LU oc a. _J cc LU a. o a =3 *y^ T*^

HOO O

_J

tO

LU "T* J^ H-

to
! >

LU ^^ r" <

o
2

^J ^J V^

/ f*

O Ctf

iu =
T

-^>
c..

UJ
^ H

.
1
9
7 J K 7

t=

i' t^^ ^g ^**. LU 1 cc a. 0

to

^^ g_
*J^ LU
OC

o ca LU
o
Of
li
LJW

us
O

<c o _J to o
to

U_

"

i n1 1 T O

1 O 1 Jl -I 1C

T C

T "7

T O

Oft 51

r*

^^

0,

"i

: PRIORITY RANKING

X-A-2

Table X-A-1 DEFINITION OF SPS COST SENSITIVITY PARAMETERS PARAMETER HLLV PER FLIGHT COST ($/FLIGHT) SOLAR CELL MASS (MT) CREW QUARTERS IN GEO COST ($/MT) (SPACE STATION AND SUPPORT) COTV PER FLIGHT COST ($/FLIGHT) SOLAR CELL UNIT COST ($/M2) CREW QUARTERS IN GEO SUPPORT MASS (MT/SPS) (SPACE STATION EQUIPMENT PER SPS) CREW QUARTERS IN GEO MASS (MT/SPS UNDER CONSTRUCTION) (SPACE STATION) RECTENNA STRUCTURE COST ($/M2) MICROWAVE GENERATOR MASS (MT) REMAINING SATELLITE MASS (ANTENNA DISTRIBUTION MASS, PHASE CONTROL MASS, POINTING MASS, OTHER MASS) WAVEGUIDE MASS (MT) RECTENNA ELEMENT COST ($/M2) SOLAR CONCENTRATOR MASS (MT) OTHER SATELLITE COST ($/MT) SATELLITE STRUCTURAL MASS (MT>SATELLITE POWER DISTRIBUTION MASS (MT) GROUND POWER DISTRIBUTION COST ($/M2) WAVEGUIDE COST ($/MT) ANTENNA STRUCTURE COST ($/MT) PLV PER FLIGHT COST ($/aiGHT) NOMINAL VALUE 23 X 106 28,677 " fi 2 X 10 10 X 106 72 1,000 6,000 10 8,846 1,698 4,002 190 5,735 1 X 106 2,973 3,000 2.50 '70,000 70,000 10 X 106

X-A-3

Table X-A-1 (cont'd)

PARAMETER CREW QUARTERS IN LEO MASS (MT/SPS UNDER CONSTRUCTION) CREW QUARTERS IN LEO COST ($/MT) SOLAR CONCENTRATOR COST ($/M2) MASS OF BEAM BUILDERS (MT/Machine) MASS OF GEO CREW SUPPORT (MT/PERSON/YEAR)

NOMINAL VALUE 1,000 2 X 106 .70 14.5 2.5

X-A-4

_Solar Cell Cost $72/m' Solar Cell Cost $5/m2

90

80

70
Q.
4-

I
o

Gallium Arsenide (62.5% of Solar Cell Mass, Concentration Ratio, 1)

60

o o

CO

50

Baseline Solar Solar Solar

40

10

15

Solar Cell Mass Cell Mass 75% Cell Mass 50% Cell Mass 25% Baseli ne Mass Solar Cell Mass 75% . . Solar Cell Mass 50% Solar Cell Mass 25%

Solar Cell Efficiency, % Figure X-A-2

Effect of Solar Cell Mass and Efficiency on Cost of Power (Concentration Ratio 2)

X-A-5

Solar Cell Cost $72/m'

120

110

100

90

<u d.
4-

80

o
10

70

60

Baseline Solar Cell Mass Solar Cell Mass 50% of Baseline

50
Solar Cell Mass 25% of Baseline

40
10 15 20 Solar Cell Efficiency, % Figure X-A-3 ~ Effect of Solar Cell Mass and Efficiency on Cost of Power (Concentration Ratio 1) X-A-6

to 59 mills/kwh for the Scenario B. The cost savings results from fewer space stations required and fewer assembly machines, as shown in Table X-A-2.
4. DDT&E

In JSC Report No. 11568, the DDT&E cost in mills/kwh was computed based on an average number of satellites operational over the 30 year period. This amounts to approximately one mill/kwh. No interest was charged for the use of the money over the time it was being used. The Scenario B implementation was evaluated using a $50 billion DDT&E evenly distributed over 10 years at 7 percent interest. The cost of power was increased by 12 mills/kwh using the above figures. To parametrically evaluate the effect of DDT&E on cost of power, a set of computer runs was made using the following satellite implementation rates - one satellite per year, two per year for 28 years. The DDT&E was assumed to be zero, 25 billion, 50 billion and 75 billion dollars over a 10 year period, at zero interest and 7 percent interest. The results of the study are shown in Figure X-A-4. The effect of DDT&E on cost of power is approximately 2 mills per 25 billion DDT&E with a four satellite per year implementation rate. If the DDT&E is 75 billion dollars at 7 percent interest for 10 years, the cost of power is 81 mills/kwh for 28 satellites, but only 60 mills per kwh for 112 satellites. The interest rate is also a significant factor since for an interest rate of zero on DDT&E, the cost of power becomes 75 mills/kwh and 58 mills/kwh for the above case. If DDT&E can be ignored, then the cost of power is 53.5 mills/kwh for the three constant implementation scenarios chosen. 5. SPS Cash Flow The cost of power is a function of the required rate of return on the investment. The average rate of return used by utility companies is 15 percent. The significant reduction in cost of power which can be achieved by reducing rate of return is shown in Figure X-A-5. The Scenario B baseline cost of power is 59 mills/kwh for 15 percent rate of return, but drops to 42 mills/kwh for a 7 percent rate of return. Figure X-A-6 shows the breakdown of the 15 percent rate of return used by private utility companies. For this rate of return, a cash flow is shown for the baseline case.

X-A-7

o. ca o o </
C. Of <:

UJ

in

o: o

uj

a.
oc

O -
V> Di O UJ

(3 U_ Z

c~*-~

<t I
x

ts

<u
<o

u a.

o
UJ

O t/1

LI_ evi O

CO O

Q_ O
</1
LU

o
UJ u_

<C

ce
LU

o: <

z >O O
CM LO

a: O *. -
cs
LU

a. o ce
eo

O
LO

X-A-8

10 Years, 7% Interest -10 Years, No Interest

80

70

Q_

I o

DDT&E = $75 Billion

60

\
DDT&E = DDT&E DDT&E = DDT&E = $50 $50 $25 $25 Billion Billion Billion Billion

ODT&E 0
50

Number of Satellites Constructed per Year (for 28 Years) figure X-A-4 - Effect of DDT&E on Cost of Power

X-A-9

60

50

40

30

I
to

v. <v

20

10

5
Rate of Return, %

10

15

Figure X-A-5 - Effect of Rate of Return on Cost of Power

X-A-10

CO

CD

cx3

CD

CD

LH

CM

cc:
CQ

cr
X

CM

a: i x
CD l co CD LU ^~ CD <~> :z:

CD CO i LU

LU <->
<a: cc: =D co s:

Ct_ <C

a:
LU
UD

LO

c_j 111 cc: o_ LU

cc: LU IE i

s: i ^z cc: CD

i =C

CD

CQ

Li_

CO <C
t_J

0 0 0_ CO

CO CO

CD 0_

cr

CQ

- Q_ cr <a: CM <_>

CD CD LO ^T

CD CD CD -C D N^> CM rI

I c_j co
Ct: LU

f LU CO <C I >CO CO

SNOmifl 3HN3A3H
CO

CD cc: >OL. CO

x-A-n

X-B, METHODOLOGY DOCUMENTATION

Richard C. Wadle Systems Evaluation Off.

A computer model COPS (Cost of Power from Satellites) has been developed to rapidly assess changes in SPS in terms of ultimate power cost. Identification of major cost drivers can be made and ultimate cost can be minimized by optimizing design and installation rate. The SPS costs are broken down into cost of four subsystems: satellite, asserrbly, ground systems and transportation. These capital costs are computed by the computer program and then utilized in a cost subroutine which utilizes a present value technique. The approach forces total cost and total ir.ccme for n_ years to be equal by iterating on cost of power (mills/kwh). The convergence is to w'thin .01 mills/kwh. To arrive at en answer for a given case, it is necessary to provide the corrputer program with input data for each subsystem plus data for the cost subroutine. Five namelist input arrays are utilizeda. b. c. d e. INPUT (Primarily transportation and scenario parameters) SATEL (Satellite parameters, masses, costs, etc.) GROUND (Ground system-rectenna-parameters) ASSEM (Assembly system parameters) FIMAN (Financial parameters such as taxes, interest, inflation, etc.)

The input data used IP the baseline case is shown in Table X-B-1. The output resulting from the computer program utilizing this data is presented in Appendix X-A. As an aid to a potential use of the program, Figure X-B-1 shov.s the order of input to the program. The logic diagram for the program is shown in Figure X-B-2. Appendix X-B is the computer program listing. The logic diagram for the program is shown in Figure X-B-2. The pronram ir, divided into satellite, assembly, ground and transportation systems and a financial subroutine. From the flow diagram one can see that the satellite and assembly system outputs are used as input to the transportation calculations Also the cost of each system is computed and utilized by the financial subroutine to compute the cost of the power in mills/kwh. Table X-B-1 is a detailed list of input parameters for each section of the program along with the nominal numerical value for each. If the design should change, any or all of these parameters can be altered as necessary.

X-E-1

$ END
I/// //DATA/

$ FINAN $ END / / / / / DATA/ // $ ASSEM $ END / / / / / DATA / $ SATEL [$ END I / / / / / DATA |$ GROUND $ END I / / / / / /DATA / / / / / $ INPUT TITLE

FIGURE X-B-1 - INPUT SETUP

X-B-2

uo
LJ

>

Q
tO LJ

^:

om

SYSTEM

VO 1/1 O

ae o

o uj a: s:
tO ul 3Z 0

3ET O. O

oo l l to to oo

C" r*-

> _i i ^_)

-j 3; i_> O CO -< -. a: Z _J LU LU u, ;> oe LW a. >- u. o o LU ~^O i-~ en ( H13 IA CO <x _i o o o 5; U. 2: _> LJ c>

V/1 1/1 LU LU t _l

5 o

Q CX < h- _)

2C J

<: oo

z: u. = ce o
LU LU

t <_> U- 00 Z3 LU 13 O

-z: i <: \rs LU oo a. oc >s: < OT o

LU OO LU LJ

<x cx: crj <o z.

*

to
LO OO LU LU 1 _l

_J _r; LJ o o <

Z QC

_J CU

*
to
^ <
Z Z 00
^-~ LU.

LU >. O
100

>- u- oo
1 t

U.LU

zr

v/o O

- _i
z

o LU
3

ra H- -to to OO S u. 2: o o
CX _J O
<_3

z o

CJ C3

SYSTEM

OO

Z LU

(D ^J 1 _J
2
K_ _1 ^J "^

1 z: 2 "XJ/" >-

>- >J _1
LU LU OO V/1 OO OO

to

<X LU i

_j_T;r

eg
OO

_J

LU </T

<

*- ^srf ^ ! u. i:E > t Io > OO is: rs o z o iu a. z 3 LJ X c

^^ ^>3

!" .

s 2:

CO CO

__
'"

z O
*ce
O

to ;> LU at -z LU O to 3
LU
Ct t

-U. _l

^w
^*

**~)<s:

<r to
O.

<: <

ZE - a: r = LU

Lu U. .. O O
LU

1 oo f 3 1/1 OO

:gS 2
VM

a7 z -,/CI^Q: "^V^li v >-^

k Z Z - LU

a: O o a. LJ cj; 00 LU _J _i > >- o; LJ _i ; c _i a. i2

5> o z >- ft <c to ^ ^S , 3 " o ..s-z: -1 LU _) LU {

H- OC t t

5 1

i S -

Lo
1/1

v"V*"

LU

LU

f > LU H _J

=>< to

z
_l LU

a. > z: t

oo

z oe (5)* - o ~^o < u. 1

H
> 10 CO _J -

LU 1/1 U. > . > 10

o z

c:i z ^ _1 LU
. u_ > o
>

: t_>

0- LU >S>tO j

C? 1

S J

oc ^>
CD
i^-t

to 5. OH t LU ></ O 2: LU _i o ^ )c > a. u. = u. (^1 <_> o. <_j

> OO o (_>

00 OO OO <0
Z LJ LU LU

z: j
u
H 4/ > >/ U H ^~ J

oo
1

*{p>)

oo oi <. 0 Z I
CJ

t HLU 1 _l H- LU LU 0. 5. v 2T 00 OO

i j j

t <: <~i z z
3 O a a. LJ ts -= -

0
LU ~>

tO VI LU UJ 1 1

to

-1 Z 0
- -i Z Z .^J LU I/I LU u. > </l 5

_> o '
11- '

u j *-: a i/>

H- z: o

O H CX Z

0 0

to _l

>- 2 U. O 0 v. O

."C "t

1 (-

0 0

t LU

U_ U_ Z
1

_i rs o o o
(_) LJ

IO tO

{ r>\

X-B-3


LU v/> ^ 5> to

31
U l

s:

<-u

tu to >- o:
> ^^ ^^

3T O i i~

1.1 2;

i o

OO _l S ^^
(X

^UJ^

01 O O
1

* o:

S -Jco S i_j LU 2: UO O */> <

< 00 H-

O OQ _J Q.

.. _J UJ oB

- u. h- O ^C uj

z o: <c o

oe
3 . (X

f- u_ H- t

SzS-o
2T

U.
,

UJ

z: <_> o
0

13 t/1 Q- O

o
CJ CM

CO I X

CD

X-B-4

TABLE X-B-1 Input (Transportation and Scenario Array) VARIABLE DESCRIPTION COTV VEHICLE MASS COTV PAYLOAD COTV LIFE TIME POTV FUEL MASS/FLT POTV VEHICLE MASS POTV PAYLOAD POTV LIFE TIME CREW ROTATIONS/YEAR HLLV PAYLOAD HLLV TURNAROUND TIME HLLV LIFE TIME HLLV AVAILABILITY SPS O&M RATE COTV COST/FLIGHT HLLV COST/FLIGHT COTV COST/FLIGHT PLV COST/FLIGHT COTV VEHICLE COST HLLV VEHICLE COST POTV VEHICLE COST PLV VEHICLE COST PLV PAYLOAD PLV TURNAROUND TIME PLV LIFE TIME
LENGTH OF SCENARIO FIRST YEAR OF SCENARIO

SPS BUILT IN YEAR I COTV FUEL MASS/FLT PERSONNEL IN GEO PER SPS POWER DELIVERED AT GROUND KW

VARIABLE NAME NOMINAL VAL 35fT COMASS FLTMASS 2^MT 30 FLTS CLIFE FUELPT 475MT PTMASS 35MT 230 PFRSONS POTVP 30 FLTS TLIFE ROTYR 4 700MT HLVPL TURNRD 6 DAYS HLIF 300 FLTS 0.8 AVAIL 0 OMRAT $10X106/FLT CCOTVF $23X106/FLT CHLLVF $15X106/FLT CPOTVF CPLVF $10X106/FLT SO/EA CCOTV SO/EA CHLLV SO/EA CPOTV SO/EA CPLV 50 PERSONS PLVP PLVTR 11 DAYS 100 FLTS VLIFE NYR 31 IYR 1996 SPSYR VECTOR 475MT FUELCO 389 PFLT
oni.ip

INPUT VALUE

i n~ i r\O

X-B-5

TABLE X-B-1 Ground (Ground System Input Array) VARIABLE DESCRIPTION RECTENNA MAJOR AXIS RECTENNA MINOR AXIS BUFFER ZONE WIDTH UNIT LAND COST UNIT SITE PREP COST POWER MANAGEMENT COST SUPPORT STRUCTURE COST BUFFER ZONE UNIT COST NUMBER OF ELEMENTS COST PER ELEMENT VARIABLE NAME NOMINAL VALUE
A B S LAND PREP PWR GMATER ZONE ELEKT CELEMT
10KM 13KM 0.1KM $ 15/M2 $.40/M2 $2.50/M2 $10.00/M2 $0.15/M2 190./M2 $.03/ELEMENT

INPUT VALUE

X-B-6

TABLE X-B-1 SATEL (Satellite System Input Array) VARIABLE DESCRIPTION SOLAR CELL MASS CONCENTRATOR MASS STRUCTURE MASS POWER DIST'N MASS MICROWAVE GENERATOR MASS WAVEGUIDE MASS ANTENNA STRUCTURE MASS ANTENNA DIST'N MASS ROTARY JOINT MASS PHASE CONTROL MASS POINTING CONTROL MASS OTHER MASS GROWTH FACTOR SOLAR CELL CER CONCENTRATOR-CER STRUCTURE CER POWER DIST'N CER MICROWAVE GEN CER WAVEGUIDE CER ANTENNA STRUCTURE CER ANTENNA DIST'N CER ROTARY JOINT CER PHASE CONTROL CER POINTING CONTROL CER OTHER MASS CER NO. OF MICROWAVE & PHASE CON UNITS UNIT SOLAR CELL MASS UNIT CONCENTRATOR MASS UNIT POWER DISTR MASS UNIT STRUCTURE MASS VARIABLE NAME NOMINAL VALUE
SCELLM CONCM STRUCM PDISTM GENRM 24,793 MT 4,958 MT
2,851 MT

INPUT VALUE

2,883 MT 8,846MT 4,002MT 1.210MT 167MT 635MT 358MT

WAG DM
ASTRUM ADISTM RJOINM PCONM POINTM OTHERM GROWF SCELLC CONCC STRUCC PDISTC GENRC WAGDC ASTRUC ADISTC RJONC PCONC POINTC OTHERC UNITN USCELM UCONCM UPDISM USTRUM

1MT
537MT

1.5
$4.46 X 109
$ .868 X 108

$7,000/MT $4,000/MT $2,000/EA $70,000/MT $70,000/MT $40,000/MT $100,OOC/MT $56EA $1.5X10 6 /MT $1.X10 6 /MT 340,000 .4 KG/M2 .04 KG/M2 .023256 KG/M2 .023 KG/M2

X-B-7

C*m

,n * l SATEL (Cont'd)
fJ

TABLE

X-B-"1

VARIABLE DESCRIPTION PHOTOVOLTAIC CONVERSION EFFICIENCY POWER DISTRIBUTION EFFICIENCY ANTENNA POWER DISTRIBUTION EFFICIENCY DC-RF CONVERSION EFFICIENCY WAVEGUIDE EFFICIENCY ALIGNMENT EFFICIENCY ATMOSPHERIC EFFICIENCY COLLECTION EFFICIENCY RF-DC EFFICIENCY INTERFACE EFFICIENCY FLAG TO USE OR NOT USE UNIT MASSES AND EFFICIENCIES SOLAR CELL COST $/m2 CONCENTRATOR COST$/m2 CONCENTRATION RATIO CONCENTRATION RATIO FACTOR

VARIABLE NAME NOMINAL VALUE NI N2 N3 N4 N5 N6 N7 N8 N9 NIC FFF .103 92 .98 .87 .98 .98 .98 .88 .90 .99 =0 - USE EFF t - DO NOT USE EFF
1.98

INPUT VALUE

CELC CCONC CRATIO FACTO

.70 ?. 2.

X-B-8

TABLE X-B-1 ASSEM (Assembly System Input Array) VARIABLE DESCRIPTION NUMBER OF BEAM BUILDERS NUMBER OF CABLE RIGGERS NUMBER OF CELL INSTALLERS NUMBER OF REFLECTOR INSTALLERS DIST'N INSTALLERS MANNED MANIPULATORS FACILITY MANIPULATORS SUBARRAY INSTALLERS GEO CREW QUARTERS MASS LEO CREW QUARTERS MASS GEO SUPPORT MASS PER PERSON GEO CREW QUARTERS PER MACHINE BEAM BUILDER UNIT MASS CABLE RIGGER UNIT MASS CELL INSTALLER UNIT MASS REFLECTOR INSTALLER UNIT MASS DIST INSTALLER UNIT MASS MANNED MANIPULATOR UNIT MASS FACILITY MANIPULATOR UNIT MASS SUBARRAY INSTALLER UNIT MASS BEAM BUILDER UNIT COST CABLE RIGGER UNIT COST CELL INSTALLER UNIT COST REFLECTOR INSTALLER UNIT COST DIST'N INSTALLER UNIT COST MANNED MANIPULATOR UNIT COST FACILITY MANIPULATOR UNIT -COST SUBARRAY INSTALLER UNIT COST LEO QUARTERS UNIT COST GEO QUARTERS UNIT COST PERSONNEL IN LEO
VARIABLE NAME BBMN CRMN CELINN REFLIN DHIN AMMN FAMN SUBINN CRQTG CRQTL PRQTS CQGEO UBBM UCRM UCELIN UREFLI UDHI UAMM UFAM USUBIN CBBM CCRM CCELIN CREFLI CDHI CAMM CFAM CSUBIN CLEO CGEO PLEO NOMINAL VALUE 56/AM 20/AM
4/AM 4/AM 8/AM 8/AM

INPUT VALUE

12/AM 4//>M 1 ,OOOMT 1 ,OOOMT 2.5MT/P/YR 6.000MT

1 4 . 5MT
14.5MT

14 5MT
14.5MT 14.5MT 14.5MT 14.5MT 14.5MT $2X10 6 /MT $2X10 6 /MT $2X10 6 /MT $2X10 6 /MT $2X10 6 /MT $2X10 6 /MT $2X10 6 /MT $2X10 6 /MT S2X10 6 /MT $2X10 6 /MT
145

X-B-9

TABLE X-B-1 FJNAN (Financial Input Parameter) VARIABLE DESCRIPTION ADVALOREN TAX RATE GEN INFLATION RATE OPR INFLATION RATE POWER INFLATION RATE RATE OF RETURN PLANT FACTOR O&M RATE DDT&E INTEREST RATE DDT&E PERIOD TOTAL DDT&E COST OF POWER STEP SIZE INITIAL GAINS AT COST OF POWER VARIABLE NAME NOMINAL VALUE PTAXR GENINF OPPINF INFLP ROR PF OMR INTR TIME TDDTE DELR RATE INPUT VALUE

0 0 0 0 15^ 92% 0 8% 10 YRS 0 .001 CENTS/KWH .001 CENTS/KWH

X-B-10

X-C. COMPARATIVE COST ANALYSIS

Ronald Harron Systems Evaluation Off.

Cost analysis studies of the SPS, its development and operation have been performed by several organizations over the past two years. The goal of each of these studies was to determine the unit cost of an SPS in terms of dollars per kilowatt installed capacity, and, by coupling this result with various financial and operational parameters, arrive at a power rate in terms of mills per kilowatt hour. 1. Source of Estimates
SPS cost estimates were made by these organizations: a. ECON, Incorporated - this cost analysis was made under contract NAS8-31308 with MSFC. The Grumman Aerospace Corporation provided supportive engineering information. For the purposes of this comparative analysis, the data presented was taken from ECON First Interim Report No. 76-145-IB dated March 31, 1976; ECON Second Interim Report No. 76-145-2 dated June 30, 1976, and Grumman Aerospace Corporation Space-based "Solar Power Conversion and Delivery Systems [Study]" dated August 6, 1975. b. MSFC - this cost and economic analysis was conducted by MSFC concurrently with their generation of technical data in support of a systems engineering study of the SPS. Data obtained for this comparative analysis was obtained from "Solar Power System - Engineering and Economic Analysis (Summary)" NASA TMX-73344 dated November 15, 1976. c. JSC - this study was conducted by JSC as an evaluation of the SPS with the objective of establishing realistic design criteria and requirements for a full scale SPS program. Data for this analysis was obtained from "Initial Technical, Environmental and Economic Evaluation of Space Solar Power Concepts" publication JSC 11568 dated August 31, 1976. d. JSC produced a second cost estimate using the technical data of "Initial Technical Environmental and Economic Evaluation of Space Solar Power Concepts." This estimate differed in three significant ways from the initial JSC estimate; (1) The PRICE model developed by RCA was used extensively to generate component costs, (2) learning advantages due to extremely large production runs was incorporated, and (3) a more comprehensive set of assembly station design data was used. e. JPL - this cost study was conducted by JPL in support of their evaluation of central power stations. Data for this comparative analysis was obtained from "An Initial Comparative Assessment of Orbital and Terrestrial Central Power Systems" Final Report, JPL publication No. 900-780 dated March 1977 and supporting documentation.

X-C-1

2. Estimates Made The actual cost estimates produced by each of the estimators is shown in Table X-C-1. A direct comparison of capital cost is possible in all cases except the MSFC cost which was reported in terms of life cycle cost. Although the figures presented have been corrected to remove the effects of taxes and insurance on life cycle capital cost, no other corrections have been made. The cost of power in terms of mills per kilowatt hour is probably more directly compatible. Differences here are primarily due to differences in design, operational and economic assumptions. TABLE X-C-1 Estimate Source
ECON MSFC
JSC

CAPITAL COST ($/KW) Nominal Low High J2,440

POWER RATE {MILLS/KWH) Nominal High Low

30 32 29

2,840
4,486 3,000 2,287 5,600

2,980

50 62
59 38

59

2,316 1,400

9,190
5,780

127 115

JSC*
JPL

4,600

7,153

40

485

118

3. Effect of Major Cost Drivers As was pointed out in part A of this section, certain design variables such as solar cell cost and mass, certain installation costs such as transportation to geogynchronous orbit and certain unit costs such as microwave transmission systems costs per kilowatt have a profound effect on the cost of delivered electrical power. To this list of SPS parameters, operational variables such as load factor, transmission efficiencies, etc., and economic variables such as the discount rate must be added. Relatively minor variations in these variables can result in large changes in the resultant cost of power.

X-C-2

Table X-C-2 contains a listing of some of these major cost drivers along with the values assumed by each of the estimators. It must be emphasized that many of these values are not explicitly stated in the referenced data sources. Such values have been calculated or inferred for the sake of completeness. 4. The Range of the Estimates Most of the estimators included a range of their estimates. This range was developed by assuming different design configurations on different weight, efficiency or unit cost data. The singular exception to this approach was JPL who obtained their high estimate by assuming that each subelement of the SPS was produced at the highest possible cost and operated at the lowest possible efficiency. This approach produced a high limit of 485 mills per kilowatt hour, four times higher than the nominal cost. While this is one legitimate way of obtaining the upper bound, it is most unlikely that such a sequence of adversity will actually occur. The ranae, as stated by all other estimators is more likely to be from a low of 30 mills per kilowatt hour to a high of 120 mills per kilowatt hour.
TABLE X-C-2*
VARIABLE J(p8ft to GEO ($/kgj

EGON
182
zrr
ino

MSFC**
1 O ^1

ase
1 r- n

ase***
31. 7 136

JPL
ii

182 834

15 300
^r\r\

145 921 14

Solar Blanket |$/kwj SoUr Blanket (/fii2) Surface1 DeRiity (K/m2) Mi6r6waVe System (/kw'j Solar lankit Eff: ('%) Mir6wav System Eff: '(%} vrall ystem Eff. (%) Load Factor Discount Rate (%) Construction Time (year's")

54
==::

59
:61

42
:6~2
o n r>

42

fl n

:62
r- r\ p\

:5

m --0
===
- r-

559

329

76

520
8:4

13:7

10:3
60:6

10:3
C^
r

58
7:

6
/> /^

5:36
:92

5:3
:92

4:2
r\ /" f

.95
7:5

:85
7:5

:864

15

15

15

*Nomihal Data **Adjusted Life Cycle Cost ***Costs Using Price Model and Learning X-C-3

X.

PROGRAM COST D. SYSTEMS COST ANALYSIS

1.

INTRODUCTION

Resources Mgmt. Office H. Mandell, W. Whittington, D. Webb, W. Haldeman, T. Foster, G. Bauch

1.1

Estimating Environment & Purpose

In developing cost estimates for the SPS, it should first be recognized that every element of the program is either undefined, or at best, in a preliminary state of definition. However, despite these limitations, there are many very valid reasons for developing cost estimates; one of the main reasons is to enable better estimates to be made in future iterations. In addition, these estimates can be used quite well to identify the areas of cost sensitivity requiring further technical definition and cost analysis, and thus can serve to prioritize future analysis. While they can also be used to scope the total magnitude of the program, and are adequate to support such decisions as identification of conceptual trade studies, they should be used very guardedly, if at all, in such matters as establishing peak budget levels. It is felt, however, that early year budgets can be roughly scoped at this point in time. The final reason for performing these estimates was to identify areas where new or more precise cost estimating techniques are required. The expertise of many highly experienced estimators has been utilized. However, these people were dealing in a new and foreign area in many cases. No estimators from the utility industry were employed, for example. But one can expect that, where these estimates deal with aerospace industry products, these estimates are very reliable, especially where today's technologies are employed. Detailed costing ground rules and assumptions are presented in each of the succeeding sections. 1.2 Configuration, Work Breakdown Structure, and Traffic Model The SPS configuration costed was the truss configuration (reference 1 ), employing nominal baseline weights. The HLLV was the EDIN EX-338-76 Propane/LOX Booster, with the SSME orbiter. The COTV was the LH2/ThermalElectric Arc Jet concept of reference 1. Two PLV configurations were costed: the EDIN 0505 (F-l engines in LRB) and the EDIN 0511 (New Propane/LOX Engines in PLV); the propane/lox vehicle estimates were those included in the cost summaries. The POTV vehicle was from section VI-E of reference 1. Concepts for the construction base, construction devices, and facilities were largely designed by the estimators, with inputs from the JSC Engineering and Development Directorate and from reference 1. The rectenna design was also from reference 1.

X-D-1

The work breakdown structure for all elements costed is given in figX-D-1. Twelve first tier elements were involved, and over fifty second tier elements, each of which was costed individually to a lower level of detail. Scenario B (reference 1) was assumed in the development of schedules for vehicle DDT&E and deployment. 1.3 Mode of Presentation To aid in communicating numbers of the magnitude involved, major estimates are presented in dollars per kilowatt of SPS power. DDT&E and theoretical first unit (TFU) costs are presented for all major items; all costs are in constant FY 77 dollars.
2. COSTING METHODS EMPLOYED

Cost methods employed were largely parametric. Estimating relationships used numbered in the hundreds, and most are shown in succeeding sections. For aerospace vehicles, existing data bases are considered to be very good, particularly for items employing current technologies (e.g., structures, engines), or those using technologies with familiar evolution patterns (e.g., certain avionics elements). Where time permitted, especially for the more costly items, multiple techniques were employed, and results cross-checked with results of other studies, where available. For certain very costly items (reception system and the SPS satellite itself), the RCA PRICE Model was employed to provide an independent set of estimates; because of the lack of precise analogies for these items, the uncertainties are probably the highest of all. All transportation elements were costed to the subsystem level, using standard NASA aerospace methods, and estimates are considered accurate and as reliable as the confidence in the current vehicle descriptions. Because not even conceptual designs existed for the assembly station, designs were postulated based on phase B NASA space station studies, and modules postulated for a variety of purposes (living, recreation, assembly, dispensary, etc.). Descriptions of the modules used are presented. It should be remarked that no design optimization was performed for the assembly station. Facility costs were based on a one-site desert launch complex with downrange recovery. The launch complex itself was extrapolated from the Saturn V complex 39 at KSC.
X-D-2

CO LU I CO

en o; _i

o 2:

i~ x:
o
ai

It I i I

to a

a: o o. co

0M-

oO >-

a:

< _j <c e> _i i 2: co ac ' a. o rr a: o

>
C9

CX. I i' Q

zr o cj o cj LU <C uj cr:

o_Jz:a:ct:2::xLU

C3LUZDO:DLULU"COO:

2: i of. ex. o is 3:
<C i I i Of. O O I CO CO O C9 CX. Q_

I I I

i i

CM

I I

I I

I I I

CO

to
c_

CO

a"
LU

LU

>_J CQ ^_. jj J tO

1 t CO

LU CO CO ^^

a:
<^
CO

LU h-

oo t z.
H -

>- I U.

co - co
i ~^S

2:

co

>1

Hf^

O
*

H-

^c

rD i_
CO

H- ce: - CD 2: _J o_ O ii o_ ii c_> r> i

<C CO <_> U_ IjJ

C C LU 1 LU OC 1 LU 1 CD

t ^

LU CO CO
<^

z:

0
O-

OC CO QLU fX. 3 _J LU CO

CJ 1*

CO
LJLJ

C CD <C

cr

u_

n: 2: co z: o- ZD co ct: z; co 2: r~> i LU z: LU 11 CO _i z:ou_ Q LU rr -J Q _i ce co o cj rj o - CD LU o 2: <t ^ o >- <f. <C 0 -> <3I => i (_> v en 2: CO I OC o3 0_ 01 (_>
1 t 1 K-
*~-4

<C J >t 2T <C <C CO I <t 1 I LU o3 H- <t 1 CO CO 1 CO CO IO 1 CO rD _l

f~^

_l 1

LU

CO
f "

^f

a.

t/> CD or i i _j
CM CO
CD

s: _i <t Q vi i

CO O t-> LU 21 rfZ LU CC. ^3 1 i LU

r f-^ r CM .

o-> co ro

< Ll 1 2: CO _J 2: LU UJ CD CD CD CD -=C CO QC CO CJ ~5L CD ro 1 1 1 1 1 1

a: 2: co t

CD. <C CO

=? ct:

LU 0 => LICO CJ CO ^~

ro

I I I *

CO

o Q.
CD
1

CO
2=

O
CO

CD O . CO

<-)
CM

OC. CO I LU i I (X. 3C LU co

ce ex. LUO o.
CJ >

<C

PTc? LU

C3

to CD 2= I-H H-0 I JC -. er C3 I c2 i <C LU

U. LU CD O-

tD

_i ct: ex.
OC CO LU LU t

a:

<_>

_j ex. co

o:

- I ! LU ZDCLU

LU LU OC _l O_ 3Z LU CJ CJ ^ "- I 2: CD LU

o: CD >t_>
I

a: co LU LU _i a. ca
CJ
O-

rv"

LU CJ

=C LU

1C LU Ll_

CM CM
I I I

i o:

CM

CM

a: co ex: co >O >- << a:

>i CO

CO

CO CJ

CO

CJ CJ

LOO: =C;TCD<CUJCJ I-DLU cji i2cocj^iir> -^i z: ct: cj CD cr >- rj co CO - << i ex. CO i zr ex. i co ct O o is O CD > i I CO CJ CO o- ex. a: -i CM i i

OLUCO>iz;i<2:<t II r >- e I < C ( -I ii I i<tcoccc3_i2:cjz<s:o2:

co CD ce

CD 2: co ( o

SEQ: oo CJ I <c
LU i

LU 2> CO

CD H-

_js:

C3 CO LU

o cs
LU CO o zr CO 2: CM CJ - <t - CD a:

O ^C
I CJ co
CM CM

ro

i a. ex. i

_:

i in CM

^:

x-D-3

3. SUMMARY OF ESTIMATES

Results of this analysis are tabulated below in cost per kilowatt (for 112 X 10" KW) for all major program elements.

X-D-4

In order of cost sensitivity, the costs are:

TOTAL COSTS $/KW

1. Ground Reception (Rectenna)

2. HLLV

945
518

3. Satellite Collection (Solar Collector) 4. Satellite Transmission

5. Construction Base 6. COTV
7.

397 242
68 45
31

PLV

8. Satellite Integration, Test, Maintenance

9. Facilities 10. All Other Total

15
13 13

The relative magnitudes of the costs are portrayed on the bar chart fig. X-D-2, where the dominance of the power collection, ground reception, and transmission systems, and the HLLV operations is clearly displayed. Certain components of these costs (e.g., collector instrumentation) are very large and not fully explainable in examining the input weight data from reference 1. A brief comparison has been made with Boeing mature industry estimates and with last year's estimates in reference 1 for the satellite system. Satellite Unit Cost
Reference 8 High Low 6173 M 2127 M

Boeing "Mature Industry"

JSC

6423 M
2287 M

X-D-5

en
CO

CM CM
**>

CO

CO
UJ

s: on 0 1 oz
i

CJ UJ

uj
fc

C\l

CC. LU

CO CO

^
O

3S
UJ CM

3^
J CM

LLO

OQ UJ

>cC

<c. u_

CO

a- <o z ^
.j
(u
1

t "" lo

uj SS

LU
_J LU
S

CO

<C J -

:>

t
1 OL

CD
^

2:

i =c co o
rf J-3T-

Z CO _l
LU
ft

?z i o co ft

o: co J
J

CO

\ r

co
oB jr CO

LU 1
O

yr 1 1
LU

l a: >-i co cj I
LIJ

uj

c
<->

_( 1

3Q a:
CO ^.

E 0
lulCL.

UJ
"J

c o a : c o o c o c o
-^~ *\

CL. Z

_J
CO

_l

en

<c Li

<t

or

-l

'

s
1

s
o
t CJ
--^ **

O UJ OCO

O.X fl-

CO

o "
1 IA
2 LO LU CO

ea

a. o

:D co Q VO o a: a.

a a

1
CM

SQNVSnOHl 'ZZ6L $ '11VM01DI c!3d 1S03 X-D-6

It is encouraging that this completely independent estimate is toward the lower end of the previous range of estimates. However, it should be noted that an extremely low cost approach for the production of solar cells must be invented (i.e., a major breakthrough in production techniques will be required) for these costs to be realized. Annual costs for the first ten years are as follows (in millions).
DDT&E
FY 85 86 87

PRODUCTION

OPERATIONS

679

1896 3178
5056

88
89

6961
7550 2174

90
91 92

5941 3134
1129
177

3818 7591
15098
14

93
94

37

8154

2310

Operations cost estimates were composed primarily of transportation costs (propellents, launch operations, vehicle maintenance and replacement) and satellite operations and maintenance (at 3% of hardware in orbit per year).

X-D-7

1.1

SATELLITE

(Analyst: W. F. Haldeman) 1.1.1 System 1.1.1.1 Collection 1.1.1.1.1 Solar Cells Four approaches, as listed below were used to estimate the cost of the solar cells. These approaches were as follows: 1. 2. 3. 4. RCA PRICE computer method A rule of thumb Boeing Mature industry approach Delphi Technique

Method 1 - RCA PRICE computer method Starting with a solar blanket and coating it by a simple manufacturing process (to be developed), a manufacturing complexity can be determined This complexity is then adjusted downward for the general advance in technology. This along with other descriptive factors are used as inputs to the computer model. Results:
DDT&E $183.175 M

Total Production Production/SAT Production/KW Method 2 - Rule of Thumb

$190,271.728 M $1,698.9 M $169.89

There is a rule of thumb which says that: to accomplish the same function, the cost can be reduced to 1/3 every 10 years. In the May 1977 "Scientific American" a cost of $1.50 per watt is given. Twenty years from now it would be 1/9 or $.167 per watt or $167 per KW. Method 3 - Boeing Mature Industry Approach This approach is based upon the assumption that inherent within large quantity production programs in industry is a level of maturity which drives unit cost down to a level relatively close to the material cost of the item. The application of this method results in a cost in the $.10 - $.20 per watt range.

X-D-8

Method 4 - Delphi Technique The Delphi technique is a formalized method of arriving at a decision based upon the opinions of experts within,a stated area. Source: Semi-Annual Review Meeting Silicon Technology Programs ERDA, January 1977 Motorola $.13 per watt .1359 Texas Instruments GE .17 - .20 RCA* .20

*Directly from their Semi-Conductor people and totally independent from Method 1. 1.1.1.1.2 Concentrators

The source of information is page IV-14 of Volume I of reference 1. The nominal Truss design data was used. The assumption was that the 5735 MT (metric tons, 2200 pounds) was made up of 62 identical elements. The estimate was made for developing this element and producing 6900 of them. DDT&E Total Production Production/SAT Production/KW $110.552 M $62,268.752 M $555.971 M $55.60

1.1.1.1.3 Instrumentation From reference 1 the undefined weight was given as 484 MT. Based on that level of information and the judgment of the estimator, the following estimates were developed:
DOT&E $609.621 M

Total Production Production/SAT Production/KW 1.1.1.1.4 Rotary Joints

$139,295.472 M $1,243,710 M $124.37

The weight from reference 1 was 635 MT. There are two rotary joints per satellite. This is a large complex pedestal type mechanism. DDT&E Total Production Production/SAT Production/KW $223.336 M $5,975.712 M $53.355 M $5.33

X-D-9

1.1.1.1.5 Support Structure

From reference 1, the 2973 MT was for 150 elements. This element cost was estimated and 16800 of them were assumed to be produced. DDT&E Total Production Production/SAT Production/KW $38.727 M $1,626.894 M $14.526 M $1.45

X-D-IO

1.1.1.1.9

Collection I&T

Based on weight and complexity of the collection items the following estimate for integration and test was developed:
DDT&E $1,860.732 M

Total Production
Production/SAT

$20,320.608 M
$181.434 M

Production/KW 1.1.1.2 Power Distribution

$18.14

This element includes power collection, power management, and integration and test from reference. The weight used was 3000 MT. Power collection was 98% of the weight and management was 2%. Management was assumed to be more complex than the collection.
DDT&E $141.677 M

Total Production Cost $9,617.637 M Production/SAT $85.872 M Production/KW $8.59 1.1.2 Transmission There are two transmission systems per satellite. Cost and weights will be kept on a per satellite basis in the following paragraphs. 1.1.2.1 Structure

According to Reference 1 the structure will weigh 1210 MT. This simple structure was split into 60 elements for costing purposes and 6720 elements were assumed to be produced.
DDT&E $14.108 M

Total Production Production/SAT Production/KW 1.1.2.2 Power Distribution

$749.783 M $6.694 M $.67

Reference 1 indicates a weight of 167 MT; 100 MT of this was assumed to be simple material for the most part while the 67 MT for switch gear was fairly complex. DDT&E $37.684 M Total Production $1,133.279 M Product!on/SAT $10.118 M Production/KW $1.01

X-D-11

1.1.2.3.1 Generators

Microwave Conversion

From the reference 1 it was determined that required per satellite. This calls for an rate of 81,654. The computer estimated an Raytheon has estimated that the cost would 1990's.
DDT&E

262,460 generators were average monthly production average cost of $2,217. come down to $2000 by the
$3.685 M

Total Production $65,182.000 M Production/SAT $581.982 M Product!on/KW $58.20 1.1.2.3.2 Wave Guides According to reference 1, 4,002 MT of wave guides per satellite will be required. The estimate was based on standard wave guide complexity factors and the design shown. ,
DDT&E $9.713 M

Total Production $64,950.848 M Production/SAT $579.918 M Product!" on/KW $58.00 1.1.2.3.9 Microwave Conversion I&I Assuming a fairly complex integration and test program, the following estimates were developed:
DDT&E $1,285.577 M

Total Production $13,654.293 M Production/SAT $121.913 M Production/KW $12.19 1.1.2.4 Control System 1.1.2.4.1 Pointing Based

Reference 1 contains a weight of 1 MT for the pointing System. upon this weight, the following costs were estimated:
DDT&E $0.127 M

Total Production Production/SAT Production/KW 1.1.2.4.2 Phase Control

$260.461 M $2.326 M $.23

Reference 1 indicates 358 MT of weight for this complex system. It was assumed that each of the 7854 sub-arrays weighed 100.5 and were difficult engineering items. X-D-12

DDT&E Total Production Production/SAT Product!on/KW 1.1.2.5 Instrumentation

$491.863 M $7,951.091 M $70.992 M $7.10

Based upon the stated weight of 52 MT in Reference 1, the following cost estimates were developed: DDT&E Total Production Production/SAT Production/KW 1.1.2.9 Transmission I&T The elements for which the integration and testing functions will be performed are as follows: Structures Power Distribution Microwave Generator Control System Instrumentation DDT&E Total Production/SAT Production/KW 1.1.3 Software $878.605 M $10,835.287 M $96.744 M $9.67 $141.749 M $19,019.200 M $169.814 M $16.98

This estimate of the cost of the software associated with instrumentation is based upon a historical relationship of software to hardware.
DDT&E $2,107.610 M

1.1.4

Total Satellite I&T

This is the cost of integrating and testing the following: Collection Transmission Software
DDT&E $1,454.146 M

Total Production Production/SAT Production/KW X-D-13

$14,884.392 M $132.896 M $13.29

Since the collection system represents such a large portion of the SPS, a decision was made to conduct alternate costing exercises whenever possible within the constraints of time under which the estimators were operating. The resulting numbers were not included within the total cost summaries within this document. Alternate estimates for the elements listed below are contained on the following pages: 1.1.1.2 1.1.1.3 1.1.1.6 1.1.2 Concentrators Support Structures Rotary Joints Transmission System

X-D-14

1.1

SATELLITE - Alternate Cost Estimates

Analyst: Garland Bauch

X-D-15

1.1.1 Collection System The SPS Collection System estimate is based on the Truss Configuration weights and characteristics shown 1n Reference 1. Table X-D-I shows the summary cost estimates for the concentrators, support structure, and rotary joints. General ground rules are as follows: + One (1) flight test and .5 ground test units in DDT&E. + The flight test unit may be refurbished for operations. * See HLLV for other ground rules. Detailed assumptions and methodology for each major subsystem are as follows: + Concentrators: Estimated by "grass roots" method. - Design Engineering: Assumed 100 MYRS for 4 yrs. at $40,000/MYR. - Manufacturing: Concentrator Sheet Installation for one (1) year (one SPS) based on 49 MYR from Section V. C. Construction Operation in Reference 1. Used $100,000 per MYR. (Includes hazard pay.) - Material: Used Kapton at $33/KG (A. D. Little) times 5,735,000 KG per SPS. The Kapton cost will decrease as production increases. Only 300,000 KG Kapton was produced in 1976. Source: JSC Engineering and Development Directorate. + Support Structure: Estimated by "grass roots" method. - Design Engineering: Assumed 500 MYRS. for 4 yrs. at $40,000/ MYR. (with direct overhead) - Manufacturing (unit cost): Used manpower for crews shown in Reference 1, section V. C. Construction Operations. Beam Building, Mobile Manipulator, and Facility Manipulator crews were 16.3, 6, and 15 MYRS., respectively. Used $100,000/MYR rate. MYRS for manipulator crews were split between Collection and Transmission System. - Material: Unit cost - Used aluminum at $2/KG by $2.27 R" KG per SPS. Assumed sheet roll raw stock was taken to orbit for fabrication. + Rotary Joints: Used Shuttle 040C Docking System estimate and Aerospace STS Body/Tank CER exponents to derive new CER. Assumed 1.2 complexity for design and manufacturing problems due to close tolerances and arcing. Weight = 144,318 LB/joint. Two (2) joints/ SPS.

X-D-16

TABLE X-D-1 SPS SATELLITE COST SUMMARY (M OF 1977 DOLLARS)

DDT&E 1.1.1 1.1.1.2 1.1.1.3 1.1.1.6 COLLECTION SYSTEM CONCENTRATORS SUPPORT STRUCTURE ROTARY JOINTS 309 102 162

TFU

194 8 68

X-D-17

1.1.2 Transmission System: Estimated by "grass roots" method. Table X-D-2 shows the cost estimate for structure. Same ground rules as Collection System. (Test units - 1.5.) + Structure - Design Engineering: Assumed 200 MYRS. for 4 yrs. at $40,000/MYR. - Manufacturing: (unit cost) Used 12 MYRS./YR. for Antenna Primary and Support Structure Crews and Harness and Array Installation Crew (total - 36 MYRS.) Source: Section V. C. Construction Operations, Reference 1. Used $100,000/MYR. - Materials (unit cost): Used 1,210,000 KG aluminum at $2/K6 (raw stock) - Tooling: Included in 1.3 Assembly.

X-D-18

TABLE X-D-2 . SPS SATELLITE COST SUMMARY (FT OF 1977 DOLLARS)

DDT&E 1.1.2 1.1.2.1 TRANSMISSION SYSTEM STRUCTURE 45

TFU

X-D-19

HLLV Cost Estimate

(Garland Bauch, LS/Schedules Integration Office) 1.2.1.1 Vehicle The HLLV estimate is based on the EDIN EX-338-76 configuration (Propane/LOX Booster). Table X-D-3 shows the summary cost estimate. The orbiter estimate is shown in Table X-D-4. General ground rules are as follows: Costs are in constant 1977 dollars Inflation rate is 6% No contractor fees included Facilities cost (C of F) not included. See WBS 1.4.1 Three (3) test units are included in DDT&E No learning for test units Two (2) flight test units will be refurbished and used during operations o All estimates are derived from weight statements/technical characteristics, and JSC cost data o Cost estimates are based on current technology Detailed assumptions and methodology for DDT&E and each major project element are as follows: 1.2.1.1.1 Systems Management Percent of total HLLV DDT&E cost. CER based on OAO, Gemini, Lunar Orbiter, SRAM, S-IC, LM, and CSM data used to derive Shuttle 040C estimate. SM = CF x .48 x (Total Cost) . Use complexity factor (CF) of 1.0 for DDT&E and 15 for Production and Operations. 1.2.1.1.2 Systems Engineering and Integration o o o o o o o

Percent to total HLLV DDT&E cost based on Shuttle 040C estimate. Complexity if 3x's relative to Systems Management.

X-D-21

TABLE X-D-3HLLV PROGRAM COST SUMMARY

(M OF '77 $)

DDT&E
1.2.1.1 Total HLLV

TFU

(13764)
232 696

(1188)

1.2.1.1.1 Systems Management 1.2.1.1.2 Systems Engr. & Integ. 1.2.1.1.3 Orbiter 1.2.1.1.4 Main Engine (Orb.) 1.2.1.1.5 Booster 1.2.1.1.6 Main Engine (booster) 1.2.1.1.7 Flight Test 1.2.1.1.8 Systems Support 1.2.1.1.9 Operations Phase

0 0
308 210 414 256

3830
630

4730 2362
257

0 0 0

1027

X-D-22

TABLE X-D-4 HLLV ORBITER COST SUMMARY

(M of '77 $)
DDT&E TFU

1.2.1.1.3

Orbiter

(3830)

(308)

1.2.1.1.3.1
1.2.1.1.3.2 1.2.1.1.3.3 1.2.1.1.3.4 1.2.1.1.3.5 1.2.1.1.3.6 1.2.1.1.3.7 1.2.1.1.3.8 1.2.1.1.3.9 1.2.1.1.3.10

Project Management
Systems Engr. & Integ. Structures Thermal Protection Propulsion Feed Power Avionics ECLS Inst'l, Assy. & C/0 Major Ground Test

92
276 1198 860 364 45 341 0 120 114

0'
0 124 105 7 5 27 0 40 0

1.2.1.1.3.11

Tooling

419

X-D-23

SEI = CF x 1.44 x (Total Cost) <65 .5 for Production and Operations. 1.2.1.1.3 Orbiter

Use CF = 1 for DDT&E and

- Project Management: Percent of total Orbiter DDT&E. Same CER as above. - Project Engineering & Integration: Percent to total Orbiter DDT&E. Same CER as above. - Structures: Divided estimate into airframe and tank. Use Shuttle Orbiter 040C structure CER (C-5A technology) for the airframe. AMPR weight equals 255, 185 LB. Aerospace STS Body/ Tank CER (S-IVB and S-II technology) was used to estimate the tank. - Thermal Protection System: Flame Whield estimated with Aerospace STS CER for Aerospace STS CER for aerodynamic surfaces (F-102A, X-15, F-106A, B-58A, F-111A, B-52, B70A, C5A data). Complexity of 1.0 used. Highly Compacted Fibers (HCF) estimated from Shuttle 040C CER derived from Structures CER (.46 exponent) adjusted to RSI complexity. Insulation estimated from Aerospace STS CER based on dynaflex and microquartz data. - Propulsion: Propulsion Feed estimated from Shuttle 040C CER (S-IVB and S-II data). Input: LH2 LOX technology and weight equals 3171 LB. Reaction Control estimated from Aerospace STS CER (Gemini RCS and OAMS data). Input: Weight - 5678 LB. and monopropellant technology. Assume new development. - Power: Shuttle 040C estimate. Assume APU system. Input: Weight - 2105 LB. and storable propellent technology. - Avionics: Shuttle 040C estimate. Assume 1980 technology (50% benefit). Input: Weight - 6718 Lb. - Installation, Assembly & Checkout: Estimated from Shuttle 040C CER (Atlas, Centaur, S-3A, Gemini, CSM, and LM data) as 15% of total Theoretical First Unit (TFU). - Major Ground Test: Percent of Total hardware DDT&E based on Shuttle 040C estimate (Grumman, McDonnell Douglas, and Rockwell Phase B estimates). MGT = CF x 8.8 x (TC) .65; CF = .8. - Tooling: Shuttle 040C CER (S-IVB, B-70, and 747 technology). Input: Weight = 498,652 Lb. IT = CE x .000842 x (AMPR) .76 x $25; CF = 1 1.2.1.1.4 Main Engine (Orbiter): Estimated from POP 76-2 data for Air Force Production (current plan). All new installation development design is included in Main Propulsion Feed System. No new engine design assumed. Fourteen (14) engines per ship set.
X-D-24

1.2.1.1.5

Booster: Estimate without engine is scaled-up from the Orbiter estimate using a .5 exponent for DDT&E and .7 for TFU. Input: Booster weight = 814.562 Lb without engine. Booster Main Engine: Estimate from Aerospace STS CER (RL-10A, J-2 data).Assumed all new development of Propane Engine using LH2/LOX technology. Input: Thrust = 1,916,290 Lb. (vac) per engine. Sixteen (16) engines per ship set. Flight Test: Assume flight test program similar to Shuttle (1 year duration, and 6 flights), but no horizontal flight test. Estimate by percent of total hardware DDT&E. Used 2% from Shuttle 040C estimate as a basis.
FT = CF x .59 x (TC)
>65

1.2.1.1.6

1.2.1.1.7

CF = 1

1.2.1.1.8

Systems Support: Percent of total hardware DDT&E. Based on 15% for GSE and Logistics for Shuttle 040C estimate. Scaled down by .65 exponent. CSM data used to derive 15%. SS = CF x 2.35 X (Total Cost) .65

X-D-25

1.2.1.2

Fuel Per Flight

The estimate for LH2 (36/Lb) and LOX (2.1/Lb) is based on a study by R. K. Allgeier and Hoyt McBryar. The assumptions are as follows: o o o o o o o o Current Technology Use Wyoming Coal No learning for Production Government borrows money at 7 1/2 % interest to fund facilities Plant pays no income tax Plant sells 1/2 by-products Coal costs $11.25/MT Use middle band for labor and maintenance costs

Losses for LOX and LH2 were assumed to be an additional 56% and 8%, respectively. LH2 losses are minimized by utilizing a reliquification plant. 1.2.1.3 Launch Operations

The launch operations estimate is based on KSC Launch and Landing CER's. Manpower is a function of vehicle flows (number of vehicles being processed at a given time). Vehicle flows was calculated each year using the mission model flight rates, vehicle processing time, and 50 work weeks per year. Turnaround time of 12 days (1 day in flight and 11 days on-the ground) was assumed. The KSC CER's included both launch and recovery operations combined; a 10:1 manpower split was assumed. Manyear rates were $24,114; $56,577; and $19,859 for Direct Vehicle Support, Technical Representatives, and Ground System Support, respectively (in 1977 $). 1.2.1.4 Recovery Operations

See launch operations. Cost/flight = (1/11) x KSC CER's launch and landing total. Recovery time is assumed to be one (1) day. 1.2.1.5 Refurbishment

The HLLV lifetime is assumed to be 300 missions. The refurbishment costs are approximately 14% of the average unit cost/flight in 1977 dollars. This number is based on an Air Force study which recommends 15% initial spares and 1.7% vehicle/year sustaining spares for the Shuttle Program. 1.2.2 Cargo Orbital Transfer Vehicle

(Garland Bauch, LS/Schedules Integration Office) 1.2.2.1 Vehicle

The COTV estimate is based on the LH~ Thermal Electric ARC Jet concept shown in Table VI-D-1-6 of Reference 1. Table X-D-5 shows the summary cost estimate. General ground rules are identical to the HLLV except as follows: 0 Assume .5 ground test units and one (1) flight test units are included in DDT&E.
X-D-26

TABLE X-D-5 COTV COST SUMMARY (MOF 1977$) DDT&E

TFU

1.2.2.1 1.2.2.1.1 1.2.2.1.2 1.2.2.1.3 1.2.2.1.3.1 1.2.2.1.3.2 1.2.2.1.3.3 1.2.2.1.3.4 1.2.2.1.4 1.2.2.1.5 1.2.2.1.6 1.2.2.1.7 1.2.2.1.8

COTV

(1655)
29 87

(128)

Systems Management Systems Engr. & Integ. Hardware

Structure Propulsion

0 0

283 205
47 60 68

1
37

Power Conditioner Other (Contingency) Inst'l, Assy. & C/0 Major Ground Test Tooling Systems Support Operations Phase

33 12

22

792 381

X-D-27

o The flight test unit will be refurbished and used for operations. Detailed assumptions and methodology for each major project element are as follows: 1.2.2.1.1 1.2.2.1.2 Systems Management: See HLLV CER. Use .5 complexity for DDT&E and .25 for Production and Operations. Systems Engineering & Integration: See HLLV CER. Use .5 complexity for DDT&E and .25 for Production and Operations. Low complexity based on fewer systems and simpler structures on COTV relative to HLLV. Hardware

1.2.2.1.3

- Structure: Estimate was scaled from the Satellite Collection System Support Structure cost (444/KG DDT&E and $3.5/K6 TFU) and weight, 2.3 M KG. - Input: 410K Lb and truss configuration. Propellant tanks: estimated from JSC derived Shuttle External Tank CER (S-IVB, S-II, and S-IC data). Assumed .5 complexity and eight (8) tanks per COTV. Weight per tank = 283,750 Lb. w/o propel 1 ant. - Propulsion: Thruster estimate from JSC derived CER's (Gemini RCS & CAMS, Apollo CM and SM RCS, and S-IVB APS data). Assumed Thermal ARC Jet is existing technology, Used 50% of new development to design for space application. Installation design costs are in structure and propel 1 ant tanks. Assumed 50 LBF thrust per engine, and 112 engined per COTV. - Power Conditioner: Used Boeing data, $50/KW and .73 x 10 watts from "Reference 1" to obtain unit cost. Used TFU estimate for Design and Development to modify existing technology for space. 1.2.2.1.4 1.2.2.1.5 1.2.2.1.6 Installation, Assembly, and Checkout: See HLLV CER. User 1.5 complexity since work will be done in space. Major Ground Test: See HLLV CER. Use .5 complexity since there are fewer systems to test relative to HLLV. Tooling: See HLLV CER. Use .5 complexity due to space operations. Includes machines for ground fabrication of parts only. AMPR Weight equals 2.68 M Lb. Systems Support; See HLLV CER. Use complexity of .5 because of fewer systems relative to HLLV. Fuel per Flight
g

1.2.2.1.7 1.2.2.2

See WBS 1.2.1.2 Fuel per Flight for the HLLV for the data source. LH9 cost = 10,320,000 Lb x .36 = $3.715 M/flt. (includes unusable propellant). tosses at 18.8% = $698 K/fH. Total cost = $4.413 M/flt. Does not include tanker loss at ground launch pad (8%).
X-D-28

1.2.2.3

Refurbishment

The COTV life is assumed to be one (1) mission to GEO. The structure and propulsion system used to transfer the solar panel must be utilized in GEO if any economic return is to be realized. This assumption places a very stringent cost requirement on the HLLV flights required. It appears logical to study methods to bring the thermal electric arc jet propulsion system and structure back to LEO for reuse. However, additional propellant and propulsion hardware is required. 1.2.3 Personnel Launch Vehicle

(Garland Bauch, LS/Schedules Integration Office) 1.2.3.1 Vehicle

The PLV estimate is based on the EDIN 0505 (F-l engines in LRB) and EDIN 0511 (New Propane/LOX engines in LRB) configurations. Tables X-D-6-8 shows the summary cost estimates. General ground rules are identical to those for the HLLV except as follows: o One (1) ground test unit and one (1) flight test unit are in DDT&E. o The flight test unit will be refurbished and used during operations. Detailed assumptions and methodology for each major project element are as follows: 1.2.3.1.1 1.2.3.1.2 Systems Management: See HLLV CER. Complexity = .5 relative to HLLV because Orbiter and ET units are existing. Systems Engineering & Integration: See HLLV CER. Complexity = .5. Orbiter and ET integration is already complete at PLV timeframe. Orbiterc The DDT&E and TFU estimate is based on the Shuttle 040C agency commitment data. No new design and development was assumed except to accommodate changes (approximately 25%) in the Avionics and Power systems. Power D&D = .25 x 149 M = 37 M ('71 $) = 53 M ('77 $) Avionics D&D= .25 x 299 M = 75 M ('71 $) =106 M ('71 $)

1.2.3.1.3

Any new test and analysis required to assure vehicle integration is included in Systems Engineering. Assume the Orbiter production line is kept open until 1995. No start-up penalty for production line is included. 1.2.3.1.4 Main Engine (Orbiter): Assume no new engine development is required. Engine first unit is $15 M ('77 $) based on POP 76-2 (current plan) data. The price ($189.715 M) for nine (9) Air Force production engines bought between FY 81 and FY 85 was deflated at an annual rate of 6% to 1977 constant year dollars. No learning is assumed for test engine buys. Assume the engine production line is kept open. X-D-29

TABLE X-D-6 PLV COST SUMMARY (M" of 1977 Dollars)

DDT&E

TFU

1.2.3.1 1.2.3.1.1 1.2.3.1.2 1.2.3.1.3 1.2.3.1.4 1.2.3.1.5 1.2.3.1.6 1.2.3.1.7 1.2.3.1.8 1.2.3.1.9

PLV w/F-1

(2359)
68

(339)

Systems Management System Engr, & Integ. Orbiter Main Engine (orb.) External Tank Liquid Repl. Booster

0 0
190
45 11 71 22

136 537
90 42

1016
307 163
__

LRB Engine (F-l) Systems Support Operations Phase

0 0

X-D-30

TABLE X-D-7 PLV COST SUMMARY (M OF '77 DOLLARS)

DDT&E

TFU

1.2.3.1 1.2.3.1.1 1.2.3.1.2 1.2.3. 1.3 1.2.3.1.4 1.2.3. 1.5 1.2.3. 1.6 1.2.3. 1.7 1.2.3. 1.8 1.2.3. 1.9

PLV w/Propane/LOX Systems Management Systems Engr. & Integ. Orbiter Main Engine (Orb.) External Tank LRB LRB Engine (Propane/LOX) Systems Support Operational Phase

(3937) 112 232 537 90 30 1016 1690 230

(365) 0 0 190 45 11 71 48 0

X-D-31

TABLE X-QdB PLV COST SUMMARY

(WOF '77 $)
D&D TFU

1.2.3.1.6 1.2.3.1.6.1 1.2.3.1.6.2 1.2.3.1.6.3

1.2.3.1.6.3.1

LRB w/o Engine Project Management Systems Engr. & Integ. Hardware
Structure

(874) 32 56 (666)
398

(71) 0 0 (62)
29

1.2.3.1.6.3.2 1.2.3.1.6.3.3 1.2.3.1.6.3.4

1.2.3.1.6.3.5 1.2.3.1.6.3.6 1.2.3.1.6.4

Thermal Protection Separation & Recovery Propulsion Feed

Power Avionics Inst'l, Assy, & C/0

18 74 98
46 32

3 1 14
5 10 9

1.2.3.1.6.5
1.2.3.1.6.6

Major Ground Test

Tooling

27
93

0
0

DDT&E = 874 + (2 X 71) = $1016 M

X-D-32

1.2.3.1.5

External Tank: Assume no new tank development is required except for interface changes (10%) at the ET/LRB and removal of the ET/ SRB attach. Use the Shuttle 040C ET estimate as baseline. Thus, ET D&D - .10 x 69 M - 6.9 M ('714) - 9.8 M ('77$). Unit cost = 71. M ('71$) = 10 M ('77$). The ET production line should still be open in 1995 and no start-up penalty is anticipated. Cost for resizing the tank is estimated to be 15 M ('77$) based on a weight change of 3.242 Ib and the Shuttle 040C ET CER. Unit Cost also increases by 1.2 M ('77$) due to the size increase. Thus, in round figures, the total D&D = 25 M ('77$) and First Unit 11 M ('77$). Liquid Replacement Booster (LRB):

1.2.3.1.6

- Project Management: See HLLV CER. Use CF = 1. - Systems Engineering & Integration: See HLLV CER. Use CF = 1. - Hardware Structures: Used Aerospace STS Body/Tank Structure CER (Titan III, S-IVB and S-II adjusted, and S-IC technology). Use CF = 1. Weight = 116,917 Lb. Thermal Protection: Used Aerospace STS insulation CER (dynaflex and microquartz data base). CF = 1. WT. = 2305 Lb. Separation and Recovery: Used SRB recovery system CER's generated at JSC for the MSFC SRB SEB in 1973. Weight = 16,847 Lb. Propulsion Feed: See HLLV CER. CF = 1. Weight =38,796 Lb.

Power: Assume APU monopropellant system. Weight = 873 Lb. Used Shuttle 040C estimate. Assumed no saving for existing technology and smaller system. Avionics: Used Aerospace STS Instrumentation and Electrical Distribution CER's (Apollo LM and CSM data) CF = 1; Weight = 1520 Lb. Assume 1 to 3 split in weight. Installation, Assembly, and Checkout: See HLLV CER. CF = 1.

- Major Ground Test: See HLLV CER. Assume CF - .5 because LRB has fewer systems than HLLV. - Tooling: See HLLV CER. Weight - 110,001 Lb. CF = 1. 1.2.3.1.7 LRB Engine (F-1): The F-l engine production line start-up is assumed to cost 30% of the original development cost. Aerospace STS says F-l engine development was $550 M (-69$). Thus LRB F-l - .30 x 550 - 165 M ('69$) -263 M ('77$). The installation design cost is included under the MPS feed system. First Unit cost - 3.5 M ('69$). One (1) ship set of four (4) engines equals 22 M ('77$). X-D-33

1.2.3.1.7A LRB Engine (Propane/LOX): The Propane/LOX engine is assumed to be all new development. The estimate is based on the Aerospace STS Rocket Engine CER. LHp/LOX complexity was assumed. Data base is RL-10A-3 and J-2 engine technology. 1.2.3.1.8 1.2.3.2 Systems Support: See HLLV CER. Assume CF - .5 because existing Orbiter and ET GSE may be used. SS- CF x 2.35 x (TC) .65. Fuel per Flight (PLV)

See the HLLV fuel per flight WBS 1.2.1.2 for the data source. Cost of RP-1 for the F-l engine is 27.5 per Ib. RP-1 is assumed to have no loss. The PLV with Propane/LOX LRB engines has a propane fuel cost of 25<t/lb without losses. Propane is assumed to have no losses. 1.2.3.3 Launch Operations (PLV)

See WBS 1.2.1.3 HLLV Launch Operations. Processing time is assumed to be 11 days. Launch to launch time per vehicle is 12 days. 1.2.3.4 Recovery Operations

See HLLV Recovery Operations under WBS 1.2.1.4; assume three (3) days for recovery operations of liquid Replacement Booster since it does not fly back and land. Thus, Cost = (3/11) x KSC Launch and Landing Cost. 1.2.4 Personnel Orbital Transfer Vehicle (POTV)

(Garland Bauch, LS/Schedules Integration Office) 1.2.4.1 Vehicle

The POTV estimate is based on weight/technical characteristics from Section VI-E in vol. II, "reference 1." Tables X-D-9-13 show the summary cost estimates. General ground rules are the same as for HLLV except as follows: o One (1) ground test unit and two (2) flight test units are in DDT&E. o Two (2) flight test units will be refurbished and used during operations. Detailed assumptions and methodology for each major project element are as follows: 1.2.4.1.1 Systems Management: Same as HLLV CER. CF = .4

1.2.4.1.2 Systems Engineering & Integration: Same as HLLV CER. CF = .4 1.2.4.1.3 Crew Module: - Project Management: Same as HLLV CER. CF = .4. - Project Engineering & Integration: Same as HLLV CER. CF = .4 because there are fewer systems to integrate. - Hardware X-D-34

TABLE X-D-9 POTV COST SUMMARY (M~OF '77$) DDT&E TFU

1.2.4.1.

POTV

(2204)

(89)

1.2.4.1.1 1.2.4.1.2
1.2.4.1.3

Systems Management Systems Engr. & Integ.

Crew Module

28 86
524

0 0
28

1.2.4.1.4
1.2.4.1.5

Resupply Module
Crew Rotation Module

235
287

7
13

1.2.4.1.6 1.2.4.1.7 1.2.4.1.8 1.2.4.1.9 1.2.4.1.10

Second Stage First Stage Flight Test Systems Support Operations Phase

328 339 44 332 ---

20 21 0 0 0

X-D-35

TABLE X-D-10 POTV COST SUMMARY

(M OF '77 $)

DDT&E

TFU

1.2:4.1.3 1.2.4.1.3.1 1.2.4.1.3.2 1.2.4.1.3.3 1.2.4.1.3.3.1

1.2.4.1.3.3.2

Crew Module Project Management Systems Engr. & Integ. Hardware Structure
Power

(524) 11 31 (439) 159

30

(28) 0 0 (24) 13
2

1.2.4.1.3.3.3 1.2.4.1.3.3.4 1.2.4.1.3.4 1.2.4.1.3.5 1.2.4.1.3.6

Avionics Environmental Control Inst'l, Assy, and Checkout Major Ground Test Tooling

171 79 12 18 13

4 5 4 0 0

X-D-36

TABLE X-D-11 POTV COST SUMMARY

(M"OF 1977 $)

DDT&E

TFU

1.2.4.1.4 1.2.4.1.4.1 1.2.4.1.4.2 1.2.4.1.4.3

1.2.4.1.4.3.1

Resupply Module Project Management Systems Engr. & Integ. Hardware

Structure

(235) 9 16 (177)
177

(7) 0 0 (7)
6

1.2.4.1.4.3.2 1.2.4.1.4.4 1.2.4.1.4.5

1.2.4.1.4.6

Environmental Control Inst'l, Assy, & C / 0 Major Ground Test

Tooling

0 31

7
23

0
0

X-D-37

TABLE X-JM2POTV COST SUMMARY

(M OF 1977 $)

DDT&E 1.2.4.1.5 1.2.4.1.5.1 1.2.4.1.5.2 1.2.4.1.5.3 1.2.4.1.5.3.1 1.2.4.1.5.3.2 1.2.4.1.5.4 1.2.4.1.5.5 1.2.4.1.5.6 Crew Rotation Module Project Management Systems Engr. & Integ. Hardware Structure Life Support Inst'l, Assy, & Checkout Major Ground Test Tooling (287) 11 20 (216) 137 79 6 9 25

TFU (13) 0 0 (11) 6 5 2 0 0

X-D-38

TABLE _X-DI13>OTV COST SUMMARY

(M OF 1977 $)
DDT&E TFU

1.2.4.1.6 1.2.4.1.6.1 1.2.4.1.6.2 1.2.4.1.6.3 1.2.4.1.6.4

1.2.4.1.6.5
1.2.4.1.6.6

Second/First Stage Structures Thermal Control Propulsion Power

Avionics
ECLS

(328) 80 12 131 23
54
0

(339) ( 0 2) 80 12 33 22 (7) 11
44
0 0

(21)

(142) 6 23
54
0

1.2.4.1.6.7 1.2.4.1.6.8 1.2.4.1.6.9

Inst'l Assy & Checkout Major Ground Test Tooling

12 10 6

12 10 6 0

44 00 0

Note: Assume commonality with 1st Stage. WBS 1.2.4.1.7 First Stage cost summary is identical except for propulsion.

X-D-39

Structure: Estimate from Aerospace STS Body/Tank CER adjusted with Apollo LM Ascent Stage data. Input: Weight = 5571 Lb and LM technology. Power: Assume only batteries and power distribution. The fuel cells are located in the 2nd stage. Estimate based on Aerospace STS Electric Power CER (Gemini, Apollo LM and CSM data). No battery development is assumed. Battery unit cost is $190/Lb (69$). Weight = 100 Lb batteries and 186 Lb distribution. Avionics: Assume major Avionics components (GN&C, Communications, and Tracking) are in the 2nd stage. Weight - 363 Lb includes only instrumentation and controls. Estimate based on Aerospace STS Instrumentation/ Panels CER (Apollo LM and CSM data). Environmental Control: Assume Apollo LM aNd CSM technology. Estimate based on Aerospace STS ECS CER. Weight - 290 Lb. - Installation, Assembly, and Checkout: Same as HLLV. - Major Ground Test: Same as HLLV Orbiter except CF - .5 because there are fewer systems to test. - Tooling: Same as HLLV. 1.2.4.1.4 Resupply Module

- Project Management: Same as HLLV CER. CF - .5 relative to Crew Module - Systems Engineering & Integration: Same as HLLV CER. - Hardware Structure: Estimate from Aerospace STS Body/Tank CER. Weight - 13,230 Lb (Titan III, S-II, SIC, and S-IVB data). - Installation, Assembly, and Checkout: Same as HLLV CER. - Major Ground Test: Same as HLLV CER. CF = .4 relative to HLLV. No systems to test except structure. - Tooling: Same as HLLV except .8 complexity relative to HLLV structure. Weight - 13,230 Lb. 1.2.4.1.5 Crew Rotation Module - Project Management: Same as HLLV CER. CF = .6 - Systems Engineering & Integration: Same as HLLV. CF = .4 - Hardware Structure: Used Aerospace STS Body/Tank CER. Assumed .5 complexity. Weight - 41.895 Lb Life Support: Same as Crew Module System. - Installation, Assembly, & Checkout: Same as HLLV CER. - Major Ground Test: Same as HLLV CER. CF = .4. - Tooling: Same as HLLV CER. CF = .4 Weight = 41,895 Lb.
X-D-40

1.2.4.1.6

Second Stage

- Structures: Used Aerospace STS Body/Tank CER. CF - 1.2 for D&D and 1.2 for TFU. Weight = 4850 Lb. Assumed LH2/LOX technology. Complexity is determined from propel 1 ant, materials, and configuration. (F = 2 (propellant) x 1 (material) x .6 (monocoque) = 1.2 - Thermal Control: Used Aerospace STS TPS CER. CF = 1. Insulation cost based on dynaflex and microquartz data Weight = 1180 Lb. - Propulsion: Main Engines: Use 30% of new development, $327 M ('77$), for RL-10 engines D&D. Unit cost from Aerospace STS Rocket Engine CER. CF = 1. Allow for 50% commonality with the 1st stage. Main Feed: Same as HLLV CER (SII & S-IVB data) CF = 1. Weight 1422 Lb. Auxiliary Propulsion: See HLLV CER. Assume use of existing monopropellant system. Use 30% of new development for cost. Assume no commonality with 1st stage because of different size. Weight - 2630 Lb. Power: Assume existing fuel cell and batteries. Use 20% of new development, $191 M ('77$), from Aerospace STS EPS CER. (Gemini and Apollo SM Technology) Weight - 340 Lb Avionics: Based on "Reference 1" estimate from August 31, 1976. Weight = 560 Lb. - Installation, Assembly, and Checkout: Same as HLLV CER. - Major Ground Test: Same as HLLV CER. CF = .4 - Tooling: Same as HLLV CER. CG - 1. Assume 50% commonality with 1st stage. Weight = 4850 Lb. 1.2.3.1.7 1st Stage: All cost elements are identical to 2nd Stage except propulsion.

- Propulsion: Main Engine: Same development and unit cost assumption as 2nd stage except use 4 engines per ship set instead of 2. Main Feed: Same as 2nd stage. Auxiliary Propulsion: Same as 2nd stage except smaller. Weight = 480 Lb. 1.2.4.2 Fuel per Flight (POTV)

The POTV propellant cost are 36</lb LH2 and 2U/LB LOX without losses. See HLLV fule cost WBS 1.2.1.2 for the data source. Losses equal 12.9% LH~ and 7.3% LOX, preflight + flight lossess, for fueling in low Earth Orbit. GEO refueling losses are 20.4% LH2 and 12.3% LOX. X-D-41

1.2.4.3

Refurbishment (POTV)

The POTV mission life is assumed to be 300 flights. Each flight may require up to 1% refurbishment of first unit cost.

X-D-42

TFU

Structural Framework Landing Gear

ECS

, ] * 3

,n (1975
]97

1 1975

$'s)
$ s

$'s)

Displays & Controls Escalated to 1977 dollars:

J ') (1977 $'s)

X-D-43

CO UD ID

10
CT CO

CM O O

oo
CM

CO UD CO CO

CO Q . O

cn in
CM

in *daCM

in CM

un
CO

CTi

un

CO

cn iCM

CO

* ^JUD

CM

CD

a: D_ co
<C

co co

oo

un

ID CM

CO CO

CO

0 0 CM

10
CO

t/1 o

o
>-

a: co
0 0 CO

co
LU CO CO = oB
CO

co

CO

CO CO

O II

08 z : o
a:
CO

t_>

ii
co
LLJ

CO

z o o o
Q-

<c

co

CO

CM

CO CO

CD CO

oo

CO

X-D-44

WBS 1.3.1

SPACE CONSTRUCTION BASE

Analyst: H. W. Whittington Introduction 'Fiaures X-D-3.4&5 contain the work breakdown structure (WBS) for the Space Construction Base (SCB) project. The SCB is the hotel, hospital, factory, restaurant, etc., used by the approximately 600 people working on the Solar Power Satellite. The design for this facility represents a composite of the Rockwell International (RI) and McDonnell-Douglas Phase B. Space Station Studies conducted in 1970, scaled in such a way to be compatible in dimension with the Heavy Lift Launch Vehicle (HLLV). Ground rules and assumptions for the Space Construction Base System are similar to those general ground rules and assumptions for the SPS program. Ground rules for the NASA InHouse Hardware, Engineering Support were developed from comments from the various JSC organizational element. General Costing Methodology Whenever possible JSC cost estimating relationships were used to estimate subsystem costs. Whenever CER's of any sort were not available, or not determined applicable because of the requirement for large extrapolations, Rockwell and McDonnell-Douglas Phase B Space Station cost estimates were used. Standard approaches used for scaling were as follows: 1. For DDT&E - a square root scaling factor was used as follows: (Wt SCB (WT Phase B Space Station ) 0.5 x Cost estimate of Phase B ) Space Station Subsystem

2. For Theoretical First Unit Cost, the following scaling factor was used: Wt SCB ) 0.75 Cost estimate of Space Wt Phase B Space Station ) Station Subsystem The above factors are typical throughout the Aerospace community. The exponent of 0.75 is used for production because while engineering, manufacturing, quality, etc. increase at the same rate as DDT&E, (Wt) 0.5, material costs increase directly with the increase in weight.(Wt) Identification of the data points were removed from the CER's within this section because some of the data used were taken from sensitive contractor reports. Copies of the original CER's are available in the Resources Management Office, Code BV.

X-D-45

Q. O. CO

CO O ll O O

o a: o co
O. CO

CO LU Z CO

O. CO

X-D-46

LU _1 LU ^J ^ ) O LU _J

a
_i ^ s: o HH
^f i ^,

o s : o 2=
Jb ^

Q C3
QC LU

CO LU i tt-* _l I
^. *

oc LU : c o

O
C3

O O .

LU OC. O LU CC

U . ^

>CO
LU J

1
UJ
0 . 1 t

* >_i
CO LU

fLU O . 1^ .

3 O

LU CO CO t CO LU eO I =5

>LU _J

a:
LU CO <c C3

ca z
0
1-^

za = u i ^ a: ca c
OO
LL.

^ O CO

oLU 1 C
O O . 0 .
vj

wj ^

CO

a z => 0 oc.
tD

to i t = o " i^ zo O LU *- I .-> ^ 4 "oO _i <t

CO z 1-1

trt VJ

^ LU Z

o 1

z
> <c ce

p^_

^a

a |
X
r**

o
Q CO 2 O U LU (_>
1 r^
H^ _J 11

LU

C3

>-

LU _l => O

tt U-

_l
3 CO CO LU

LU

2
-

11

CO

LU O < L^_ CO

3-; o. LU
CC O . oO LU

a o

LU
^ J

a %
O3 Z t t Z H^
J-"

z^^ -H
CO 0 t
1 11

01-1 : 0 LU
LU h t" ^ f C5 S ^C3 2 L : U LUI
Lf\ ^"^ ^ t* J ^

LU

"^

^ a S

i LL.

_J

a.
CO

cc 1 O
CO

U ^ H-t
CO

g.

>CL.

LU ad >CO
^ ^ CO

0 CJ Q

<
LU

LU _l LU _J LU _l

a o
3^

1
LU r~ CO LU 1
^ ^ B

a z
3
LU C O

t^

a o
^J CJ

UJ S

<:
^

<

z _j o

a ^

^
0
CO ^ x:

at o
^ 3

51

o iti
3 -

O ce. a.

X-D-47

t~*l oQ

tt LU

oB Q LU C3 Z 1 i <

co ac

CO

o: LU
3 O 0-

<: =3
1

fc hOS O

CT

SIMULA TRA

1 <S. CO
UJ CO

CO

a.

<C CL.
O CO
1 CO LU

LU Q Q. CD O 3 21 0CO 31 fl _l 1 2:

or i

o o.

21 <C oB LU

< O"
08

-" Oi LU 1 t

=3 CO CO *

co -z.
LU =C

Tilt" 1

CO or LU
14

or i

Ko

o3

- 0
0Z *"^ - 1

CO 0

LU CJ O C3

c. :
2

t
j

o8
LU C3

UJ

co
or
3

>C O CO

<:
<
U, T

=
O 0

oo

2:
or
UJ CO

=3 Z

LU or
CJ T

O oO

T LJ
oc
h 1*

<c

UJ CO CO

uJ <_
2

C3

1
S
LU U

or
: 5?

O OOu
CO 1
CJ3

th C CO

o u O ai <: 0 1(_} aE

C.3

o. - i
O H-

a ,
><

co o

r u.

z: c.i

12 3 u2-:

a.
CO

g,

CXJ

CO LU LU

UJ LU

2? UJ < 3C

a: LU 0 C o: z a. <C

1
5
y 3

z:

LU Z

T '
CO Z O
Z

z LU

1-4
CO
-!

Of 1 CO f
0.

uj or
' oB

5
LU
Z3
_J

CO

or

O
I

LI
U.

ZQ t LUUJ Z SI3C LU
LUZ ii

>
LU

c: o LlJ
5
<_j

i-> ClTCO

= Z
O

ii s:
^^

or-i oc o. i <_>
3 ~ i i Z Z O **T"

LU

0-

LU

CO

-4

<

i co >-i o.
2

o
L U
III

LU

UJ

<_> or

or

i_)

^j

LO

^L.

r^

03 0UU. LU

1 |
X-D-48

Sizing/Quantity Assumptions 1. Crew Module - The 33' x 52' (44, 250 ft3) Phase B (1970) Core Module housed 6 crewmen on one of its two decks. It was capable of supporting 12 men for an indefinite period of time. Using both decks for crew quarters it could comfortably house 12 crewmen. The 50' x 100' (196, 250 ft ) Space Construction Base Module, based upon its volume relationship to the Phase B Core Module, will be capable of housing 50 people. This is equivalent to 5 people living in a 10' x 50' mobile home, which seems pretty posh for a space facility. 12 crew modules will be required to house the 600 man crew in the Space Construction Base. Temporary overflow could be handled by using the clinic module or recreational module for crew quarters. 2. Projected quantities of modules required as follows: Module Crew Module EVA Storage & Prep Module Cargo Module Galley Module Clinic Module Quantity 12 1 4 1 1

Physical Fitness Module Fabrication and Assembly Module Power Module Information Module Training Module Boom Recreational Module

1 2 1 1 1 1 1 27"

All of the modules are similar except for the boom which is a non-pressurized tunnel running to the solar array and through which the electrical power distribution system runs. A summary of equivalent units for the total complement of 7 SCB's is contained in figure X-D-6.
X-D-49

CO

<mfjnow ^mHWon

o J,
LU
tt Ll_

jo yaewriN ivioi
80S H3d S3inOOW dO b39WnN ItfiOi
3S9

CM

en ao
r

oc.

3
csi ^~

1 1 1 1

i '

CM

i i i i

1 1

i i i

i i i i

fc

i i i

i i i

** g _i
CL. UJ

to

u>
O
LU >

1S31

1
1

LO

1W9W

iD3royd

d 1

IViSNI ? 9N3 1SAS

n /"^ 7 AbbV *JLSN1 U/ J o i ccw i CUT
*C C_3
2p UJ 00

'
1

'

' '

> O

LU

o a: co
| Q.

'CM

CM

S r
^sCO

0 1_> LU X Z LU
tO

O r** ^^

* > Ha: O

3 S 9/9V1S

'

CM

to to

LU

to
3

o a. "=> ^ ujt a_ 5 z
LLj<cy t en ?r
iHi O > h-0 on 0 uj ZD u_ Gi a: O ^J i ^_ ^ ; Op^ O
=j2:>

"*

viva/wwoo/swi

* O

LT>

O
CM

in

in in

O
-

* in o in

LU
LO

CM

a- ao

vo

_l H g a:
0 LU

Sd3 n

in

in

in in
*

in in in in

NOI10310Hd !VlN3WNOaiAN3
S3
CM

/
i
1

* cn > ^

QC LU

A
CM

|t-

^
LU

fe & oS

_J "* LU

i ,_

'

i ,_

3 O O

-8i^ c^
! ' ' 1 ^^

S1D3

CM

r-..

in oo

Ot

CO

OO

r*. r r-

cn o-> to to LU LU z * ~1 _J
CM CM

'

M
U 1 QC O
-. <_> U .

g rf

O <C oo GO Qoo

^0

ZD

to

LU

ONIlOOi

^ _l
CSJ

'

LU

>-i

aanionais
EQUIVALENT PRODUCTION UNITS

55

ao

THE SOLAR ARRAY IS CHARGED T *

*- % O

[TOTAL SUBSYSTEMS FOR 7 SCB'S

ON-BOARD COMPUTER ASSUMED TO **

^^

FAB & ASSEMBLY MODULE

" *. v
IS) 1

a.

COMMAND & DATA MODULE

i
LU D
LU _1 =>

PHYSICAL FITNESS MODULE

r\i

[TRAINING MODULE

MODULE

X\

< in <t a
\.

X.

LU 1 3
t Of O

LU _l

LU _J O >LU

| DOCKING MODULE

ac a.

LU _l

LU _l

UJ

o o

a
3C LU

o
(_)

_i o

E tt

to
LU

a: (_>

5ss

x.
t*

*-^

of.
LU

t LU
oe
0 LU

_l <_>

o
(X

o CO

X-D-50

j TOTAL SUBSYSTEMS PER SCB

o^

LU _l

IMS/COMM/DATA SUBSYSTEMS

3. Calculation of Weights - The ratio of the circumferential area of the 33' D X 52' L module to the 50' D X 100' L module is 5388 to 15700, or 1 to 2.9 All system and subsystem weights in the 33' D station were multiplied by this factor to establish the following weight statement of the Space Construction Base. Obviously this technique leaves something to be desired, especially in areas such as environmental control where volume maintained is such a cost driver, but the technique does preclude design extrapolation at this very early stage of the SPS program. The following weights (table X-D-14) were established for the Standard Module. Estimated Costs 1.3.1.1. 1.3.1.1.1
DDT&E

Space Construction Base - Space Facility Structure

Approach 1 - By use of figure X-D-7, which implies that the module structure is equivalent to that of a cargo aircraft, an estimate of $87 M in FY 1970 $ can be derived. By escalating to FY 1977 $ using the escalation factors contained in the program ground rules and assumptions, the resulting number is $156 M. Because of secondary structures, (floors, partitions, etc.) the ' module structure was considered to be 30% more complex than the cargo aircraft structure, a complexity factor of 1.3 was applied, resulting in an estimate of $203 M. Approach 2 - An estimate of $80 M in FY 1970 $, or $144 M in FY 1977 $ can be derived using the CER which forms figure X-D-8. Application of the 1.3 complexity factor yields an estimate of $187 M. Approach 3 - Scaling, by the square root method, of the Rockwell and McDonnell Phase B Space Station estimates yields the following results. Rockwell Structure Estimate in FY 1970 $ = $134 M Rockwell Structure Estimate in FY 1977 $ = $241 M MDAC Structure Estimate in FY 1970 $ = $88 M MCAC Structure Estimate in FY 1977 $ = $158 M (2.9)0'5 X $241 M = $433 M, where 2.9 is the weight scaling factor based upon circumferential area (mentioned earlier), and $241 M is the Rockwell estimate for the 33' X 52' crew module. Using the same technique for the MDAC estimate the following number can be derived.
(2.9)0'5 X $158 = $269 M

X-D-51

TABLE X-D-14 SPACE CONSTRUCTION BASE Weight Statement in Lbs. WBS Element Crew Module Structure Primary Secondary Reaction Control Environmental Protection Core Thermal Micrometeroid Aero-Thermal Dynamic Electrical Power Arrays Orientation Mounts & Supports Fuel Cells Plumbing Batteries Equipment & Controls Distribution & Wiring ECLSS Atmospheric Storage CDy Management Atmospheric Control Active Thermal Control Water Management Waste Management Personal Hygiene Food Management Special Life Support Crew & Habitability Personal Equipment General Equipment Furnishings Recreation Information Data Processing Displays & Controls Software Comm & Tracking Guidance & Control Inertia Reference Optical Reference Control Moment Gyro RCS Electronics * In Galley Module ** In Recreational Module
Y

33' D

SCB

36.010 104.429 31,361 90,947 4,649 13,482 3,350 9.715 9,540 27.666 T2T .2 3,558 1,563 4,533 6,750 19,575 25,585 74.197 4,720 13,688 286 829 2,434 7,059 480 1,392 160 464 11,430 33,147 1,813 5,258 4,262 12,360 15,804 41.540 1,255 3,640 2,099 6,087 2,476 7,180 5,231 15,170 1,581 4,585 657 1,905 719 2,085 1,483 (4,301) * 303 888 2.127 4.800 47 136 555 1,610 1,053 3,054 472 (1,369) ** 8.000 23,200 1,595 4,626 1,630 4,727 985 2,856 3,790 10,991 1.740 5,046 81 235 341 989 1,212 3,515 106 307 _ w A-U-O^

TABLE X-D-lltCont'd) WBS Element Docking Module Passive Ring Active Ring Boom Primary Structure Secondary Structure Env Protection Docking Active Thermal Control 33' D 3,100 ITSCff 600 3,124 1,328 212 340 580 664 SCB 8.990 7,250 1,740 9,060 3,851 615 986 1,682 1,926

X-D-53

CO

0 .

o
UJ

UJ

o
1 3 14

to

LiJ O

o:
CO

i
X

i)

(oz) saviioa jo SNomiw

o o o o o o

to o o

O . O

CO

CJ

i-i
LU

OC
=>

a o 03
00 I

a:
C9

J
o o
ft

I
oo o o o o o o> co PN. \o m
OJ

!
csi

o 2

sNomiw NI $ cue i/
X-D-55

Range of Estimates JSC CER (Cargo Aircraft Data) JSC CER (Booster Data) Scaling of RI Phase B Estimate Scaling of MDAC Phase B Estimate $203 M $187 M $433 M $269 M

Estimate Selected - $200 M. The estimates of $203 M and $187 M were developed from the CER's in figures X-D-7 and 8. The higher numbers of $26? M and $433 M were derived from assumed scaling relationships applied to estimates taken from CER's, which is a less desirable approach. Theoretical First Unit Cost (TFU) Approach 1. Figure X-D-9 yields a TFU cost of $ 22 M, this figure beinq taken from the lower complexity line. In real year $ this equates to $40 M. Application of the 1.3 complexity factor results in an estimate of $52 M. Approach 2. A number of $8 M in 1970 $, or $14 M in 1977 $ can be estimated by using figure X-D-10. This equals $18 M if a 1.3 complexity factor is applied. Approach 3. Use of the scaling factor approach discussed earlier Rockwell TFU in 1970 $ - 18.4 M Rockwell TFU in 1977 $ - 33.0 M MDAC TFU in 1970 $ MDAC TFU in 1977 $
(2.9)
'75

- 35.0 M* - 63.0 M

X 33 M = 73 M

(2.9) -75 X 63 M = 140 M

Estimate Used - $60 M *Derived from $38 M for 1.1 units 1.3.1.1.2 Environmental Control & Life Support Subsystem DDT&E Approach 1 - By using Figure X-D-11 , a JSC Cost Estimating Relationship, an estimate of $706 M in FY 1970 $ can be derived. Conversion to FY 1977 $ using the escalation factors contained in the overall ground rules and assumptions results in an estimate of $1224 M. X-D-56

o o o
o
OS

ej

to o

to
QC

a: o
CC

o: to
cr>

i o
x

oo

(oz) syvnoa do SNomiw

X-D-57

o o o o o o
o
X

a:

UJ

CO QC

I
00

o ci *
O 3C r^ C3

O O

? o

O
CO

en. to

I
^_

CD O O

$oz jo sNomiw
X-D-58

M M 2 ft, OIS SJ
O i-J s. M =2 3 CO M -" f- O CO CQ < CO to

O 2 *5 W o o S

I L J J I LI

syvnoa o/et - isoo

X-D-59

Approach 2 - The CER's in figures X-D-12 and 13 were developed for MSFC by the Planning Research Corporation (PRC). The following estimate >n 1976 $ is the result of using these CER's for a closed ECS system. Design and Development = 5.623 (41,5*0) Ibs) '415 = 464.1
Major Test Hardware = 0.282 (41,540) Ibs) '536
To convert from 1976 $ to 1977 $: 548.4 X 1.088 =

= 84.3 548.4
597 M

Appraoch 3 - Extrapolate from the Rockwell Phase B estimate using the square root of the weight scaling factor of 2.9. Rockwell Phase E. Estimate (1970 $ in millions) ECLSS Crew Habitability 219.2 19.5

ECLSS Vent System

1.6 230.3

Conversion to 1977 $ using the escalation assumptions results in an estimate of $413 M. The following estimate can be derived by using the factors mentioned above:

Estimate Chosen - $600 M. The PRC CER is the best estimating relationship available today primarily because it contains skylab data. Use of the CER in Appraoch 1 requires extrapolation of data beyond what is reasonable. While the adjusted Rockwell estimate is relatively close to the estimate using the PRC CER, it was based upon only one data point. Theoretical First Unit Cost Approach 1 - Use of the JSC CER in figure X-D-14 results in an estimate of $82 M. Approach 2 - Extrapolation from the Rockwell and McDonnell Douglas S,pace Station Phase B estimates using the weight scaling factor of (2.9) 0.75 results in estimates of Rockwell Estimate (1970 $ in millions) ECLSS ECLSS Vent System 46.9 1.8
X-D-60

ECLS/CREW ACCOMMODATIONS SUBSYSTEM

FIGURE X-D-12
STEP /EQUATION EOIMTION N A M E

ECU AT ION

CONSTRAINTS

STEP I EQUATIONS

Subsystem CERs DfcD (Closed System) (Open System)

*

0.415
E/CS 5.623 WT 0.294 E/CS = 8 196 WT 0.536 E/CS 0.282 WTQ J85 E/CS = 0.592 WT WT 'Subsystem Weight (Lbs)

Flight Hardware (Closed System) (Open System)

STEP 2 EQUATIONS

Subsystem Element CERs DfcD Atmosphere Mgmt (Closed) (Open) Water Mgmt (Closed) (Open) Waste Mgmt Accommodations Flight Hardware Atmosphere Mgmt (Closed) (Open) Water Mgmt (Closed) (Open) Waste Mgmt Accommodations -

0.478 SLEl = 1.416 WT SLEj 1.258 WT0 SLZ - - 8 3 7 w T 0 '473 SLEj = 0.114 WT SLE, SLE4 = 0.921 WT' 329 0.279 = 6.413 WT WT Su*sytem Element Dry Weight (Lbs)

0.611 > 0.088 WT 0.6&5 SLE, = 0.014 WT ^ 0.587 SLE, * 0.121 WT ' 0.603 SLEj = 0.0103 WT 0 02 e SLE, - 0.0094 WT U - ' ' 0.280 SLE4 * 0. 760 WT

SLE.

Subsystem Element Factors

SLv = (E'CS) x(SEF t )

i U 2. 3, 1. 5 E/CS * ECLS/Crew Accommodations Subsysterr Cost ~~

^ -

SF 1 * Subsystem Element FACtors i = I, 2,3, 4 j = Module SF 3 = User Develooed Spread Factor SLE, sSuosyseenrElement Costs SW Subsystem Level Wraparound Factor SLE . Subsystem ^ Element Cost by Module

STEP 3a

Subsystem Spread Factors

SLE J l =(SL l )(SF J

EQUATION

STEP Jb

EOUATIOM

Subsystem Wraparound Factors

E/CS

=( SLE.,).(1 *-SW) J \ll '/

E/CS SE/CS^
SUBSY STEM ELEMENT FACTORS
DhD

SUBSYSTEM ELEMENT SLEj SLE. SLE} SLE SLE. * Atmosphere Mgmt (Closed) Water Mgmt (Closed) Waste Mgmt Accommodations Subsystem Level Wraparound

Flight Hardware
450 143 012

SEF, SEF2 SEF, -

.403 .098
GIB 188 293 I. 000

SEF4 SEF5 -

.214 181
1 000

Subsystem Level Wraparound 4 As a Percent of SLE.

SW

414

220

ECLS/CREW ACCOMMODATIONS STEP I, 2. AND 3 EQUATIONS

X-D-61

REPRODUCEBILJTY OF THffl ORIGINAL PAOF IS POOR

FIGURE X-D-13

ECLS/CREW ACCOMMODATIONS

000 ,

Equation

Cor Cocf

Stud . Error

>

ft

8 * 10

& * 7 9i

N|

^*?T,"\-

1C

ffif
-H-

LEGEKD Reference

1
C

1C
3 4 b

10

100

t,ooo

10,060

lOD.uOO

SUBSYSTEM DRY WEIGHT, WT., (LBS)

X-D-62

c:
C O

CO

i a i x

cc

1 3 Cfl

I I I I I

M i l l

.savnoa o26t isoo

X-D-63

Crew Habitability

2.6 51.3

Rockwell Estimate in 1977 $ = 92.1 M MDAC Estimate in 1970 $ = $20 M MDAC Estimate in 1977 $ = $36 M
(2.9) '75 X 92 M = $202.4 M
0:75

(2.9)

X 36 M = $ 79.0 M

Estimate Used - $80 M 1.3.1.1.3 Reaction Control System DDT&E Approach 1 - The derived weight for the SCB RCS in 9,715 Ibs. By using the CER used by Rockwell during the Phase B Space Station Study (see figure X-D-15) you arrive at the following estimates in 1970 $ Major Test Hardware - $6400/1 b X 9715 Ibs = $62.2 M Design & Development - $36,000/lb X 9715 Ibs = $350 M or $412 M in 1970 $ This escalates to $740 M in 1977 $ Approach 2 - Scaling of Gemini and Apollo Block I Stabilization & Control Data System Weight Gemini Appollo Block 1 40 229 Cost in 1969 $ 6M 61 M

'5
'

x $6 M =

(249) '5 x

6 M = 94 M

X 61 M = ( 42) -5 X 61 M = 398 M

In 1977 $ the Gemini extrapolation yields an estimate of $177 M, while the Apollo Block 1 extrapolation yields an estimate of $750 M. Approach 3 - Scaling of Rockwell and McDonnell Douglas Phase B Estimates MCAC Estimate in 1970 $ RI Estimate in 1970 $ 24 M 81 M
X-D-64

 tn

> r

to

ilti::iijii::::::i:iJs:rB:ii:i:::i:::e::::::::=====i:===;!

o o
CM m

rr^ t/i

ll/t

0161

X-D-65

As mentioned the weight scaling factor between the Phase B station and the SCB is 2.9. Using this factor and the square root relationship used earlier the following costs can be derived. (2.9) '5 X 24 M = $41 M in 1970 $, or $73 M in 1977 $ based upon The MDAC Phase B estimate (2.9) '5 X 81 M = $138 M in 1970 $, or $234 M in 1977 $ based upon The Rockwell Phase B estimate Approach 4 - NASA In-house RCS CER (figure X-D-16) 9700 $/lb is indicated for the 9715 Ib RCS using the LM line, while 15,000 $/lb is indicated by the CSM line. 9715 Ibs X 9700 $/lb = 94 M in 1970 $, or $169 M in 1977 $ 9715 Ibs X 15000 $/lb = 146 M in 1970 $, or $262 M in 1977 $ Range of Estimates Rockwell CER Gemini Scaling Apollo Block 1 Scaling MDAC Phase B Scaling Rockwell Phase B Scaling NASA In-House CER - Upper Limit NASA In-House CER - Lower Limit Estimate Selected - $250 M Theoretical First Unit Cost Appr oach 1 - The Rockwell CER (figure X-D-17) indicates thate the First RCS unit should cost approximately 3200 $/lb. 9715 Ibs X 3200 $/lb = $31 M in 1970 $, or $56 M in 1977 $ Approach 2 - The NASA CER (figure X-D-18) indicates that if the RCS is of similar complexity as the RCS of the program represented by the lower line it should cost 3600 $/lb; or 35 M in 1970 $, $62 M in 1977 $. If it is similar in complexity to the program represented by the upper line it should cost approximately 5200 $/lb; or $50 M in 1970 $, $90 M in 1977 $.
X-D-66

740 M 177 M 750 M 73 M 134 M 262 M 169 M

(M CO CM

ONCIOd M3d X-D-67

 Oi

(D

to

in

SfpjjjtSiiiiUiiiHfii

llpliillHJff!

IliiiiiiiplHHL

. t >i itt itt HM*S y* g ^M< HIM MItMitinaa> >

mil II III I I 11 ! HI I I MM Ml t l ! Hill I I M I! i il II I

= = = = =

iiiiiiiiiliigiiiSSSSSS isiss=s=sa^=^iii;s!i:tBKi:iiiiici::s:=s:i 11 utiiiiiiifl* ! mlitimmmttimmmmmmmmm

llltllBl(lCt *

IIIIIIIII IIIIIIIIM Illllllllltl llllllllll ll !,5.S*2 :!!!!!!] !i!S3!SSSSSSSSSS5

;::!;!::i!&!f!JH5iS

rsJ en i

CO

C/J

iiiiniiiiiiiiitiiiiiiiiii

X-D-68

in o

S 3 o

g s =g

CO

00

co

</> <

swnoa
X-D-69

Approach 3 - Extrapolation/Scaling of the Rockwell and McDonnell-Douglas Phase B Data results fn the following estimates.
1. (2.9) '75 X $18.2 M = $40 M in 1970 $ or $73 M in 1977 $, based upon the Rockwell Phase B estimate. 2. (2.9) '75 X $7 M = $15 M in 1970 $, or $28 M in 1977 $, based upon the MDAC Phase B estimate.

Range of estimates: Rockwell CER NASA CER - LM complexity NASA CER - CSM complexity Rockwell Phase B Scaling MDAC Phase B Scaling Estimate Selected - $70 M 1.3.1.1.4 DDT&E Approach 1 - Based upon a weight of 27, 666, and by using the Rockwell CER in figure X-D-19, an estimate for DDT&E in 1970 $ as follows can be derived. $940/1b X 27,666 = $26 M for Major Test Hardware $2200/1b X 27,666 = $61 M for Design & Development WTM in 1970 $ This escalates to $156 M in 1977 $ Approach 2 - Scaling/Extrapolation of Rockwell Phase B Estimates Rockwell estimate - $36.9 M in 1970 $ Environmental Protection $56 M $62 M $90 M $73 M $28 M

(2.9) '5 X 36.9 M: $63 M in 1970 $, or $107 M in 1977 $

The work breakdown structure (WBS) used by MDAC in Phase B allocated ECLSS, crew habitability and environmental protection in such a way that it would have been difficult to cleanly extract cost estimates for environmental protection. Range of Estimates: Rockwell CER
$156 M

Rockwell Phase B Scaling $107 M

X-D-70

LU

to
o^> s~\ O ^2 Nca H- O) "
UJ
iiiiiii" :5::::2:::|=3!i ;Sii5:jri::Jtr==f 5: ....!i!f5i:!!!::::!!S!:s!s5=3:!!::!i3:Ilr!::s===3 ..Mn!i:i;<;]::::::i:::-=2!iii:isra>9s::ss=: ^^{'{^^^{^S sif==~iiupi :;;:i;:n>:t:<i:cx=:i;:is>:::::::::::= 5fl==j|i !i!ili!::: :5:-:=h-:===i! !5::;:-:==:==== : SG==!I; i!iiiiiliiHCi:i:;iSSS=siili::;i::::::::::= :===K:i!::(i;;::ii:::::::::s::::::::!:::::::::::::

MIIIMIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIBIIIIII IIIIIIIIIII

E8 ^

.iu out H ! i lit mm^mm^mmmi< MM in it mti nil < (! ! mm^^^mmmn*

;;;::;;;;;;;;>ii.;;:.:=:==;;.,i;;;:=:2f ::::==:===*=====;;;

flVJ

X-D-71

Estimate Chosen - $150 M Theoretical First Unit Approach 1 - An estimate of $50 M in 1977 $ results from using the Rockwell CER (figure $1000/1b X 27,666 Ibs = $28 M in 1970 $, or $50 M in 1977 $ Approach 2 - Scaling of Rockwell Phase B data results in the following estimate: (2.9) '75 X the Rockwell Phase B estimate of $16.3 M equals $36 M in 1970 $, or $62 M in 1977 $. Range of Estimates: Rockwell CER Rockwell Phase B Scaling Estimate Chosen - $50 M 1.3.1.1.5 Tooling DDT&E Approach - The CER which forms figure X-D-21 is the standard tool used by JSC in estimating the cost of tooling. The lower line represents the CER to be used when estimating tooling used for aluminum skin and stringer structures. A structure of this sort weighing approximately 104,000 Ibs, the derived weight for the structure, would have a DDT&E cost of approximately $85 M in 1970 $ or $153 in FY 1977 $. No complexity factor was applied. In the judgement of the estimator the relative complexity of 1.3 applied to the structure CER does not apply since the primary structure material and total structure weight drive the tooling cost, rather than secondary structure complexity. The DDT&E estimate chosen was $150 M. Production - The Apollo factor of 3.6% of hardware TFU cost results in an estimate of $20 M. 1.3.1.1.6 Stabilization/Guidance & Control DDT&E Approach 1 - The Rockwell CER in figure X-D-22 was used to estimate the cost of the S&C system for the Space Construction Base. While the total system weights 5,046 Ibs., only 1934 will be new development according to the Rockwell Phase B assumptions. The following table breaks the total weight between that which is new development, and common weight which is composed of articles identical to those developed as "new weight." X-D-72 $50 M $62 M

SaVllOQ SNOITUW-SNIIOOl 1VI1INI

in in in r>.
Is*

in

in in

in
**

in in
I'll!
III

in m
o o _ o
C9
O O

mi

11 i i

i i i

1 111

i i i

o o

co CO i
o. o

s: O. o
UJ

C3

I ^c
LLJ 2

to uj

to UJ a

UJ OC

co

to

CM I

HIM I

llU I I I J

III It I I I

lilt I I I I

o o

o o ^ o

-9NI1001 1VI1INI

X-D-74

 0>

oo

r~

co

Element Inertlal Reference System Optical Reference Control Moment Gyros RCS Electronics

Total Weight 235 989 3515 307

5046

New Weight 116 493 1171 154

1934

Common Weight 119 496 2343 154

3112

The new weight figure of 1934 Ibs was used to estimate the cost of design and development (D&D) while the total weight of 5046 was used to estimate the cost of Major Test Hardware.
For D&D

1934 Ibs X $140,000/lb = $271 M in 1970 $, or $486 M in 1977 $

For MTH

5046 Ibs X $37,000/1b = $187 M in 1970 $, or $335 M in 1977 $ $486 M + $335 M = $821 M for total S & C Approach 2 - Scaling of Rockwell and McDonnell-Douglas Phase B cost data. (2.9) '5 X $183 M = $311 M in 1970 $, or $559 M in 1977 $ based upon the Rockwell Phase B estimate. (2.9) '5 X $56 M = $92 M in 1977 $, or $171 M in 1977 $, based upon the MDAC Phase B estimates. Range of Estimates: Rockwell CER $821 M

Scaling of Rockwell Phase B Estimate $559 M Scaling of MDAC Phase B Estimate Estimate Chosen - $350 M $171 M

X-D-76

Tneoretical First Unit Cost Approach 1 - By use of the Rockwell CER which forms figureX-D-23, it can be determined that the TFU cost for a S & C system weighing 5046 Ibs would cost $14,000/1 bs in 1970 $, or $71 M. In 1977 S this equals $127 M. Approach 2 - Figure X-D-24 is a JSC CER for TFU for Guidance and Control (G&C) subsystems. The following estimates can be derived in 1977 $ by use of this CER. Low Complexity Medium Complexity High Complexity 43 M 181 M 426 M

Approach 3 - Scaling of RI MDAC Phase B Cost Estimates. (2.9) 0.75 X 28 = $62 M in 1970 $, or $112 M in 1977 $ based upon the RI Phase B estimate (2.9) 0.75 X 10 = $22 M in 1970 $, or $40 M in 1977 $ based upon the MDAC Phase B estimates. Range of Data Rockwell CER
JSC CER

$127 M

- Low Complexity - Medium Complexity High Complexity

$ 43 M $181 M $426 M

X-D-77

9T*

X-D-78

i
=5 * i.i
S

to a

* z o
Q z

ZD ta i

CJ

O <-> O

- * ">
r>. ra o> I1- ~

a a.

u.

- HUJ

i
(M

CO <M CO

CO

J
in

I I I I

< to

awnod M3d swiioa

X-D-79

- Scaling of RI Phase B Estimate - Scaling of MDAC Phase B Estimate Estimate Chosen - $100 M 1.3.1.1.7 DDT&E

$112 M $ 40 M

Instrunentation/Communications/Data Management

Approach 1 - Figure X-D-25, the CER for communications system was used to estimate the cost of the WBS element "Communications." The $100 M line was used since the integration of the communications systems for 28 modules, EVA operations, etc., will be complex. An estimate of $111 M in 1970 $ was developed using the CER. This escalates to $199 M in 1977 $. A number of $105 M in 1977 $ can be estimated for Instrumentation (including data processing and controls/displays) by use of figure X-D-26. In 1977 $ this equals $189. Software was estimated at 15% of hardware cost. 0.15 (189 +199) = $446 M. Approach 2 - Scaling of Rockwell and MDAC Phase B Data. (2.9) '5 X 260 = $442 M in 1970 $, or $793 M in 1977 $, based upon the Rockwell Phase B estimate. (2.9) *5 X 146 = $248 M in 1970 $, or $446 M in 1977 $, based upon the MDAC Phase B estimates. Range of Data:
JSC CER $446 M

Scaling of Rockwell Phase B Cost Scaling of MDAC Phase B Cost Estimate Chosen - $450 M Theoretical First Unit (TFU)

$793 M $446 M

Approach 1 - Figures X-D-27 and 28 indicate costs as follows:

1970 $
Communications Instrumentation Software at 15% Total 11 M TO M 3M 24 M X-D-80

1977 $
20 18 5 43 M

D OQ

,
o o

5 S o
be
o o o
I

3 0)

'

-c

i
o o
i

Ol

I o
CM i
X

-2.

$>/

o i

u>
CtL C5

o o o o

o o

o o o

X-D-81

O D O
o o

ft
o o o

o J
bO

CO

0>

I II

o o

s/
o o

*
Z
4->

CO

1 0 CM
O X

o o o o o o

o o o

0 0
SJB||Op 'C

o o o o
1SOO

X-D-82

4C

o o

>r

*s
.&L
11 /
sV
o o o

I
u

ss
V
00

I
a

I g o
i

CVJ

Q I X

o o o o

o o

'q|

X-D-83

o o

ft

-^
4>>

J?>
I

1 s
Q>
I

CO

o o o

*> CO

u
O O

i u
g
! y^
CO CVJ

I X

I o

CD

o o

o o o
*q| wd

o o

X-D-84

Approach 2 - Scaling of Rockwell & MDAC Phase B Cost Data (2.9) '75 X $96.3 M = $214 in 1970 $, or $348 M in 1977 $ based upon the Rockwell Phase B Estimate. (2.9) '75 X $18 M = $40 M in 1970 $, $72 M in 1977 $ based upon the MDAC Phase B Estimate. Range of Data:
JSC CER $43 M

Scaling of Rockwell Phase B Data Scaling of MDAC Phase B Data

$384 M $ 72 M

Estimate Chosen - $50 M. Discussions with JSC and contractor personnel indicate a general feelinq that $50 M is very adequate for the first unit cost (including all DDT&E) for communications, instrumentation, data processing and display and controls equipment. The range of the data would indicate a higher number. 1.3.1.1.8 DDT&E Approach 1 - No CER could be located which could be used to estimate the cost of a 74,197 EPS using solar arrays, consequently the assembly-level Rockwell Phase B were scaled to scope the cost of a solar array EPS using 1970 technology. Element Solar Array Orientation System Mounts & Supports Fuel Cells Plumbing Batteries Equipment & Controls Distribution & Wiring TOTAL
WT

Electrical Power System

Data Source GE Cost Data

Apollo EPS

Cost (1977 $ M)
121
18 36 90 22 42

13688 829

7059 1392 464 33147

5258 12360 74197

S-II Structure Apollo Pratt & Whitney Beech Aircraft Cryo Tank Apollo Eagle Picher Battery
Apollo EPS CER Apollo EPS CER

102
48

480

X-D-85

Approach 2 - Discussions with JSC and contractor personnel indicate that a realistic estimate for a 300-500 KW solar array system for the SCB in the 1985-1995 timeframe would be $100 M in 1977 $, $64 M of which would be DDT&E. This estimate includes all equipment up to the distribution and wiring interface. To this add $48 M for distribution and wiring, $10 M for design mods to the Shuttle Fuel cells, $102 M for equipment and controls, and $24 M for batteries. Discussions with JSC and contractor personnel led to the lower battery estimate since a larger quantity in lieu of a larger dimension battery could be used. Summation of the above number results in the following estimate: Solar Array Distribution and Wiring APU Design Mods Equipment and Controls Batteries
Total

$64 M $48 M $10 M $102 M $23 M

$247 M

Range of Data: Scaled Rockwell Estimate $480 M

Composite Rockwell/JSC/Contractor$247 M Estimate Chosen - $250 M Theoretical First Unit The same philosophy applies as in Approach 2 to EPS DDT&E. The $34 M mentioned earlier was assumed to be the TFU cost for the solar array, orientation system and mounts and supports (general structure). To this the following estimates were added: Solar Array, Orientation, Structure Fuel Cells (Shuttle TFU) Batteries (Scaled RI estimate) Equipment & Controls (Scaled RI estimate) Distribution & Wiring (Scaled RI estimate) TOTAL Estimate Chosen - $73 M
X-D-86

$34 M 5M 16 M 12 M 6M $73 M

1.3.1.1.9

Elevator (for Cargo Module)

The elevator was costed as a large hydraulic system, weighing 10,000 Ibs. The landing gear CER's in figures X-D-29 and 30 were used to cost the elevator. These figures indicate the elevator should cost between $15 M and $70 M in 1975 $. A DDT&E estimate of $50 M in 1977 $ was selected. Using the same logic as above the range of TFU estimates would appear to be between $800 K and $3 M in 1975 $. An estimate of $3 M was used. 1.3.1.1.10 Cargo Transfer System (for Cargo Module) This system is used to transfer the cargo from the docking module to the storage area. It same rationale was used in 1.3.1.1.9 above and a DDT&E cost of 50 M and TFU cost of $3 M were selected. 1.3.1.1.11 Cargo Storage Structure (for Cargo Module) This subsystem consists of approximately 10,000 of structure in and upon which cargo is stored until it is used. By use of figures X-D-8 and 10 the following estimates can be derived in the dollars indicated:
70 $
DDT&E
TFU

77 $
48 M

27 M

4M

7M

1.3.1.1.12 Cargo Deployment System (for Cargo Module) A remote manipulator system of less complexity but greater size than the Shuttle RMS will be used to place materials into work areas from the cargo module. The Shuttle RMS will cost $75 M in approximately 1977 $ for DDT&E and will have a unit cost of approximately $5 M. The above numbers were used for the cargo module. 1.3.1.1.13 EVA Support Station (EVA Storage and Preparation System) Within this module there will be a station where suits can be recharged, crewmen can sit or recline while preparing for EVA. The most parametric data found was within the Rockwell Phase B WBS element, "Crew Accommodations." By scaling these estimates you arrive at the following numbers:

(2.9) '5 X $19.5 M = $33 M in 1970 $, or $60 M in 1977 $ for

DDT&E based upon the Rockwell Phase B estimate for crew accommodations.

(2.9) '75

X $2.6 M = $5.8 M in 1970 $, or $10 M in 1977 $

for the TFU of the EVA Support Station based upon the Rockwell Phase B estimate. X-D-87

FIGURE /X-D-29
LAhOING GEAR
11
1
7 3 <

e 7

4 8 i 1
:

CER

cotrr
N/A N/A

rsp-a '*'
N/A

t
4 IA S t

! C?5 = 15.48 4W 5 .7096 - C76 - 20.3 11W5.7096

"

N/A

a i lOO.OOOi i

"

J^
c

^
-

X
xT
-

in u

'

10.000

t
4

I X V* i i^^"
^
*
m
M

e>

76
i 1
1 1

LEGEND:
,

a a , 1 i 1.000 LBS ,
3

C75
^76

Y
T
U

1.000

t
4

i i ii
&

i
2 1

i
14

7 8 91

0,000 LBS

t t ; es i 2 1 100.000 LBS

i t t i i

i*i t | | f ^
4 i A7 I 1

454 Kg

4,536 Kg

45.359 Kg

WEIGHT OF THE LANDING GEAR. Wg

X-D-88

FIGURE 3C-D-30

LANDING GEAR

1 *

CCRR COEFF

6 1 t

7I*|

CER

sro

(%)

f C89 - 4.091W 5 -7096

4 1

N/A

N/A N/A

**Qrt *u

i i yywc o

N/A

1 *

3
^
^^

10.000 1 IWf VWW i

G)
S

-
v*.

,
-

n r*
2

.
4 ,

S / r >
/

jS

O cn O

09

a:
et

a
1 ,000

/ U >X^ ^ .
x

e
*~

i
C

-j
90

- _-.

wr*

^
^r^

X
.

LEGEND:

"
J U Y

89

cgo
100 i '"
|

*
i i | i i ti

i 1, 000 LBS

i i i ii

gi
,

1
2

1
3 4

i
4

i | r i
8 7 8 8 1

4 9 8 7 8 0 1

10,000 LBS

100,000 LBS
45,359 Kg

454 Kg

4,536 Kg

WEIGHT OF THE LANDING GEAR, W5

X-D-89

1.3.1.1.14 Food Management System (for food galley) These subsystems, all part of the Galley Module, would include refrigerator/freezers for storage of perishables; a storage area, similar to secondary structure, which would store non-perishables; a food preparation area including sinks and ovens; a cleaning area for wash/dry operations; a general dining area; and a food disposal system. The Rockwell Phase B estimate contained a DDT&E estimate of $36.3 M in 1970 $. By scaling and escalating this number becomes $111 M. No TFU was contained within the above mentioned document. By assuming the same ratio of TFU to DDT&E as in the total ECLS a TFU estimate of $15 M can be developed. There appears to be no duplication of cost between the Food Management system and the ECLSS because the Planning Research Corporation CER used to estimate the cost of the ECLSS did not contain a food management system. 1.3.1.1.15 Physical Fitness System (for Physical Fitness Module) A separate module for physical fitness might be extravagant, but when compared to a standard National Collegiate Athletic Association Gymnasium, the 196,000 cubic feet in a 50' x 100' module appears reasonable to support a crew of 600. A NCAA gymnasium floor is 94' x 50' within the lines and 114' x 60' including the out of bounds area. All are 18' in height. These dimensions yield a volume of 123, 120 cubic feet for a gymnasium with walls within 10' of the court on the ends and 5' of the court on the sides. 5000 Ibs of crew/habitability equipment was used as the standard to cost for the equipment within the physical fitness module. The Rockwell Phase B estimate for 2127 Ibs of crew/habitability equipment was $25.6M in 1970 $ for DDT&E and $2.6 M for TFU in 1970 $. Scaling results in the following estimates:
Ibs \ }
Ibs j

X (25.6) = $39 M in 1970 $, or $70 M in 1977 $ for DDT&E

X (2.6)

= $5 M in 1970 $, or $9 M in 1977 $ for TFU

1.31.1.16 Fabrication Assembly System (for Fab and Assemble Module) Within the two fabrication and assembly modules will be production line equipment which will be used for (1) subarray assembly for the SPS compdnents, (2) production of small components, (3) make-fit work and technical services support, (4) repair of retrieved hardware, etc. The total of all equipment within the fabrication was assumed to be 1.5 as costly in DDT&E and TFU as a beam builder, therefore a DDT&E cost of $300 M and a TFU of $33 M were used. Each Fabricaiton and Assembly Module has a Material Deployment System (MDS) which was assumed to be identical to the cargo deployment module, consequently no DDT&E was assumed.
X-D-90

For simplicity it was assumed that units 1=28 of the MDS were assigned to the Cargo Module and units 29-42 were assigned to the Fabrication and Assembly Module. 1.3.1.1.17 Docking Systems 41 Docking systems, each of which weight 8990 Ibs (see Table X-D-14) were assumed to be necessary for each SCB. 25 of these would be required for correction of modules + 16 for docking with the launch vehicles. For costing purposes it was assumed that the docking module was 95% structure and 5% ECLSS. In order to accommodate the electronics and mechanical systems an complexity factor of 1.15 was applied. By use of figures 6 & 8 it can be determined that a structure weighing 8548 Ibs would have a DDT&E cost of $25M in 1970 $ and a TFU of approximately 3.5M in 1970 $. In 1977 $ these equate to $45M and $6M respectively.

Using the Planning Research Corporation (PRC) CER's (see figure X-D-12 and. 14) the following estimates in 1976 $ can be derived for the DDT&E of the ECLSS related portion of the Docking System. Design & Development = 5.623 (442 Ibs) *415 = $12.5 M Major Test Hardware = 0.282 (442 Ibs)0'536 = $26.2 M

The above total of 38.7 M in 1976 $ equals $42 M in 1977 $. The same ratio of TFU to DDT&E as in the SCB ECLSS was used to determine the TFU of the ECLSS portion of the Docking System.
.133 X 42 M = $6 M TFU

By adding the above numbers the DDT&E and TFU costs of the docking system bedore adjusting for complexity are $87 M and $12 M, respectively. After applying the 1.15 complexity factors mentioned above these become $100 M and $14 M. 1.3.1.1.18 Medical Systems (for Clinic Module) The Clinic Module will provide for emergency treatment for those people who become sich or injured while in space. The assumption must be made that the selection process will eliminate workers with even a reasonable risk of illness while working on the SPS. No biomedical research will be conducted, nor will routine physiological monitoring be planned. It was assumed, based upon scaling from the Rockwell Phase B weight statement, that the Clinic Module would contain 6200 Ibs (see crew/habitability weight statement) of beds, chairs, EKG/pulmonary/biochemistry equipment, routine medical equipment, etc. This 6200 Ibs was assumed to be 1.5 times as complex as the Rockwell Phase B Crew/Habitability subsystem which consisted of mounts and supports, mobility aids, tethers and restraints, furnishings, medical and dental equipment, and recreational equipment. The 1.5 complexity factor is to accommodate the diagnostic equipment which must be available to support a 600 man work force. Using X-D-91

the Rockwell Phase B estimates of 21.8 M for DDT&E and $2.0 M for TFU in 1970 $, the following estimates can be developed: (2.9) '5 X 21.8 = $37 M in 1970 $, or $67 M in 1977 $ for DDT&E

(2.9) '75 X 2 = $4 M in 1970 $, or $8 M in 1977 $ for TFU

Application of the 1.5 complexity factor results in the following numbers: $67 M X 1.5 = $100 M for DDT&E
$8 M X 1.5 = $12 M for TFU

1.3.1.1.19 Simulation Laboratory (for Training and Simulation Module) It was assumed that two of the three crew simulation and training devices would be used in the SCB as on ground and that 25% of the DDT&E costs discussed in WBS 1.3.1.2.1 would be required to space -rate the simulator equipment. The small scale mockup of the S6B will not be duplicated in space. The assumption was made that the TFU for the ground unit and SCB unit were the same and production learning began with the second SCB unit.
DDT&E
Fabricaiton & Assembly Simulation

TFU

- Ground System - SCB System EVA/IVA Part Task Simulator - Ground System - SCB System Total - Ground System - SCB System

40 10 11 3 41 13

16 8* 4 4 20 12

*The Shuttle Mission Simulator upon which this estimate was based contained an $8 M computer. The assumption was made that the SCB IMS/Comm/Data system could provide this capability. 1.3.1.1.20 Recreational Systems (for Recreational Module) The recreational module will contain approximately 4000 of crew/habitability type equipment including a movie theather and television room. Reading material will be displayed on consoles. The remainder of the module will be reserved for tables, chairs, etc. X-D-92

Based upon the Rockwell Phase B estimate, 4,000 Ibs of crew/habitability equipment should cost $54 M in 1977 $ for DDT&E, while the TFU would be $6 M.
1.3.1.1.21 Boom

The boom separates the solar array from the main Power Module. It is basically structure, but provides a crawl-way through which personnel may travel to repair the electrical power and distribution system wiring. As reflected by figure X-D-6 it contains 0.1 of an ECLS, 0.2 of an Instrumentation/Communications/ Data System and a full environmental protection system. All of these items are costed elsewhere. As indicated by the weight statement the boom weighs 9060 Ibs. Based upon the CER in figures 6 & 8, using the S-IC/S-IV structure line, the DDT&E for the boom would be approximately 25 M in 1970 $ and the TFU about $4 M in 1970 $. Converting to 1977 $ these equate to $45 M and $7, respectively. 1.3.1.1.22 DDT&E Approach - The equation for the line in figure X-D-31 is complexity factor X 0.15 (TFU) 1.01. Assuming a complexity factor of 1, an estimate of 101 M for IACO of each DDT&E unit results. Assuming one DDT&E unit for major test an estimate for IACO of $101 M in 1977 $ can be assumed. Theoretical First Unit Assuming no learning results from the DDT&E unit mentioned above, a TFU of $101 M follows. 1.3.1.1.23 Project Management Installation, Assembly & Checkout (IACO)

The line in Figure :X-D-32 represents a multiple regression throuoh I-HP H^ta points on the chart. Use of this CER yields the following cost estimates: a. DDT&E - $172 M in 1977 $
b. TFU - $15 M in 1977 $

1.3.1.1.24

Systems Engineering & Integration (SE&I)

A factor of 7% was used to estimate SE&I costs for the SCB. The following data were used as the basis for selecting 7%: Program Saturn IV-B Saturn I-C Saturn II SE&I (1970 $ in M) 65 48 68 X-D-93 DDT&E (1970 $ in MQ 568 580 700 % 11 7 10

CO

LU

cc

IS

h i i

s
UJ

c
CVJ

a:
ca
co co

to

u o

a
o o
CO

CO

CO

($ !fl|) 310IH3A/1SOO 'S VI

X-D-94

PROJECT MANAGEMENT CER

120 110 100

ST
90

o '3 80
z
1I ~ 70

o *_>
60
LU

50 40

o.
30 20 10

500

I I I I I I 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 4500 TOTAL COST (IN MILLIONS)

I 5000 6000

FIGURE X-D-32 PROJECT MANAGEMENT CER

X-D-95

Program
CSM

SE&I (1970 $ In M)
150

DDT&E (1970 $ in M)
2300

%
7

LM

84

1300

Applying the 7% to both DDT&E and TFU the following estimates result: DDT&E
TFU

$300 M in 1977 $

$ 51 M in 1977 $
Combined Subsystem Development Testing

1.3.1.1.25

The amount of testing performed during a program is a function of the desires of the program manager, and the risk he wishes to assume. The following estimates represent the independent judgement of the estimator:
DDT&E
TFU

$128 M in 1977 $
$22 M in 1977 $

1.3.1.1.26

Ground Support Equipment

Historically, GSE has been a large cost driver in NASA programs as indicated by the following data ( in various year dollars): Project
CSM
LM

Total
2.1 B 1.1 B 780 M 660 M

GSE
310 M 143 M 130 M 133 M

%
15% 13% 17% 20%

S-IC S-II
S-IVB

568 M

107 M

19%

A factor of 4% of DDT&E was used for GSE for both the DDT&E phase and the TFU. In the opinion of the estimator this will be adequate. The SCB will be launched unmanned, the crew being placed into orbit by the PLV. The crew will actuate the SCB in orbit and will have a large volume in which to work and the PLV on-dock at the time. The levels of GSE experienced by the programs above will not be experienced on the SCB. Based upon the 4% the following estimates can be made for GSE:
DDT&E
TFU

$172 M
$26 M

X-D-96

1.3.1.2 SCB Support

This WBS element represents support which can better be provided by NASA than by prime contractors. DDT&E and production costs are discussed together, with separate cost summaries provided in,figures X-D-33 and 34. Operations cost are discussed separately following DDT&E/ Production. 1.3.1.2.1 Crew Training and Simulation

A guideline from the Flight Operations Directorate was that maximum use would be made of on-the-job (OJT) training in space, that the ground training would be kept to a minimum, and that ground simulation & training requirements & equipment would be approximately equal to similar efforts in Shuttle. Using this philosophy an estimate of $133 M was developed for DDT&E. A detailed discussion of this number follows. Since only one of each simulator and trainer were built, no production costs were included. a. Fabrication and Assembly Simulator - As suggested by the title this facility simulates crew activity in fabrication and assembly operations. The DDT&E estimate of $56 M is the expected run-out cost of the Shuttle Mission Simulator. b. EVA/IVA Part Task - Regarless of the success of OJT some training in EVA/IVA will be required. The Shuttle Aerospace Simulator was assumed to be similar in size and complexity to the EVA/IVA parttask simulator and the expected OAS cost of $15 M was used. c. 1-G Trainer - There will be adequate space and people in the (SCB) so that familiarity with that facility will be easily acquired. The 1-G Trainer will be used to aquaint workers of the relative positions of the fabrication and assembly equipment and the SCB. It will contain a very small scale mockup of the SCB and fabrication and assembly hardware. A DDT&E estimate of $12 M, the approximate cost in 1977 $ of the JSC 1-G is trainer, was used. d. Crew Procedures Development - 1430 MYE at $35,000/year was used to arrive at the $50 M estimate. This effort is similar to the McDonnell-Douglas effort presently being performed for the Space Shuttle Program. 1.3.1.2.2 Test, Evaluation & Analyses a. Engineering Verification Laboratory (EVL) - this will be a laboratory equal in complexity to the Shuttle Avionics Integration Laboratory (SAIL). It's purposes will be to verify fabrication and assembly concepts, and to ensure compatibility between the SCB and fabrication and assembly hardware. The expected cost of SAIL, in 1977 $ and including Development, Test and Mission Operations (DTMO) support, of $130 M was used as the estimate for the EVL.
X-D-97

ro Ko in CM o ro in i iin

to o o in o o o in in in o en co ro CM in CM CM CM|I

o co CM CM o CM O o 10 CM in ro in in in oo i in oo t CM CM ro CM CM oro r co | i| evil

co cn

t tn i i * i

* in "3- CM * F CM-i-in ro r

, ^-0

CM CM|O i <> m OJCMO i t CM|^ CM|

CM OCM CO CO

CM en
S LU Of. -"3

ID |ro ro in in ro |i i

^- li i*^ r*- in CM vo i -in t-^ |ro i

ro CM i

^- |un ^- o in ro|i r

en jco r *|

"~

CM

en

CD o LU

o cc. e GO ex. o-\ z Q. o. co LU Q i-l LU to _i 1- tf i _J

1-1 CO I"

r en

10 vo a- in ^~ i i

menr~.coincMvOi-r- co ro i

CM CM o

en rolin ^ o * colco CM r i i co oco en CO d-|cM i 3| ro

CM

LU O O Z

1 ii cu ii

<C 1 Q. GO O => </

en

CM |3- * CM CM

ro|i

10 CM

3" 00 1 ID O CO ** r-in

ro CM

volo CM O * ro|CM

in olco i i i o UD ocoen ro ID] r~

c c r**. LU H- S r-^ 3 to ^ en O^oir Q. O CD O o >a: ct LU

<C UJ Q-

en CO

co co o ** i

cor-.uncsiiocMCMi-co ro r
a:

i o

r-|r-

r^lo r ** CM

CM

CO CM en ID i i O ro OLDen

e^ <

"8s
CO ro DC O I Z

g^
oi o; oo
CO t t ct I c2 00
O '
h ^ Z^LU

LU
I-H ~T*

a: <a:
13

s:
O

LU

^ootocc
i E os 1-1 a: i z i i o z O- < ac t-^ LU 1 O C >
LU S B 1II 1 i Q. _J U_ "H _l _l

to a 1
O

S^

>

><

LU o;
^ rij ^j

u,

^ S <t 1 S^ ItOOO
^>-|

z =c ^ i o i !- LU i-iZ3tO2

LU Q

3 a : o o
GOCai

LU

00 LU^LULU tOO-^O tDtO Il O

s: a; a; a

Z3

^<c<Ca:cx: 1-1 => a: a. Z 08 1-1 1 i -~^ 3

QCL. Q:ozi-i'-i = 1 \ LU _1 O m _l 0- Ol ( O Z 3l i-HZJ Q: a. oc3Lut_i o'l u JOti Z O ZD LU rv^ 13 n 1 i 1 CC C/l O :i/> S ^ICliLUS. I Q. C cj 3 LU a; LU -i: a- n LU ~

. c_> l
LU

cc. LU o: i LU ^1 LU z

=-i-<z
O*^ ^H ^^5

H
LU l~ wj ^" LO

3>-iOO

"^" C^ 1 CX UJ
LU | O ZICSGO CD rf

z -~^3:

CJ LU Utfl i ^y f n CO ^ ii * O O ^ *

?:

2 C3t > CD^ ZLULU

*H

zg
Z"

IQ:_I
f*y^ jt j

LUe3|

LUS:^

Z 1 CC Z O O 1 t

t - 'z. z
Q LU Z
Q.

fCOKfCDLU LUC9Lul/)Lu| C O O O I QC ^ > Q ^OLU^^^U I Lu LU r O a S L U t O I OO SI IH ii

_i LU ec >- HH 3 o z z to s: o o; o i <: Z 3 "1 CCC/) !-!<-! |_ HI I-H X >HI| i LULU i i Z:LUCC a. i/> r oo CD

\ CD

t _ > 3 Q i
Z

vj C1 O
LU *

l/) ^u LU^3^^
HH

H-|C^J ^3 * ' i c n
^ECJ 11

jz

s o <:
CD O 01 CU

^1

GOtOI tOi-H 1

<C c_> O

1 ZI Q SI Lu
CD I-H _l Lu LU LU CD

"i <c i- i

52 <t Q- ( a o: <t LULU i ^ > i LU 3 i-i ZCJLU 3CJi 1 z: LU Q Z<XLU so 5 a: * <Ca.ce c_>
LUQ.C-) CJ t-J CX Z^GO Lu

O SZUJ S z foo>-i GO Oi I-H QCLu o

Q; 0

LU

LU H-

GO

X-D-98

g
o oo
VO

in CM
CO

,10 f)

in oo r^
CO

vo cn in

3O

o
VO

VO

CO <_) CO

VO

O VO

vo

LO

oo <: u-i o
0 0 O CD O

ca v_> oo

CO C\J VO

in oo vo

0 0

o cc z: a: a. o z o_ >i LU i o
LU CO <_> "I

CO

o
CO

CO LO VO

oo vo vo

o o o
CM CM CM

CM

. -H CO O 1

O >-*

O 2Z

I -i C I I oo O o: a: o LU i i r3 oo

LU O Q.

oo
CM

o oo

CO

r^

oo aCT> VO

CO VO

oo LU oo <
CO

in ca o oo

vo r^ea ca o o oo oo

o <. oo 00 Qro
I
I Q
X
LU BL

Q- O O >U_ O QC >LU Qi I O

CM

ca o oo

CO CM

o in

oo co o oo

in cr>

o o: ^ i uo o 3- i in cr> o

o^ o o o en o o o
CM CM CM

<c Qoo

=>
CD

cti O
oo

0 0

I
CO

or: O o. ooo i
CO

o
r CM OO

=T

CQ ca ca co o o o o oo oo oo oo
LU CL. O

o oo

oo

X-D-99

b. Software Development Laboratory (SDL) - The $15 M cost, including DTMO, of the Shuttle SDL was used as the basis for this estimate. Thus might appear to be a small number for 7 SCB's, each with 600 men building a SPS, but $450 M was estimated as the cost of the instrumentation/Communications/Data Management System; Consequently resources have likely been estimated in this overall area. c. Test, Evaluation and Analyses (TE&A) - $25 M during DDT&E was estumated as the amount required for NASA in-house TE&A. This includes items such as development of components such as sensors, testing of contractor designs, parallel efforts to reduce risk, etc. d. Safety. Reliability and Quality (SR & QA) Assurance - The estimate of $50 M provides fro an average of 250 people per year at $40,000/year. e. Materials Qualification - $10 Million over the five year DDT&E period to qualify materials & analyze out-grossing, flammability, etc. It provides for an average of 50 people per year at $40,000 per person. f. Laboratory Support - The $20 M estimate provides for an average of 100 people per year at $40,000 per person for the 5 year DDT&E. g. Test Chamber Support - Operation and Maintenance of the JSC Test Chambers will require 25 people per year at rates of $25,000 for maintenance & $30,000 for operation. $5 M for DDT&E was estimated for this effort. h. In-line Support - Refers to those efforts performed by NASA and provided to the prime contractors as deliverable products. $25 M for DDT&E was chosen for this estimate. 1.3.1.2.3 Program Management

a. Configuration Management/Performance Management - An average of 32 people per year for DDT&E was assumed for this task. At $50,000 per person per year a DDT&E estimate of $8 M is calculated. b. Data Management/Scheduling, etc - 10 people per year average of $40,000 per year yields a total DDT&E estimate of $2 M. 1.3.1.2.4 Flight Support a. Mission Control Center Modifications - A DDT&E estimate of $80 M was selected for the cost of MCC modifications to support the SCB. This estimate was based upon 1/2 of the cost of the MCC Level I update including program and DTMO funds. b. Data Reduction Center (DRC) - Bulk data processing will be handled by a Data Reduction Center, which will also act somewhat as a backup to the on-board SCB computer. The $12M cost of the Shuttle DRC was used as the estimate for the SCB DRC.
X-D-100

c. Mission Planning - The estimate of $40 M for DDT&E was based upon an average of 200 people per year at $40,000 per person. d. Flight Planning - 100 people per year at an annual rate of $40,000 was the basis for the $20 M DDT&E estimate for flight planning. 1.3.1.5 Government Furnished Equipment (GFE)

This is the only area of support which has production estimates. a. Extravehicular Mobility Unit (EMU) - The estimate of 32 M for DDT&E reflects a suit of the same complexity as the one developed for shuttle. Based upon the assumption contained in Table X-D-15 "Quantity Assumptionf for GFE", that 1649 EMU's will be required, or approximately 236 for each SCB, a total production cost of $171 M can be derived by using a a TFU of $250,000. b. Closed Circuit Television (CCTV) - As indicated by Table X-D-15, there will be 7 CCTV's for each S C B . I t was assumed that the CCTV would have the same DDT&E cost as the Shuttle CCTV, $23 M. At a TFU cost of $500,000, approximately the same as the Shuttle CCTV, the 49 SCB units would have a production cost of $12 M. c. Manned Maneuvering Unit (MMU) - As with the EMU, there will be a total of 1649 MMU's.Because of the mobility required for EVA fabrication and assembly operations it was assumed that a new MMU design would be required, and that this new MMU would have a DDT&E cost of $25 M and a TFU of $125,000. At 90% learning the total production for the 1649 MMU's would be $85 M. d. Crew Provisions - It was assumed that the DDT&E for all crew provisions would be $5 M, and that $5 M of production items would be required for each SCB. e. Space Rescue and Retrieval System - A DDT&E estimate of $100 M, and a TFU of $10 M was assumed for this one-man rescue craft with a small set of manipulator arms on the end. It will be a low thrust, minimum range & ECLS vehicle. Two would be required for each SCB, resulting in a production cost of $107 M. f. Free Flying Television System - This device, which could be in the NASA inventory prior to it's requirement by the SPS program, will be used to investigate areas not readily accessible to EVA crewman or visible to fabrication and assembly operators. A DDT&E estimate of $30 M was assumed and a TFU of $5 M was estimated. It was assumed that each SCB had 2 free flying TV systems, consequently a total production cost of $55 M resulted. *The following pages contain cost summaries for WBS 1.3.1, Space Construction Base.

X-D-101

TABLE X-D-15 QUANTITY ASSUMPTIONS FOR GFE Extravehicular Mobility Unit (EMU) Of the 600 man crew per SCB, 300 will be EVA qualified, consequently when 7 SCB's are in orbit, 2100 EVA qualified crewmen will require suits. EMU's will be designed such that more than one crew person can use the same EMU. 20C EMU's can satisfy the EVA requirements for fabrication and assembly of the 300 EVA qualified people per SCB because of multiple shift operation. 15% spares will be taken directly from the production line. 25 units will be procured for production testing. Replacement due to limited shelf life or damage will come out of the operations budget. Quantities to be costed are as follows. Initial Suits for 7 SCB's 15% Spares Production Testing Units Total Production Units Closed Circuit Television System (CCTV) Each SCB will have the following number of CCTV units: 1 CCTV for each of 4 Cargo Modules 1 CCTV for each Fab & Assembly Module 1 CCTV for EVA Preparation & Storage Module Total Per SCB 4 2 J_ 7 1400 224 25 1649

Since there will be 7 SCB's, 49 CCTV production units will be required. X-D-102

TABLE X-D-15 (cont.)

Manned Maneuvering Unit (MMU) The same logic applies for the MMU as for the EMU, consequently 1649 production units w i l l be requirec.

X-D-103

<->
t3 O O C

ID e\j in
00

to
CO

ro
CM

oo

1 0 LO

a: ooo a.
uu o
OO

>-
_l

CQ

CJ

i'

z o

-J
<C

_l LU

2= I O O

<C

to

O CD
CtL

o z: a. o o a: X uJ oo _i o o cC oo a.

r^. r^

cr>

00 00

CM o CM
CD O

on

CD

00

co

LU O ^ O Q O

a.

a. o

X-D-104

IS o

i i^ r- ooo

vo r-.
LO

CO

GO

QO

ooo

If)
CM

o
O Q .

id 00

oo
a:

2
a a
CM in

ft *3- if) CM CM CM

CMCOCOfncOCMCMCMCMCMCMCMCMCMCMi

OO Q. O

o o a:
Q-

ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooom OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooor>.

i C M C O C O C O C M C M C M C M C M C M C M C M C M C M i i ^-i i i r r i i i ( i -i c i

co vo cr> in co i r^ r^ 00 co i r.
CO CT> Tj- Tf OO i

oo oo o^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^y^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ c? ^D ^3 ^^ c^ ^j* ^3 t^j* c,_j ^^ ^~ ^" f"-^ r^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ <Ticr>crvcr>CDencT>CT>cy>cricT>cnooocDOOOOOOooooooooooooo

i r i i i i t i t CMCMCSJCMCMCMCMCMCMCMCMCMOJCMCMCMCMCMCMCMCMeMCVJ

X-D-105

10
30

in
CM LT>

ro

CNJ

cr.|
CD

Lf) CM I--.

30 3O

oo

oo

o ce: o: Qo. LU LU in h- a: il CQ o
Q

oo
O
CO CM

in co

cr.

<C
OO

I
tj

a: o: LU l 2 oo o z= a. o
O OO Q0 0

cr.

in CM

n
CM

cr> oo

co

oo

un

UD

oo col

r--. CM

CM r~ ro

o: o
QQ-

0 0

oo

CQ <_>

oo <_) oo

X-D-106

Oif>OLOLOLOif>LOLOLO3-t^.vOir-^O'd-Oi LO a- li o o r-^ CM r*. LO CM c\ji vo CM i CM 3- oo i oo i kd-i oo i i i , |oo

O O O O O O O O O O C O L O O , O O CM O CO * LO CO i O CM CO CM O 00

r CMCM

vo 3- CM oo i

if)

>|LO
OO

i I

co
o

3 - L f > C M o o i f > o o i o c r c o c o c o c M O a t c M i r>- r^ CM ot

OOCMOd-CM*l-r^LO r i i i LT> ,

If)

f If) CM CM CM

r-- i cr> CM ot oCO

LO CM

<C CJ

CM en|

CMI rocMOOi CM

o oo a: oo 0- i z o
LU J

CD D_

r i co CM co cr>

OO

LO

co
If)

CM

CO

(?
CM

1 UJ I <_> _| II
10
2! UJ ht O- Z 00 UJ OO - * fLU CO
0_ O

-l

Cr>|

r , CM i^

CO CM CO CM

en r im

vo o r^ o r- o CD co LO oo tn cr>

If) LO CM CM

o
CT>|

i r i i Lf)

hr-

OO r-~ i CT> CM CTi O CO i COi L O C M C M C M L O C n CO LO i f.

CD Z CT>
CT> CO

CM r

r i r

' CMCM

en co

CM i LO

o LO o OO

CM

o a; oo i oo

z o o
ct

Z3 O C D -

a. oo

I oo >oo
.

UJ

^ I O <f. LU ct:
-r- CD CJ UJ

OO

So: a. LU
i

CD

a: LU rs i h- oo oo co o >- z oo >- 2: oo ^ oo o >- 00 LU 0 0 >- a: oo h- i oo oo oo LU z oo *f.

I >C OS.
Qi 00 O >-

08 Z I

LU

Q-

s :

CD

ca: oo oi LU
I

3 2: CD Q LU Z I CC. 00 >i ^
ZCD

CD* LU

-3
Qu

>i Z OO OO e <c o ooeC O r CD z oo a. h^ Z I O i Z _J a: CD u_ o >- >- z z o-za:ujo_ooo ti OO OO O O II UJ2:i 3LUI LU<C -*h< O D- oc I 2: O 2! C D D; LU a. z CQca: 00 t-i CQ a: 00 Z i' 2: M O t Q ID_I 00 h- 00 13 oo_i2:tJ2:ot-ioo CD Q O t ii oo i1111 OL \ CJ _l <C O o o oo _i oo ti CJ ^^ CO > CD C3 CD oooii^t-i=3ct:2: a: O _i oo LU oo <c LU cma a: : o > - c o c j Q 2 : o o > OO OO O OO CD CJ O CJ CJ OZetOUJi-iUJO 2: >- DC >- Q: et iu.a.u-Q2:oocca oo LU LU t OO UJ CJ CJ ii 00 O- OO CD U-

_J O e <C 0_ I Z

CQ LU 2 : LU C3 >- t LU 2T 08 I 21 <C oo z: 00 Z t- LU LU _l _l I

:z i-<a: i o

CC.

_J

< oo

CQ CJ

<: <; CD _i H^ P

X-D-107

o >-<
o:

8 a:

i rv ti c=C CO

I =c CO O. ii m
t UJ
UJ O o I - 00
i CNJOOrOrOOJCMCSJCMCMCXJCMCMOvJCM
OO C_J

UJ OO >- UJ

<c

oo z

=C I

fv ry UJ I I O 3 00 <_> z O ^ Z3 Z3 X O a o

a:

O a: o:

o =a: OO Qoo

Or cMoo^-Lnvor-^oocriOi c\jro*LT>voi-oocr>

CTl<T>CTlO>CJ>O1CT>O^Cn<T>OOOOOOOOOO r r r r r^ r i i CM C\J iOOOOOOOOOOOC3OCDOOOOOOOO C\JCVJC\JCVJC\JC\IC\JC\1C\JC\JCVJC\JOJCVIC\JC\ICSJC\1CVJCVJC\JCVI

X^D-108

LU CC O CO tu i LU O

in
CM
>- *~^

cc
LU

CJ

<c

oo

ca CM

ca o CM
Qi LU
LU LU CC

cu o
a:
LU

>_J

cc I So* Q0

LU O

Z
<C

CD Z
I-H

2:

cc
O

ca: CM
CD 0
LU O

CC O

cc
CJ
DC

LU

CJ CO <C

CC

CD CC I-H LU I O. Lu LU CJ CD

C
LU

33
CJ CJ

Lu O CC O

LU

u_ n:
0 1

LUO OO LU
Cu O VO

LU

cc o
Lu 3Z t

cC >
CO

cc

LU 0 0 CQ

oo z
O

I ii z LU

fee CC
cc o

oo Z Q oz
CC CO LU O VO Cu O i O CM O CM LU I I

0
CM

CO LU ii I

2:
O
CD
LU LU LU LU

o
et
Lu O

a. cu ZD oo _i
CD CC

AN ADDITIONAL $

cc

(0 31 1t

a. o
Cu I

CD
Z
I-H

I 3 z

if j
I-H I-H

Lu

<:

Z CD

cc o

co

H*

AR DURING THE

o I-H

ca co co O O

CD CO

_l _J
I-H

Z 0 1 0 3 O eX OO

>i :r oo h- o-<a:
CO Q ZZ 0C ii

LU O CD <C CC CC =C O LU 1 >OO --x.

o:

r4=

ho CJ
o cc
CD

3 co
oo oo

in o o
CM 1

cn
LU LU

CQ

O H00

CJ ZD C I OO

H- cn oo

Z O ii H-

Q LU
LU

O LO OO-

OO O CJ

O ef. LU

z i oo

<C z
t O
> I-H

I O O ^ CM CM

<c rs
OO

<j o; _i LU 13
CJ O eC Q00

cc
LU

LU Q- cr:
a:
CD

Q Z ^3 O

z a ><C a i a: a. a. CC ct ii t LU LU
I

Q- I OO I-H .

1C. Q Q CD O O i< ti CD CC CC CC LU LU
1C I CD Z

cri li cr
oO CC 0 0 LU
-H

oo LU rv
CC

o
O

LU CQ 3= CC h- O

LU

ca

5
Cu CU
ID

31

Lu

in

o -
LU CJ

in co
1-0
LU <C >- CC 2! LU
CU

oo
A

>

o co
cc o
Lu LU LU CC

cc ca i o cj
LU CC V V <C z :n
LU LU CD
> 2 - : " H -

> I H - -

Lu O =C

CC DC <C I LU >- CD ^-~Z

^

CQ oo

O O O

cc
LU 2 1 C\J

CJ O Q O CC Cu

in too <z in

CD

in cc cc oo:
l

t-H t-H

0 0 vo LU CJ
LU

a: o
VO

LU _l I LU LU

a cc
LU oo

a. cu

a: oo oo

o o vo
CJ

cc
LU LU

oo CM o VO Lu
Lu O LU O _l CM LU O >O LU I-H _l CC LU CC

Lu ,
I

< LU >CM

Lu O CC O LU _J LU LU

Lu -

LU oo a: o CD
Lu O O

LU O CD >_ LU LU

CD ca CJ t oo cc
O I
LU O

2: cu cu

LU LU

cc z o 3 LU
oo

O I _l CO <C ^
Lu CD O
O
I* I-H

zz
CC LU

o
CM

**

Z LU

o cc
LU

LU

LU l <C

>

LU h- LU _| ii CO

OO Q Q cC ^""l C3, CQ <3Z ^ CO CD

LU I-H >Q LU O I <C

oO

<c
CO

CD

CC LU Cu 2!
r bO-

I-H I ID O
00 LU

o
OO

I
CD

co o
LU O_ O CC O

C a.

CD

cr
Q
LU

-
C

CO CD Z -H 00 OO LU CJ O CC O_

I
CJ LU GO LU

OO O CO CD O

LU cc

<:
z o co oo

I-H CD Z LU
CD Z I-H Z I-H

CC

a:
LU CC CJ

I
Lu

5-

CC
O CC CU

Cu 0 0

<c oo

O O Lu

21

<c

cc LU cu
O
CJ CJ

o;
UJ CD

O Z <C

oo

oo oo

X-D-109

CM

CO

CD

CO

LO

CM

CM

CO

CO

CM

co
CO

oo
CO

LO

CD

CM

CM

CO

CO

CM

co
CO

o oo
LO

CD

CO

CO CO

CM

CM

CO

CO

CM

cn

UD

en o co CD

CO

CO

CM

CM

VO

CO

CO

CM

LO

wo cn
CM CM CM
CO CO

en
CO

CM

CO
LO

CO

cn
r LO

CM

CO

CO

CM

CM

CO

CO

CM

<*

0 1
VO CD

oo
^ ~ CO

cn oo P_
LO

CM

CO

CO

, _

CM

CM

CO

CO

CM

^ .

CO
^ ~ LO

__
CM
CO CO

t a: o a. D > 5 a: i co O h a: cj oo 0- LU Z: I a: o _i
l i O- CJ 'O 1 0 LU O OO *

LO

CO

CD

cn ,
LO

, _

CM

CM

CM

CM

CM

,. 3

VO ^~
LO

S' .
col o |
CM 0

CO
1 CO
VO

CM

CO

CM

CM
,

CM

CM

CSJ

CM

CO

CM

CO CM CO
r

cn
CM

co
CO

^-*.
VO

CM

CM

CM

CM

CM

CM

CO

cn
CO CM

CO
f*^

CM

CO

VO CO CO
f*^.

CM

CM

CM

CM

CM

CM

CO

cn
CO CM

_ILU Z. s: oo LUOO
=C CO i i > i CO H-

,__

1 <C 0 -Z.

0
CD 0

vo
CO CM

CM

CO

CM

, _

CM

CM

CM

CM

CM

CO

cn
CO

00 a : :
LU i LU J-.

~^ l_~ *"* r*^

a: LI_ Oil =c. oo - Z I . oo

OO CJ LU

CD CJ CD Q- O >-

0
CM

CO

o CM
CM O CM CM O CM CM O CM CM CD CM CM

CM

CM

, _
^
^ ~

CM

CM

CM

CM

CM

CM

^~
CM CM ^f CM CM ^~ CM CM ^~ CM CM ^ . CM CM

cn

cn

CO

CM

CM

, _

CM

CM

CM

CM

CM

CM

co cn

CO

CM

CM

^->

CM

CM

CM

CM

CM

CM

a.
0 0

r~vo cn
LO

CO

CM

CM

r_

, _ ^ .

CM

CM

CM

CM

CM

CM

CO

CM

CM

CM

CM

CM

CM

CM

CM

cn ^ .
cn

CO
_

CM

CM

0
CM

CM

, _

, _

CM

CM

CM

CM

CM

CM

^. j CM CM
CM CM CM

CM O CM

CM

| ___

CM

CM

CM

CM

CM

CM

0 0

CO t(

Z . Z . ^ LU ^r* LU

co l

" ^ ^ T>"

CO Z . 1 1 0 0 CJ OO LU
H 1 OO

^ ^ > 1

a: 1 a; co a. a. oo o
r~^

CJ LU

<x. ^f a: o\
08 C
0 0

3
LU CJ

Q U_

^^ co 1 LU "^ i * CO HOO tt fv* 2T Z . co Z LU cC 14 z r | . "^^ . . O o "^ a. z 00 LU 0 OO 1 1 O LU 0 LU 1 ^^ i 1 LU CO Q- a: -z. CJ ^*" CXL a; ~^ o >- Q_ LU z 0 ^ i a: >. i O =c s a. 4 1 O 1 1 ^r 0 0 3 08 1 ^ ^ ^ ^ ^^ CO t g CJ 1001 s: i i CJ 2: 00t a OO
t t

^ "

a:
LU LU

1 ^f
LU U_ CO

HO 1

x-o-no

o
CM

if)
CM

in

CO

fv

CM

CM CM

C M C M C O

CM

CM

CTV

sH CM

CO

r-~ O

CM

CM

r-!

C M C M C O

CM CM

CTl

CM|

CO

CO

1^

CM

CM

CM

CM

CO

CM

CM

CT>

CMl CM)

CO

r^ O

CM CM

r--

CM CM ro

CM CM <r>

co
CMl

r*. o

CM CM

f-~

CM

CM CO

CM

CM Cn

r-^

0
CM

ro

CT> CM CM ro

VO

CM

CM

CO

C M C M C O

CO

CT> CO

CM

CM

CM

CM

CM

CM

OO

CO

en

(V.
CTl

CO

CTl

ro cr>

CM

CM

CM

CM

CO

CM

CM

00

CO

ro

o> CM
CO CT>

CMi

l>

CM

CM

rO

C M C M C O

CO

co en co *j~ i
CO

CM

CM

CO

CO

CM

CO

cr>

co

en

co

CM

CM

CO

CO

CM

CO

CO

CT CO CD

CO

CM

CM

CO

P O C M C O

co ^- co o
CO

C M C M C O

co CM r>.

o
CO

oo o

HCD <C CD ^ _l O

ra

00
<

>-H <c oz
C

Z O

oo i a: c_> z: CD
2: 'Z. LU Z Q- I

LU cr> I-H
oo
O
1-1 Z (/) LU

s
I
LU LU

oo >-
-
00 CJ

oooi

Q:

<I

01 c a. art o
OZ

L U H - - J L U L U C D
-

I cr

a. o

Q.

t-i

- -J

<C l I O O L U

cc^u. OOOCD

x-o-m

REPRODUCIBIUTY OF THE ORIGINAL PAGF IS POOR

O .1 1 LU V

cj-2

0 C'

0 O

o o o m in in

o m in
O

o o m m

CO

in

r-H

O 0

CNJ

rH

in .i f\J m d- o

O 0

CO CM

CM

o in

11

*r

_l t
LU I/) t/1 LU

UJ ^ < <l LU _ UO LU

r^r^j

"^

r-<

T t j

r' (^

rsi
V "i, r ^

o r-. in r < ,i in

^r j_> sf in en
CM

m in

CO ^f

IT,

r-.

i 1 1 ,I

o
r^^

i?

0 0

(f\

CM 3

o o
r~1

CO , <

<^ m

in .i T o
-H

fNJ

[^
t

o o en

CO , 1

CNJ

i 1

o o in o ,i CM iri

UJ 1 g < -J h^ l/l LU

OJ

I?

f^

o ii -o u ' 1-1 ^

CM

o in

CO

m o
r1
11 -

0 0

CM

O O
"~*

i |

in

in

i 1

CNJ

c*

"+

0 o en

CO
! 1

CNJ

r- in J

o
0

i i

"*

LU

< 2
Ct UJ

T: < o ^
J r(/l LU

~i
1I

o in

in
r-H

in

r(

OJ

O CO Tt

o o m in

rr

CO

in o

r-H r-H i-H

o
0

CM

O
.-H

r-*

in

in t

I 1

O
,t

0 0

CO
CNJ

CM

o in
r*

1 1

CO

01 LU t- LU

CO u. < O

LU

o
j
LU

o
I
o
LU
C_>

z o
ce <j
LU

UJ rr LU O. 0 I

to co
2

V
1

CARGO STORAGE STRUCTUF

FOOD MANAGEMENT S Y S T E

PHYSICAL FITNESS SYSTE?

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECT

CARGO TRANSFER S Y S T E V

i
o

COMBINED S U B S Y S T E M S DE

C A R G O DEPLOYMENT S Y S T

S Y S T E M S ENGINEERING AN

SIMULATION LABORATORY

RECREATIONAL SYSTEM

PROJECT MANAGEMENT

E V A SUPPORT S T A T I O N

FABRICATION AND ASSEMB

S T A B AND CONTROL

MEDICAL S Y S T E M

DOCKING S Y S T E M

INSTALLATION

S'3UCTURE

ASSEMBLY

O <

LU

._

n >-

o
0 r QLU

(/I

-J

LU

o o
CD

FACILITIES
CNJ

ELEVATOR

TOOLING

j-SAsans

LU l/l O

i o i

CA
'^ ^

r 4

CNJ

en

in

-0

r^

co

r-H

fNJ

q. in

~0

~\
4

en

en

en

en

en

en

0,

en

en

e.

en

en

en

en

en

en

en

rn

en

en

en

en <
IT)

X-D-112

i <: o s:
LU CO CO LU

iocor-~t-oc\jomr-~

tf> CM

CM

IT) CTl

<C "Si

LU i

> u> r CMVO cr> Oi LOCMCMICVJ

s: i

CO

oocycxDOOorocococor^ir>ouocr>ro<d-cvicM3i~~rLOrcvjvo r r-^OJLOC\ja-*d-t^ i i coi i < Oi LOCMCVJ

co

CO

LO

CO r r i r CM

i i uoi -

o o co

co
0 0

o CM

c/? cr:

a o 2: o; co
Ll_ ^

CO If) CM i VD CO

2: o;
co

LU LU CQ t

ZP 2: z:

en
I

CJ3

c*. d_ " Stir CD

<*-

co

ca 2:
z : o II
CO >-

co

CD LU O I _l Z. LU

co
co
CQ

LU I O

<_>

t-u 2: CO
I CO >CO

ct:
Q-

co
LU

o o; g
Q

LU >- CO LU J CO CO co CO CO co >co CO a: LU >-

>-

co CQ co >- 2:

z: co i

<
CO >-

a: o LU a: ha: co o >CO CO

>_j
OQ

-H >

LU oZJ Q

CO LU Q_

U- CD >co a: O

ce:
O CO

LU

o z.
CC >-i

QC _J H- CJ CO LU C LU I i

rj co

CO o D- O a: <i i LU D_ ce o I co a a.' a: o o o o co >-i -i ii CJ

_i o; < Li_o

=t o
_l LU

co co LU ct: I < LU co LU LU >CD z: co i CQ : CD Z3 z: co

z 2 : : ; ii LU

CD CO

cc. <c
CO

: LU

co

CO LU

i a: 1-1 O
KH

co > o CO CO o z: o i a

CD CD CD

I I CQ

LU i

LU LU

i co 2: LU o *e
. CO CJ CD U-

: >- o co <f. m
CMCMCMCMCMCMCMCM

I LU co a: >-CQ co 2: CQ ^> rs z: co

oooocorooocococorococococororocorococopocococococoooco

X-D-113

l>

oo
1 O

co *a- oo oo oo =i1

CO O

oo

CO

LO *~~

r ^~

LO

oo i i CO O> r~x co
r

CTi CTi OO 1 1 1
LO LO CO

r** i

CO CO f^

LO LO LO LO CM CM CM CM

CO 00 CO cc CM CM CM CM 1 1 i

r~. r> r-.

<3 CM 00 r~ <st* CM 1 1 CO r f*^ r" *&~

r^ r^*

^^ CM

co
CO OO

CM
r

<
r

CM

CM CD *d- T CM

r~- 1 CO 0

1 0 CO
1

O) CO ^J*~~

i i 1 1 1 r~-. r^ i>

i-.
UD

VI ^" ^" ^JCM CM CM CM

CM O ^J-

.0

r ^ CM 1 VO 1 CO CO <JD
r O1 vo r CO 0

vo vo

CJ CM CM CM

Cxi

OO
LO LO CO C_) OO LO

i~
o

CO

LO O OO

o%

1 O

cr*
1

r*^ 01 co r-^ r-- ci

CO r 1 1

r~- r^ vo
i i i
LO ui vr

o oo

LO

O 0 0 CT

0 CO O

r**.

r-

CM CM CM CM r CO 0-J LO 1 1 1 1 LO LO LO 1 1 1 LO IT) LO O} f''*. LPj t-- f""* !"* 1 05 '4D

r-*

UJ

CO <;

3{_j
CO CO

8
r~-

co co ^r r~ LO LO tf
P"*-.

1 O
CM CC

CO P*x, LO LO OO CO

co co r*>- *J- co

i i

*^"

^~ f. O.I CO 1 1 | ^~ ">i" 1 1 3" !* LO CO CO CO co CO r i r

^ r-

^ ^~

| ^~ ^<^j^j CM

LU OO UJ

O a; oo O
ZD

''
00
LU
^^^

<:
^>
^*^
CO CO ca 0
r~~ f^

i 0

Q_

^S

OO

31
O

<c

oo

LO CO 1 O 1 LO CTl
LO

CO CM LO CM CM CM

co co vr j- co 1 1 i i i LO i-^ O1 CTl LO

VC *

O-l CM *JD
CO

f r t r>.

CM CM CM C>J

en

1 CO 00 CO 1 CO CO CO LO CO f) Cn co CO

<o oo i i

CO ^J- CXI ^~

oo

oo
CLJ

UJ

_i
I D Ci
CM LO O O'l

ct: 0 LU _j o o oo Q_
00

OO
LU

I O

O 1

a Q or

ID

LO a")

CO

cxi co
CM

1 l 0

CO CM LO CM CM CM .-J CO ex* CO cc co CO 1 i i 1 1 1 CM 1 i i 1 OJ CM CM 1 1 1 CM OJ OJ LO LO LO LO o CO CTl LO LO CO tO i OJ CM l CM i i r CO <-

=j- ta-

CO 00 =!

CM

oo

Z^I
^*
^ '

_J
CO

co <t

UJ CO

,_

00

en
(__J

CXI 1 CO CTi CM r~ d vj CvJ r- UJ i r CM r~~ r~~ r^

oo

00

C/}

1 1 1 ! | 1 1 i r r~- l r ^ i r r~ r CO 11 i Z= CM
I D

^r i 1 1

^J- w^- ^J-

<c

^t~

^_ r

^_

CM CO *^p i i 1 1 r r~"' i CTl i-~

CM

cr

"J"^

Ci
t-H

t i i

*c ^_J
^_l

en j.
Li 1u_
o3 .
1

a.

CO

CNJ
^^

'J- CO
i' !

->- *
1

CO
LU _J

CD

to
CO

Ii j.
CJ>

i. i

G
L_

LU UJ >UJ 00 OO k- C^l UJ

i > I U) _J O')

0
^_

o
CJ CJ O<^
f ^

1
Cx_

UJ

0 Ou*
1

oo 1 co o
^}

H^UJ >^ ^

oo ra oo l co
^
^'j

>-

>- CO oo O-J >- t'H;

(^"

1 t

HUJ
^

u.
UJ

UJ H21 , 1 UJ UJ J~ OO UJ ^r -, 1 CJ UJ =C 0 o_ JD 1 a: u_ o ^. ^ K~ <. L 1 to ^_ 0 (-7 LU l< ; 1 1ClL 1/"J ^*" ^y (^y* CO Q --' v^3 U_ C O L_ ^_ ts t i LU UJ t/} CO -^.o T: o o_ o ^f-~ OD: CC h- LU Li. ^ \ | i i- o 1 CO CJ Q- *^C 'A. *-X ^* C13 r^J ^*" ^5 CD ~j r c i O -' ^^ ^L o O o3 l H- 2: Ht D:. t- ^ (__,> C_> I < O OCJ O o ob H- 1 ^ t~* -^QJ y ^> CD C_3 ZD _l CO cn oo co > </J CO Kt c5 uj o: o _i CXL *J o >- CO H- CJ CTi * ^1 c^ *^C ^ C' 1C **C ^v r j ^ ^ 1 1 O CJ> t ) 2i CL. it ( c^ <Sl \ LU LA: LU UJ i , L/J CO LU O t_J o uj U- Q. U- 2_ o it_

CO 1 c LiJ UJ 21 C 00 f o--) /"^ ^- ^_J l U i J ^- O t

H- _l
I H I I

_J <_J

*4

CJ U.
^

o: LU

<. a: k_l UJ ^i_

(~i UJ

ci o ti --* h- l

c^ ** f izz

re ( c ca
C~j
LJU!

:D o: <_j 2: o o
co a:
_J

X-D-114

co CM
_l CM OCM |* f O <t- CO O hO O VO

cn in CD oo o m co in CM in

CM r^ CM CO CM CO co r^ oco > CM CM m in r^ * co r-* CM co ^t- in P^ ^^ CO . in i^ u n i n c o c n v o c n i n i n ' VO CO O VO CO CO CM VOCM

i CO

in in i
CO

CM

11

co

CO

z
Ul

r- cn o i co in in CM covo
co
co

co r*^

oo co in t r**. ^ vo in CO vo

CO CO vo en o o in inlin <3- CO i CM CO VO cn co in o in o < o i cn

CM

CO VOlO

CO r-

r CM

in >-

co

CO

CO

VO

in CQ r o co

t-. O Cn 3- r CO r

r a co CM vo co r~- *J- vo cn co vo

coioomo co r- 1 CM

O
Q_ U l

a o

in r o ro CO i co P^- in i co r~ r^ tr o co

o o c o o o r c n c o o o r* i^>coooco r o r ^ r UT r r CM

c o

CM o co m vo u-> r- crivo co oo 01 co en co co cr> ID o ^- r- ir>

LJJ 00 c' [ <C ^ oo

I 2: UJ CD
I CD

coco lo

co -a vo u-> co vo

^-r-

r-

l--r-r-

CM

os z:

| I C3
SI

00 CJ &

ca co

cocor^-u>ejr-

1 i CM co

10

1 C

jc co

:z oo y-

UJ ^ ^ S

CD -Z. j -eoCM
O CO

CM

*O3-i CTCOi

i *3~ i^ "d* *d

i rCMi n O 'r r> i nm ) c o o ~ > vo - = ) c r a r > trco

vo

.
!l- t^
r CM

CD <C OO Q_ 00

^ S<
O
CQ O

rCJ CO

co

CO ^1" t~~ If)

c o o o o v u v o c o v o r-*> r- r- i n c a c T i n c n c o v D c n o J C M v o '-'' O W O c>JLf > fV ' c:> ^ N" jr ^- IO CO i CO

r

I ^ CO

i vocnr-inCT>

*^

CC CO CO

r*~ t~ ^M r~~ r~" r

VO

1^" '~~ '~

f>

r~~ ca^ i in r CM co

Q. U. CO Ul Ul

Q ui cc:
_J l ca ^ i
' O

on \00

U.

3 n

1 s-sss o o o o o c o o o r - r o c o r ^ c n o i n o ' * O r ) JT-.rvp r _ r _ i CM 10 w- > r*. CM co ^<*, t r ) _ r i M vocMcOr-.tnr^tno ro o> co i vo i-^

U l 1 0 I CM -

3C

I
CM

Ul
O

5 08 I CO
CO S"_

Q CO Ul Ul

UJ

z: Ul
I

cj us Ul UJ
ef.
CC 08 I
3 > O I

iO

LU

I/)

>- r..- CO </) o >CO I )

2C t"J CO >UJ l- E i/) h co ui

>- CO (-r

<.1

-Z.
! -

co

>CO

a: o.

cr
a:
C-) i

H ;
UJ

<to I ac CK-

or

.o
O c

t.?
V-

t_ . n. l t- u. <c co < O 1-; Ul i-. Z_ UJ t/', l/; _ CO UJ t/', l/; ocxog: i / ) c o o o

O O

<S> IS) -^ CO *J. LiJ CO CO 1_ _l >- _i I CO d > >-co <C r=- O t h- rv in 2" r-~ IZ ^_ o; i UJUJ <t uj o co

ca co

a: CQ os a: ui CQ i c I o

AL PRODUCTION

> I CO

co => ta; o ca l o z z co ui ui S CO <C o co >

_i co >-i ui

W . Z Z - .

ct UJ -Si UJ

-i <c Ul z O. CJ Ul o o uj Q:
oio1C Ul

OH h-

1 an o

O "-" Z CO Ii CD ^ Ul

O I CO , I CO

r -

co ci n. ci. j u ?c en _i i (

CJ
CO l/V i

<r o

CO ")i." t_l <_) i' 2. <JT 1 <t CO ~ >-< > D' i< ( J _l Ul\ 11

o a:

ias!

^ o: Qt.' o uj ii^ a. u. si! a sc co cc: CO

pzx u. co o 3 -i o; co e_ co co o co ui u, co e. z >- a: >-co w CO O_ CO CO * * *

_! I CO _J S CJ Z c^ I.I 111 111 I I <~3 h-

X-D-115

CVJ

IV.

LO oo

ro

LO vo

vo

ro

Lf>

o oo

CO

ro cvj

VO

LO

en in

CO

ro

o oo
LO CO

CM

LO

i VO

o 00

co

CVJ

LO

CVJ

CVJ VO

CT>

r-

etQ_ I
CD => O

SO oo

a: o_ oo

CQ O oo

CVJ
CVJ

LO

CVJ

CO

LO

VO VO

VO

0 to o 01 CO - ' z S oo

CO DQ OO

LLJ h- ii ii I OK- _J i UJ (_) 1 I -O ID -> I OQ S

CVJ

CVJ

CVJ

CO

LO

VO

vo

vo

I CX.Q: Z <C Q- >-

UJ 0:0

oo uj
3

CVJ OQ

o: a:u.

OO LU -bO-

CVJ

CVJ

CVJ

LO

CT>
VO r

LJJ QQ C3 1-^

O 2U_ Q- OO >>l U_

r^.

a: i >< oa: _i =3d: o ens: oo t s:

o o
OO

00

CO

o co

co

LO

LO

CVJ CO

CVJ

en

o =c a.

LO CVJ

LO CVJ LO

r-

10

CO CJ

oo

vo co

CVI

VO

CVJ

co

CVI

CVJ

=} UJ

cyo.

a:
oS

oo

o ti
00 OO

o oo oo >UJ

oo
OO >OO

a:
O

o
a: Q.
CQ I D OO

00 UJ

a:
D00
LO

_l <C I

>

CJ

O. OO

LU UJ

o a; i CL.

^5 Q O

ac

CJ

X-D-116

o o o
C3 UD

CO

CM
CO

o o

o co

o
I) T CM

-to-

CO UJ
ej;

s:i i
1
CO UJ

CO 0
OJ

r^ en co oo v> co ^.f^.^.

cviiooo c\j co co o CJ* r^. c\i oo co cyi LDi r- ^cxicno ^ ^ <^ .5; ^!^.^

0 1 ^ o c o ^ a - c v j c n ^^ r^* if) f~^ co ^o tf^ r-^ t r- i c\j i

a: O z CQ Q o o -
r I> UJ I

CD UJ O CO _l CO

O I I

i s: s: co o
co co i -to I cn o uj f >UJ CO i

re o u_ re u_ >> 4-> >, ^ +-> iX

(U
X

4J (_)

so

SO
->

0 t-MO

re
+J 10

u u. re u_
>, 4J >,

4->

!->

o !--> c_> x <CU

-(->

o c_)

-M rt

Q: uj
O

4-> to

4_J

4^

re
re

o o

1/1 o c i
^_)

Q
14

CQ 2: <: r-. 3 o t-i r-v o 2:

Q_ I UCO CO

Q. 0 0

( U b O C Q i
r

O ) t O C Q
r

CQ

to

CQ
tO

en

=C
D-

+
ct: UJ o
+->

n: o.
<.

to

o
S^^

o ca n3 <> o en ro <_) *: o J= O) D_ 4QJ D+ to + /i re i o: re i o;j=r UJQ:J:I LU o- cu t-> uj Q. 01 cj 3 cj 3 o .*: +-> cj -^ i - < : o M - $ - a : o O I Q O r e o i o o -i->s:o;j--(->s:ct: to o to o en en i- o en en ct.
O C C
-tr

Q . O O (/)

Q.

E C L C J O J O E to

' . - O C C
CQ

U J - r - C
C C
<i

ore cj -c O. _c o s-^red) CD 3 to -at c u o 0 : 0 o: en c en

Q.OI S_ (/I

cj

cu
re

re
re

-*

CQ
O) 01 -C

-4-> O

o
en
C -ir

SZ

!r

^~

re
CO C CU i

J= C4i

Q
v-

CQ

O CO

rei
<U 3
tJ

O_
e

!-

ci

cj-^
Q

o i t D c c c Q r e c o s :
11 l
rcU

E O CO CU Q.

re
O

CQ < c
CU in SI
1

_J
|

2: Q:
oc UJ
0

<+- 4-

en en c c:
-n-r-

i en en J^ o> c c o_
J
.^-r-

o re

to

CU Q.

ii
CJ CJ

i o c. o> LLJ LU

CQ

o c j r o r e CO C O O U -3 - 3 C O C O

-ii

<C

C OI C O O O ~3 -3COCO

c j o r e r e

if

!
|

^3

C O i U -3D_CO

o r e r e

c j r e r e C O O O -3COCO

o r e r e o c j c j O O O Q O C O C O accocosoi-o'-o

4->

j_
UJ CO
^^

OJ
3

re c
0)

i
UJ

r~~

oO

-!->

e c
sZ3

0
S-

hC Q

o
3

0
i- UJ ^ oO

-l->
C

O O
T-

0 0

-t-> 1 0

nz
Q_ 1

1*

co
r

u.
1

UJ o oj i

C \

i
4_> C

re

OL 4->
CO CO
r

re E at co
(/) >l

UJ 1 .

2:
co
>CO

cu

JO

CU

^~
i-^ LJJ

M
i. !-> CO

'"i 'o

i S-

o
S-

i SCO C

~i'o

CO

' CO

CO H. C 3 i C3

CO C .0 i CJ

UJ>

c u_

> Z3

i CJ

-o

X-D-117

o
o
IT)
O

00

LO

o LO

o
<NJ

o
LO oo

o o

be-

be-

**

-be-

be-

oo

to
LO

CM

to

OO
-be-

00 CsJ

UD
LO

O CM LO <JD

O LO

O CsJ

i O1 i CM LO r-~

r-. ro
CM

-be-

-be-

be-

</*

te- -be- -be-

00

LO

be- -be- -be- -be- -be- -be-

C\J

to cvi
.
i

CO r-

c :n
0 OJ Q.
r~ _J
C

ai
Ol

c
'ro o oo
CQ

o ro u. $
X Oi

4J

so

U . 1
t>-

CQ

CO

O) to ro
Q-

CQ

Ol C
T-

00 CO Ol

ro o

<c

Q.

ro o oo
CO Ol
LO

OL

uu O
t~~ ^~

21
J

^
C_)

ro _c
Q.

1
cv i' i

2 CJ <_> o 0 0 o oo oo cc. '"O r~3

01

^~ rv j 1 1 1 01

OL Ul c ^ ^~
P.

ro u oo ca a LO ro j=
Q. ^~ ^~

U3 00 M-

to ro
0.

c: i _i
r CL. Ul
f ^
^~ ^^

ro .c
CL.

2 u =

OJ

s
OL
0 0

Ol

3
a:
U O

OL

o o 2:

a: ro j= U l o a. r r p.. 01 Ol 2 3: o u O o
!.

to

Ol

'o. o o

4^

+
en Ul o o oo

ro u. o 'o

^ U

73

<c

Q.

a: o: UJ o ^ o ,_ ,_ ai a c 2 >ro U o oo Q

1 U Q o ^

c _l

a>

<u ro 'a! a. o ^
0

o> to ro a.

c _l
0

0)

z:
C(_

CJ 1

s: _i i
OL Ul 0

C.

s: s:
MO

4O

ai c i

Ol

rv Ul C_5
C_J OO T3

ro
oo
0

o o cc

ai c <o ro ro 0 oo o 0 oo ~3 oo oo T3

01 r>^ C 11 i - <->

ro +-> c:
Ol Ul

CL. l ^*

oo a:

s-

C o3 o 1 S- Q ^ Q U l

E Ul

1 O Ol O
CL.

r-M

c o

'o
4_>

i . C

ro
I M

s_

, oQ
Ul o9 I Q
Q
LO I , ,__ Q^ .C r *f t ,_ CO O
r 1

UJ

t ^

Ul

oo
oo
^^

ra oo

CQ

r- E 4-> O 4-> LO

c rs o u. I c: , o ro
O)

> c

r
-M

|
t~~

ro

^ o
1 -fj o
. 0) oo o
^ i CL. 4-)

*f

i *^ U . E (

Z3 U . H1

_a

ro Q 4_> oo 1
^3 ( O i S_
4-> r C

oa c o
r" \ ^*

ai

ro

o;

<??

r C > C r U -M l

O S-

ai
c~
f f

? ^

O O 1

oo o
i o3

r J^

ro ID 4-> U . oo 1

X-D-118

00

o o
LO

o
LO
faO-

o ur>
OJ

co r-.

o
LO

co

o
LO

CO

to

*f.
t1

co

IX) *3*3b^-

CO CM
be-

r-.

VO *3* bO-

co
<3be-

3CO CO -be-

CM

r-

be-

CO * *i- CM fae- be-

o r-

CO
b^-

r^

o
LO
</*

CO
b^*-

O
LO

CO

CO *d*^V

bO-

be-

UJ

cn c:
r

ca

CQ CO Ol rO O_
r cOl CQ

in to
CL

Ol

-o c rO _1 s0 <4-

cn c: -o
E ro

cn

c
r

en

c
"O

T3 C ro 1 S_

rO 1

CQ 01

in
CQ 0) I/)

. C D_ i

0) to ro

to
CQ 0) t/l
-Z

01 to <a
Q_

t0 <+-

ae:
UJ CJ

s_ o <fo;
UJ CJ CL

o:
"QJ
^ u
UJ CJ

o;
UJ CJ

a;
UJ CJ

ro JZ D_
<

ro
.CZ 0t_)

ro

"aJ
C

t 0 rv
CL. n

:r: cj

jg
0

"i
NX U

to
r

o a: s i+_ (^_ 0 o
Q

<C

01

a. t_^ =t

0 4_ O

<4_
tO

O C
!

o a: -o Ol +j Mto 0
0

^4 o -^ o
Ol

o: o
4->
-->

CJ

s_ o

CL

CJ JZ

so
o

ex

a. x_
0 CJ

0 CJ
JZ

s-

o>
3 4> (J
S_ +J CO 1 Oi 4->

^: o
ro 01 to Ol

B in
c
-a
-3
3 r-3
CJ

C Ol

a:
c c

cn

0) </ Ol

i . to

_c o s_

o
Sro Ol to Ol

o;
cn
r

0 Ol in Ol

CC LU

cn c
^_^
rO O CO

cn

c
^_

o;
UJ
CJ

cn cn
c:
^_
rO
CO

co rs

CJ

'rO U CO

CJ *rO co o r o co

cn <-> i 3 i to CJ o co co ~3

cn

co

ra ro i Ol CL. CD

c s_

rO ro r- Ol Q. CD

c c c s-

CD

C Sra ra
Ol

Q_ CD

i Ol Q_ CD

a: cn c c C Sto to

O O CO
CJ CO
"~3

in

LU oO C | O O
Q

(
fO
^

u
c

S0) Q_

E
O)
!->

LU

->
ff* O ^^

s o
to s_
(J

to

cu

m 'U
-*J

s
CJ

i^.
r LU

eg.

co

111

(-> (/)
EI
l4 fx.

-^ _

E rO r"i

o
t c 11

J3 3 CO

in

>)

o3 1 Q 0 1

s0) <4-

1 3 U_

to c
rO

1
f->
Ol

01

*Xii^ V) c
l~

CL. 1

o ( *^ P 1

o3 4-> 1 O Q Ol Q

SOl
CL.
r fO

o
4->

S_

s o
O

ro Ol UJ CM i i SO 4-> rO > Ol
UJ

u_
1

s( o cn t- LU
ra o3
CJ

to

co1
SOl Mra

s~ o co o cn s_
4J

cn to

Lu 1 co >CO

^ I I T
c ^

+J
c

UJ

O
r

rO 4_> Ol ro EQ

oQ
. 1
*~~

to c

ro CJ

UJ oS

O O i 01 to

CO E . Ol I -t->

^ $_ +J

in

co

CQ =3

CO E O f CJ

11 4->

to c

f >)
</l
CO -Q 3 . CO

to

"^

S-

4->

i Ol

s_

Ol Z3

la_

CO

UJ 1

i CO

. -> co to >)

*~~
CO

SrO 0

cn

. <-> >>

r- CO

X-D-119

oo o
O O
bOOO

00 CO

-fa*

-fa*

fa*

fa*

oo

to

o
fa*

o
fa*

en

oo

b*

i fa*

fa*

-fa*

fa*

fa*

o o co

CO CO

OJ

fa*

ca
o: LU o
CD 3 4.) O 3 i 4J 00 OO

ca
<u
CO

CO
O) CO

ca
0) CO -C

CO
Q)
LO

ca
O) CO fO 4J CO
CO O O y.

OO

oo

oo
O)
r-~

0) CO Q_

_J LU O
^N^_

ra

_c

s-

ai +3
oo
CO

Q-

a.

a.
r 1 O

^:
Q. ^_ O)
NX

a. ^^
3
XX

:: i
<t
0

4-> 3 c~

.c oo
CO

4-> 4-> 3

rr 0)
^x,

o c_>
SOJ
r ff

^_ CD NX O O

i
3. NX
C U

cn a.
cc
LU O

-o

O)

o fV*
Q.
^

s_
(U 4-) CO

ra

*a
o o a>
oo u_
1

u o a:
M-

0.

4-> CO

"~3

ca o oo

O O

o
O>

4-> CO

o
CD

a: 14o
r

C.
*4

o o

U O
<4O

GC.

O O

>r

ca

ca ca

a> s3 O 3 S4^ OO

*O

MO CD C r^ r^*

c
T

CD

O)
r r

CD
^ r.

c
fO

CD

d) ca
X

E ra

E ra

ta

fm

X
LO ^

oo

oo

ro O OO
,

ro O 00

u oo

ra o oo

ra

oo
ID LL.

LO r

oo -3

1 3

[ *

LL. t

^3

1
LL.

(U
f~ >J

rs
1

1 4-> O)

c
a; cr
Z3 U1 1 -M C QJ

CO CO 0)

1 E
0) CO

E
4-*

ai

"a
O) Q O Ol

to

4-> S-

^
U-

4->

i i

i
o3 f* 08 O 1
LU O >^ ^~ f*> c F^ O 4^ CO

E
4J CO >^ OO CO CO O) C 4-> r U_
r^^

>^ ^) 4J C <U
p^ ^]

o a. a.
3

c o
4->

oo ^^ 31
Q1 S LU 1

LU

^^ oo

ai

01 ro y~0

LU rO oS 0 h0 OJ Q

s-

oo LU * B > h-

rO

oo >oo ca ra oo

oo

(""*)

a. a>
o
Ol S-

Ol SrO

. 01 4J
CO CO

- E

a CO i r C * o
CO ro
4-^ i 00

LU

/"^

4J 00
^ *

ra z: o o o
LJ_
* i
^- LU oS CO H Q i Q

ro C

f. .

(O 0 rCO >, LU ^= oO a. 1

^j Q rO U 1 i S-

^^ OO
Ol C r~
NX

w
CO CO ^^
O0

t-

o Q. a.
3 00

cr ra

O)

c
ro

LO Q ^_ . 1 p. .

CW ^ ro 4_> U_ CO
^

>^ LD OO
^^ r^i <"> E 0)

C 4J

o
ra

u_
1

~^

o
^^

H-

r^ *^ 4J

S
"O O O Li_

^^ i oo

ra o

>
^^

e . CO

ro (J
CO

0) 4J /> ^.

>,

r ^^

u E

LU

i oo

. E

co in
CO

c^ /^i CO

a>

r^ n f~
f

11 1
oQ t O Q

a.

<t

ro LL,

^. oo

CO * r

X-D-120

o o o
CVJ

GO

CO

bft-

faO-

*>=

faO-

to-

GO

GO U l

O O

C\J

CO

CVI
r

co

to-

to-

ct

to ^E
GO

LU

GO GO _l UJ

co <v
rO (X
i

CD

to rO

0)

C 3 O

CO 01 rO

CD LU 0 O)
UJ

CJ

a.
1

o
r 3
r GO

S-

CU 4-

01

{J
i^

:E

o. a: UJ o cu
S1 3
^>

ro

o
to

a.
i

.G

'aj

2
0

'a; S .*
(J

1* T^

a. i

s_

01
3
CJ 3 S4-> GO S-

o
r C

01
4-

-a c

4->

"a 2 o o

'<u 2 ^
cu

3 4J (J 3
M GO

01

o rv*
o Q_

o
S-

4o
e >CD

o
CJ"}

fn

3 O S-

=C

+_> GO

c "-

4O

rs o a> 4-> to

4O CD
C
I

M0

+J

S0)

o
GO

la
GO

"ro O GO

s-e
LO CVJ

c -

CJ)

CO

to o o

^J

O O CQ
<_)

<u to

Qi UJ CJ

C.
UJ CJ O
GO

rO O GO

'rO O GO

o GO

tn

"~3

GO

CJ
"~i

*~3

\
.4^

Lu 1
1 C 0

LU

Lu 1

Z3

to
r-

ID U_
1

^^ GO

Lu

rs
1 c fJJ 4->

^^ S4_>

LU GO ^^ ac
Q. 1

1 <U ^

ro 0 r ^3 (U ^r*

r4.) LU

c o ^
-l->
ro O) SQJ
UJ

ra

to E
-|-_>
</)

LU oS 1 r^ 1

ra oS ^~ H3O EQ
GO

to
>> GO CO ^-

/)
>i GO

rO SO -Q ra

(J oQ

>^
GO , ^

CTi >,
"~^ O
S O
"~' ro

S
GO ^ GO

c o
-M ra
3

CVJ

a: o o o
1

rO -U ^~ 3 ^_ O rO ^^ i ID Lu 1
|

+J

Q co o 1

08
>) ^^ f^

to

OJ
(O

GO rCVJ

to at C _c

<c

~^

rO C O
4-> ro (U &. CJ OJ

Lu
1
3

CVJ o3 CVJ
r i f~*

C h-

C rXX

cn

i
,

i LU
OQ

i
trm

ro -u) ^~ O ra to (!) C JC 11 LJ
4J CJ

ro O
-O V 21

10

CQ

to

~~>

0 O Q

CO 1 Q i Q

co J3

* rO f J

E
GO

r^ GJ ^-* CO tO * ^) r GO

co

a:

CQ

E o

i E co to to
r <t

X-D-121

I o
oo

o o co
(/*

00 CM

CVJ CM

CM

1 0 CM

O LO

to-

*<<

to-

CO

CO
CM i i I 00

un
bO-

o o co

LO

CO CM

CM CM

CM

CM

O IT) tO-

bo-

bO-

bft-

00 CO CO ra

ca
CO ro

08
o cc CL. a.
r~\ Q

LU
Lu I 03 O
r~\ Q

Lu h03 O CO

a
Q CQ 0 CO

LU

OL UJ O
CO

CO O CO

co

CQ O CO

1 ca o
CO

a:
o
I

O O

a:
o
-I

O O

"3

co

co
, LU |* oO CO 1 c0 -r- Q
LU CO
i*
CO

CO

o co

ra

o co

ra

CO 01 ro

1
O)

^
LU

Q. O

1 +J O

1
1
CO
r

" 1-

c
ro

H-

2:
LU CO Q, ^ 1
S

1
-u>

01

1 C O ro

oO 01
r *"^

u> O

o. LU
co ( CM Q C3
1

co o J_

co J
oC

C
CO

co

co -a

^3 3

-|-_^
t/^

"ai
CO
l~~\

k^

OJ

a. a.
3

^j C

O /^^i

cu

Q. -^ CT LU M JO

CO

CO ^ *

^J

0) rO
^

>i 01 CO CO *&
+J*

fO
21
+) O CO
! }

LU

HT CO >CO

CO CQ

r* +J

CM * ^~~ oQ . 0!
.C

c 1 ^ 01 c c o

^ CO CO

u_

c c:
O)

LU r4^ 1 0 rO F i .
4_> CO CO

CO LT> > CM CO Q

I o

E ^^ CO LU M 1 CO 1
CO CT 3 C r CO

TJ LU oO O 0 O O 1 CM +-> C r- CO
r " C^. "p1"
1
p^

+->

r O

co -a

a. a.
3

ra Lu CM
^_

co

Ol

"~- E

CO CO

co c

CO

O tQ-

CO -r ii CO

CO

i CO LU oQ CO IO I >. Q Q

-r^ 1* c O CO 0

c I

co a c:

CT i LU

ro 3

o ra Lu l

co i

r~

ro

co

X-D-122

_ -

<=>

CD

c
1 Q_
UJ Q.

*
^| i-l

S^S

CO 00

1
UJ

1 ^

1
0
r^

5 O 3r 3 u2
ni fV "^v^.

CO

-y.

o
CO C_J
UJ

< > CO ^o *>

_. f) /V

LLJ Z

o_
UJ

s
r

Q.

S ol D. *

^ *tL G^ *" ^ o

CO
UJ

00

1 Q_

<>

C3

UJ Q_

oo
l/V

{* s S
^v CO

CO J Z^ ,r\

O fcr Z u O0

o-)

CO C.J

UJ

J (X
Q_

O O

__l
o o

uj h Z] LJ 1 1 ~^

O*
4/5

ro CO

o
00

UJ Q_ UJ

>-

CD CD
(SJ

3 < <*
CO CD
S ^ ^ ^
CO

Q.
O

r
UJ
00 O 0

%
CM

CO

fc

o UJ
Q.

CL

CD

i-H pH

co

CO 00

i i
Q.

rH

8 2.

< x
uJ

^^^'-cfsssssssssss0--'---^'-00-0--^'g

to

^^^^M

0
1

, i

X-D-123

WBS 1.3.2 AND WBS 1.3.3 FABRICATION AND ASSEMBLY ANALYST: T. S. FOSTER

INTRODUCTION

Table X-D-16 contains the Work Breakdown Structure (WBS) for Satellite Fabrication and Assembly (1.3.2) and Antenna Fabrication and Assembly (1.3.3). These projects include the design, development, production, and maintenance (operations are excluded) of the orbital tooling used to construct SPS in low earth orbit. General Cost Methodology Costs included herein are based on parameters and guidelines provided by the Spacecraft Design Division at JSC. Because Space Fabrication and Assembly is as yet an untested concept, aerospace cost data for such systems is not readily available. In addition, the SPS fabrication and assembly concept is in its earliest stages of definition. Hence, subsystem costing in the literal sense is not feasible. For these reasons, it is necessary to depart from "normal" parametric costing techniques. The method used, therefore, is summarized as follows: First, approximate weights and subsystem analogies (Table X-D-17) for each system were supplied by the Spacecraft Design Division. A figure representing the percentage of the total system which is "like" the subsystem analogy was assigned to each analogy. The Beam Builder, for instance, was assumed to be similar in function and complexity to an aerospace system consisting of Structural Framework (43%), Landing Gear (40%), Environmental Control (15%), and Displays and Controls (2%). Each percentage was then multiplied by the total system weight to obtain a weight for each analogy. These were costed using parametric techniques, as if they were subsystems. Various cost estimating relationships, scaling factors, and other techniques were used. The cost of the system is found by simply adding together the costs of each subsystem analogy. Other costing methodologies are summarized on WBS 1.3.1. 1.3.2.1 Beam Builder

The Solar Collector Beam Builder will rely heavily on mechanical and hydraulic control surfaces, structural elements, thermal control devices, and various electrical subsystems. It is assumed to be similar in function and complexity to a weighted composite of the aerospace subsystems listed below. Percentage weighting factors are shown in parentheses.

X-D-124

TABLEX-D-16

WORK BREAKDOWN STRUCTURE

WBS 1.3.2 and WBS 1.3.3

1.3.2

Solar Collector Fabrication and Assembly Project

1.3.2.1 1.3.2.2 1.3.2.3 1.3.2.4 1.3.2.5 1.3.2.6

Beam Builder Reflector Installer Solar Cell Blanket Installer Conductor Installer Mobile Manipulator Dock Module

1.3.3 1.3.3.1 1.3.3.2 1.3.3.3

Antenna Fabrication and Assembly Project Antenna Beam Builder Antenna Conductor Installer Antenna Subarray Installer

X-D-125

IO 0)

to
0) <O

CD

3 10

o (-> o o

<T3 OJ CD

CD

i . QJ CD
<O

co o co

o o u

10

I-

u
<O

QJ CD CD C f-

CD

Q)

j-

CD
CD

<O O)

c
(O

ro O

QJ C7>

J_

to

at
fO

o c
IO

o c a

4-> lO

i . o
i

QJ CD CD
03

10

-a
(O

J3 10

c o

<o
o <a

2:

Q-

S-

o
O lO r
rC

S-

o
IO r 3
"rC

to
fO i 3

co

0.

a. a:
UJ

a. c IO s

!u O a

CD

a.
IO

a.

CO O

"r C

a.
IO

IO

CQ
CD CD
0 O O 0 O O

CD
0 O O

CD

CD

CD

CD
o o o LO

CD

CD

Q-

co
I/O

-
z: o

OO

co
O

<c

z <c

o o o in

in

o o o m

o o o ui

o o o

o o o in

o o o o

QJ

O
UJ

uj I

I-H

a: CQ

to
CO

in

evj

If)

CO

co

3 CT QJ CXL

>,

CO

QJ -Q

co

O Q) UJ 4-> C3 to >> CO

in

co

ao

CTi

CO

CO

CD

10

modules

CO

s. Q) a

i. ^s_
to

4->

to i_ IO QJ

Manipulator

.^ c

O)

to

J_ QJ

I/) J_ QJ

CO

S_ d) >
(O *->

s: E o: IO o o QJ I CQ v^^
0

QJ 3 4-> CO QJ

s-

O 4-> O r

QJ <_>

to
S-

-o
r

fO
4J 10

O IO

cz

to

H- 1

a>
QJ
i

s,_

3 CO

-os QJ

(O

QJ

4_

lO

4->

o to
to
0 QJ
3

4->

10 o:

co
i

to

1*

IO E 0 I C_J ^_ ^

c o s_

OJ
r~!

CD C ^

co s:

Q)

4->

o o

S-

>>
(O

i3

IO

$_

J3 O

s:

o a m

-^ O

re 0)0 co >

E CM

-O

c O o

-Q

03

JO

S<0

co
CO

co

_j _i o
CO

UJ

r^

CM

ro

a-

X-D-126

a. b. c. e.

Structural Framework Landing Gear Environmental Control Displays and Controls

(43%) (40%) (15%) ( 2%)

Aerospace Cost Estimating Relationships were used to cost Structural Framework, Landing Gear, and ECS. CER's selected for costing Structural Framework (fig. X-D-35 and 36) and Landing Gear (fig. X-D-37 & 38)were derived by Planning Research Corporation (PRC) of Huntsville, Alabama. The Environmental Control CER was developed by JSC for the Shuttle 040C Agency Commitment Estimate (fig. X-D-39 & 40). Displays and Controls were costed by the RCA Price Model. Assuming a total weight of 11,000 Ibs., the following costs were derived: DDT&E Structural Framework Landing Gear ECS Displays and Controls
TFU
30 8 59 9 M M M M
(1975 (1975 (1970 (1977
$'s) $'s) $'s) $'s)

Structural Framework Landing Gear ECS Displays and Controls

2 2 9 9

M M M M

1975 1975 1970 (1977

$'s $'s $'s $'s

Escalation to 1977 $'s results in the following cost estimate: DDT&E TFU 1.3.2.2 Reflector Installer The Reflector Installer is conceived to be a large (22000 Ibs), open structure with some moveable parts. It would be of fairly simple design and is assumed to be similar in function and complexity to a composite of the following aerospace subsystems. a. Structural Framework b. Landing Gear c. ECS
84% 15% 1% 162 M 29 M

The PRC CER's for Structural Framework and Landing Gear, and the Shuttle ECS CER may be used to derive the following costs:

X-D-127

FIGUREX-D-35

STRUCTURAL FRAMEWORK

TOO' 1,000 LBS

4 5 6 7 I A 1

4 5 8 7 8 9 1 100.000 LBS

7l*i

10.000 LBS

454 Kg

4.536 Kg

45.359 Kg

WEIGHT OF STRUCTURAL FRAMEWORK, Wg

X-D-128

FIGURE X-D-36

STRUCTURAL FRAMEWORK
4 / 9 9 I.

o o

CENTAUR

2 S-IVB 3 S-II
5 6 789I

e 7 8 81

S 67881

1,000 IBS

I 454 Kg

10,000 LBS I
4,536 Kg WEIGHT OF STRUCTURAL

100,000 LBS I
45,359 Kg FRAMEWORK, Wg

X-D-129

LANDING GEAR
1 7
"

J
CER

e T9
CORR COEFF

'

6 7 B9

4 S 6 7 I 1
-

STD

(%)

ft

C75 = 15.484W 5 ' 70S6

7o " 5

N/A

N/A N/A

4 3

N/A

I o

Y
C

S
^

^
r*. en

, 100,000; 1 7

75

X
-

in

e i
4

3
O

in r-. o

s
a a

10

10,000
1 * 7 t 4 3

/
C?6X

T S <4iX^

u. p

. "
"*

LEGEND:
.

C75
2

Y C-5A

C7e

T U
1

y. c-141
1.000
t
1 t
1 1 1 1 !

C-ITO KC-135
1 1 1 1 1

i i i11

1,000 LBS 454 Kg

10,000 LBS 4.536 Kg

100,000 LBS 45,359 Kg

WEIGHT OF THE LAUDING GEAR, V

X-D-130

LANDING GEAR

f,
9 7
f

S 7*

91
CORR COEFF

3
STD ERROR

3
,. l *'

e 7 i
-

CER

'. C89 = 4.091W 5 ' 7096 - Cgo = 1.199W 5 - 7096

N/A

N/A

4 3
2

N/A

N/A

10 000 i .
t 7 . f . 4 .
3 2
C

G)

0
89

X X^ r >/ A)

X
r

.X X

. . , " -

1 000 i
1 | WWW I

o o

t
7

/y X ^f
C

rf X

X
. -

e ' -

90
-

LEGEND:
CQQ

T
C-130

03

U KC-135

Y C-5A
Cgo

100 i 1 Ww I

i
2

i
3

f i i ii .
4 S SI

1 1

1 3 <

i $ e7 i

f i l l

i
2

1, C-141 i i i t i ii
3 4 5 8 7 S1

' ,000 LBS

0.000 LBS 4,536 Kg

1 00,000 LBS

454 Kg

45,359 Kg

WEIGHT OF THE LANDING GEAR. W5

X-D-131

o o o o o o

o
o -* Q
CO

o o

VO

CO

CM

oo
o o o
O CM

t co

I CM

_
CO

A.

or

=;

UJ CJ o3 0

C3

o CM .3H fcj *-t

Ul

y-

to o

w o

a: o
to
OJ "3

ui in
o o

=> CJ3

CfL

as
(5 CO

& >-. s o
E- E E-< ^* p~> p^

& to

o t-( t-i
Sa" . CO M E-" H co m <. to
M < WO

I 111 I I I I I a: o s

I
"S ru

I I I I I

SHV110Q OZ61 - 1SOD

LU

ra o

Q
CO CO

CD

11 I I I I I
OZ6L 1S03
X-D-133

DDT&E

Structural Framework Landing Gear ECS

TFU

65 M (75 $'s) 6 M (75 $'s) 13 M (70 $'s)

Structural Framework Landing Gear ECS

6 M (75 $'s) 1 M (75 $'s) 3 M (70 $'s)

Escalation to 1977 dollars results in the following estimate: DDT&E

TFU

109 M
16 M

1.3.2.3 Solar Cell Blanket Development of the Solar Cell Blanket Installer will be somewhat more complex than development of the Reflector Installer. Because the two systems, both of which weigh 22,000 Ibs., are alike in many respects, however, common development would result in a substantial cost saving. Therefore, it is assumed that development costs for the Solar Cell Blanket Installer would be the same as for the Reflector Installer.
DDT&E TFU 110 M 16 M

1.3.2.4 Conductor Installer The Conductor Installer uses a manipulator system much like the Shuttle RMS. It will also require mechanical/hydraulic transporter devices. For costing purposes it is assumed that this system is similar in function and complexity to a composite of the following: Shuttle Orbiter RMS Landing Gear 70% 30%

The total weight of the installer is 11,000 Ibs. Using the scaling factors described under WBS 1.3.1., General Costing Methodology, and the PRC Landing Gear CER, the cost of the installer may be estimated as shown below: DDT&E
Shuttle RMS: [^j '5 X (75) = 213 M (1977 $'s)

Landing Gear:

6 M (1975 $'s)

X-D-134

TFU

Shuttle RMS: Landing Gear:

*75

(5) = 24 1

(1977 $'s) (1975 $'s)

Escalation to 1977 dollars results in the following estimates:

DDT&E 221 M

TFU

25 M

1.3.2.5 Mobile Manipulator

The Mobile Manipulator will be similar to the system described above (1.3.2.4), except that it will be manned. Thus, it is assumed that this system is similar to a composite of the following: Shuttle Orbiter RMS Gemini ECS Total weight of the system is 11,000 Ibs. Using the scaling factors described above and using Gemini ECS costs as a throughput, the following cost estimate may be derived: DDT&E Shuttle RMS Gemini ECS
TFU
rm-:-: rrc ECS

r S ! '5 ^ )) &

X 75 = 255 M (1977 $'s) = 7 M (1970 $'s)

Shuttle RMS

(11000) .75 v c I ocT\ X 5 = ( 965) =

,, M

31 MQ77 M (1977 $ j S) $lg

<-. x

Escalation to 1977 dollars results in the following:

DDT&E TFU 1.3.2.6 Docking Module 267 M 34 M

Docking Modules will be used to join major sections of the SPS. This system will be similar in function and complexity to a composite of the following: Docking Mechanism Landing Gear Stabilization and Control Structural Framework 10 10 1 79 % % % %

X-D-135

Costs for the Docking Mechanism were scaled up from the Rockwell Phase B Space Station cost estimate according to previously described scaling assumption. Landing Gear and Structural IFramework are based on the PRC CER's. Stabilization and Control costs are derived from a Rockwell Phase B Space Station CER (f icv X-D-41 & 42) The total weight of the system is 11,000 Ibs.
DDT&E
(1100) .5

Docking Mechanism Landing Gear Stabilization & Control Structural Framework

TFU

(39.5) = 54 3 29 42

M M M M

(1100) .5 Docking Mechanism ( 580) Landing Gear Stabilization and Control Structural Framework

(6)

10 1 3 4

M M M M

1970 1975 1970 1975

$'s) $'s) $'s) $'s)

Escalation to 1977 dollars results in the following cost estimate:

DDT&E TFU
205 M 28 M

1.3.3

Antenna Fabrication & Assembly

1.3.3.1. Antenna Beam Builder The Antenna Beam Builder is functionally similar to the larger Solar Collector Beam Builder (WBS 1.3.2.1). Because they are so much alike, the costing assumptions for the larger beam builder are used here, also. a. Structural Framework b. Landing Gear c. ECS
d. Displays & Controls

43 % 40 % 15 % 2%

Applying the previously selected CER's (WBS 1.3.2.1) to a total system weight of 2200 Ibs yields the following:
DDT&E

Structural Framework Landing Gear ECS

Displays & Controls

12 3 17 3

(1975 (1975 (1970 $'s (1977 $ ' s )

X-P-136

REPRODUCEBILJTY OP THE' ORIGINAL PAGE IS POOR

i . - , I 4 t 'I i
'

_ . . J __lL:
tr ' . ' i. ":.!

"t

i;

! .

i ' ! i! ,:' M; H j
,-i'!.!"
J

j:

: . i j . i j_
;

' '

'

M'

fl-^3t' : ::f

.; j,....!,..,;..,.;.:!.!.. j....,l..Vi . - , t : - T : : i ' i; . '. . .v'rlhf : n . ./i: .":. T..:: : i " ; i i . . ; 4 . / . . . : . : ^H i : '. ...: i. it' ;; ; ^ii^Llii-: 4

" 'H M M i I

'

".I

, , i

'> '

i ... i,: j.:

ss

j . . . . _ : ) > _ ' . ; i ; / %;-; i J_ 1 ,.,'"..!!,., ,' ! . . '{--.^^t^lT 1 -;}.:!-;:: i

^ "p T^ rj

--=rt-'

3i

tl 1 *-. Mtiii.ui-r i :tn^ftHT-H T1 .j j- -H- H-^lrrrt^h It - :-::h:r.tH:?gSEH tr- , ,,; - j- "-- r-" . - t . . r ! ; , t r f - T>t '-"-f-r-l-! -i -tl r -]-^/f>-, ' ) >^-*-

D-i"

C "

ujO DC O CT) [_^ ID oS

?o ^E -S

-?*'

^"'

*, *4 ^. ,^

sii:
CO

S| O
_|_4_4;i|rU7 M =r! 08 CD

O < LLJ

<

fell- jJ:L:^i^:_..:lll"[JS^ffl^ ti 1 . '.'>'.-^-' J J 1

N. , '.M-^ -i '

CO

-te^-^ffe '- :--r "H-->. ' M-.. iri-fe^ / -1 . . , . rr^{". ,~i r zzrrij-zjni

r-,-;""

. tr."< m .
sO

, : :::'-;t:i-rr4

co

fl-1
rr~
I

CNJ

/::v*i:tr.r-

t i/i
i
U,4

< or <

!u.j.i.,iii.z,i!i nt
I- l . U l l i ult

J4-t-

01H

X-D-137

er*

f.

.i

i,. t i - -

t-

i-t-r t

, '

t I r. ^^j-j-j^a- i

:!'H "! i ^ r U H
HHiHtiiri-rrtttH

81,1

X-D-138

TFU

Structural Framework Landing Gear ECS Displays & Controls Escalated to 1977 dollars: DDT&E TFU 1.3.3.2 $51 M 12 M

1 1 4 3

(1975 (1975 (1970 (1977

$'s) $'s) $'s) $'s)

Antenna Conductor Installer

Like the Solar Collector Conductor Installer, the Antenna Conductor Installer will closely resemble the Shuttle RMS mated to a transporter device. System costs are based on cost/weight relationships for the following: Shuttle Orbiter RMS Landing Gear 70 % 30 %

Applying previously discussed scaling factors to Shuttle RMS costs, and the PRC Cost Estimating Relationship for Landing Gear, system costs are as follows: DDT&E Shuttle RMS: v!^~K Landing Gear: yoj>
TFU

'5

X (75) = 213 M (1977 $'s) = 6 M (1975 $'s)

Shuttle RMS: v T^Sjrf Landing Gear: '

>5

X (5) = 24 M (1977 $'s) = 1 M (1975 $'s)

Assuming common development with the Solar Collector Conductor Installer, a DDT&E cost saving of fifty percent for the Antenna Conductor Installer should be achievable. Escalation of these estimates to 1977 dollars yields the following: DDT&E TFU 110 M 25 M

1.3.3.3 Antenna Subarray Installer The Antenna Subarray Installer will resemble a manipulator device with additional mobility provided by transporters. The following systems approximate its function and complexity. Shuttle Orbiter RMS Structural Framework Landing Gear 20 % 65 % 15 % X-D-139

Applying appropriate estimating relationships and scaling factors to a total weight of 11000 Ibs results in the following: DDT&E Shuttle RMS Structural Framework Landing Gear
X
(75)

113 M 1977 $'s

38 M 1975 $'s 4 M 1975 $'s

TFU
Shuttle RMS Structural Framework Landing Gear
(5)

9 M (1977 $'s) 3 M (1975 $'s) 1 M (1975 $'s)

Escalation to 1977 dollars yields the following cost estimate: DDT&E TFU
165 M 14 M

X-D-140

CNJ

oo GO
C3 DU

X-D-141

O o co CM LO cn co co r*x o co
LO CM

a- cn
00=J-CMi r OOr- ^J-

i i

CM i

OO CM

o> r- o co t CM

oo z o
LU Q .

LO 10 3^1- co
CM

vo
CO

CM

CM

en to oo
oB

C_3
Q O

cn
LO

iID CT> r- LO vo
CM CM i CM

co co LO CM co LO

CMCMCM

CM CM i

r C M L O L O i CM ^~

CM CM (O VO CM CO

CD Q.

o:

z : o

o
CM CM CM CO CT> ^J- CM

n CM CO i * VO CM CM. r CM CM i

d" VO CM CM r i CM CM r

CQ
>- e

Q Lu

oo
LO O

LU I _l tO OO _l Z O OO C_) CJ I DC _l

2:h- cr> rs o r> oo o r

OO

o
oo o. oo

co

CM CM O IO CM

, co co co cn . co o

co co

oo un uolo co

co 10 co LO

CM

CO

0 0

CQ

oo oo a: a

CCL

LU cc: I <C

LU

< oo
oo

co
I0 II OL
HH O

a: :

<:
oo
: 3T O : OO <_>

Q;

o oo o ;
Q. <C >- oo 00 t-i 00 CD
00 LU
O LUQi
OOQ.

00 <

CQ i<

I LU

o oo c_>

_i a: _j a.

CQ

OOLU O OO ^C ^ I I-LJ **~* ~*^ O LU tQ-ea:>-OOLUQ:a-1. . . . oot OOLU O O CQ to it oo to oo a_ LU ct: <c o_ a: oo CD LU ce: >- oo CQ .00 . _ oo a. Lu

LU

O OO

i C M C O ^ - U > V O I

i C M C O s J - L O V O r - - .

CM

CMCMCMCMCMCMCMCMCOCOCOCOCOCOCOCO CMCMCMCMCMCMCMCMCMCMCMCMCMCMCMCMCMCMCMCMCMCMCMCM

oo
CQ

co

cocococococococococococococococococococncocococo

X-D-142

<>

i P^. US OO O OO r- O en CM <a-1 CMOOCMOO r-, r-~ CM oo LO CT O o us oo CM

CM

CM O UD CM OO CM

oo
*3CM

o oo i
CM 'd- CM

oo o

oo
( X

3CO r

CM LO LO

CM LO LO

Lf) C3 CM

\r> O
CM

CO OO OO

o oo ;z o ii OL ai a. a: o

CT(

en ro co i
CM ,

CM

LO oo oo >3o O i i CM CM CO < i

LO

O ro ro i i CM o r -sr i r~ ro ro

03 <C

u. OO ct: a: O a:
OO

CO LT> CO CM

i i CM i i
LO CO

tn

CM ro

CM OC * CM

i . OO i

o; _i o -=c. _i s: o P^ ^: o r^ ^D CD oo a: . <
I _l OO OO O "Z. O OO O

>- LU O

LO CO

<_>

OO _l O -- 1 CM CO

a:

DC

C3 i
VO CM CM CM

I
CO|CM

oo oo r CM

o LU z a:

CM LO LO O CM CM

<X> CTi VO O

OO CO

rv' [ i i

LU a:
I cC

=C Q OO <X. ii oo
O LU

oo

CD <: Q
ID et

_ID;

oo

o LU ce:

oo LU

o 02;

o: o oo

a: ii Q; 08! oS I oS oS O <=t >< OOLU o oo <c COLU O S O O - r c . < I C Q- O O3 OO < O O C J 3 0 0 n - L U D O O O > I O O O O O => Q . z oo o o

LU

>i <c ii o: s: o

Q OO C_) 21 O l_5 LlJ LU

zj DC

^: - o: 03 H-

OO -=C OO LU O I f Q. <C >- OO uJ Oi

oo t3

>-< =t CC

2:

: oa oo >- oo C3 oo Q.

r CM CO

LO IO ! -

i CM CO

LO UD

CMCMCMCMCMCMCMCMCMCMCMCMCMCMCMCMCMCMCMCMCXJCMCMCM

02

X-D-143

evj o o

oo (N) 3- co un co m o> r oo cvj CM * c\j in d-

vo oo in CM LO r>. co i CO CO *fr <NJ Csl CO i oo w- CM

oo

Lf>

in

co co

co co

vo cr>

Q. O

en
co

00

o o

CM

oo

CM3r>.

VDCO

oo oo oo o o cr> o oo r^ r~ CM CM co CM

co cr> o> o o O oo co co CM CM CM
CM

oo oo
O

o
I-H OO

oo CM CM CM
r ,

I CO

co

Lf> CM

i i CM i

t * CM CM CM r

QL 03 Q <C <C

o _i ii _i >- o: o

oo
CM

00 CM

00 CM

002:1

z oo I z

H- UJ OO O ^O OO _l Q. HI 00 S

o =c i-
O ZD

ro

z o: zo
UJ

I C

co

UD

CO CM CM

CM CO CO

i r-

vo co in cr> LO

CD KO CM i

iILO

co LO r co oo

ro

00 Qi 00 CO

00 UJ

OQ

ct: _i

O- iI LU >- CO <C

o II
CL.

00 S Q OO 00 <C Q <C LU <C 01 0 3 0 5 oO CO 2: <C O LU oQ UJ 00 Z t-i CC I <C Z OO

i LU

u. LU <; D- <C >- 00 LU OL UJ I CQ OO ii OO UJ OO Q_ I <: z

Z <C

<c

oo LU

O 1-1 et Q; et oO O Z

o: o o i => O Q 2: z

UJ

SE
00

Qi CD *

s: CQ

OO

to

3^

o ;z

00 O S * O LU UJ C <t ii Q: oO | o3 t3 Z 00 t OO LU O Z
CQOOiiOOCDOOO-1

=3 2! OO

O LU

oo o _

LU LU C

I-H Q: o3 hoB 00 OO LU

oo i-i oo ej ss cu: >- oo

oo o.

O OO

i CO CO

LO VO 1 CM

i CM CO ^-

LO VD t^.

r- CM CO *fr LO ^D Is**

CMCMCMOJCMCMCMCO

oo ro ro co co co co
CO CO CO CO CO CO OO CO CO OO CO CO CO CO

CO CO CO CO CO CO CO OO CO CO
OO CD

CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO

CO CO CO CO CO CO OO CO CO CO

X-D-144

CTlllO WD UD IT) IO

> cn cri ID i

CO

z o

vo vo in vo
CT> CT> LTJ i

a_ o

a: o CL. o. ra co
GO

co <c co _i <: -J >o cc 03 a

s: z r--

UJ a:

co

CO

2: o r-zo ii ai co ( PI o co
CO HH Z:

O C O CJ CO >I

co O. CO
CO

O UJ

z: o

I ^3

a: a:

z D;

CO

CQ

( CCL O D-

Q-

O QC3 ii CO CO Ct I O C3 ^D CO ii

z:LU <c c :z ^Q LU o i _i Q
Q.

13 LU O LU CO CO I CO I ii CD CD UJ CO O .>- 2: Z C >- O I - CO _l CO I -ZL >-

zr _i 2: H-

=C ct: zo z: cd o:
oO Q- CO ct CJ3 O

CO ' D I 2 = Z ! ) D CO O CO O O O

o: o co
LU O

II

co

i CM OO

co
CQ

OO CO CO CO CO CO

X-D-145

SAMPLE

CALCULATIONS

1.3.2.1 Beam Builder The Solar Collector Beam Builder will be made up of subsystems characterized by mechanical and hydraulic control surfaces, thermal control devices, monitoring and control instrumentation, and a variety of structural elements. During discussions with E&D engineers, it was jointly dtermined that the Beam Builder would be analogous to a weighted composite of the aerospace subsystems listed below. Structural Framework Landing Gear Environmental Control (ECS) Displays & Controls (43 %) (40 %) (15 %) ( 2 %)

Cost Estimating Relationships (CER's) were used to estimate the cost of structural Framework, Landing Gear, and ECS. CER's selected for Structural Framework (figures X-D-35 & 36) and Landing Gear (Figures X-D-37 & 38) were derived under contract to NASA (NAS 1-13869) by Planning Research Corporation (PRC) of Huntsville, Alabama. The CER selected for estimating ECS costs was developed by JSC for the Shuttle 040C Agency Commitment Estimate (figures X-D-39 & 40).
DDT&E

a. The curve derived by PRC for costing Structural Framework (figure 2) is defined by the equation C = 234.351 W >572 The weight of the Beam Builder is approximately 5000 KG (11000 Ib). Fourty-three percent, or 4730 Ib, must be applied to the Structural Framework.
C = 234.351 (4730) <

X-D-146

= 234.351 (126.48) = $30 M (1975 dollars) b. Fourty percent, or 4400 Ib, of the Beam Builder must be applied to the Landing Gear CER. C= = = = 20.311W -7096 < 20.311 (4400) 20.311 (385) $8 M (1975 Dollars)

c. Fifteen percent, or 1650 Ib, of the Beam Builder is analogous to ECS. The selected CER (figure X-D-39) is defined by the curve
C= = = = 196155W <77 77 196155 (1650) '" 196155 (300) $59 M (1970 Dollars)

d. The Displays and Controls estimate was generated by the RCA PRICE Model. PRICE generates cost estimates based on physical and programmatic parameters that are closely related to design complexity and other factors bearing on cost. Assuming a weight of 220 Ib, the Price-generated estimate for Displays and Controls in $9 M.
TFU

TFU costs were generated in a manner very similar to that described above for DDT&E. a. The curve derived by PRC for Structural Framework (figure X-D-36)
is

C= 8.097W >676 Sugstituting the appropriate weight factor of 4730 Ib,

C= 8.097 (4730) .676 = 8.097 (305) = 2.47 M (1975 Dollars) b. The TFU CER for Landing Gear is C= 4.09W -7096 Substituting 4400 for "W"
C= 4.091 (4400) ' 7096 = 4.091 (385) = 1.6 M (1975 dollars)

X-D-147

c. The TFU CER FOR ECS IS

C= .22346W

>5

Substituting a weight of 1650 Ib, C= .22346 (1650) '5 = .22346 (40) = $9 M (1970 dollars) d. Assuming a subsystem weight of 220 Ib, the RCA Price-generated TFU estimate for displays and controls is $9 M. Following escalation to 1977 dollars, Beam Builder costs may be summarized as follows DDT&E TFU Structural Framework $38 M |2~M Landing Gear 10 2 ECS 105 16 Displays & Controls 9 9 Total $T62~M |9M 2~

X-D-148

WBS 1.4.1

Facilities

Methodology:

Individual methods for all sub-level WBS's are shown in succeeding pages. Conclusion & Comments: Methods chosen were to provide order-of magnitude facility costs. No detailed facility plans were available. The launch scenario called for up to 4000 HLLV launches per year, and this is a major sizing factor. Most data are based on Saturn V and Space Shuttle Facilities. However, little data were available for liquid hydrogen production facilities, and the estimates herein are scaled from a single point of data. Many of the estimates are highly concept dependent (e.g., processing facilities) and many are not (e.g., runways). In fact there is a class of estimates which is so highly concept and location dependent as to be virtually impossible to estimate without a detailed basing plan. Some of these are: Launch Control Center Downrange processing facility Payload handling facilities Utility hookups
New Railroad Roadbeds

Roads
Water provisions

Rough order of magnitude estimates for these items would indicate that they are no more than 2-5% of the total however, so no major error should be introduced by these uncertainties, unless, for example, the availability of water in desert areas were to become a driving factor. In summary, this is a good planning estimate, but has some major weaknesses.
WBS 1.4.1.1 Methodology: Launch Pads

Costs are based on the cost of complex 39, escalated to 1977 dollars, learned at 90% for 6 pads. A circular (hexagonal) patterm is assumed, ten miles in diameter, with the processing facility at the center. Actual aerospace escalation model used. Input Data (See general assumptions)
Schedule: 3 years X-D-149

Summary of Results (All costs in millions of 1977 dollars) Unit Cost: $97.2M (1st of 6) Conclusions Although the complex 39 analogy was the best available, the designs for high-launch rate pads would undoubtedly be different from complex 39. The costs are felt to be realistic ( 30%). WBS 1.4.1.2 Mobile Launch Platforms Methodology & Input Data Costs are based on the cost of Saturn V Mobile Launch platforms. One platform for every active launch vehicle (70 vehicles X .8 incommission rate = 56 platforms). 90% learning was assumed, as well as a 3 year construction schedule for each platform. Size differences between Saturn V and HLLV platforms were ingnored, but would probably not create major errors. Buys were assumed to be spread over a 20 year time span to reduce peak funding. Thus, the design is very likely to evolve from early to later models crawler costs are included (pro rata)'. Summary of Results Unit Cost: 60.75M (1st of 56) Conclusions: Analogy considered good if this concept is adopted. WBS 1.4.1.3 Mobile Service Structure Methodology & Input Data As in the case of the mobile launch platform, costs are based on Saturn V Service Structure costs. However, it is assumed that a total of eight structures would suffice (one for each pad plus two spares). Costs were escalated to 1977 dollars and learned at 90%. Summary of Results Unit Cost: 48.6 (1st of 8) Conclusions The analogy is considered very good (Costs 10%), 1f this launch concept is used. Cost not as concept - dependent as others in this section. X-D-150

WBS 1.4.1.4 Crawler Ways Methodology & Input Data The ten mile diameter complex described in 1.4.1.1 was assumed, with crawler ways to each pad from central processing facilities. Complex 39 way costs per mile, multiplied by the required 30 miles of ways, were escalated to 1977 dollars. No learning was assumed. Summary of Results
Cost Per Mile: 4.86 M Total Cost: 145.8 M (X 30 mi)

Conclusions This analogy is considered to be very good, because any site location being considered is likely to have stable, sandy soil, perhaps more stable than KSC. Costs could conceivably be high for this reason. Costs are very dependent on the concept chosen. WBS 1.4.1.5 Runways

Methodology & Input Data Runway costs were based on Shuttle Runway costs, escalated to 1977 dollars. Only a minimum of facilities is costed at the downrange runway site (safing and railway loading). Summary of Results
Cost (Each): 35 M Cost (2): 70 M

Conclusions The analogy is felt to be exact (+5%).

WBS 1.4.1.6 Land

Methodology & Input Data The circular launch site (11 miles in diameter to the outer perimeter) is assumed. This amounts to 100 square miles or 64,000 acres. Land price was assumed to be $400 per acre (desert land). The recovery site was assumed to be 20,000 acres. Results
Cost: Launch: 64,000 acres @ $400 = 25.6 M Recovery: 20,000 acres P $400 = 8.0 M

X-D-151

Conclusions The costs are accurate If the assumed facility concept is adopted, and desert land is employed. WBS 1.4.1.7 Service Facilities Methodology & Input Data This is one of the largest items in the estimate. Costs are based on the KSC VAB and stage preparation facilities, including all cranes, handling equipment, buildings, office space, shops, utilities, etc. A launch rate of 10 per day, with 56 vehicles in flow for 6 days each will require a 56 bay facility, or roughly 9 to 10 times the VAB facilities. The VAB cost was raised by this ratio and escalated to 1977 dollars. Results
Facility costs: 3914.4

Conclusions Although the HLLV is physically larger than the Saturn V, the number of subsystems is basically the same, and the number of stages is less (2 vs 3). These two effects are assumed to offset. It was assummed that vehicles will be erected outdoors, thus no indoor space is needed for 56 vehicles in the erect position. Costs are considered to be only rough order of magnitude (+0%). WBS 1.4.1.8 Railroad Spurs, Marshalling Yards, Warehouses Methodology & Input Data Railroads cost about 40tf per foot, including grade preparation, in areas of stable soil. ($2112 per mile). This cost can increase by orders of magnitude in mountainous terrain. This estimate was prepared as follows: Warehouses: 1M ft2 @ $30/ft,, = $30 M Railroads: 50 mi @ 2112 = .r Terminals, etc 1.0 Payload receiving facility 9.0 4U7TM The use of commercial rail lines for transportation from recovery site to launch site is assumed. Results Total Cost 40.1 M X-D-152

Conclusions Warehouses are highly dependent on the operational concept, and may be undersized. Since some of the facility might be in mountainous terrain, railroad costs may be considerably understated; However, fifty miles should be an adequate allowance for marshalling yard connections, etc. Costs are highly dependent on concept chosen, and could be low by factors of 3-5. WBS 1.4.1.9 Fuel Pipeline Connections Methodology of Input Data This estimate was based on a non-cryogenic pipeline of $2 per foot for 350 mi, plus terminal costs of $300 K. Results: Cost: Pipeline Terminal Conclusions: Pipeline costs are not verified; no data was in hand on propane pipelines, and chemical line costs were used. However, these costs should be a small percentage of total facility costs. WBS 1.4.1.10 Methodology: This was an assumed number (ROM). Results: Total Cost: 2 plants @ 50 M = 100 M Conclusions This cost must be verified, and could be in error by an order of magnitude. WBS 1.4.1.11 Hydrogen Plant Methodology: Cost data for large cryogenic hydrogen plants, of the scale rquired here, is scarce. The Shuttle hydrogen facility, designed to produce 30 tons of LH2 per day, will cost approximately $90 M. Scaling this with the customary fabrication scaling exponent results in the following CER: C = 11.694 W -69 X-D-153 Propane Liquification Plant 3.7 M 0.3 M 4.0 M

Where W is production in tons per day and C is the total plant cost in millions of 1977 dollars. A capacity of 17,534 tons per day, that required to support scenario B (hydrogen fueled orbiter, propane booster) was assumed to be required by 2025. Results
C = 11.694 (17534) '6 = $4.114 B
A cost of 4.0 billion was assumed Conclusions

The magnitude of this cost indicates the need for much greater study in this area. Cost fidelity is considered to be low, but the estimate is probably conservatively high. WBS 1.4.1.90 Program Management & Integration Methodology: A 20% factor was applied to all estimates for program Management & Integration. Results:
C = 0.2 X 11,278 C = 2255.6 M

Conclusions This method represents data from large NASA R&D programs, and is adequate for planning purposes.

X-D-154

C-U

LAUNCH/RECOVERY FACILITIES

Assumptions 1. WSTF study ops concept

2. NASA costs include

Launch site facility development Landing site facility development Tow path preparation costs Transporters Fuel facility Pipeline, tie-in only

3. 70 Vehicle fleet size 4. 12 hours pad time per launch 5. Traffic Model: Peak launch rate 4000 per year in 2024
- YR LAUNCH RATE
200 600 1200 2000 3000

PADS

1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030

3500 4000
100

10/day peak 11 /day peak

1 1 2 3 5 6 6

6. 6 day turnaround per vehicle

7. 6 pads required (4000 730)

8. Mobile Service Structures 12 hrs use per launch + 2 Standby = 6 + 2 = 8

9. Raw Land Cost $ 400 / Acre

10. Use of Existing Rail Facilities for return of empty boosters; minimal facilities at recovery site. 11. Time Spreads
UNIT TOTAL

PADS MLP MSS WAYS

RUNWAYS

3 yrs 4 yrs 3 yrs 2 yrs

2 yrs X-D-155

2 groups of 8 years

Assumptions cont. LAND

SERVICE FACILITY RR's PIPELINES PROPANE/LOX PLANTS HYDROGEN PLANT

UNIT

TOTAL

1 yrs
5 yrs 2 yrs 1 yrs 3 yrs 23 yrs

12. Operational Readiness Date is 1995 for HLLV 13. Service Facility (Buildings, cranes, equipment)
Based on VAB cost @ 177.8 ($1966)

VAB will service 6 vehicles ( 30M/Vehicle)

56 vehicles 0 $30 M = $1680M

14. Railroad costs:

5280 ft/ mi X $.40/ft = $2112/mi

Source: Constructon Industry Standards for preparation of roadbed on stabilized earth and laying track 15. Hydrogen Plant Costs
Hydrogen Plant CER: Based on a cost of $90M for a 30 TON PER DAY PLANT: C = 11.694W '60

C = Cost in $ Millions 1977 W = Tons per day liquid hydrogen Source: Shuttle Facilities Office, NASA Hqs. Tonnage Required (Second Stage Only)
FLTS/YR
95 2000 05 10 15 20 25

TONS/FLT

TONS/DAY
877 2630 5260 8767 13150 15342 17534

T/DAY

200 600 1200 2000 3000 3500 4000

1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600

1753 2630 3457 4383 2192 2192

Cost of Total Capacity (17,534 TONS/DAY)

C = 4.114 B (ASSUME 4.0 B~) Assume Single Plant

- Initial Capacity = 877 T/Day ($700M) - Linear Additions over 20 years to 4.00 B (77 $) @ 165M/YR
X-D-156

WBS 1.4.1

FACILITIES COST ESTIMATE

ITEM 1.4.1.1 PADS 1.4.1.2 MLP 1.4.1.3 MOBILE SERV. STR. 1.4.1.4 CRAWLER WAYS 1.4.1.5 RUNWAYS 1.4.1.6 LAND LAUNCH RECOVERY 1.4.1.7 SERVICE FACILITY 1.4.1.8 RAILROAD SPURS MARSHALLING YARD WAREHOUSES 1.4.1.9 FUEL PIPELINE CONNECTIONS 1.4.1.10 PROPANE LIQUIFICATION PLANT

QTY

UNIT COST

LEARNING

YEAR $

TOTALS }

6 56 8 peak

40M 25M 20M

90% 90% 90

65 65 65

495.7 2151.8 319.3

30 miles

2M/mile

100

65

145.8

30M

100

75

69.6

64.000 Acres 20,000 Acres

.000 .000
1680

100 100
100

77 77
66

25.6 8.0
3914.4

40

100

77

40.0

100

77

8.0

50

100

77

100.0

X-D-157

ITEM 1.4.1.11 HYDROGEN PLANT

QTY

UNIT COST

LEARNING

YEAR $

TOTALS 77 $

100

77

4000.0 11,278.2

1.4.1.90 PROGRAM MGT. & INTEGRATION @ 1.2

GRAND TOTAL

2255.6 $13,533.8 M

X-D- 158


9 *

S V-

CO ^

a n

^ *

<o
K CM ^ ^

K M N CM

n <fi m

M *

n
M ft ft

ft 0 ft

(3
Z
(0

M K " M g M g g

.g. .j 3

,8
K. M

z
Q.
M .

S
M A 0

..
0

s^ s s"
.
.0

1
M

,, .. .

s
O M M

. K. ft

,s n
A M

,*.

o.
K-

<n

O ft

, '

...

S
.,

a
M M #

9
ft

o < UL

.*

J
* ^

s
ft

s
n M
10

~x
0 M

8,

.,
9

tf>

S
*
Ilk

,s

....

s
n n

* n

g
N

<A

M)

**
r>

h.
N

* o* *
M)

.^

*.

ZN

8.
n

"s
0 *" "

M N

2
*" o
08
. . ,
r- *"
N

S
M " "_

o
(M

"

S
g

3
K M

g
M

n in
A

S
CO
sO C\J

s at

w''
M *

PROPANE LIQ PLANT

CO

(0

w a < a.

a.
X

O Z _j

a. 3 a. CO c ac
-159

>< i

GRAND TOTAL

SUBTOTAL

RUNWAYS

i/i <

HYDROGEN PLANT

MOBILE SERVSTR

PROGMGT&INTEGR

FUEL PIPELINES

CRAWLER WAYS

SERVICE FACIL

15. Hydrogen Plant Costs Hydrogen Plant CER: Based on a cost of $90M for a 30 TON PER DAY PLANT: C = 11.694W
>6

C = Cost in $ Millions 1977 W = Tons per day liquid hydrogen Source: Shuttle Facilities Office, NASA Hqs.

Tonnage Required (Second Stage Only)

FLTS/YR
95 2000 05 10 15 20 25

TONS/FLT

TONS/DAY
877 2630 5260 8767 13150 15342 17534

AT/DAY

200 600 1200 2000 3000 3500 4000

1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600

1753 2630 3457 4383 2192 2192

Cost of Total Capacity (17,534 TONS/DAY)

C = 4.114 B

Assume Single Plant - Initial Capacity = 877 T/Day ($700M) - Linear Additions over 20 years to 4.00 B (77 $) @ 165M/YR

X-D-160

APOLLO FACILITY COSTS

DATE ORIG. COMPLETED MOBILE SERVICE STRUCTURE PAD 39A COMPLEX CRAWLER WAY * MLP - (ACTUALLY LUT-1 NOV) (STRUCTURAL STEEL ONLY WAS 4M OUTFITTING IS BALANCE)
** SHUTTLE RUNWAY

COMPLETION COST

CURRENT RECORD COST

1967 1965 1966 1967

18.3M
24.8M

25.1M
47.4M

3.4M
24.3M

6.8M
20.2M

27.2M (RY $'s)

VAB

1966

177.8

143.1

SOURCES: * KSC REAL PROPERTY OFFICER

** HQS. FACILITIES OFFICE

X-D-161

AW

5/19/77

1.4.2

Reception (Rectenna)

There are 224 rectenna in the total system, each covering 37.5 square miles of 1.045 X 10 sq. ft. The total area required to purchase would probably be larger. All costs (except land and land preparation) were estimated on quantity, weight, complexity etc. bases then reduced to a cost per unit area using these area numbers. Detailed Assumptions:
1.4.2.1 Land

224 sites, 1.045 X 10 ft 2, 43560 ft2/acre, $650/acre

for a total cost of $3,492,943,000 cost/site cost/ft z cost/KW $15,593,496 $.015 $3.12

Perspective: For an area reasonably close to this size it may be difficult to buy land at $650 per acre, but this is only abbut .3% of the cost of a rectenna so that it is not a real driver.

1.4.2.2 Site Preparation Same area as the land, cost $1800 per acre. Total cost $9,672,768,000 Cost/site $43,182,000 Cost/ft $.041 Cost/KW $8.64 Perspective - this highly dependent on the exact location but since it is only about .9% of this cost, it is not a dominating factor. 1.4.2.3 Structure The drawing in Figure IV. D. (1) b. -1 on page IV. -D-l-b-2 of Vol II of the refprpncp 1 was nspH as a hasi? fnr ^^ti^tinn th cost. This is a 16 ft. module Total cost $595,084,544,000 Cost/site 2,656,627,000 Cost/ft z $2.54 Cost/KW $531.32 Perspective - This is the cost driver, 58% of the total rectenna cost.

X-D-162

Bovay (study contractor) estimated the cost of a 96 ft module including ground plane at $15,660 (System 2 all aluminum). This would be equivalent to $2610 per 16 ft module. If the cost of the ground plane (see below) is included in the NASA estimate, the cost is $2500. 1.4.2.4 Pi poles The drawing on page IV_D-l-5 of Volume II of the reference 1 was used as the basis for estimatinggthe cost of this item. The reference 1 gave a quantity of 15 X 10 dipole per rectenna.
Total cost $273,419,776,000 Cost/site $1,220,624,000 Cost/ft c $7.168 Cost/KW $244.12

Perspective - This is the second most important driver - 27%

1.4.2.5 Ground Plane The drawing on page IV-D1-6 was used as the basis for this estimate. Total Cost Cost/site Cost/ft * Cost/KW $47,413,872,000 $211,669,070 $.203 42.33 4.6%

Perspective - This not a cost driver

1.4.2.6 Power Collection and Management The data on page IV-D-2-7was used as the source for this estimate. Assume option 1 and add 30% for G&A, fee and profit
Total Cost Cost/site Cost/ft Cost/KW $69,504,354,000 $310,287,729 $.297 $62.06

Perspective - This is only 6.8% of total cost and well understood compared to some other parts. 1.4.2.9 Integration and Test This was based on the cost and complexity of the components being integrated into the system.
Total Cost $24,030,860,000

X-D-163

Cost/site Cost/ft Cost/KW

$107,281,070 $.103 $21.46

Perspective - only 2% of total cost. Summary of Costs Total Cost of one Rectenna
$/KW

$4.56 B

= $931

X-D-164

The following reports were used as references and in the compilation of this data: 1. Initial Technical, Environmental and Economic Evaluation of Space Solar Power Concepts. Vol. I & II, JCS-11568, Aug. 31, 1976.
2. NASA MSFC TM X-73344. 3. JPL 900-780. 4. ECON 76-145-2.

5. Analysis and Derivation of Cost Estimating Relationships and Trends for Airframe Structural Elements. NASA CR-132736, Planning Research Corporation, Oct. 15, 1975. 6. CSM Cost/Schedule/Technical Characteristics Study. Rockwell Space Division, SD 71-35, April 30, 1971. 7. C-5 Cost, Schedule, and Technical Characteristics Study. MSC-07018, Lockheed, Ga., Nov. 17, 1972. 8. Avionics Cost/Schedule Study RCA, MSC-05178, Sept. 1, 1972. 9. Space System Cost Model RCA, Contract NAS 9-13562, March 31, 1975. 10. Earth Orbital Space Station Rockwell Phase B Final Report, SD-70-154, July 31, 1970. 11. Munson and Paczynski: Heavy Lift Launch Vehicle Launch and Landing Studies, NASA/JSC/WSTF, 1976-77. 12. Space Station Costs and Schedule Data, McDonnell Douglas, MDC G0646, Aug. 1970. 13. Advanced Spacecraft Systems Cost Analysis Study. McDonnel Douglas, MSC-01248, Jan. 2, 1970. 14. Bovay Engineers, Inc., presentation of results of rectenna design study, untitled, undated.

X-D-165

SECTION X APPENDIX A COST COMPUTER PROGRAM SAMPLE OUTPUT

X-APP-A-1

!
*

<
- ..

i
1
I

c
cf
1

32 Qc 6- C
(*. g

cu

*t~f

1
,
f*>

c. ...'-t -o
05 ** LJ O

QQ a. ce
01
U

CJ

^ txj

rj -

o
j C * 1 1 1 , | ** -l_J U . QL '

a ^c o^
fya

~3 O

11 u. ^ < Q.II _i ' n J

2^S=ilj

c.

O 2
^ *^s /s ^^ Ej T3

>st

^ vO
II o
_
r* *O Ul 1 3

31 Cr ^ J -J tu

*^

oe o

' '

t f 1

t-J X. *J CL ** *J JCJ t- J *, jcCJO

r

. ' i

Zt ,

C-J

* m

r^ I

a
Z

fj

f*- r- t,> * f- r ^ \ t-o^oor-oocj

i I IVU<_I C3

1
1

i^ &

^.'^".^^^S o
OOO*

m \
i
) t

^.

O
* *

,^

vo .30TJU JO ~*0

3 3

OCJ*3

( 3 ^. Jf

t- L_jC_r l_i t * I-J tJ*. J* J l->

t
\
1

' 1

r~ i i - *-^
fx
W.J

u. ^* </^ 1 1 H- '

* ar^=r r* c x - ^ o o o t ic^oo c." **- c r x. c a cr cut j i~ o r; ^. w -*^- c-,'-<Jt_jc * j < . c j ^ 4j

Wc^o*

i II ^,

<. r\jfu f>4 %

e

ill f i

C5
UJ

II

r i t , 0

i j L-* ** *--
L

"* , j

Jl X

1 .1C * O Z ,_ 1 t > t J
-J L*

*^ ^

_J * J

t I

**

* '-J t

Ulltllltlllllll 11 M II II tl 1*1 U LJ O tJ *w O O **J tJO *-> O

iN*4_j->
*" -

-
"*

j^J *~-> ^-LtO-J1"" ^j*~'j;

*J>^ i W ^f Off

VJ^-^C-i^f i^j

Q j j I. 3T t-jj ''^ t~^ 71 X ^ i f*4 1 ' 23 (u> QC 3 4 */^ CJ _ **J L- C J ^, <I 1*. (M) t_> ^"l^tJt 1. t k^ U* V> - J I CJ 3L CTLJ U n u CJ ^~* -*--> t_* J* ^l fc_/ V>U< I/U * t^lUl.J *

it M _JL_ mi i 03

0
UJ I"1

n <~> I ,j

c*
*" *
***

t * *^* Uj c or ^*u ^ ^~ >* c^ tj ^* ~^

1 1^ c^ t j CJ ^ Ci ^0 1 ^^ '^ ~3(^. *3 f^
vJ w' i^tJ* <-l.-*CZ, <X W

'

cuf
"!

uoc.it * *c_3r"*ji *
^ UlfcH-J -f Ul /1 ift

' dJ C~J

'^

rj
! -4

* . - " -T J^^ O"

'

'

^ i

1 11 U. '

rr 0

1
^J

**

^^ ^ ^ 1 I I ^ 1-4

[ i '

U-

d i r* u.

*> 1 1 II c,~ LU a. 1 1 = = 1^. -1 > 1 1

^---I_JCC

13 I I h**

^o

II

'>

t l
f J

" 1 1 UJ

tr i

i x _j u. >-< x x ai n

*V

1 1 It _J 1 1 1 1 1 1 H-*

<

u_ LJ

3u}~i*:.c- 'C *ir>i^.ooc'iJijt.J)Illoo

tn * i * JL. ^xj i n i cr J j tj ij

-j wJ u ^ J
>-

.-a.0'*
-J

ac-jWijoSV
i_j

^ ^ t. j u * v * u
j

c.o

'vjin cnij-ji .1 ,r i M i'-

a
- J

H-OL . ic-c/oaiJjO

-i
ntj

t >*--- u ^ T - r ' ' - ' oiu^

a.a.r*. ' j i ^ i l i j i i

** u i

i*J
_ ' O _J M ( 11 1 t 1
**i^cf
*

*"*
U

'

,
^

>- O
A M

O
^

1 1 * 1

**

* ' t l i ' i 11 11 1t 1 ' * i i i | ) , ( (

^ O l V _ J ^

II

1
;

r-* _

-r -rr i y i .'^ 1. t_j

> - d " * j^r

-ju< * - n f ^ _ j ^ * - ^ - > ~ . _j."73t^^crrr ^j-*^ ^p u 3

/>

H - * a n n ^ - i i i H i t y w i i u r oi*J r* 7-< -J-* .' -" -* o

'

\ 1

>

! I

i' u

_ \.o c ^/ *1 *1 .

J- ^- ^ i-

. ' JU *

IU *

t^J

P-A-2 .. X - A P

' *L

-*J
p- ~^

33 C& ^ff

>,83

Ct, g O

3^ II ij M
XO

=30 aS

t"* fCf

X- APP-A-4

IU /)

a. or >/>

Z 0. >-< vl

c. 001 c n woj<

(-APP-A-5

*
l

**P

-''V I( ^.J

ODUc "LLiJ 1 JB/? IT

^4L

ISPQ

TUP ^

- .

*
vt
fc*J

>

f~ ^J
UJ

oS*5S"a>" fcrjc jf*>3- Go^r^r

11
=

_
in^r-a

u. -J

-.

>oci_ir
l-*r-4O4r\

isss "1^?
^f*-O"C I I r ^^

c>
2
U

ifi^r u.v wDr-coo-

<N,* b

3 ^

! ,
1

<t
L

>^^<r%
^

20

r^'S" ^.^,

,^0-5

35 *-^ 3 P1 iivj jf>

r 4 ^ _r * B35=> lA 1/1^3 f- f*-r*i ^_> i

^ 3 "

-. -t-

or -I >*^_JC
U . 1

.-.. ,,,,.

in^"

l/^ ^t/) -<

'

H- 3-"OC -t'OC3- ,c-~-c

4 fNj *-r> i(sirj<sr ic^r^cvjc MfxjroC

= &.

)OJ3JC
J^t -^*4^J

it

I/M '

lit
|
-0 Z- LU

^ L>--*C " ^K O| ^^^" -" fv'Mt^ t'

* CM rsj * j *

i*> ^ro*'

3 I 7 .7 UIWU 1 uU*u \j >

> ^ T **lf" i MJ -4J ^><J

y ^ra-c i

^k

3* O .J r- T "^lO *>' r* Q ^ -T ^0 ft O J-^-Or->v. .. J ^> r*T r- f m " c^ t, ^) 3 \\i v a- o vOC Jt>U " U l
<
t

ir~or^i. )
^OOOC/^tT'U

t .Jfi ra .i. Lu

5C1OU-O

jor

o^o- o-o o-o iro^&3

>to-

r o oj jo .1

) .1 J- J- 3

3--T

oxncoi t rjrsicj

w - a.

Jc

^ rj ^* n

"- "

NJfXi

" ' - ^'

V F

->

1 ^ -^O *J J~OO -D- 3 f*" f*^ ro r

iA
UlQ-

:"^c;^

IOOOC

-r J * - a- v

>r-r-f-i I

in
i
1^- l_ */>

-^
-*

;>

O O -Q -

^ OJ - -4 *<

z * J
t J
<t

_>__-.
t

^^ cr cr i - n r> ^3 D O- O if t, v

r >ro fOr- 10 f. -01 >OI/T )* f-rvioc e c a o rot i

" U" O CO U l/l
r

C li~>

" _m u i i M j^-^fi IA or-^ 'n c- c > *n !-> j.,nv 10^ : M^-> -MAS, 1 r- rr o r >: y^-r^r -J-i OOt>OOLjC J T 1 <i. 1 J ^ 5l_.->lJ~, J 3 3 Ji .1 O J j O O O f .-i ,~c<^tii^f *r^r JI-LJO. j*
|

'M

'

X- .i... APP-A-6 i

. ..j

>-

o
I

Q. -O,_
tt W iTi U U w U1

O IX

er. 01 cutr
O i/l

cr

UJ

 ^ r><iNrgri * a a a r-^j^J^:,0^^,^,;^7^" ,*? ^) JJ^J

iO '

*iNl , . f .- 1

c_l_i_/l. ^Cv*Ol_>_IIMLX-JC

csxjr^c orjuc ir.tuc^c. IMCOC

JO 00 cO CO
vO CO

o
03
> 03 ' uJ

LO

3
OD

CO

o
CO

|2
I.UIIDC u* 1 ^ X UJ
1 <UltC

ro

i"

IOK> *o<^i ^-hTOf" flMt^K

r~f^r-

CO
ri <=>

0.

</>LT i u U1C U iC-tni/ii/1C^C.C If ir.ci C

t^ me \r-\t t U i C- Wi W C J C C.C V

cc
l/l
^r-iv.1

a.

Q_

UJ :
1 0

ifi -

oc

-,Jf
- APP-A-8

'j ~cjfvjip^7f
X-APP-A-9

SECTION

COST

izcxcxuutxtrizcrcrcxarczcrcrcia:

IC*~1*^'

j 3.J j J. J_i J.j JO. > j J j J j.j J

Ou.u,_J_j

u.u> 3

ui

u.^O^

OO

OU.J
>-< 'jl O

*oo * oo ot_i f^^o^x ^* tfo:<*^4

. ' ' I

-i

.z oa.

i^p^uiu>rs4sOr-^^ iMr->ror"tr 4>por ^**-tinOK>

CtkJO'JOncJCOOOOOUOOOOC'.l

CKJ OJ -JCJLJ O<_1O Ui JO > JU _>JO Q OkJOO O -JCJ -J-^ UUC_ U_H-'-Jt l_it_(J_iLvl

II

C_ll_0t_

er a tr a cr or er a- cr tr a?cc a cr o: or a a a >- M >-M ' | l ooociJt-.oOL.c.'-'oc ooccc-occjt-ia

l !* ti

o o . 1 z o o
X +. _J
CO

ii si fig
c o

ui

i_.c~c r ntjrw.-c-t.- c t otJt_c>c c ccaccccttacri caizacEiccrcrQccxcr (zccaaactrctM - ooutJot oJt:i,ocjcl t t.Ju o

1
I

o<_ic<ac>iji x o

O
O
-J_J

^^assssjs
II I ' I ' J

5
**

t->
IX

I
I ccraccrcr oca trecr crcr exact cttz .J.~^,^J.i., ,e.-t!.uo, , ' j.- '.oui-tL.1
Jf JV ( H Jl JIJU

I
in
7 o ^ out

o c

ry

o -

4
v*

VI

<

o;

ui
0

uJ
U

cr

_, i j:tr
zzzzzzz

Oo*

r Z

I ! 1 i I | J 7 jimn-<iMi/) Jjojrwr- ih^-ior-r* JJuivOir-icir>-i/>a-ir/MiJir->O'ir-

or oi
-II 1-4

II:

Ui

our.i>ci.n^c-cji_C't c - c t't-r ;cjr-t'r.'r.>cx-c c-oocjc c_o I

la

o-o-cr o-crarctcrQ aa aar o-ttcr ri>-<>--< .-jiuo^ioja

'

'

'

.flJif-i.i^J,-*
>x i n

-->.^i. l--i,o.^rj-^oL.J.J.j,' norrooi

11

uo

cc > one

w-ir-r-.,~i"-1>ooC3

JL-APP-B-2

J x^^ ii/i HC-LX

UJtt

x er a
C Of JWOVJC-UC3C i-* JCJOOOO . J > JJJ-J J JO J->-liJvJ J D^> f-H~ U CJ UJ CJ w 1.1 LJ O i J *- U 1.t t^t_l i J i. t LJ t _X J l- t_ Urt-> D

ot^ LJOC.r JU*LJL^CJLILJ t^i.->

ll-IO J.I- 1 JLJJ'-I.J_)_ - _J J

co o uo pp> or, cio GJOI 3 ouoo o cjoo ooa c

a: * ^

-UJOO

'x

2 O

2^C.-JLJ_J > i--uJu.OuJi/1i/>i: _J>XOO O O X X

*-a.

*-o-J oc

rjd c- 01... ocjrLoir 3cjco-iac Jc oc-oocjoo O

Oti C- CJt_ OOO' }_> Lj.jOC-O l_ OCJCJCJl..O>-CJ JO

u.

o -
O O

m.

z *i- . zu.
4 OCTLJZ

t-i^-t tror d aacr crcr aaa arcro: act aero; ace tree c oc ot-'>oc..)L.''.>
.^i-it_> J JO >i >. J.J-J

i*-ia.cr jo^_jn

' *-
rid.

-10 >

.
,U10Z

IX

I Z.Zr-X

I I

O < z

' o*-in- >- J -10 i >o ou-o-j o i es.o>i/^>-a -J m

too. UM >-_j -o zz o_/oz oa

* co

1 iji 4 e-t.*u i mir>- n-

-.^;o~

-O.t/^V> O_J

>xcru
' _JO

-h--r o o _ j > in oo.u

-JH-
O>U

I LJ=. Of-

>-u C

t-t-otr

ft II-<M

1C DC U

l"_iaOCLOC _JH- t-

Ul h- I UOJtO

.^

r. tjom**Ki'i

o->rjo.;o 'fjrtn

-n-iacrcr a tratra. cr ccctcc

r cc <z r a tr cz cr cr a <t tr
1 n j J-" ZZ Z^U. 3-^

kd'UliOl CO

c.

_iuj x>-<ui>^-->xo>-uviaca.>->x x oa.

t **

^CJ -JVIU.X.1-* UJJ

XX

J. JUIJI J^JI t-JWJt^i.

T r-t

,,h

UIJ(| ->

^rif

4 < a

> *

<* h

eiO'C'^ixK

-* <H *^P4 <M rj \

JO' jomtj

orinni-cii-'eif < u if^r'Oi

r 10oonooo j^^^tr^v^^^p^v-tr^vH*^*^*
POOCJC'CJt J" IC>(-!O4J_>r>OOI-J"O

it j<.Jcis>i ILJOI. iou< 'jort. iuuo

X-APP-B-3 I I

1 I

a os
z
CJ 3 \S>

V'lJ(X

X UJ

<x wit

Oll-x
3

a
> U ! C.
' UJ X 3 J

o
a x

ii u .j ecu

c z tx

0<J

z o

-as *n 1
_|W bJX 3U.

II +c.

X OQ QC T-< Z O

I)S QCO

zmu.

tnutx* * -.ZII ^>i^ x* I cr

(J <.>

>- o a * x
k

a.* x O9 crae zUJWt

0*1 tK

era oo
3

XX

- ec ft/i -
i/)CC CE

I
LJOCJ>X Mr~2uj o *u.oz >oo_j<r is _io

oo

II

UIU. </>

Acrza
UJ-U

can.

30C

ctuj

^ o

* i

M o u)u a: <M3 uxua ^w zo:

t oro>-o-x ii %
. _lr-

^
UwJU" J

3 r-o
IIX

>jtj/iuj)^i:-!j.-Ji ^^ ^ t_if-
i i I I I i i i I i i a. ii u u o

O 11 *- II ^ t I On

CLt M &.ti o IIJL >. u ii^u>.i^'^i/)x: **a. j -Joio3i/i cror M

Oi-lOUJJ

> 'bl <^I.J Jk Cl *J U >

oo^-uj

-ll>-IVII-

Ooow

;^.?tAtnr-rj<Acr*i^)'/t^k'4>/>-o>J3<><J>n.c/ o or>r^j^ JIAI/> irnntn br-o^rUi** ^in*i>h*ri I 'Ulvji 11 . l<

fvjTJM > J-U^iA

-<rH^4>^i^iM><4rMr L'I >c.*-C'tJdr.itjrj >li>LJ>.ltJ ," It )i|! >tl' jrrji ji it->o' J>J<,n I Ji_>i^f > >ov l "-' vj JtJl>i it J.IM-" X.IOOU

j|,APP-B-4

LJkJI JOCJCJ
JO J.J-JLJ J

0-u.ucro

a =

LJX

LjOL.

uu

oa

ui- cro

<e _o!
oui

oj

<- >_l

LJ

LjXt

_ll G.5C X.UZ

01}

J:LJuja.crcLJ ^i/i_j
d

u u, :> z or>- IM X : >/-_joio cr *o

oui<v< ococtj i/i-c.u. (jo "~~i-< cc'

j*->ncunci-<OU]ooa. i 9 rj.Zi_io JTO u. ur *> i^-i i -an a. OO.LJLJ CJ ruetr ji3-j-T(_j_ja.iiiin<fj;oo*-^*iW4j^^ijULrikjujia.*4J^"*tJf*iJi^

jr-aj'ji^*^iiiiniu

-3J-JjX>"u.^>^l !-- 11 />i.LOl-^Ja'<^J J ^ iauJ^J>-<^I.J ' I II I I M I I I I I I I I I I > r-l H- f I I >-vJCJ^~^!UJ-J-J h -O*5^-3a.u.*I^^^ | C-^>-J*J^ 4 ^ 1 U.*'^'>~* - 'JH"fcO-*lf-l -J-ll''-'\l*03 - (llp-crH-'JI3I7t t ^ jt

f>4^
*
*r

u nir-t>-jiQ.ti.LJi/>i--j _ji-i>-ioi-'H-i>-4Lv(r. t/ i:^s:u;>. s j L j r i i i i i i n i i niiiiiio . X C T O ~ 3 L t a a ujI3!->->-! > i i f-r-^o<fi4/>,'i ur-ajt/>.-n. a. t-Tuari/'o.i~cr UJLJ ji a u;<c.ar ^ j ji a w> jtj1 4 Tl JIJU.JUUUCI Ul->O<. >J*<rj -T 1
^^(N 9

i UUV.il IU_>1> .1

a 1^ * < < * < >

.,,

.. ..

O O i 0 < ! !

"T"

p''^<j"'jy^^y'''Jy^

,L,,y<M,^,^n,^

i i
Oi. 9

3 C3 *""'*''* w

9 o*

_<_! O I. ^VJCJUCJOCJO> JI_UUl. <OLJl_)l JO *_(<-> I IUOI_ >_>I_)O> >0<_>VJ

<t

O O> 0 > 4> 0 <> 0 0 0 ' > 4

t 1 1 k

> 1 h

<

j - j - r r ^ - j T 3- j-;T t nifii/iu'~>ir>Lnu)uTij)i/i.o>^ o O*<)-o-4> ^JO-or*

r i~*n-r** j in vo

> o e ct n . 0 * 0 1

f J<JC1tJI J C J C T t m OfDOCltJCJI

t X Iff

!>>< >f ir 5C I J Lll JO I JI1.3l-JtT"jt H I C 'C J -> Jl

>'1C I D C i U I J O l . J O U

|x.APP-B-6

i
rr .CXIMOJIN IN rwr* r CMO*TJ*N rgi Jfsjrj cvryrfN rvc^tNCN rgcjfsifN rsirwrsjr

J
OOOOl J<3 OO-. Jt JO'

^nnrtr^t inoijocjorjooooorx-joi irn u ir > Jonncitjfnoc'ijcocjrx.if mo ^rjr;ifj( LII

I __ 1

-B-7

C J(-*_ *-

> jwjtj^ 1 J

> Jv-

->oo . ^ jo._ u_^l_)_/

O- J

-ju j - 1

l-JL-t
JtJLJ _ ^>00 .

^J_I_J- IJ^-.

>

2* ofl13 o

0 UJ

o o rcc

UJ Or
X

a
3 UJ
VJU

l-4l-"-l

CCO

cr u
i uj
UJ

cccccccc
X X 4-4 UJUJUJUJ

J" >

z
UJ

a:cr crz z zz

* o *

>-ti- >CC4

i
'

O Ot

uj

z i/> "z cr cr cr
s i

UIUJUJUJ ^^^^OOOO

ujuiujuj
cz ct era:

* -1
XtJ 3

i/i
l/> C. tt ^ ^

I/I

^ ri ^t i. i wt ^ ^ ^ fv fv f> (5 ^ f^ ^* ^ *J T" z i- i uj ' - Jl - ' UJ *- i . i Ltj^J <J CJ(J _Jv/> O >->->->- Ck C. O. 1.^ ^ ^33

>- ;

x*^O CJ *-

* * *
U1

>-a:
13

-cocr o:*^

>-/ _j

O ^-

.j

_i

i UJ UJ *JUJ*/1 W^*/i I*OV1W> /!/) ^IlO.Q.Q.C.CGOGiJirZ'Jr

oooooooo

z o
ft

l-t

in ^ ^
0

r+

J^uJ3C<*t/><* -.!*" y^tj a: _|</>v/H/>t/)~JUJUJ~J */* l*J ^ * O U ^ Z O O ^ t O l / ^ ^ < ^ - / H i l 3 _ O O O O J J-J J 5 3 ^ i 'J > *S J > i "u')>^"l^_J^v/);CLJOULJO OO O J t~ > ^ O C ^ d O l ^ Z k J O C O " * ~O-* _J_ji/^uJ H-*-^^^t _ J O O - J Z UJ l-j ^ W^ _j *"^. 3C OCX J X ^J^^l^-* ^~h '2. ^ ^R X *r.Jft-(V UJ *~i. Q. Ijjh*- _Ji> if Ci. X V l X X X X i ^ J UJ ' UJ ^^ ^tw^ t/^ x. u 13 I &. O LJ U. O C O U. O ^-" *"*t-^^ ] * vi ^i fc/i /^> - u> UJ J**H JO C_J ~ * _ J _ 4 - J l ^ * ^ 3 C O OO IM'

>

*/) r^3: ^ H* d, ***>-<

1 *- *^ ^

^-J
DC >-U,

*>"^^t/1 OZVI^SCC*

*-c.ua.

i-i _j > o a: u- a. r
vrt~Q.v-.OQ.

J **O**> Ci.^" ** LJ tt uj*^ O ^O X

j*'**

<*>o^

o
O

- 1 a. * a * r t. a t/i i- u a:
wlXin t C C T J T-.

_jz:x:zu.

z:-ui

o-r'-uazrz

o_io_ioooo>-

o - s uwn<^ -i/,^./-o- OOUJHH

uoa. u p
II II II >-*^-

vi

O I I IJ O M I I II U U- y LL Q. I I II U.

o n/iujo^-^-JC z o o- j- wior-ou o 00.0. i ^- u * Q cz a. o. i/i ut^t

X(-APP-B-8

T"-"T

LJ.J^>.

J JO J_

U*J J_U

__>>- vJ-J-J^-

> JOJv.

CJO UC.VJC2C1C.IO 1 -J JCJu

*>

i i
** *
1

u ^
Q. M UJ

**^< I

xx
XI
VJt.
1

o z

a c c
!

0 >

u.
-4

-1
_J

r>1
H ~
0 4

2:z U :ce
fl -k
4>
Jl/l

ou> a 441 [ a -* o a. a o a --
1

UJLl1

O
4

X
JC19

c>

< >o
^

C>
c) ^> ^1

4 -1

CJ 1 1 ^ * - ^fc K-H t-3

^v ^X 1

>_t

J *w ^ H O CL I ^
"^ ^*
*^^ 4* (^

o
^

O^
^"U -* o* z^

">r*i *- OC^4
>b

V^C^

4p^** O
* t** 4
CJ^ "

OL ^*

>/> >^o

a ^
a

>O C<-> U " ~ 01-) *

C99 *Ol-

no1

I/J1/1 ^ O *r^ ^H ^x4 ^ <l B O'-i CO l^- O O '^t/ 1 1/1^^ i . 4" > p** ^ ***> ^ UJ V)< i _jr[ i^t>- ^^ OX 1 r u.**f1 W ^4*^
41^**

( JJ

o
3 VI U 4 U>
4>

>

Jh i "^ l ik. & h* ^ j ^

**

*v

c -o-ia-
l^ \,

* 7 O

^/"

Jl

_J -u_

1 2 ~*Tr ^ ?

!--

>- uI>-LJUJL:

rr fX

1 O

f>

a 2 - ^^ i.)
!<t

02 ^ u.
OlT 13J

#-H

<^_It/1 n WOQ ._!- = _ I~_J_I 4C tk <^ V)Q. */ 1 U. *-^*MiA Ou. t^ ^ U ^O ^" ^> * ^ * ^ 3o i* ^ * > LJ^" O CJ * * *r* <r ^ *~ > >-.Ovjc IOOO O OG

W *

01--

u. t

! 2?* S

*~-J

- a: "" "*
U. L 4 4^ J i ^-UJLU 4> M7UJ )CJ_JOl_>i-<~OJ

^*

^r-

or JC ^ ! ^t*l

<i^H N > 1 1 dz ^* . 1 1 " J-.

>

^**

It N*O j^ . J

II

II 1 II II T f *^ ^ IT C

M ^ i II II

X Jt 1 3^. U. 1 3 -- _></>--j ^ i <_J * ^i/> * vl^^u. 2 *- ^*- < j ^H "rujt. 4WJ 1.*. _ / - J 4 :u^ 4 ^:i. .CO. 4:a. < x 3C Jll --i Ju_ b. *^ II -J ^3~* i/1 O ~9(/7"^ ^^ **O *-<'* ^4-^ *LX ^ -TO> *-*4^O*- .J~O Ji f~* -J*** "' ^4ttfl>Ui J-Oi- l-sl^f** -1-1 T> vT II llp-i >-^ h- *- ,-,^-H^ r-^O- h- CJ* t-C>f-Uf- O .5 - -j:Hi )H h-h&*r-JT 3 !--* * 7TCJ 2 o z > a Q. ** H *:>- >- h- a 32T 1 2 1 1 ~ " i/^ Z H-Z" O> O _l 2 Oc ll

or ^

< ni-icjr: *:t-QC

*-i

<e

tn

tJ
f 94

-
*

a to

J U

1 t1 J t

i t

U 0 Kl

4> * *

> I

oo

o a

t
4 > * * > - l ) O ' *>* 0 I > vOr-er c r y f^jfacM i ^tofiror->roromr* ir-ll-1 1

* \

3- j- 3r a- jrr q uTfiuiu> r

(( - * ! 1 * 0 ' * -rxjroa ui-or-ao i wor inmtnii "Oin D^>W>4> JD JJOJJ

p. >, >.,<* ,cy ,, , o ^ ^ c ^ , , , o , ,,, oc.J^.c.o^orjy ^ , ,

r*tut ui,4j wi-or^c- I--f-^ rs*f ivrv r*u-j

fU L J I * t J J*-"* f*J IWfO

**Drvjuu X) o*-*r W3LJ-Jr-i o j- T ui u">w >mr--J t J*-j*- *-*-*n^^iM< ^t%i*i '' i 7 ^ uyui u>s4J rLJt_>iJ*^-
irifi^irTmr'iira^TJaj^^O'J^^Ja:
' <& y & & 3 & 3-btMlUllTtUt

05
QQ

r^ Ha

9
*3 04

x3

-iO'^OO-^'Q.-"^^' U.Q-12OU. OWO- C**-^"^Wi-ICLX^i.^-^^AO

M [J

K '

c ^r

u a

*
O CJ

>o

o4 cJ L3 ti

*O U

LJ

n in

* u

>o

O '.> -e -o <h

^ h

0 0 (

4! * 1

1 * <

4>

o < h 1 ' * )

"> in n r >-fo ^ if ^> r*

*^^^ ^-*~^Cv-i'Nl ,^ f-jp-j * K^^* * f'** t ^*>*Of i/'i

o * > ^ ^ > O s O o o f> i > - ^ o o^}*.xO.i ii o o ^ o ^ ^ j j i o o i>^)*t />-/)suj o n 11 *> u>j>a>sO-4j -*-oj>*J ^>^jf-r-r-r-rr* r-r*r ncj-Jw">c'v~>LTjf~^o*J* jCJcrr>tjr^rJCjt">c)nr>!Jt>cn T"JLj'jtj")f5i *cirir>Ljo'-jot.icjcji u^t u 1 . oc. utjcorjor 11

l-f^T-^ J

JJ

J" l/>tOu^tA U^Ul^O -CvU-O ^3 !> O^*"r^f*~' l s "'^r^ i t* > f^h"tTl Jt-J' **3 ' > O^^*1

| X.-APP-B-VO j

i
~a-r-- i>-i' r- r r- rj vn r- cv'' i/iisi<oi. 9 ^r~ r*w*r- f*r* <0 c

_o r- >ci js^/r- rwi/,v.ir

maaif r>u>inu i/.biiAir

o
O

.3

^ o

1
_ ) _ J J J ^J^HU; ^ ^oa i^iOf-i^ii-jo _j> -j . ^ _Jif-^:>-h-^f-JJK--J'H 1_<0 J-0 ZOS--JW1I<. ^. C-U O tC C. O-I O I^->"I O'-'UOUO V > U O U . I I W I ' U.U.U.U.U.

]^.l. e(M *., < *

; i

"] ,00

-1
.i

* O

1
^

~
VJ 0

r|l ->
Itf ** O O
" V

4 t

CJ U

4 * 4 * 1 * #

<

OCjc_if joot JCJ^-<Ol.>tjO-3f3iJOCJ' JT3' >

'(-If -Jf lt-.J.JCJCJi,H_>O<Jf7CJO j j i > i jr i i l i u 1 J ' J i j u l j k i..i^;ni il,>ni Jj

'

X-APP-B-11

*ri t/xn u

U" U"iO U

tf"* ^i U 1 U

y ty j y j

p-p-

r* r-p-p-

i-i-r-r-

r-r-f-r. r-r-r-r- p-p-r*c- f-r r-p-

P^P^r--

*/>
/<

* ^ \/
JC- KO

x
JL

!/._> X.

o <

*." O Q9O. UJ_I

O X C X

ox

O>

>x o)

.i/i trx
U>O 'I i--

* t

It o.

II u-m

i
>- X

I Z X C O

U J C C O T II (
l-l"MJZQ.

I II ' in *o
U ^ u t "O n* 11 tvo x.-i: 111"< 11 - % (j^u.Jt X nu-j* iiiif> < - S LkHu.2*
>-Z-U_f|X >xr<

no
C iT

C'U.' t/1
t-tf

-" 1_J llj

t IX

OCJ

>

r*CJX

U.-J "

xjjji
> d. I I ! X >x Z

3_jr^ a.-x JL^J

-|r>

z M -o i_i>x

vO 0.

o a. it
xu
*0* X

^i O

r o

11 u.

ft o '-e I a>

~l/)

OIIJ.

UJ^II

II
h-

C C I I C L ' O * -X us: iioo J T'N.'<3C

Q.XOOD ILt> CO

** O tt </> r>< z Qx
2TUIX ' t 1-UJUl || .

LClt ^

J
r**-^ *O 11 ^* X ^ O r-4 ^^ * -O *3 ~3*x rr r ^ a Lu u C UI C3CD >-i/i*x;;. -i i-uj u; 11UJ x oo 11 u.
I I I ^J 4/^ 3O

o or
t OX IX

UJ_jO

Q.

cro
Q.U. -JO

oo
0.0

x rj
uj OJ:>=>

o i^> 11 11 re x- ^ * rg i/>4
QC

rj
O "i o.*-

u.o

^-x o-^- ujx:uj<x ^ 11 vie ^ 11 tA. cu 1^ t^-u.ji/' iirv z_) ^i-3: x .a i-iiinj jcr~aii-a vj >
C_**

^'LJOQ.

a
OLJ

U 11 < "-"O.
z *u.9< ^LC

>xi/i>-x

'a.

j"r^it fl-jc-Ouji *-i^-ui^cr

X ^ l l i O - x * I U O OJUI9

LJUJ'049

f J

^c~^^l~. aa i i x - o - n

L^ ui

u . - 1 ^ " J i i i u ' x ~ t O u . i i i f Z 3 *J i.j UJ

<UGL. *a.OUJWJ^J r II a m *^

ix

ou u. * 3 J> ~H*

a. xi >c ii jc ?

rjc

> *<

u-EMaot'Liixi

u'O l O X

a.

j. j >. a. <

i.

JD._I t
X X 2-U^ X J f t v - l -J II 1 > I X ' ^ I U I > > J l j . - "t I ->-*t-l t r ^ - t j ^ t I f I

^cjo~ca.

^oc roaj

-^o

t. i-C
>

L-otxiu.
ao-

iJ

ai LT a oix o aa. o cr oo. octixcc

)
,
fX

oj

tmj occ

c a> ri

coc t> fxr 1

>aK

Cl x

i >
'*

C- < >

<

< >

O<

k 0 < > 4

1
H V mtncj uu-. knm^icJ t> ui - - -<j ^1 -o -a *if*>riuin^i r^-r^ i J* * ~j~* *-< tOfO^ rf*->< Hi 4 "4 -t'-J CJ_O _l O t. ICJ <->_) > JJIJ.J ^Iv9 7 >>-<JtJ^ O^O

< *<V4 jr^i^<\ U^L ic)-x->cjt_;cj

-, ,-j

LIC J^ ^^ ' * * '

!
V
k.

.
^

1 1
1 1 >

to

| -

j
i

9
U .

r* O

a * * -

! i
1

o o

< i

i ^ ^ u. s .
0 ui
13 V)

5 u.

; I

_l z

2
*^

s>.

-T
ftM*

'

*
/\

-
k

z o
ix:
>'<

ui -"- o ^ tt ' -w
^K-

"

0.0

! j i 1
i ! . ,

1/1

sx a** wi-i ^ *-.a

^^ ^
-*
* ~ "
l

3v/)_J -J

- >-4

' ' i

o ' - Ul U,"* > >-= a. o_i ' *-j

'
1 lJ -t

O -

VI ^ >

u
I/I

a *i
LJ
1 l >-

' .

er <
UJMI

z to

"

'
,

LU**
>--

^** *

cr

cr

QC*-^7k - M 1
>-
k

u o <e

2^200
*-L_/l^

yai ^o
CJV^ *VJ

*J J*-*L*J1

*^j **nct

-C * ">V*-*J *- CM It. ti \j** f>i'-J M -4 r^r^t-^r*-*1k ^ *-n_j - M*l * +<UI

Wl ** -J 4J -O
^JJ ^7 -A*^""^ AJ *

-y-a.C~ "i <c - ij s <: * jaiij^j j AJ<-W*J ^jj *j- r-O

)->-

** Z *-^v- k-iz -- -*a.s: a >ooz ou. cuaci: ou-oa:c.octt_ LJ or OLJ ^t CJ3U - JO 33 kkJOUl w - i ^ VJ *O 1 cr
^4
-

<e o
>*4

U .
-

ei
CO

>t _J

a. r o i>
r ^. f i- jy m o^ aio-r *-*rii" jtnvo > j cr T^ T^r -T^J- -*"ti /IOU'P-UP u)t/)uitnu")Ututu~i/^iStutw*tJ">iS>) LrtiAi/>

^^

u. o

1
it_j^

,
i-OT^">f-

'
^4 T<N< ^fT^K>^"^r^

o z
U I

^^

r-oC3^-^-4 Cx MK^iOr-i^ ^r ^ *Ao^ J rji j jt tin 1 >-<-J 1 J I.J l_ll J J'

"-'O

X-AF P-B-I:

U.

> J
*.j

UJ-

IUJ .
r

>^-\>utr-~LJ fc. l

v mo.

cr aaccaura
UJ_1.J_( J-J.J -JLj->^> J^l J JO_) J J-JJO

.. ..
1
^>

L.P. -lcil_ICiL.JLJLJ -3-3 J -J J J_J J J 1 LJLJt J L HJCj L-H-ILJ CJL>JC. JOOC d

^C OL>'LLJCJLJLJCJ L.'LJL, C^OOCJXjrj LJLJO

J J JO-1 -J-JO >-">.JJ^>_) JO<~>J>-> JVJ_J 4

*
u

L^

U.
O-l

f _>o *~Z

10 x X :-j 4M:3 ^

x ac

o
I/I I/I
4 LJ

tJ^

-t,

Xt-4 VI ^t^LJ U .-ioatnyo J CJI-XC I/ f-iLJ Ljuut ,o.0f*i l/>*^_3 u (vJ*-4 ^ ^idLJL.V.IL. C.OOLJOOtJC 'OCiOC-OCJL.C.|L3

a ^ m ^ v t/i * ** ^>
fl
^

i
1 1

ce
X

2 ^ a O ^ i4 ^ f ^fc
Of
0

*" ^j ^j i? (^ ^^ CQ ^* **^
_*i C5
wj ^"5

3S

10

LJ V

^ te

a
^
^_' -

era: tree a

O Z
VI 1 ^ ^ ^*L9

2Q /v

c, or >DC oc.)O O-JCJ t->1->LJO_ 10

L

^LJLJLJL_ LJ

*~ ^^

0^

' C U JOLJtJLJtJLJ J l

39

1
CJ
1

aj
Q.

x:a
4
LOL^Lw *"*

uj
X

3X
LJ UJ

roc

.. x 3
bj -

Q.

Lil

Jl fl

Cj /y*

a o a

r- .TC' U.Zh- U.C. O ~>JO O*-t- CL VI l"

OJ*^ *"i^iui j i> fv

ccz o IB otn avi

Q.Q. Vl"!

: i
CJ
Ui.
M

^ I

i
*i*

0. i?
BCO

s^

' 0

' VJLJCIL, JLJLJLJLJLJ llCJCJOCa

h-4 | \SX

UJ

Cf cje orL

uo

o o z _i a f^ <
!*

zt
^ OVI V^JV^

or

4 Z

cccr'a.crcr i/ICL Z -V) M X. * i <J"* & 0 O

J
d
o
UI
UJCL >-/> 4JT

IT

1C

1 1 ^, LOC7OC3 t , i'XTIk^ C3LJL-jtJC>O z i oi-x-'i st_O t-*l u

o^
,

C Ld

jr
4 O _J
UJ 5

era
u.
VIi

-; Li. LJ 4

cr

a
o o

a!* l** *-*

LJ)

^^

o^_iac cr u 4 rj -o^> _ j --./ > t/>f^iQ 4J Z -3Q.O ^v-^a> w3-iHtOVF-

a> -t

. I

% u
4 *

^* 4

j
UJ

. r^r -n < jr-^>r-L

^ul<^tl l*^mr*>t< i

a*

LL

^ull'4 4r ^ u ^u i ^ '* " ' 1*LJl_ k^VjL^

im

X
4

C-L-X-1C t'CI'T L? UOOV.JJ-IO J ILJ irr-<a:crcECX _, j , ,.

UJt/ldinUJ Z *tt ZHCL U. *H" X e w^UI O ^ j H* LJi>o2v"*O 2* > 2 "'i Ct */> aa t -'ow uj */i<* 3 h-z o o LJ *O Z t3 CT - 43 WO ^QCiVQ^1* O *^ *JO i-cr -Ji"r cr -ix 0.2 ujz L3 U. L3 ** X ^9<< ^ ZO ^* O . *t.^ ** ^. C^~ t^ t*++~ 2 ^ ^~< 1. 0*"^ * i*n_*i* *, JC. r LC LC vtr^ ^Z *-tj o/O. OT^^ Zt/lO ' O< \Ji Wu j "^ ^, uj UO^^CZ U**" UJ Wl ^T ^ * i VI X U*CT .J r-ijy UJ O X O LC*~ C.HM x^-oo^; oo< ^- i cr t>o-t COU, <t Oi.^ .JT*"iJ^.J CJsC JOuQC Mjjjl U.*-^-=0-4U-r-OU^-jr^^ ujHO-r-^z^vo-s .uoa:a.j _ju.ijj*-

f.

a
LJ

,
-~

-
IX

a. >

i^^^V>^r>^tlSti^.i.1ll^^^i^^uj
4 ji t * rs "'2.'r. I^1??"^?. T^lillJ.""! r ^^aS^cj^ .oc.ovioLjH.aQ.cr4i-a

-
9

. >.
cr
^

o o

J^Jl^*J >-J) ^ J 9 -*

LJ

^
b

^"^ J C v^ *2 -j ^j C3 _C j -^ ^3 ^T ^^ OC ^ * A *>/l * Q*ti. -J^J ^T t^Ji LJ A. tj X r~< * *'"^u* ^^ 1*' -J ^ Ztt

_,
VI
I1

co
u.
L3<T_JUJOU.'-' 1 'J

LT>

x
CJ^J <

zur,

a u
U

LJ

z , r~- o- o cr z a. o - 1
.JLC jry-iX

Si
fc

2
U. 1

fr

f\*r-T_J LU~4I >fNl^fJ

u
I H h VI

"X.

U.

*- ' IKlir-lU

.ui o-r

rc ;

zxzzxz

4 LJ

! r7ioLJ|L-lL-'cJL,'iJ crrr
J^-*^J

IS-f ^

.f> ui^>f- p- o-.rjf03-u-.vOi- 030-0^

m^

"-CT

u. 1
f*'*J "*"" >*/>

>3
t c; i 3 */**

UJ 0
CE o > VI

4 1Z ' '*J i *x UJ JU* JUJ4.J c^r jc LJC c""*cr*i"~r*oc!i

crcear
>_j|_J

^ Q

CE

O 3r
U>O
1 U

JVJ _J M.IftJI (X *| Uw^* J *-. o I JLJl LiC7f |( f >0 Of t~*< T^ OCl in ^* VI

O^^^ i -T in. a Q ^ *fi j& ^) n *LI >J1 J3JD- j s|\^tO OOi"Jf jOO /OOO. *>lli >t '<* O~OOC JOO oo-jijcjtjuiotn jo* >r >C'orjooi.iritir

X1-APP-! 1-14

''"I"

""

1
i
C'CMtV J J J J ~ 3 O _ J _ J J.J J > J - J - J J J J JO JO *->../ O JO *OUoO,J JO. I JO* JO J^ J ^ J - t r ) .* JOO j JOO'JOJ C^L* L. i_>Cj *.! t^L, LjC< )^> L*O t * C-* i_J L J *. > L* O C. 1 WLJi O C-*l lOLJOL. 'UO t_*C i L* LJt_*C>Ljl ' U^CJlO U< >f->l C I OLJO UOO ooooooo jo jo oo jo j j- J jo<joooooovj>ij.joo - JOOOOO>.J.iOOO JOO J JOO . vJOo

.- L--

>
o
UJ

u
a a j *~ a a a. ^j u.
UJ

^
1 ^

3
z
U l

a
-k
* _

^ * a.
u.

Z
U l

o -t
Z

f.

u.

E
V) 4

,J
UJ ^ H*

Z
r-

cr _ j v> i^

^ Z

-1 c

U)

a
o cr u. Z

oe ~" ^u. **
^u. >
rt

ce
W ^4

A
^ *^

1 1

H^^ 1

H
^M

a.

9 4^ ^

cr

a. o i^ ^

a ^% - ^
4/>

Z>-t 4 * **

VI

^| 2 UJ

*~ 1 ^

a. ^>
l/>

U* ^'^ ZOi/)**^ ^4 ^ < v# ^ Q. LJ^*X O **t-*UJ

o w-* o a. * ^ wt **
""*
"tt* ^^
U.* **

^ t
QC U Z
4

a. X ij
r
O
y.*

* * ^*>-* CC *"O
- Ov/> UJ O < K-

z
(

a* ce LC OO o -aoc tr r-

^ 4^

1 O MJ
o

>^

<* u>
>a

to

o z o
t

o
*

cc tj
1 . f*

o o
ft
CI

i-> o 3 */> i~i ooa

*^ * <
-is*

J X UJ

cc :
U. JC

* CL**n:o* OH* ^
Z i/x-ioooxS^

i Ht 1 | o
Ua. Jtr uji-i
tj.LJ-

i Z
-

-i >-O
11 -(J |

f^d*^i~7- icuujf- r-

~o-

Vo~uJ
>-WOJt-l

r~<a zoo
t e !
-.HU '

>_ >_<_ - ^Vrf j -^WU.

~
I

t S ' E - !-- II ~

! .i7aiji-n^o ; I i r ri

ao^.jn uj.liz r 3

oz uc>czr-i*-iiflj> ^J^-VJO-*Jl

:J

i "
4

"ir
^4^>

J w^ 7^ t* * 2 i/>* uc. > ^ o o CV Q L - C.-X *-C .CJU.OCr o^juju H- i"r- s> O 9 f-rJ I/>CJ** t.

s;
o
o

.4LJ3C30 net c>rrco -1O<->13U J Jl i. J30U.

>
r> c>
O
*J

u
0

o^ o

inr-

ur*
^^4

i
CSjK>

3*n*o f-rvir>4 i^^rsio

OCO-

T C '* IfVlf J U

\or- roo O-tNr'r> Jio^ir ecoi '- 1-jri.j- u vci coo^ l--(\ll' iroMror 1 J 3" J - a- j r j- 3- mu>ir>uTuii 1 tf)t/)L/) ij ) *O 4> H? ^3 j

U>^>U> s j

ono-c *rs*ri3-u aj^jr-r . r-r~r-r j"rr

-r

1^-iTjj^O 4 '

>X>^- *4^

J^*'
JC)l

:"css;

4M(VJir

f-r~r-(-

:^^r;~ r
.OC3CJOUJOCJI

f"* ^~ C-t "

11 .

_M.I ...M.H > >oooi JIM or

j' r )i jij j' ,j>.

:D: 4(^o^r^tv !^^"r' moo J^M-J! '"""'

JI/)7s/> 4f-J(WfJH
J ^4
fMI" 4O

1 f JINII^J

IUi 11 J

Ix-APP- B-75


I/Its

fl*""

J.J - ->0 J ^ J J J
C<C-J *H_> t LjOCJO .JO JOO_ I.-J-J..J

w~trin>tr 'f.r f^ r^)f> tf 1

A 1 ^

' ^*

>. & x,*>

Ut < >-<i^U1 1 la, *--< UU . . ll (Zll ll

/1
H

( u

- *

^^
*^^

t-

. u ^ OC

ll

CO
*^

*< u. u

-*_IX

a.-: x - A
ji ^~ j z
O *!i Z
^

-u.c,t

-^ ^

BN

^^ff<
vO U
Ul

-X

11
^
C"* ^ CJ '
' 1

>--r

<t

j f

F^M^.JI j^> n o J - i^orjrg^rvj^ ji

C^Ji J f w f ifNj f\j P\jr- 1 fi ^* ir^i i* i fTfO^fO f* fOfO if ^ y ^ ^ y j ^ y "T *f & ^ ^ & & JF ^T u^t^^J t_ J OOOuJ LJ-VCJ OOO OOiJ

3^ ^) O "^

II l__

Otr>i/ltSt --- > u_u.W

>

a. ii ii u zucujae * _*^- cr -a _j 3 < i

l l

C t^t_* Cj ! & T ^ ^ LJUuJlt)

si c^i "^
IM p5

>

OK! G

t_J-^r-|-^

, j

*-J

-I-J

, (^t- ^.! *- O'.VJ t> c>

lU"*3.^3 jOC'O 1-3 O

\ftj

^ T j - ^ - ^ u i t r f r ^ n ^ ^ w i ^ i^^l-*

i i

*^^r -7 -Xt/i r- f^- f^-L > * 4 c \ i r ' t r ifir*itr>u> N<J orwr^r^r -4 rNj.Njr^ro r-i^^o K>*nroK>Jir*i
^3-^^CTrrJ'tTOp3^'3'J'a3'J^^ OGOOuJCTO*- Jt^ OVj, OCJOiSfJOO

XX
^^* 00 UJtU 00

t O

c/
0

tA UJ

* M

Z * * "X ^. -x 2 J Jr .

LJ

cr
rgrjr^dl ^ ^ wfv.M,- J AJ-M^^ ^ry f^rM^r^r J^<M

i 1
"
**%* V <* ! ******;<.****<**

-^ u. j-> in /

vov.

,/\ u-u-u. c> <C-v . I I I L. . I I I <ou-a

fl>

era '
00

I/)
I J

J^
^X

^4

>.
**^

1C - s: 1 -<-il Ci Q.C11 O.

- >
^)

zz
-tt ! o^ ' *->O i

o xo
^-,. Lh I
***-

o
x,
1 3
l l O -4

m vn 4> ^^ wJ
!_,
-

' ^^ w * ^ >.>. J 3 ' U

'

j r* f*^^^'" ^ i/> c.J j3 JL/)H o r^i ^ ^ fN -f f^ ^^ r^ r>j n * ^4 J* "">CT f tji t. JIM rJLw J* r<"* i/"* f^^-* */> *T i"Jt>* ^^ r~ CJ*. j *Hfu r^ r j r ^ r o ^ ^ ^-^r ^o^*1*' r* ^ *D \o u ^--.~.-.^-rjrxjrr\,fM r^ a j-i^W) ^i^oo
ULJ*-t^*t_ C,OO*-UO

^* r<<jiZ3CJ -^ f*ii*ifi txtouitO

CZ1^CJJ l*lur-l*-

*-- -

ou t^* i r~^> ;

a? ? m ui o

- t_> C3

1 wju^ V- j I1** r*j ^j-*r- ^ *L< <Njr *>uiutrfia.iJt>a c"CJinM^r>-ut">mif)Ci .T^tn^-*-^w^crr^<>j

UUI Jl__% J ^*U f J C ' 4 /LJ UJCtCJUL, O U-

i- IT.C- EJt-"7U>C*l-O

CJ f-l

% "S"
w-^ - *-

S " u
** -.

"> II II II > WU.UJ ^o.

rt
'^4 IK

I
!n"

X- 2C 3. 3C 1- J

j
tf 1 ^

i ..
^f
O
| M * ^*

I
- Vtf -<

IT T: o:
*~J Wl

tto
lt-1

*~^ ' i
* tr uJ
i

<in
CJ^-*
t^lWJv-4

^.^.^..^.-.^I^^1^,^.

^^^^^,^^^,M
"'^-

-4

*<* *-*4

Sw
CO >O U

-''

rr*-

-''-Jt~

r~r u^
*->^

o*^

^t

X _J

in

^^
CL i . O Vj

t_>^ -
l_f CJ V^

>^ U l t <J
UJ

i
o- _
1 i
] ,_rjtvjrv

cr < j
fn 1
l/t
^^

1/1

vn
UJ
QJ

0
r\

I/)
0-L.-UJCViU*u]fMuItf LUGO

i1 -j
^> K^ M^
t*\

^t

rouj
M%

cQ ft -J
(Z
k

*\ 1

i/^ O ^* '

^5

f* CO fO O CO <O JD CO CO 1

LJK> O>LJ l*i uJ^ ui

O Lw 1 ttfCDLJ^>

j i

-
^ **1
t^J

vO i i i j i I uj i -u I ja l u t o i i UJ i u"uriroujuj|i*j D.rrorio'OirEO'nrcr dicrncttoinr ->oou,lttCErc r

ooo^f^o^-ooc/c

on c , o o o r o

i U.U."XITOOO

U l

*i

0 ^ ^

f~C !Cc
1 1 f

jr\*^i^ *fi^!C
tf
* t

r*
h i ^ ^~ ru

t->3COt#*- T w t / > > C - j * / 1 ^ ^ ^ - Q ' ? ' ^ ***^

U-OOO^i^-OO.

1
:

A* ^W t^t _

* C f j CJ . JLJi^tJ, >.

ctrt. X f '

O '"^ *-_r

- ^^

-rro^uj ^-H- j

nunrvu.*- D . - o - S - c r u

-a ^ rro- Tr xvj-u.^u.-cu:-c-c
-

tn

^^i-^-c^-ir^-tr^-c^^-c^^^^-c-:^

^^_^

,
I

X-A PP-B-' 6

-j-orvr
9O.OU

>o

C.-4r4 .-tO-a-o J-^-T-J liniox a * * \a- Xtn<

O^J-JO OOCOO o O

M<2TOa

~f^rw3 w7~ur^
xt/t-l

4<lO* i^X**^A
^^-it

OOOI3

^ f I yi<si*t a- a-a- a

oxocO

xr4fvir^ j orjijcn *

- 0 1 .

X-APP-B-17

Tony E. Redding James 0. Rippey Harmon L. Roberts Systems Evaluation Off. XI. COMPARISONS WITH ALTERNATE SYSTEMS A. SUMMARY To become a viable electrical power source for the future, SPS must be competitive with alternative sources from the standpoint of cost, techstatus, and environmental factors. Studies have been conducted to determine current and projected cost of electricity for fossil, nuclear, solar (ground), geothermal, ocean thermal, and hydroelectric power systems. Also, environmental factops such as land use, water consumption and air pollution have been determined for comparable size alternative systems. The evaluation of current and projected technology status of each of the systems indicated an anticipated shift in power source mix from predominantly fossil fuel to predominantly nuclear power by 2000. The study also showed the potential emergence of new technology in solar and geothermal energy. To the depth studied, the SPS appears to be competitive with alternative systems for the future, particularly fuel-burning systems for which fuel cost may undergo higher-than-average inflation. From an economic standpoint, geothermal power appears very attractive; however, its widespread use may be limited by environmental considerations and the lack of suitable plant sites. SPS offers the environmental advantage of no major cooling water requirements. B. STUDY APPROACH The approach utilized in this study was to first review and update electrical energy demand projections from JSC's previous SPS study (ref. 1) and to identify the potential competitive power source technologies that could be utilized to meet this demand. Only those technologies suited for large-scale, baseload power generation were considered applicable; however, systems not normally considered baseload types, such as wind power and hydroelectric were included for reference purposes. The time period of interest is 1995 to 2025; therefore, virtually all of the presently known power system concepts are potential sources, including those systems which utilize fossil fuels. Data describing the economic, environmental, and technology status were then developed for each system. The economic comparator utilized was cost of electricity (mills/kwh) at the busbar. Environmental considerations included were land use, air pollution water requirements, and waste disposal requirements. Technological comparisons were made on the basis of current status, expected commercial date, economic size, key problems, and potential and/or anticipated contribution to the electrical energy supply in the year 2000.

XI-A:B-1

C. ELECTRICAL ENERGY REQUIREMENTS PROJECTED DEMAND

JSC's previous in-house SPS study (ref. 1) included a projection of the Nation's electrical energy requirements through the year 2025. This projection (shown in figure XI-C-1) was based on Federal Power Commission projection through 1990 with an extrapolation to the year 2025. Figure III-A-2 (section III) shows projections of electrical energy requirements made by the Department of Interior, Shell, Electrical World Magazine, and ERDA. These projections are somewhat lower than the extrapolated FPC projection; however, the extrapolated FPC projection appears to be a reasonable upper-limit on future electrical energy demand. Figure III-A-3 shows ERDA projections of electrical capacity requirements through the year 2025. These projections are discussed in more detail in section III of this report.
D. SOURCE MIX PROJECTIONS

Figure XI-D-1 shows two projections of power source utilization in the future. The solid line is the projection used in ref. 1. The Department of Interior projection shows higher use of coal through the 1980's and 1990's and less use of nuclear power; however, by 2000, the use of these primary energy sources is about the same as the original FPC projection. Only conventional energy systems are included in these projections although it is expected that the new-technology systems will be utilized to various levels by the year 2000.

XI-C:D-1

BASIS: THE 1970 NATIONAL POWER SURVEY FEDERAL POWER COMMISSION

30*

12000

25'

10000

y
vo o

20

8000

|l5f
CD
UJ

6000

_i

lOf o

a:

4000

POWER GENERATION

200C

INSTALLED CAPACITY

1970

1980

1990

2000

2010

2020

YEAR

TOTAL ELECTRICAL POWER GENERATION AND INSTALLED CAPACITY PROJECTIONS

Figure XI-C-1 XI-D-2

Figure XI-D-1 ELECTRICAL ENERGY RESOURCE UTILIZATION -

i ^j

tn

70

jt*^ NUCLEAR

.- ,
60

NUCLEAR
50
3 HYDRO

OGAS
;- OIL
40

UNITED STATES ENERGY THROUGH THE YEAR 2000. BUREAU OF MINES, U.S. DEPT. OF INTERIOR, DEC. 1975

^ o

20

COAL

OIL HYDRO GAS

1970

1980

1990

2000 YEAR XI-D-3

2010

2020

E. ALTERNATIVE POWER SYSTEM TECHNOLOGIES

A review of the literature indicates a large number of existing and potential power system alternatives that may be contemporary with SPS. Figure XI-E-1 shows a list of those technologies selected for evaluation in this study. The list includes proven technology systems in current widespread use and new technology concepts under active development by government or industry. Fach of these technologies are discussed in detail in the sections which follow. 1. Conventional Systems a. NATURAL GAS: Early use of gaseous fuels were localized (northeast primarily) and many utilities distributed gas manufactured from coal. It was used primarily for space heating, water heating, and cooking, but not for power generation. In 1947, a major change occurred in the gas industry when natural gas from the southwest was piped to the east coast through two converted liquid pipelines, the "Big Inch" and the "Little Inch." The "Big Inch" had been used for crude oil transmission and the "Little Inch" was a refined oil pipeline. As a result, the use of natural gas was expanded to all end-use classifications, including power generation. By 1974, about 17 percent of the total U. S. power generation was derived from natural gas. In 1970, about 270,000 miles of high-pressure gas transmission network existed in the lower 48 states. This system included about 4 million horsepower of compression. Due to substantial reduction in gas supply, the pattern of rapid expansion that occurred in the gas industry in the 50's and 60's may soon drastically change. Already, power utilities in the southwest are planning a shift from natural gas system to coal, oil, and nuclear. For example, in 1970 almost 100 percent of the power generated in Texas was produced by natural gas-fired powerplants. By 1975, this had dropped to 90 percent with the other 10 percent split evenly between fuel oil and lignite. It is expected that by 1980, natural gas will be used to produce 55 percent of the power, and by 2000 only 3 percent. Figure XI-E-2 shows a schematic diagram of a typical natural gas-fired power plant. Figure XI-E-3 shows a diagram of the natural gas use chain beginning with exploration for the resource. As indicated in the diagram, the natural gas may be used in a central station powerplant with 35 to 50 percent conversion efficiency or on-site generation with heat recovery. In both cases, residual heat must be rejected to the environment. In the case of a central station plant, the heat is rejected either to a local body of water (lake, river, ocean) or through a wet or dry cooling tower. Wet cooling towers provide for the highest overall efficiency, but require large quantities of water for evaporation and other losses. A typical 1000 Mwe natural gas power plant using a cooling pond heat sink requires about 13 billion gallons of makeup water per year. This amount of water is roughly equivalent to the needs of a city of 150,000 population.

XI-E-1

LO

l>x i-H

OO r-\

-=T XT

CO

LTk I

r-H

O
/

5
00
0

oo

iL
o; o

CD 0 .

[BREEDER)
CD

(_> a:
00

OO LU
^ ^ ^

OO

oo

<c
CD ^^^ l~~
LU

OO CD
1
w ^

CD OO
LL_

OO OO
I 1

00

CD
LU

oo

LL

LU

i i i rv I LU

oo

UJ _J

Jg o

UJ CD

Q ZE

0 C_) OO

oo

XI-E-2

Q-

<u o
(13 OJ

S-

OO

LU I t X

O O
rtJ

<u
-

-o
O)

XI-E-3

S- 0) C O 4-> O
i_ 1- !

Q)
i O

O 1d.C7>

o. o> o a> C o o o o

OJ -O </-> 31- I (O O J- C J-

o
I\

rt

ro a> u s-

4-> <T5 U OJ (U-C

0} QJ

o <a in x
CD O)

f a

0)

CE RA PO ERP

o m
O

en

0)

O M -t-> 3

f--r- d)

t0) C 3 (_> <O h- Q. QC

T- 1

cc

E OQ n3 O >>3T

i n

co

ia 0) 3 E t3 a: LI_ (75

V> O O)

O. (!)

I o </>

(- U O C 4- <U
UJ

co
CO

UJ D-

ae: a.

O
(O i O) (0 C S_ (U 3C3

O>

T-

o oo 1 a-a
X UJ

1 UJ

i i < a: a

UJ 1

o<
130 01

co ex.
UJ X

a LU

XI-E-4

Technology Status: Natural gas energy systems are generally proven technology with the exception of extraction technology and some end-use technologies such as fuel cells. ERDA plans to spend approximately 30 million dollars in FY77 on improved oil and gas extraction technology. Environmental Considerations: Natural gas production, transmission and utilization is environmentally a very clear process. Some thermal pollution and water pollution problems occur at natural gas processing plants (sulfur removal), but these are relatively minor. Likewise, air pollution is minor except for NO emission from thermal powerplants and engines which drive "gas transmission compressors. Economic Considerations: The economics of power generation using natural gas-fired systems has been strongly tied to government regulated wellhead gas prices. As intrastate prices are raised and as deregulation of interstate gas occurs, more gas will be diverted from boiler fuel end-use to residential, commercial and industrial heating and product uses. Powerplant capital costs tend to be low for natural gas-fired systems because of no fuel handling and storage costs and relatively simple combustion systems. Maintenance costs are also low because of the purity of the pipeline gas and clean burning characteristics of the fuel. From an economic standpoint, the key problems with natural gas fueled systems are increasing fuel costs and availability and reliability of supply. Projections: Most projections indicate a rapid reduction in the use of natural gas for power generation in the late 70's and 80's and, by 2000, only one to five percent of the power generation will be natural gas derived. b. OIL: Oil has been a significant factor in our national growth and development. Oil is a primary energy source in all end-use categories (transportation, power generation, etc.). The United States was a net oil exporter until 1948, when U. S. consumption exceeded supply for the first time. Although the importation of oil creates political and economic problems, it will probably continue for many years. At present, about 18 percent of the power generated in the U. S. is derived from oil-fired systems, primarily boiler-fired steam turbine-generator plants. Figure XI-E-2 shows a schematic diagram of a typical oil-fired steam power plant. Figure XI-E-5 shows a schematic diagram of the utilization chain from basic resource to electrical energy to the user. Like natural gas, fuel oil may be used either in a central station power plant or in smaller, on-site powerplants. Oil has the advantage of relatively inexpensive storage, whereas gas storage must be accomplished on a large scale (salt domes, depleted oil fields, etc.) to be economical.

XI-E-5

CU

-a
CD 01 r O

i CU .

Ol f . c

am
CU C

r- t, 01 i- C to CD O 3

01 J=
</> 3 "

at

I
Central Powerplant
3: u_ ^
1

^
(O Q; OS OJ ->

tj
T3 f^ CO LO C -tO .O+J E O LO

^r
(/) (-> -0 C 0) (O CO t. Q. <U J-

<u
CO CU !-> (O f r -^
'T~

*-^

(0 CU CU 3

co

Q I

s:

co

cxcu 01 S

-i-> />

r* ^^ ^"^ .Q O CU S* 3 ^-Q 4-> CU O -rU) !-> tO CO CU M

j tCD Q

LO o CM a.

r- O

'"

'l-'

o o

* to c

J-

in

CO

Q S- CU

>,
01
r(
r

**~.
0 Mi- LU <0 T3 N E 1. LU

c I

1
i
o u S- 3 a. -a
1 CU

'*~ * fit ^ C ><

^5

4J

a,
i-

c o
nj
X LU

r- S. 01 O CU -r-

c u.

CU 0) CD U_ U

r-

a ^ o
r~

i Q. X
JLJ

Resource

CU
rtJ .* I/)

--> 01 CU

5t t
<C O
"

O -M -C S_ I/I O

s-

XI-E-6

Technology Status: The technology of fuel oil exploration, extraction, distribution, and utilization for power generation closely parallels that of natural gas. The only major difference is the refining processes which convert crude oil into many varieties of fuels and other products. Oil transmission technology has been mostly expanded by the advent of the Alaskan pipeline. Environmental Considerations: The most serious environmental consideration associated with oil extraction is well blowouts. Although the number of blowouts per year is small (0.04 to 0.2 percent of the new wells started), the contamination and damage is usually severe, particularly if a fire is involved. The most serious environmental concern in oil transport is spills, particularly from ocean-going tankers. Air pollution is a major concern in oil-fired systems, especially where high sulfur oil is used directly in boilers. NO production is also a major consideration, but particulates, CO, and other organics pollution is not as great a concern as with coal. Economic Considerations: The economics of fuel oil burning systems is driven by oil cost and supply considerations. At $12 per'bbl, the cost of electricity for fuel only is about 22 mills/kwh. Imported oil currently costs from about $13 to $15/bbl, depending on quality and other factors. The capital cost of boiler plants and engines which use oil are reasonably low and tend to be predictable. Multi-megawatt oilfired steam powerplants cost from 290 to 350 $/kw installed (1976). Gas turbine and large diesel electric systems cost from $100 to $250/kw installed. Projection: With the continued high demand for oil for transportation and other non-power generation requirements, few oil-fired powerplants will be installed or replaced in the future. It is estimated that by 2000, only 6 to 8 percent of the U. S. electrical energy production will be derived from oil, down from 18 percent in 1974. c. COAL: Coal was the primary energy source in the United States from the early 1880's until shortly after World War II. Since that time, a number of major users have converted to oil or natural qas as these fuels became available at competitive prices. Railroads converted to diesel oil and residential and commercial converted to oil and gas. Electric utilities also moved to the use of cleaner burning oil and gas in the 1960's. These newer fuels were generally cleaner, easier to handle, and more environmentally acceptable than coal. It is expected that this trend will be reversed as a result of natural gas supply problems and oil importation (high cost) considerations. Technology Status: The coal utilization technology is expanding rapidly at the present time. Many new developments are in progress in mining, gasification, liquefaction, pollution control, direct-firing, and transport. The most efficient method of coal use for power generation is direct boiler-firing of solid coal (usually pulverized) in a steam power plant as depicted in figure XI-E-2. Overall conversion efficiencies range XI-E-7

from 35 to 40 percent with current technology. The various gasification and liquefaction processes renders the fuel more easily handled, and usually cleaner burning, but a 30 to 50 percent energy loss is taken in the process. Energy conversion efficiencies in direct-fired systems may be increased to 45 to 50 percent with advances in boiler design (fluidized bed), high temperature combined cycles, and, possibly, magetohydro dynamic (MHD) conversion. Environmental Considerations: Environmental issues exist in practically all steps of coal utilization for power generation. Whether surface mined or underground mined, air, water and solid waste pollution must be dealt with to various degrees. In the case of surface strip mining, land spoilage is a majcr concern; however, reclamation methods have been developed to negate any long term spoilage. Coal transportation poses problems of numerous trains crossing the country. Use of coal slurry pipelines could ease this problem; however, legal barriers (right-of-way) to their construction must be overcome. Sulfur is the major impurity in coal that causes environmental problems. Sulfur content varies from 0.02 to 7 percent according to geographic location. Low sulfur coal (less than one percent) is generally located in the western United States. The lower heating value (BTU/lb.) of western coal is lower than eastern coals, therefore, the difference between eastern and western coals in terms of amount of sulfur per BTU input is somewhat diminished. The combustion of coal in boiler plants may produce large quantities of particulates, nitrogen oxides (NO ) and sulfur oxides (SO ). Stack gas scrubbers of several types are being developed for SO removal; however, the system adds substantially to the cost of the powerplant. Also, the wet scrubber systems that use limestone slurry have major waste disposal problems. Particulates are removed mechanically (cyclone separators), electrostatically (precipitators), or to a limited extent, as part of the SO removal.
A

Coal gasification and/or liquefaction plants have many of the same environmental concerns that exist in direct-fired powerplants. As mentioned earlier, a large energy loss occurs in these processes, requiring more solid fuel input for the same output at the gas or oil-fired powerplants. Another related consideration in coal energy utilization is mine worker safety. This consideration is most critical for underground operations rather than surface mining. Economic Considerations: The current cost of electricity derived from coal is about 15 to 26 mills/kwh. The lower cost range applies in location where coal prices are $15 to $20/ton and plant capital costs are $400 to $500/kw installed. The higher cost range is associated with $25 to $30/ton coal and $500 to $600/kw plant costs where stack gas scrubbers
XI-E-8

are installed. Stack gas cleanup systems may add as much as 10 to 20 percent to the capital cost of coal-fired powerplant. An extensive study of advanced energy conversion systems using coal-derived fuels has been recently completed by NASA Lewis Research Center for ERDA and NSF (ref. 9). The study investigated the technical and economic characteristics of the following advanced energy conversion concepts: a. b. c. d.
e.

Advanced steam (Rankine cycle). Open-cycle gas turbine (gasified coal). Closed-cycle gas turbine. Open-cycle magetohydrodynamics (MHD).
Closed-cycle MHD.

f. g. h. i. j.

Liquid metal MHD. Super critical carbon dioxide. Liquid-metal Rankine (potassium). Fuel cells (gasified coal). Combined cycle (gas turbine and steam).

The study results showed a wide range of costs of electricity* for the various concepts. The lowest cost systems tended to be the least efficient systems. For example, the cost of electricity for combined cycle systems was 23 to 34 mills/kwh (mid 1974 $), but efficiencies were as low as 20 percent. On the other hand, MHD concepts had efficiencies of up to 54 percent, but electricity costs were up to 110 mills/kwh. These high costs are attributable to high capital costs for the power conversion system and high balance-of-plant costs. Projections: Coal is presently used to produce about 44 percent of the nations total electrical energy. This percentage is expected to decrease to about 25 percent by 2000; however, coal will comprise about 78 percent of the fossil fuel input to electrical power production by 2000. This is compared to about 56 percent presently. The projected use of coal for power generation seems te be subject to progress of other technologies such as the liquid-metal fast breeder reactor (LMFBR) and, to a lesser Extent, solar power. If these other technologies are developed in a timely fashion and are economical, they will probably be used in lieu of coal to avoid the environmental, institutional and resource limitation constraints associated with coal use. The total remaining U. S. coal resources are about 3000 billions of short tons. Only about one-half of this quantity is known to exist (discovered). The remaining half is yet undiscovered, but nevertheless, believed to exist based on broad geological knowledge and theory. Of the discovered quantity, only about 200 billion tons are classified as reserves, meaning they are known in location and quantity and economically recoverable using currently available technology. *Busbar cost, transmission and distribution not included. XI-E-9

Another factor that will tend to restrain coal use will be raising the necessary capital to obtain requisite coal mines. Most of the coal presently mined is on privately owned land, although almost 50 percent of the coal land is federally owned. With high demand for coal, the mine lease and purchase costs are apt to greatly increase in the future. d. NUCLEAR FISSION: Nuclear fission reactor power plants may be classified as either "burner" or "breeder" type reactors. Burner reactors generally operate on thermal or "slow" neutrons which cause fissioning of uranium 235 atoms. The energy released in this fission process is approximately 1000 kw of thermal energy (heat) per gram of U-235 fissioned (consumed) per day. Thermal neutrons are produced by a moderator or "slowing down" material within the reactor. Water (light or heavy) and carbon are good moderator materials. The process is controlled by inserting or withdrawing neutron absorber materials (control rods) from the reactor core, thus controlling the neutron population at a given time. Compounds containing boron make good neutron absorber materials. The heat generated in the reactor is transferred to a coolant which conveys the energy to a steam generator. The steam is used to generate electricity via a convectional steam turbine system as indicated in figure XI-E-2. Breeder reactors will produce more fissionable material than it actually consumes during its operation. This seemingly impossible process occurs as follows: In a water cooled, burner reactor, a neutron is either absorbed by or splits a uranium-238 atom during its chain reaction. Absorbed neutrons cause the uranium isotope to convert into plutonium-239, which can spontaneously emit its own neutrons. A breeder reactor may use a fuel mixture of uranium-238, which is found in nature, and plutonium-239, which can be obtained from a previously operated burner reactor. A chain reaction in the breeder is started by neutrons being emitted from the plutonium. The neutrons are either absorbed by, or split, the uranium atoms. The splitting atoms will, in turn, emit some of their own neutrons and maintain the chain reaction, while absorbed neutrons will convert uranium atoms into more plutonium. As the chain reaction continues, more plutonium is produced than is actually consumed. Unlike the burner reactor, the breeder reactor does not utilize a moderator material but operates on "fast" neutrons. Otherwise, the breeder produces heat to generate power in about the same way as a burner reactor. Burner Reactors: Burner reactors are currently commercially available in the U. S. and abroad. In the U. S., light water (ordinary H20) cooled reactors (LWR) of either the boiling water (BWR) type (figure Xi-E-6) or pressurized watsr (PWR) type (figure XI-E-7) are most common in commercial use. In 1974, about six percent of the total power generation was derived from light water reactors. By 1976, this percentage had increased to about ten percent.

XI-E-10

T3

OJ
O

4->

s-

(O O) C

o-

Ja>
CD

c >I
3
O

iO U

CO VO
LU I

<-

-a
C

S4-> l/> 3

o
CJ

en
o
3
OO

xi-E-n

o
^ ^

o
03

d o

Q.
S_ O

o: s_

-o

01

so
r-

It)

t/1

+J

o.

OJ S-

3 T3
O ^O +J

to

UJ

i *<

<c

.? s
u_ S-

XI-E-12

Other less developed burner types Include gas cooled reactors, organic fluid cooled reactors, and liquid metal cooled reactors. In general, the above types of burner reactors require "enriched" uranium for operation. The enrichment process increases the fraction of fissionable U-235 in a uranium fuel from the normal 0.7 percent as found in nature to about three percent. The enrichment process involves a complex selective filtration operation based on the small but significant mass difference between U-235 and U-238 atoms. The process involves chemical conversion of the solid uranium ore into a gas. In Canada, the heavy water (deuterium oxide, DoO) cooled and moderated reactor is commercially available. This type of reactor does not require enriched uranium but because of the superior moderating qualities of D^O, may use natural uranium. This type of plant does require extensive facilities for separating D?0 from ordinary water. The concentration is only 0.016 percent. Technology Status: The technology status of PWR and BWR power plants is relatively mature in the U. S. However, plant costs have risen sharply in recent years due to inflation, construction delays, fuel ore cost increases, and stringent environmental and safety design requirements. About 60 units are presently in commercial operation in the U. S. comprising about 35 GW. Four major commercial suppliers of reactor hardware are available. About 155 additional units are on order or will begin commercial operation by 1990. The ERDA is funding LWR technology with emphasis on fuel cycle development. The primary improvements under development are in the areas of nuclear waste management and nuclear materials security and safeguards. Enargy conversion efficiency (heat-to-electricity) is about 32 percent (maximum), being limited by maximum fuel operating temperatures. The key problems associated with LWR reactor utilization are uranium supply; plant siting difficulties, cooling water, waste management, proximity to population; and high costs to assure reliability and safety. Estimates vary, but it is generally acknowledged that proven uranium reserves are on the order of 10 tons, which at the projected rate of consumption in 1985, would last only about 20 years. Projections: It is projected that LWR plants will continue increase in utilization through the 1980's subject to environmental constraints and/or potential legislation that could limit widespread use. Nuclear waste management and plant siting are a key limiting factors. Environmental Considerations: The normal operation of a nuclear reactor produces radioactive liquid and gaseous and solid waste materials, in addition to being a source of thermal pollution. Open pit uranium mining operations also pose potential environmental concerns related to land use, water pollution, and air pollution by mining machinery. XI-E-13

Underground mining of uranium raises the controversial question of exposure of miners to radioactivity, primarily radon gases released from uranium ores. Because of their lower operating temperatures, light water reactor powerplants are less efficient in converting heat to electricity than are modern fossil fuel plants. As a result, more cooling water per megawatt output is required in an LWR than in a modern fossil fuel plant. This characteristic is undesirable in an area that already lacks water for other purposes. Probably the most significant environmental issue associated with LWR powerplants is radioactive waste management. Waste management must be exercised in practically all stages of fuel handling from mining through final reprocessing and disposal/storage. The handling problem becomes more significant once the fuel has been used or irradiated to produce power. The radioactive wastes include reactor core structural materials, coolants, and processed fuel elements. The primary objective of handling these wastes is to minimize their volume and thus reduce their required storage space. The liquid wastes are concentrated as much as possible and then chemically converted into a dry, granular solid material. The material is then put into heavy steel containers and transported to federally controlled burial caverns. Certain abandoned salt mines provide the most stable and geologically sound storage space. Research is being conducted to develop nev^ ways of disposing of the highly radioactive wastes. Methods are being explored to concentrate the wastes to even smaller volumes. Economic Considerations: The costs of light water reactors (boiling water and pressurized water types) have risen sharply in the last 5 to 10 years due to inflation and the high cost of implementing safety and environmental protection features. The construction time for a typical 1000 MW nuclear power plant is 8 to 10 years. The plant capital costs constitute the majority of the nuclear electric generation costs and dictate that the plants be used as base load units. On the other hand, fuel costs are, percentagewise, much lower than in fossil fuel plants. The fuel portion of a fossil plant generation cost ranges from 30 to 50 percent, whereas in a nuclear plant the fuel cost is 10 to 20 percent of the cost to produce electricity. It is expected, however, that as low cost uranium becomes more scarce, the fuel costs will escalate, thus driving up the generation cost. Typical costs for LWR nuclear power range from $600 to $1100 per kilowatt (installed). The cost range reflects variations primarily associated with site location (local labor cost, land, land preparation, cooling method, etc.) and the cost of capital at the time. Power generation costs range from 17 to 35 mills/kwh and consists of 13 to 27 mills/kwh for capital, 3 to 6 mills/kwh for fuel, and 0.7 to 1.7 mills/kwh for operations
XI-E-14

and maintenance.

All costs are expressed in 1976 dollars.

e. HYDROELECTRIC POWER: Water used for power development purposes, such as in streams, rivers, and lakes, derives its energy from the radiant energy of the sun through the hydrologic cycle. This cycle is accomplished as water from ground and water surfaces is evaporated by solar radiation into the atmosphere, the vapor is then cooled and condensed and falls back to earth as precipitation. The precipitation falling on highlands frequently accumulates into streams and lakes in sufficient quantity and with sufficient potential energy remaining (as dictated by the terrain) to ibe utilized for power generation. Water power has been a source of energy to perform a significant portion of man's work for many centuries. Early applications consisted primarily in the grinding of grain, but this century's lifestyle and its high demand for electrical power has dictated a far greater utilization of this resource for the purpose of hydroelectric power generation. As a result, the nation has been extensively surveyed for practical sites to determine the combination of water flow rates and heads which are essential for successful utilization. Uti1ization Forecasts: Table XI-E-1 lists the developed and undeveloped (but physically feasible) hydroelectric site potentials by geographic division in the United States. This data, taken from the 1975 Statistical Abstract of the United States, shows that approximately onethird of the total potential is currently utilized. The same reference also shows that hydroelectric power furnished as much as 29 percent of the total electric energy production in 1950 and has decreased almost linearly to about 15 per cent in 1973. Although an increasing amount of electric power has been supplied by hydroelectric plants during this period, other conventional sources have made up most of the increasing demand. This ilustrates the major limitations of hydroelectric power as we look for major contributors to increasing energy needs. Not only is water power restricted by number of feasible sites, but especially within the past decade, restricted by an increasing concern for the environment and possible environmental effects. This, and the fact that hydroelectric plants take nearly a decade to place on-line, supports the projection that water power will continue to suppliment our electric energy requirements with only a slowly increasing total output for the remainder of the century. However, the relative contribution compared to other alternate energy sources will steadily decrease as total demand skyrockets. Technology Development: As a result of tapping hydroelectric power for many years, the state-of-the-art is well advanced. Efficiencies for extracting the potential energy and conversion to mechanical and then electrical energy are very high. Breakthroughs, therefore, cannot be expected to provide significant contributions to the total energy picture. Environmental Considerations: Changes to the environment due to creating large reservoirs, lakes and altering shorelines, both permanently and by the rising and lowering of backwater levels, is a major XI-E-15

Q LU Q .

CM vo co i o> r-* r-. CM i A M i- co oo **

00 LO
CM CM

CM

LU

00

1C.

1 if

oo ii ^*ji

o o
OO

oo
LU O

CO

<c <c
1

LU Q0 LU > LU O ^^ ^

* rCT> CO IO CM VO r"*

O> OO CM CM * O OO ^1- CM O> i" i

_J <C 1 ^^> LU ^_
0 Q*""""

<f.

O LU ^-

CM r00 r^ CM VO

LU
HH

a LU a_ 0 i
^
LU LU Q 1

0
I1

co r-^ cr>
Ll_

O
^J

<1>
!a
h<T3

oo

LU

HH

s IH a o i

O
00

<C
LU Q. O _l LU > LU C3

z
LU S

<f.

oo

^)

31 Q_

CO O CM i r

CM 00 CM r i

LO ^* VD CM r^. VO OO (71 VO LO CM * LO

> 00 LU
i- OO

LU -11

2 CJ3
O
LU C3 >CQ

LU

z
HH

_l 00 CQ Z *-* O

OO ii

a;
LU

2^ LI- o:

111 I_LJ

o
Q. C LU (__
rf

o HH
00
HH S 1

^^

t00 <C LU

1Z LU O

<c c2

_l

Z ii

Z 13 O 21

x ii t- LL. _i
- CJ cC Q-

t_J

>- Q _J Ii _l OO ^^ ^^ ^t *0O >-* (_) 00 >- LU IE C3

-JO J 1 cC OO *

C 1 O 1

o- o: a:

XI-E-16

concern when considering the suitability of dam sites. The considerations of covering homesites, historical locations, natural attractions, etc., has become much stronger. The impact of such changes weighed against the significant advantages, such as those listed in Table XI-E-2, will nevertheless dictate that maximum developed utilization of hydroelectric power in the United States will fall far short of the physical potential. Cost Projections: Due to the variety of sizes and varying potentials of existing hydroelectric plants, the cost averaging techniques used in Hydro Power Engineering by James J. Poland, University of Illinois, have been used and projected to 1975 dollars. Figures XI-E-8 and XI-E-9 show the range of capital costs and production of Federal hydroelectric facilities as a function of average water head and plant size. Incorporating the assumptions listed on Table XI-E-3, the average cost of electrical power from new hydroelectric plants coming on-line in 1975, is about 10 mills/kwh. This compares with 14-35 mills/kwh from oil/gas/coal/nuclear electrical power generation the same year. Startup of hydroelectric plants in 1995 are estimated at about 18 mills/kwh using the projections listed. 2. Advanced Systems a. BREEDER REACTORS: Breeder reactor technology development began in the late 1940's in the United States. The Experimental Breeder Reactor I (EBR-I) was the first nuclear reactor system in the world to produce electric power (1951, Arco, Idaho).* A number of breeder reactor concepts have been pursued, but the liquid metal-cooled, fast breeder reactor is probably the most technically advance. A large number of liquid metal-cooled reactors have been built including the Sodium Reactor Experiment (SRE), the Hal lam Nuclear Power Facility (HNPF), the Experimental Breeder Reactor (EBR) and several foreign reactors. The term "fast" used in the description of breeder reactor concepts refers to the neutron energy level and is contrasted against "slow" or thermal neutron energy levels of moderated, burner-type reactors previously described. Technology Status; The U. S. government (ERDA) is currently sponsoring major efforts in breeder reactor technology, The Liquid MetalCooled Fast Breeder Reactor (LMFBR) program is the focus of this activity which is funded at about $650 million annually. A major part of this program is the design, license, and construction operation of the 380 Mw (electric) Clinch River demonstration plant located near Oak Ridge, Tennessee. The demonstration startup is scheduled for early 1984. The operating program will continue for a period of 5 years to demonstrate and document reliability, maintainability, availability and operating economy of a breeder reactor on a utility grid. World-wide, a total of eight countries are sponsoring breeder reactot development efforts. France has recently completed a two-year operation of the 264 Mw Phenix reactor with a plant capacity factor greater Nuclear Engineering Handbook, Etherington 1958. XI-E-17

oo
z <=c _j
Q-

:D oo

oo t z
Q.

03; I

_l O 1-1
C I

C3 Z

=c

>I H-

oo oo
LU _J LU O

Ii Di

< >->

ca >

o
Q.
00 LU OO
CNJ I

a: o

>i oo i' _l
O-

oo

Z O

^ o o z
LU

LU C Z O
HH

o o

O
I-H

i3
O O O OO I

J C

OO LU
00 LU tj

o
Q

Z
LU
t4

I1
=E
UJ

U. O

I
CJ

cu
HH

Cu
S Z3 Q.

a: rs
O 00

<:
eC
tt

Q Z

z o o
Q
LU

OO

Q;
Z LU C3

I1

Q eC O _J
LU

3 O _l _J O u_

a.

z.
-=>

Q-

C LU

o: oo ^> a
Qi

=c

3 O Q.

00 < CO

<c o
CQ

LU

o z o
o
_l

o
OO 00

o P
CJ3 i
Qi

z o o
Q.

a: o
00

O LU
LU

i oo z
C3
O O

O LU LU

Q O

o
LU Q.

a;

o: o

o:

Z
UJ

a:

a;

a.

=:
00
(Ti

XI-E-18

KEHRODUGlblU'lY UK 1 ORIGINAL PAOF IS POOR

Hydro Power Engineering

$ s/61 'ILVMOIDI
XI-E-19

Hydro Power Engineer ng

UJ I

<u sZJ Ol

$ 9Z6i '

XI-E-20

CO

CO

oo I
al

<c.
LO CD
LO

LTV CD
LA

LO OO

r^ cn

CD LH CO i-H ^-^ CO <C UJ >-

CXI

UD

12: CM o -wco
1ST

LT> r^
I CO O <_>

oi cn co i*i >- I i J cc: ^_J 6>s <s **s. ^^^ p^\

3: ^ ^

co i UJ i ii
X
( U

CD

CO

CD

h^ <C I

cr t9- :^

SI LU CD >- CD CM h -N UD
CD CD

! Q
C

CD UD cr LO cz.
CO

=C I CO

= hCO

co
CD CO CD

o: i Q_

o <_5

CO

Q_

ce: f co

LJ_

t
Q_

\ cz.
OL.
CD Q_
CO

C_>
CO CO

^:

r^.. cn cn cn

LO

LTV

. UJ ct:

XI-E-21

than conventional power plants. Environmental Considerations: As in the case of burner-type reactors, breeder reactors produce radioactive liquid and gaseous and solid waste materials. In addition, they are a source of thermal pollution. The primary objective in the handling of radioactive wastes is to minimize their volume to reduce storage space. The material is generally put into heavy steel containers and transported to federally controlled burial caverns. Certain abandoned salt mines provide the most stable and geologically sound storage space. Economic Considerations; The capital and operating costs of breeder reactors are somewhat uncertain at this point, but the minimum estimate is about one-third more than a light water reactor (LWR). This higher cost is associated with liquid metal (sodium) systems primarily. Fuel costs for LMFBR are estimated to be substantially lower than LWR because essentially no new uranium purchase is required. Projection: If the LMFBR program (and its associated plutonium fuel cycle) is continued in the U. S., the LMFBR will reach commercial status by 1988-1990. Under these conditions, up to about 10 percent of the U. S. electrical production could be provided by the LMFBR. The widespread utilization of LMFBR may be limited by high cost (capital) and environmental/safety constraints. b. NUCLEAR FUSION: Electrical power may be produced from the heat generated by the controlled nuclear fusion reaction. Unlike a fission reaction, which produces energy by splitting heavy atoms of uranium isotopes, fusion produces energy by combining or fusing the lightest of all atomsthe isotopes of hydrogen. Nuclei of all atoms have a positive charge and, therefore, repel each other as they are brought close together, just as two magnets of the same pole repel each other as they converge. Fusing two atoms of hydrogen together requires tremendous heat and pressure to overcome the repelling forces. The source of our sun's energy is an example of a fusion reaction; hydrogen atoms are continually fused together by the sun's tremendous heat and gravitional forces. Fusing the two hydrogen isotopes, deuterium and tritium, is the most efficient method for a man-made fusion reaction. Deuterium is very plentiful in nature; all water contains a small percentage of the isotope. Tritium does not occur in nature and must be synthetically produced from lithium, which is abundant in nature. Lithium atoms must be subjected to a neutron bombardment which splits its atoms into helium and tritium. The splitting action is similar to a uranium atom's being split in a fission reaction. Tritium atoms are radioactive and pose the primary environmental concern for a fusion reaction. The atoms are so small and light that under pressure they can diffuse through most materials normally used to fabricate reactor walls. Should radioactive tritium escape into the atmosphere, it could conceivably contaminate air and drinking water. If
XI-E-22

the contaminant were ingested by man, it could cause serious health damage. Advanced technology in the fusion process should be able to contain and control any leakage of the radioactive gas. New ceramic materials that will contain the gas or new techniques to convert the gas into a safe form will probably be developed. Two basic methods are being pursued to develop the required heat and pressures for a fusion reactor: magnetic containment and laser beams. A magnetic containment fusion reactor uses a magnetic field to raise the temperatures, the fuel materials cannot come in contact with reactor walls; otherwise, the hydrogen atoms would rapidly cool or the reactor walls might melt. The fuel materials must therefore be suspended in free space with no mechanical support. In the reactor, powerful magnetic fields provide the required suspension. All nuclei of atoms have positive charges and can be repelled by positively charged magnetic fields, just as magnets of the same pole repel each other. The reactor is a tube-shaped vessel of various configurations with powerful donut-shaped magnets ringing its circumference. The positivecharged magnets cause the gaseous fuel inside the reactor tube to be repelled on a 360-degree circumference, thus suspending it in free space. Several methods have been proposed to raise the fuel temperature to the required level. One promising method requires a magnetic-pumping action, using a series of magnets surrounding the inlet port to the reactor. As the gaseous fuel is introduced, the magnets suddenly increase their strength in a progressive manner, causing the gas to compress and heat forming a plasma. The reactor's pumping action would be required only to begin the fusion reaction; once started, the reaction would be self-sustaining. The fusion reaction causes hydrogen isotopes to fuse together, emitting neutrons from their nuclei and releasing heat. The heat of fusion is carried away by a coolant liquid which flows around the outside of the reactor vessel, but inside the magnetic rings. The hot liquid is pumped through a heat exchanger where its heat is transferred to a secondary loop containing flowing water. The exchanged heat boils this water, and the resulting steam is directed through an electric turbine generator. After spent steam has passed through the generator, it must be condensed back to water. The cooling water required could be a source of thermal pollution. The reactor's coolant is liquid lithium; thus, in addition to conveying of heat, it can also provide a source of tritium. As previously mentioned, tritium can be produced synthetically by neutron bombardment of lithium. While liquid lithium circulates around the reactor vessel, it would be continually bombarded by neutrons emitted from the fusion reaction. Neutrons have no electrical charge and therefore are not restricted or contained by the magnets. A portion of the lithium is converted XI-E-23

into tritium, which can be distilled from the coolant and used for fuel in the reactor. A laser fusion reactor develops the required heat and pressure for a fusion reaction to occur from a laseia device that transmits a source of high energy by a pure and precisely focused beam of light. The reactor is a spherical-shaped hollow vessel having numerous equispaced portholes situated in its walls to allow passage of laser beams. Fuel for the reactor is composed of small pellets of deuterium and tritium, mixed together and frozen at a temperature of near absolute zero. The normally gaseous hydrogen fuel material must be solidified so it can be injected into the reactor's center. The solid fuel pellets are injected into the reactor sphere at a rate of two or three per second. At the precise instant the pellet reaches the sphere's center point, laser beams instantly and simultaneously hit the pellet to explode with a tremendous force. Since every action creates an equal and opposite reaction, the explosion causes a concurrent implosion. The imploding force, in conjunction with the heat conveyed by the laser, cause the nuclei of the hydrogen isotope atoms to fuse together, releasing heat and emitting neutrons. The heat of fusion is carried away by a blanket of liquid lithium flowing around the outside of the reactor's sphere. Similar to a magnetic containment fusion reactor, the liquid lithium conveys heat for producing steam for electricity production and is also the source of tritium resulting from neutron bombardment. Technology Status: Several laboratory scale magnetic confinement fission reactors nave been operated intermittently. No continously operating reactor has been built to date. Minimum plasma densities were achieved in 1953. Minimum temperatures were attained in 1962 and adequate confinement was demonstrated in 1962. Simultaneous achievement of these minimum parameters is yet to be accomplished. The ERDA magnetic fusion power program has been directed toward developing an understanding of reactor-level hydrogen plasmas and the associated technologies. According to ERDA-76-1 (June, 1976), this understanding has been developed and the next step is the design, construction, and operation of a Tokomak Fusion Test Reactor (TFTR), which will be the first energy-producing fusion- experiment. This facility is scheduled for completion in the 1980-1981 time period. The mid-term (2000) goal is to produce electrical energy in quantities in two experimental power reactors and operate a commercial scale power reactor. The laser fusion program sponsored by ERDA is less developed than the magnetic fusion approach. Research is in the program to demonstrate a significant fusion burn and "scientific breakeven", which means that the energy yield is just equal to the energy input to initiate the reaction. Both laser and electron beams are being investigated. XI-E-24

Environmental Consideration: It appears to be far too early to ascertain the full range of environmental implications of fusion reactors, Similarities with fission reactors will exist, particularly with respect to radioactive wastes and waste heat rejection. Economic Considerations: Potential capital and operating costs of fusion power plant concepts have been estimated several sources*; however, the estimates are somewhat, speculative because the technology for satisfactory reactor design is still under development. Projections: Concentrated fusion power research has been in progress only six to eight years. Prior to that funding levels were too low to make substantial progress, owing to the high cost of the equipment needed. With the current program funding levels, substantial program is being made but it is not expected that fusion power will reach commercial status until after 2000.
c. TERRESTRIAL SOLAR POWER

1. Photovoltaics: When light energy falls on some crystalline semiconductors, it may excite the electrons to jump from the valence band to the conduction band of the substance. A result of this electron transfer is that the electrical resistance of the substance is changed proportionally, making it a good detector of the quantity of incident light. Used in this fashion, the semi-conductor is called a photocell. If the excited electrons are allowed to return to their original band by passing through a useful load, a small quantity of electrical power is generated and the semi-conductor is called a solar cell. The direct conversion of sunlight to electricity by use of solar cells is a very enticing alternative because of its pollution-free potential. However, the output of each cell is limited by the low energy of incident sunlight on its limited crystalline size and its low conversion efficiencies (8 to 15 per cent). The result is that for quantity electrical production, great numbers of solar cells must be coupled. The large solarpanel arrays used in the Space Program serve as the most conspicuous application of this. It is apparent that solar arrays can be located very near the electrical energy user, thereby minimizing distribution costs. However, the necessity of an electrical power storage system to provide for nighttime requirements or low sunlight periods becomes a greater factor with the smaller systems. This and the overall economy of scale suggest a central power station arrangement such as pictured in figure XI-E-10. In this representation, *1.) Robert G. Mills, Princeton University, IECEC 1974, paper no. 749076. 2.) R. W. Conn and Gerald L. Kulcinski, University of Wisconsin, Science Volume 193. 3.) Lawrence Radiation Laboratory, J.D. Lee, R.W. Werner, et. al., IECEC 1970 #709007. XI-E-25

Fiaure XI-E-10

Mile Terrestrial Solar Power Plant

XI-E-26

the solar cells are simply oriented on the southern slope of a hill. Cells within groups would be arranged in series to elevate the voltage to an economical distribution level and the groups paralleled in sufficient quantities to allow a reasonable load capability. Obviously, some form of energy storage is necessary for continous electrical production, but this requirement can be lessened if the solar system is coupled in a grid with more versatile generating stations. Utilization Forecasts: Although the photovoltaic phenomena was first reported in 1839, it wasn't until 1954 that practical conversion efficiencies (approaching 10 per cent) became available. The production of solar cells began in the United States in 1957 and until recently has been reduced from about $500/watt in 1958 to less than a tenth of that currently, the cost is still far from competitive for quantity terrestrial electrical energy production. Because the photovoltaic energy conversion technology is essentially in the research and development stage, it is difficult to predict a meaningful cost and utilization forecast for terrestrial use. Referencing Volume 2 of "A National Plan for Energy Research, Development and Demonstrations: Creating Energy Choices for the Future-1976" (ERDA 76-1), it is stated that the long-term goal of the program is "to make possible a solar photovoltaic capability in the private sector that may approach 50 GW peak by 2000 with a market price as low as $100 to $300 per peak kilowatt. " Technology Development: There is significant emphasis in Solar Photovoltaic Conversion (SPC) as indicated in the FY77 federal budget. Of the $290.4 million earmarked for solar energy development (which represents 18 per cent of the non-nuclear program's energy budget), $64 million is devoted to solar cell R&D according to the Congressional Record. Figure XI-E-11 shows the milestone chart in which ERDA projects technology development. Quoting from ERDA 76-1: "The central element of the strategy in this program is to lower the cost of collector arrays by a factor of 50 to 100 from present levels. This will be done through R&D on production of low-cost photovoltaic materials, large-area crystal growth, high volume sheet production, materials and techniques for array encapsulation, improved cell and array designs, and high-volume, cost-effective, automated assembly techniques. The experimental testing and demonstration of SPC systems will be based on applications that promise early cost effectiveness, wide user acceptance and significant market development by the private sector. Emphasis is initially on the use of single-crystal silicon because of the abundance of silicon and the availability of proven techniques for production of large single crystals. However, alternative techniques and materials such as gallium arsenide and cadmium sulfide, are also being developed. XI-E-27

ENERGY RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT ADMINISTRATION

PHOTOVOLTAIC ENERGY Fiscal year

1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 198S

PROGRAM ACTIVITY

1986

2000

BcYOND 2JOO

.
Systems Analysis and Assessment Advanced Research and Technoloyy Novel Materials
1-Ten Percpnt Efficiency 2 -$100 - $300A W Shown
0

A
V

VA
A

Si Material for Cell Production

1 Prorpss Defined 2 Pilot Plant

V V
\

V
7

I arge Area Silicon Sheet Production

1 Continuous Growth Demonstrated 2 Laige Area Growth Demonstrated 3-P'lot

Automated Array Assembly Task

1 Pioccss Defined 2 Pilot Plant

V
V

Test Facility
4 Construction/Fabrication

A
A

Subsystem Studies and Evaluation Demonstration Projects

1- DOD Applications 90kW 2-RLsiclentul Systems 75kW 3 Load Center Demonstrations (Up to 4 MW)

^7

Key to symbols \y * Significant /\ Fstim-,tPrl completion date o f p,ogram activity \/ j ' Slippage
Date of

-^- Continuing "v Completed activity

actlv

C Construction
start

R Research start
s

milestone* Administrative decision point

Studies start

information

D Demonsiration start

T Test start

Figure XI-E-11 XI-E-28

Assuming the success of the above stragety the following could occur: by FY83 pilot plants capable of producing in excess of 5 million m2/year of silicon sheet at a value-added cost of less than $18/mz; the establishment, by FY84, of plants capable of producing about 2,000 metric tons, of silicon materials at a market price of less than $10/kgm; and the establishment, by FY85, of plants capable of producing in excess of 500MW/year (peak) of encapsulated solar array modules at a market price of less than $500 per kW (peak)." Environmental Considerations: The most attractive advantage of the solar cell is its ability to convert an abundant and replenishable energy source (sunshine) into a highly usable energy form essentially pollution-free. During photovoltaic generation, no wastes are produced, no unusual safety problems arise, no radioactivity is released, and for most uses, no thermal problems are encountered other than those normally associated with darkened materials exposed to long periods of sunshine. For many small-scale applications, space used for solar collection may be used for other purposes as well, such as roofs and walls. The cental power station concept requires large areas, but their utilization could be limited to otherwise uneconomically problems are the problems of safety associated with possible means of energy storage such as batteries and fuel cells. Cost Projections: Several cost projection objectives of the current U. S. photovoltaic conversion programs have been mentioned earlier in this section. Some of the major milestones used in developing a comparative cost analysis are: o Reduction of solar array costs to $500 per peak kilowatt by 1985 with an annual production of 500 mW per year. o Combined costs of collectors and cells using concentration to be $250 per peak kilowatt. o Demonstration of thin-film array technology leading to array costs of $100-$300 per peak kilowatt. o Terrestrial environment lifetime of at least 20 years. Studies performed by the Jet Propulsion Laboratory for the NASA Office of Energy Problems show that using "the $0.50/W goal, the photovoltaic plant is 25 per cent to 60 per cent more expensive than the solar thermal plants as solar load factor goes from 0.3 to 0.70. Lower goals may be necessary before the photovoltaic plant is competitive with other ground solar approaches for central electric power." Comparative costs with other systems are covered more extensively in a concluding section to Alternate Systems. XI-E-29

2. Thermal Conversion: The central receiver arrangement or "power-tower" is the primary terrestrial solar concept examined for the large-scale conversion of solar energy into thermal and then to electrical energy. This concept is illustrated in figure XI-E-12 and consists of several major subsystems. A field of tracking mirrors (heliostats) reflect the collected solar energy onto a central receiver. This concentrated energy is transferred to a steam turbine-generator facility for electrical oower generation. The transfer medium is -returned to the receiver after cooling by use of a condensor-cooling-tower loop. A storage system may be integrated into the basic system to allow uninterrupted dispersion of electrical energy during periods when sunshine is unavailable. However, when the solar system is used in combination with another electrical power generation system such as hydroelectric, the need for a storage system may be minimifzed. Utilization Forecasts: The production of large quantities of electrical energy from direct solar energy is in an infant stage of development. Only one sizeable facility has been built (at Odeillo, France), and this has served as a worldwide solar laboratory for many years. Another project, scheduled for operation in 1978, is a 5 MW test facility under construction at Albuquerque, New Mexico. Until the development of the solar central receiver technology has substantial field testing for the variety of equipment options it offers, utilization forecasts are highly speculative. Technology Development: The central receiver concept requires no major breakthroughs; however, the program is dependent on new technology in order to become cost competitive in the production of electrical energy. Initially, major work on the concept was funded by NSF (National Science Foundation) grants, but several years ago, ERDA (Energy Research and Development Administration) assumed responsibility for the project and designated Sandia Laboratories of Livermore, California, as the technical manager. Under this guidance, three contract teams are working in parallel to develop preliminary designs of a 10 MW plant. A fourth major contractor is concentrating entirely on the heliostat subsystem. Research and development initially is centered on providing low-cost components. The three major subsystems that require substantial development are the collectors, the receiver and the storage facility. Figure XI-E-13 shows the 10 MW Pilot Plant Project Milestones and the initial results of the four study contracts available in mid-1977. Site selection for the 10 MW pilot occurred as scheduled in January 1977 and Barstow, California was chosen. Site preparation and construction on the 10 MW plant are expected to begin in mid-1978 and checkout two years later. Obviously, reports on the details of technological development should become available from the final Phase I report period through the remainder of the five year schedule. Figure XI-E-14 illustrates the long-range plans for Central Receiver and Test Facility Projects. This orderly technological development will allow accurate utilization forecasts within the decade. XI-E-30

E <a
W)

i.

1 o a.

CO

CC
4J

8 (U
E

<

evj i

a>
3 O1

XI-E-31

z o
to
3 -3

1
O 03 CT
_J

3 -1 "* z P
f

^
.:

0 CO O)

5 ,^ \
fO

; ^

j LU O. - o
H < J

10 s/

LL

LL

Z O

LU

to
3

H to >

^. '
!

o LU X
>

o -J
0-

t O

s
Q

(O CO

J2

i\

5sU . 1

en r-.
LL

H ^
1 LU tO
CO Q Q;

a CO
CO 0) O

S
LL 3

oc

<

Q Z

0
CO
CO Px

z:
CD
S

,
|_
0

en

03 CD

S 2

I Si
" o

|g
S

j^
i

*;

2 "i

]
3 ^ ) J J

f.

c/3 c/ a5
LO

CJ

Q >. 2*

gj ~
_ r-f

LL

LL

5? <

^ to
f
--^

ir
LU

1H<
^ CO

*J !
\n
Z

1?
3

-" >

Q d U v

' !o (

E g
2 J
0

<C h 1 f

Q.
4-<

_ra
L
4-1

Z O co
-3

ac

O>

i
s
LL -3 Q

cn * .j o

o Q_
LU ^LU

CC

= 11
. '

^ r~~
(O LU |_ ^0

^y

1 <= ''
*~ to

to
*S

LL

to a

LU

p s. < ;

? p <2 ^ S L| '< i M i '< fc. ir I c o

E <
JJ

i t

1
ro i

4
Q

^ & [
0 to
5 LU Q S
^-

i.

o
CO

z.

1
co
LU

to
3

to o

> n_
LL i

<

s3
'-

S
0 LU -1 S
LU

S 5 ;o sO)

<
_|

i i'^
LU QC

CO

LU ISJ -J

5^ Z ^J LL

to
CD

5
LL
3

a.
LO

LL

Q Z O
CO
-3

^
f

0 LU 0.

to

C)

XI-E-32

T3
DC *
^f

CN CO -0

^2

*-

<j N

S3
*""
CO O

"~i

>
*t 00

co o *
CO

ro oo ^ co > co
r-

a
a

^-

tt

CN

CN

en

f\i

m
tt

<
CN

""

</

cn

>
oo

ONS O PROJECT COMPLETION

CO

<u o" ct
^ o LU

en

* -

LU

cr>

2 .
lo ID ^ CM

a
CO

co en *en

" >LU

I
o <u DC
0]

f^
^ LU

"J5
0)

^^

A BEGIN OPERAT

O^
LD

z
to

^^

r*-

LU
H ;

>

LU 1 X OJ
O1)
^^

PROGRAM ELEMENT

c3 <t
, CO
h ^
.1. 1 J

cy?
^ _]
.., "^

fX+> -

^ ~^^. ..

1^1

CJ f\^ ^^^

*Z ^

<f i ^"-'

cu
Qj

<C

co ^

m
"CD (--.,. n_ -^ ^c5
-^ ~" Q_

-_ aj fv, "s: J;"TCD CD

Q-

v-

LI.J _cr ^"^ ^1

c5 ry *' uj ^ ^
CD CJ>

< ^
CD " ' 00

^ S
UJ ' C3 '

XI-rE-33

PROJECT INITIATION

*o" C/3 ^

Environmental Considerations; The land requirements of the solar central receiver concept are very substantial. The 10 MW pilot plant designs presented in the study contracts all require approximately 100 acres. Since commercial size conventional (fossil-fueled) plants frequently run greater than 1000 MW for economy of scale, it follows that much larger solar central receiver systems would be planned. Obviously, the solar "farms" would have to be located in good sunshine areas at remote (inexpensive land) sites from load centers. These requirements alone may be seriously restrictive. Another question that remains unanswered is what effect on local weather conditions will large fields of reflective surfaces produce? Hopefully, the long range test projects will be able to answer this. Cost Projections: Figure XI-E-15 shows the results of a comparative cost analysis on similar central receiver concepts by JSC and JPL. The major considerations for each analysis are presented and it can be seen that projected energy costs for plant startup in the year 2000 range between 123 and 193 mills/KWH. Obviously, cost projections for these systems are extremely "soft." The proposed system development will allow much more accurate estimates in a few years. d. GEOTHERMAL ENERGY: The distribution of thermal energy and temperatures beneath the earth's surface give rise to geothermal resources. The more widely known and accepted forms of geothermal energy, geysers, boiling pools of mud, fumaroles.and hot springs, are exploited to some extent. However, because the need for more energy has pushed exploration, which has exposed a rather extension resource, a great untapped energy potential exists. The evidence reveals a world-wide distribution of geothermal energy reservoirs beneath the earth's surface. There are three types of resources for geothermal energy; steam, hot water, and hot rock. The steam resource can be subdivided into two types: wet steam or dry steam which is the most desirable, in that with little pretreatment to remove corrosive materials, it can be directly piped to a turbine to produce electricity. Requirements for plant equipment are greatly reduced because there is no need for boilers, furnaces and storage tanks for fuel. A simple schematic of dry steam power plant is shown in figure XI-E-16. The problems associated with dry steam are mainly due to plant location. Usually dry steam fields are located in isolated, highly structural geological regions thereby making plant construction extremely difficult both from a material transportation standpoint, and from an installation viewpoint. Plants must be close to the steam source to prevent large losses in the piping and to reduce costs by requiring less piping. As of today explorations into geothermal resources have shown dry steam fields to be a rare phenomenon and have shown wet steam fields to be much more plentiful. Wetusteam fields outnumber dry steam fields by at least 20:1 and the prospects for the future are for this ratio to increase considerably. However, continued development of existing fields is expected. XI-E-34

Qi >"
CNJ

CM

CD

cvj CTl

2:

NX

O
LO

o on

o
c^-

a: ^i
CM

00

co i

CO

it

i o

VO CO

CM

oo

ex.
CM.W

o o t i
un
CO

r**
CO

_L.

a: LU

o
LO
r

1
CM

CO
. , ff. 31 LU

^^ r CM

~J. -*J ^j~ r~ f~~ i CM CM CM

CO (

CM CM
1 p^ LU O CD

CO

__ii
LU

0 .
h-

LO

,-

H- Z ii
LU

o
I
cC
LU V^

LO LU p^

>_ 1

>~ E 1

C.

^^ 1

o Q_
C

cy \x LU CJ 3 <C

O
LU 1 LU _J _l 0 LU U3 CJ Q^

CM

CJ CO

Q. I

o o:

z. o

CMjpCM E ^s^.

_J o

LU 13) > CO
ii
LU
.. .

LU -3CD II 1 LU

. **^ ~x
"T"

^^

a>
CM

; >
1H
^*)

^ i.
1

cj co
LU 1 rv* e3"
1

Z.

_i co
CO LU 0

C O h- <

!** i s
+4

cr
LU

A i cv ' i | .s: s

4J 4J ^-^ ^^^ ^1 ^
33 i^ ^
5 vij
CM

cv

LU
*""!

***^>
-> ~-

LU 1

CU c^

z.
LU

3:
NX

CO CM

*T 2T S = LU

I r
LO

01
^^^

5 v>
CM

'

0)

a:

Z, 1
LU LU

CJ 2C

LU 1 CO

o cj O Lu in en

O 1

CD 0
c~\

_^g

>^C.

<o
cr>

CO

LO U3 LO i LT> VO CM CM CO

O CO

OH O CJ LU

co
LU UJ

Q < O

I O LU Lu

D:

cc LU o

co o H_ co -D H- LU i cj a: LU Q: ir> co z a: o o o a: cj LU
M O

CJ Z li CJ

CO LU

o;

2: UJ 111 CD CD -=C cd* o: a: o

o CO
CO

i LU *~-* Lu i z . -
Q_

a: a: &s O O CO c ctz. r^ CtL CtL i 2: 2:

CD Lu >> LU et C3 CO

O -^

H- CJ . O Lu CO Qi
LU Z. Lu

o
CM 0 CO

C O LU

a: t-i LU co

co

O H-

O =

Q_ LU CJ LU

o a.
CM

o a. o

>CD LU LU

co

O 2 OO Lu CO O Lu Z |
LU

> O z, Qi O _i o: I-H a. LU -, CD 2: cj -o LU
C.

e CJ CJ II LU

> Q: CD o t CJ o ii CO
I I

o co
LO

a. a: >- i I a

XI-E-35

0 e

o ^ "T~ L.
oo a:
^ ^*^

S 3;
00

Oh-

co

i <^ r tJ _J

LUOO

*
1

0)

Q.

2
^^

<u g
N^

ZaS
l-HO "~"'

^^

O^ *-*>

LO

LO l

OJ

r^ o%

00

vo LO t^ ^

t~

^^ f
ro
^

V*

fee^

^l ^

_l

Q. 0

3: 1 i ce LU -^ o

LU

OL
O 1 C CO " O CO T3 O> 3
*^^ OO

CCL

CJ LU

1
; l

o o
LO LU I

o
OJ
~qg X/ *^^

a.
CJ

a: o
CO

^^ r^*

CM

o o

OJ

o o o - o r^ CO
r-

^^

"^^*

^^

lI X

o
CT>

Q)

OJ

00

1
CJ 1t

ro

'

CO LU

or as LU l

f>

>- oo

-1

</)

oo

UJ X

O
KH

Z CJ LU CD 1 Z CJ i l LU 0Q CJ 21 ti
(/^

*0
LO
f%.

^^

~
t

H~ ^^^

2
Ll_ KH

o\
3:

"~

ai

^ ^
_l 1 ii

LO

CD LU r- CD et

* O CC. Z 0 Z LU CD O hf Z 00 ^^ * O^ 1 O LU 00 CO _l Z Z

oo

<^.

1 > o
Q. *~3

0 LU

i
CO Z 0
H H 1 %

LU CJ

a. t-i<C
et I

Z 1

^~> "^ "

a: co
O

i cj
LU C.

(y LtLU Z 3 >- 0 Q 1 ^

^-' ' ' '

~^

LO

x^^
O rLU I

1 0 00 1 O CO

a:

c2

LU

<_>
\

CO 1 CO

. ,

r*st <T> r-

_i i
3
1
H-1

O o

to
^~

o <t
1

^^
1

<r j_:

>CD LU

1_

3: u_ S h- 0 <c co o a: LU S. <~> O = Q- >c i i i 1 <^^ i 1 i i Z 1 1 i i

>i I QX <C 1

^^ f LU et r^J l

*^

LU o ca;i r^ f~\
OJ

Oi 1 LU l1

O LU 00 C9

vo ^j*

3 C

o:
LU

O. CJ

c o o

CO

CT>

XI-E-36

o: LU

o I <

:E co
LU

LU

a* jLU

\-

co
CO

LU I CO

XI-E-37

A wet steam field is an underground reservoir of hot water under pressure. Temperatures of the water are above 100C or the boiling point at atmospheric pressure, but the pressures at the hot water's depths prevent it from changing into steam. The field is encased in impervious rock. Upon the opening of a fissure or well into the reservoir, the pressure can be released thus allowing the hot water to rise effecting a mixture of steam and water at temperatures ranging from 180 to 370 degrees Celsius. This mixture is composed of 10 to 20 percent steam and hot water. A wet steam well can produce quantities of steam comparable to a dry steam well, but along with the steam, water is produced which is usually 2 to 3 times as heavy as the steam. Therefore, the utilization of a wet steam field is quite different than that of a dry steam field. The operation of a wet steam plant requires centrifugal separators to separate the water from the steam before it passes on to the steam turbines to produce electricity. Figure XI-E-17 gives a schematic of a wet steam power plant. Another type of geothermal resource is the hot-water system. Not to be confused with the hot water derived from the wet-steam system, this form is sometimes called a low temperature field. Water temperatures are usually below the boiling point at atmospheric pressure ranging from 50C to ?n upper limit of 125C. At these relatively low temperatures, steam cannot be flashed to run a turbine. Therefore, the use of secondary fluids has created interest as a viable alternative to flashing steam. The hot water passes through a heat exchanger and transfers its heat to a liquid such as Freon, Isobutane, Isopentane, etc., which in turn runs the power plant. Figure XI-E-18 is a powerplant which runs on a hot-water-secondary fluid cycle. It is predicted that a minimal amount of technology advancement is needed to make this resource a viable electrical production system. In exploring geothermal resources the evidence has shown the world to possess numerous hot spots without the availability of natural steam and/or hot water. In fact, it is estimated that between 50 and 90 percent of the energy source of the geothermal reservoir is in hot rock of the earth and not in water and steam. Hot dry rocks which are impermeable are a source of geothermal energy with heat great enough to generate electricity. The mere drilling of a well is not sufficient to gather the necessary heat in the quantities needed for electricity production. The reason: the low conductivity of rock does not allow the heat transfer to the surface to be as rapid as necessary. The answer is to effect a larger surface area of rock exposed and to pump water into the well to "capture" this heat. There are presently two general concepts for creating reservoirs in the hot rock. First, cavities can be blown out with either conventional or nuclear explosives. Water would then be pumped into the cavity, circulated and withdrawn to run a power plant similar to those discussed above. XI-E-38

I <
CtL

1
\

\
\

<

<*
LU
3:

LU

Z ' LU O i
i

0 H-

i
H ^

s:
LU X
W

C ^

o: ^ w 2:
LU Q ^

O
J

Lx

o
k

^:
LU
h<S) \

^
^x

O 0

, fe^. ^^

01 LU

x
OJ

i-

1/5

\
\

Ul

o;

^* M

o
X

uy *-

LU I-

XI-E-39

X CO

5: LU
h-

co

CO Q
tl

I D

a:
z O
LU CO

o:

XI-E-40

Quantities of heat gathered in this manner are questioned as to being sufficient to warrant their economic feasibility. Another problem associated with this method is the uncertainty of the underground blasts and their affect on geology of the country. Seismic waves can and do cause shifting of geological formation effecting earth tremors and other activity. Second, the generally accepted proposal in which there has been much interest is the idea of creating an underground reservoir by producing a crack system and circulating water through the cracks causing it to come in contact with a larger surface area of hot rock. Theories for crack creation have included explosives. However, experimentation is being conducted with a method called hydrofracturing. This is a method of cracking hard rocks such as granite through the use of high pressure water. Figure XI-E-19 depicts a power plant which utilizes a crack system in the hot rock with water circulated so that heat is brought to the surface to use in power production. At the present time, the total installed generating capacity of the world utilizing geothermal energy is less than 1000 MW . About 200 MW of the total is in the United States. However, estimates of the geothermal resources of the U. S. vary widely. One estimate predicts that, using present economics and technology, resources are available to support 5000 to 10,000 MW installed capacity for 50 years. Another estimate states that, with increased power costs and successful development and application of technology for recovering thermal energy, steam and hot water resources are available to support 13,000,000 MW installed capacity and hot rock resources could support another 60,000;000 MW installed capacity within the U. S. An estimate of a reasonable contribution of geothermal energy to national electrical power generation is: 1.) 1 to 2* of the national total of 1,000,000 MW installed capacity by 1985; 2.) 25% of the 480,000 MW installed capacity for the western part of the U. S. by 2000; and 3.) 12:5% of the national total of 2,000,000 MW installed capacity by 2000. Table XI-E-4 summarizes the present technology status of geothermal resources power production systems. Some problems exist with development of the geothermal resource which will be solved as the technology advances and the economics improve. Environmental problems are generally less severe than fossil fuel and nuclear powered power production facilities but include areas such as gaseous pollutants, volatile substances, thermal pollution, high water volume, dissolved minerals, and acoustic pollution. Other problems area to be solved include resource location and evaluation (similar to oil and natural gas but less well understood), drilling technology (high temperature, hot fluids, incompetent formations, large flows of corrosive fluids), corrosion/scaling/ plugging, and unknown affects on geology by creating hot rock reservoirs. Cost projections for geothermal energy electric power generation are not based on a large data base but are very competitive with other conventional power generation costs. Based on cost data from "The Geysers" in California, the cost, in 1975 dollars, for power production facilities capital XI-E-41

s:
LU CO >CO

ct:
CO

CT>

c:

LLJ a:

o o on

OLU

CO

o o

XI-E-42

CD CL
CD

X
CD OO 2 CD CD

LU I

X
GO LU

OO LU CD LU CD OO 00
.^" J"

CD I

s ;
I

oO OO ii_ CD

CD

=c
CD OO LU

=3: i OO >CD
CD

I
<C

00
LU

5 jr
oo
^3 CD C-> Q^ LU 0 0 LU

oo
OO

S:
LU C_>

O
CJ LU

LU
OO

<C 00 LU

a LU

CZL
Q_

CD 00

LU

Ci

OO LU Di Q_

CD OO LU

c: .

rt_

1 CD

XI-E-43

investment is $162/KW. The operating cost is 0.37 Mills/KWH and the total cost for power is 7 Mills/KWH. Other projections, for all types of geothermal resource utilization, indicate a total cost of approximately 20 Mills/KWH. e. OCEAN THERMAL ENERGY CONVERSION (OTEC): Using the solar energy collected by the world's oceans has attracted interest since the late nineteenth century. In 1881, a publication suggested the possibility of constructing a steam power generator that made use of the temperature difference between the surface water and the deep water in tropical seas. A prototype ocean power plant, based on an "open-cycle" in which the sea water itself provided the working fluid for the turbines, was actually operated in the late 1920's. This plant was not a commercial success because of equipment failures and technical difficulties. However, greater interest has been generated recently because it is believed that the equipment and technical problems will be solved by modern technology, and escalating costs of conventional power generation are making the OTEC plant look more economically advantageous. There are two distinct OTEC plant types with respect to site selections: the shore-based system and the ocean-based system. Either system can be an "open-cycle" (uses sea water as the working fluid) or a "closed-cycle" (uses a secondary fluid such as ammonia as the working fluid) concept. The "closed-cycle" ocean-based concept has received more attention recently because of the versatility of location. A shorebased system would be limited because of availability of sufficient neartropical land areas to install the number of plants needed to significantly affect the country's electrical energy needs. Therefore, the following description and discussion will deal with only the "closed-cycle" oceanbased concept. A 9-month study of the practicality of this type of plant was conducted by the Lockheed Missiles and Space Company, Inc., for the National Science Foundation Research Applied to National Needs (RANN) program. The Lockheed baseline design concept (figure XI-E-20) consists of a stable, semi submerged, spar-type platform that can be sited either in the deep ocean or in coastal waters such as the gulf stream. The concept would utilize a mooring system capable of use in water depths of 2500 to 20,000 feet and would consist of a series of pin-connected pipe lengths, designed for minimal current drag, and a single gravity anchor point. The concept employs a central platform through which the water (both warm and cold) is delivered to four removable 60-MW (gross) power plant modules. Each of these four power modules is a completely independent, self-contained power plant consisting of evaporating and condensing heat exchnagers, turbines, generators, condensate pumps, and pumps to circulate warm and cold sea water. The design is such that the power modules can be removed for maintenance and/or periodic replacement. A cold-water pipe extends downward from the central platform to the 1500-ft. water depth. The mean temperature differential between the surface water and the water at the 1500-ft. depth is 34F. This is the temperature differential which sized the equipment in the Lockheed baseline design concept. Environmentally speaking, this type plant cannot be compared to fossil-fuel, nuclear, and geothermal systems; because, it does not add heat XI-E-44

60 FT

WATER SURFACE

100 FT ' -TT r&a* 0

..... ~3 '

430 FT

> - PLATFORM

1500 FT

>-COLD-WATER PIPE

\ \
MOORING LINE

ANCHOR

FIGURE XI-F-20:

OCEAN THERMAL ENERGY CONVERSION CONCEPTUAL PLANT XI-E-45

to the ecosphcrc, its waste product is simply the discharge of unpolluted sea water at near-ambient temperature and isothermal depths, and the materials used are compatible with the ocean environment. The only possible hazards that have been identified are the possibility of developing a leak in the ammonia working fluid system and the danger of collision of ships with the platform. A leak detection system'for the" ammonia system has been designed into the Lockheed baseline; however, ammonia mixing with the sea water would not be detrimental because it will be biologically assimilated. The collision danger is always a problem with shipping. The baseline platform has been designed to be submerged to a depth which will clear all foreseen ships with only a non-critical section extending above water for servicing and personnel entry. The net power output of a plant like the baseline design is 187 MW's. The production cost of the plant is estimated to be $1,350/KW and the unit cost will be 34.0 Mills/KWH. With improvements in technology in the areas of heat exchangers and sea water pumping, the expected unit cost for multiple units will be 23 Mills/KWH. This value is equivalent to power production with oil, at a 10% cost of capital, of $8.00/barrel. The principal attraction to this method of using solar energy is that there exists a renewable "free fuel" (the ocean is a vast natural collection and storage system) which is available with minimal regard to seasonal and diurnal cycles or weather conditions. The disadvantages of this type of system are: siting significant numbers of the plants reasonably close to land areas, transmission of the generated power, energy conversion efficiencies of approximately 4%, and large water volume movement. Current plants within ERDA call for a prototype plant construction in the early 1980's. f. WIND ENERGY: Wind energy conversion systems (WECS) generally fall into two categories, vertical axis wind turbines (VAWT) and horizontal axis wind turbines (HAWT). The fairly common sights of horizontal axis systems on farms in the country are taken for granted as they pump water for livestock or generate small amounts of electricity in remote regions. An even more common sight, especially in earlier years in Scandanavian countries, were the centuries-old windmills used primarily to pump seawater from lowlands. As a result, the HAWT is further advanced and currently receives a major portion of the WECS budget for possible large-scale electrical energy production. Several advantages unique to VAWT (i.e. non-directional, vertical axis allows power generation equipment at ground level) however, encourages continued development of these systems. The major emphasis on VAWT is being performed by Sandia Laboratories and is centered on Savoniustype rotors, figure XI-E-21 and Darrieus-type rotors, figure XI-E-22. Utilization Forecasts: Work on VAWT has progressed as far as current construction of a 17 meter, three-bladed Darrieus rotor and turbine XI-E-46

S-

LU I II X Ol

s-

> to

XI-E-47

Three-blade Darrieus Rotor & Turbine Figure XI-E-22 XI-E-48

test model by Sandia Laboratories and Kaman Aerospace Corporation. Utilization forecasts, obviously, would be extremely premature on all VAWT systems until more experience is gained from the current program. The HAWT program headed by NASA Lewis Research Center (with major contracts to Kaman Aerospace Corporation and General Electric) is much more projectable. A series of demonstration projects have been initiated with the completion of a 125 foot diameter, 100 KW generator system (figure XI-E-23) in 1975. Two additional units capable of 200 KW each are projected for 1977. In 1978, a 200 foot diameter, 1500 KW is planned as the first cost competitive project followed by a 300 foot diameter, 1000 KW unit for low average velocity wind regions. The plan emphasizes grid interface problems as well as technical performance optimization. Concurrently, some site selection activity is underway although remote area meterological data is lacking. Most available wind data must be extrapolated from low level (30 feet above ground level has been the general weather station height) to more suitable heights and out of the effect of ground disturbances (figure XI-E-24). Since the power output of HAWT systems is proportional not only to the square of the blade diameter, but also to the cube of the wind velocity, accurate assessment of the velocity profiles is essential. Therefore, good estimates in the extensiveness, availability, and accessibility of desirable WECS sites are dependent on a comprehensive survey. This coupled with operational data expected in the next few years will allow very accurate utilization forecasts.
/

Technology Development: Indicated earlier is the chronological development of HAWT to an expected competitive level. Performance results of the initial unit, (125'0, 100KW) are expected in 1977. Major technical problems uncovered in initial testing include the larger than expected blade bending moments caused by tower blockage, exceedingly high labor costs associated with acceptable tower construction and fabrication problems concerning large rotor blades. Environmental Considerations: The impact of large WECS dotting the countryside is being considered in the on-going LeRC programs. Not only are the effects of the rotor in downstream winds being determined to establish spacing on "WECS farms," but also aesthetics, the effects on local television reception, the impact of blade noise levels, and the addition of numerous aircraft hazards are part of the studies. Cost Projections: Initial cost estimates by Kaman and General Electric in independent parametric studies showed a large dispersion in results. The differences were sufficiently resolved so that figure XI-E-25 was presented in preliminary reports as a basis for cost estimates. Using this cost data and other assumptions listed in table XI-E-5, an annual energy cost of 32.8 mils/kwh for 1975 was established. This is high by current energy costs, but apparently competitive in the near future. XI-E-49

100 KW WIND TURBINE Figure XI-E-23

XI-E-50

CM UJ I
h4

ef. CCL 01

O)

s-

3 O

I o

XI-E-51

OPTIMIZED MACHINES 500 kW MACHINE OPTIMIZED FOR 12 MPH SITE 1500 kW MACHINE OPT I Ml ZED FOR 18 MPH SITE

8
o in

10

12

14 16 18 MEAN WIND SPEED, MPH

20

22

Effect of siting-12 and 18 mph optimized machines located in various wind regimes.

Figure XI-E-25

XI-E-52

OO CD

CD UJ CU

oz - az
|.> s~
C-J CL.

U_ CD

CD

ZC

=2

CO <_) LU

>-

C =:

LH i I 00 UJ

or CD Q_ u_ ir:
I

> CD 0_

CD or Q_ 0 0

CO LO I [.< ^ C

--t- CD r~>
Q_ iI

c5 j 00
^3

i I CD

D_

X
LU U_ CD CO

or oo a CD LU LU u_ i or <=c z^
(=3 SI CO LU <C
hJ I

CD OO CD I UJ OO OO

=^

LT)

OO CD CO

UJ

CD

<_> CD
CNi
LU

a>
-Q

to

LU CD <_> OO

0 S 0 ^
CD Q_ I I CD LTV SI D_ CO h^ CD CD OO ( > ii OO CD UJ CD t^ "^ UJ UJ GO CO

ct: c_
"

CD

- CO CD I >CD CD 0^ GO CD

c_i r>

or

oo

GO I

II

ce:

UJ

I or >- cr? or CD >i CD cf or <c

GO I LU LU _J
t_J ^Z. HZ

! II

2i n
2C. CD

CL.

<=r LU LU &I C_>

0 0 CD c_> CD LU OJ I <C CXJ LU

CD
Q_

OO CD C_> ZD

a_ Hsz oo
OO CD

<_> I <

LO LU a .i i =c

oo
CO

o o o o o

O
LU Q_

O O O

<c

XI-E-53

9- OIL SHALE: Oil shale has long been known as a potential source of energy.A U. S. oil shale industry would probably have developed in the late 1800's and early 1900's had it not been for the discovery of large oil fields in Texas and elsewhere. The problem in the U. S. has been one of economics rather than purely technological. In some countries where crude oil has been scarce and expensive for years, oil shale has been commercially mineral and processed into liquid fuels. According to reference 2, the first commercial processing occurred in France in 1838; production continued there and in Scotland and South Africa until the early 1960's. Currently, oil shale is commercially processed in China, Sweden, and Spain; raw oil shale is being burned to fire electrical power plants in Estonia and the Federal Republic of Germany. As the demand for liquid fuels increase and with interest in becoming domestically self-sufficient, it is expected that oil shale development will receive increased support. Figure XI-E-26 shows the locations of the major oil shale deposits in the U. S. It is estimated that 90 percent of the identified resources are located in the Green River formation in Colorado, Utah, and Wyoming. A detail discussion of the technology, environmental considerations, economics, and utilization projection of oil shale is beyond the scope of this report. However, with respect to projections, it is estimated that the total U. S. oil shale identified resources is about 1000 billions of barrels of oil.* On an energy basis, this exceeds the identified coal resources and therefore, a very significant domestic energy resource. Projections: It is generally believed that oil shale development will continue to be pursued. However, to become a major energy source, numerous large scale processing plants must be developed and put into operation. Possible limitations are: lack of large water supply at the ore locations; and environmental consideration of large quantities of residual materials from the processing plants. Nevertheless, it is expected that three to six percent of the power generators in 2000 may be oil shale-derived fuel. h. BYCONVERSION: One approach to utilization of solar energy is to use the process of byconversion as a source of fuel. Byconversion may be used at several levels of sophistication: (1) photochemical reactions, (2) chemical changes to produce fuel, and (3) use plant material as fuel. The highest level of sophistication is the photochemical reactions which are often aided by catalysts and used for the direct production of a fuel. Some investigators are searching for ways to accomplish the production of hydrogen by this process. *1974 World Energy Conference (PIC report)
XI-E-54

C1

CL> O

cc.
ItJ

c
U->

=>
M-

tS>

<s>

1C 5

r>
r-

n3

c
O

O)

cvj i
UJ

<u s-

XI-E-55

In the next level, organic materials, either freshly grown or waste products, are changed chemically to produce liquid or gaseous fuels. At present, the best processes for producing these chemical changes are: (1.) Pyrplysis - High temperatures are used in the absence-.of oxygen to break the chemical bonds of organic materials and release methane, hydrogen, and various liquids, (2.) Anaerobic Digestion - The use of bacteria in the absence of oxygen to break down the carbohydrates from plant and animal materials to yield methane, carbon dioxide, and other gases. (3.) Fermentation - The enzymatic decomposition of sugar molecules into alcohol"^ These processes have been designed into pilot plants in several areas of the country primarily for the reduction of waste products. In 1971, the estimated amount of dry, ash-free organic solid wastes produced in the United States which could be considered collectable was 136 million tons. This is about 15.5 per cent of the total generated. This amounts to a net oil potential of 170 million barrels. An example of the costs for these processes is the present cost of producing methane by anaerobic digestion which is approximately $4.00/MBTU. It is forecast that this cost can be reduced to $1.00/MBTU. However, the technologies must be improved to solve present problems to meet this forecast. The simplest concept is to grow plant materials, dry them and use them for fuel. This concept employs what is called "Energy Plantations" which are areas planted in crops specifically optimized for yield of plant material. It is believed that Energy Plantations are feasible anywhere in the United States where precipitation is 20 inches or more per year, the soil is a few feet deep and the terrain is not too steep for field machinery. Some areas would be conducive to annual crops such as varieties of sugarcane, sorghum, and prairie grasses. In other areas of the country, various tree species such as hybrid poplar and red alder could be grown in dense plantings on short harvest cycles. Sustained annual yields from these plantations would be between 5 and 15 tons of dry plant material per acre per year. On this basis, the crop from one square mile will be adequate to support the fuel requirements of between one and three megawatts of electric generating capacity at the average thermal efficiency and load factor of public utility thermal electric generating stations in the United States. The cost of the solid fuel produced, chipped or chopped, and loaded for transportation out of the plantation, including profit and costs associated with owning the plantation land, will be between about 90 cents and $1.30 per million BTU. In order to minimize the freight cost of the fuel and the freight cost of returning the ash to the plantation as fertilizer for qrowing subsequent crops, it would be advantageous to have the power station centrally located in the plantation. It is believed that the Energy Plantation concept will not require land suitable for dirt farming or tree farming XI-E-56

C-13

because of the ground requirements

postulated.

Considering the state-of-the-art and assuming the required incentives, a realistic assessment of the U. S, energy potential from byconversion is approximately 3 per cent of the total U. S. energy demand. The byconversion processes are still in early stages of development and require considerable research and development to realize their potential for producing usable fuel supplies.

XI-E-57

XI. COMPARISONS WITH ALTERNATE SYSTEMS F. COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS

The previous sections of this report have provided discussions of the various conventional and advanced technology power systems and their projected future utilization. This section provides a synthesis of the descriptive and characteristic information on each system, including the SPS. The objectives are to provide perspective among the various power system alternatives and to summarize the advantages and limitations of the SPS concept relative to alternative systems. The approach utilized was to develop comparative data for each system sized at 5 GW plant capacity. This capacity was selected because it is the reference capacity of one SPS rectenna. It was not necessary that unit capacity be 5 GW . . . the 5 GW capacity could be obtained by multiple units of smaller capacity. It was also assumed that the various power system technologies could be made available by the 1995-2000 time frame. It is realized that there is uncertainty at present regarding the future of fusion power, the liquid metal fast breeder reactor (LMFBR), and oil shale development. For purposes of comparisons, these were assumed to be viable candidates for the future since there is no firm technical basis for-excluding them at present. Bioconversion was excluded from final system comparisons due to lack of data relative to large scale power generation capability. The comparison factors utilized were technological status, costs, and environmental considerations. Technological considerations included current (1976) status economic size, expected commercial data, key problems, and potential or anticipated electrical energy production in the year 2000. Technology status in 1976 was expressed in terms of proven demonstration in progress, laboratory, or conceptual. Cost data was determined in terms of capital cost, fuel cost (as applicable), and operation and maintenance costs. This data was summarized in terms of power generation costs (mills/kwh) using 30 year lifetime and 15 percent rate of return on investment in each case. The plant factor used in cost calculations varied from system to system based on their design/ operation characteristics. Environmental comparison data was developed in terms of land use, water consumption (cooling and process), air pollution, waste storage/ disposal quantities, and other factors as applicable. In addition to the above comparisons, more detailed comparisons were made between SPS and terrestrial solar electric power in terms of design concepts, costs, and power transmission considerations. A review and assessment of the material presented in this chapter was made by Stanford University XI-F-1

under contract to JSC. A brief summary of their report is presented in XI-G below. Technological Status Table XI-F-1 presents a summary of the technological status of the power system alternatives. Most of the data is self-explanatory except economic size and potential/anticipated contribution in the year 2000. Economic size (expressed in megawatts) is the minimum plant capacity that results in lowest overall power generation cost. This size may be dictated by the largest capacity component (e.g., steam turbine, generator) available or transportable. The value given for SPS (5000 Mw) is based on very preliminary system sizing studies, primarily related to microwave transmission considerations. The potential anticipated contribution column of Table XI-F-1 is the percentage of the year 2000 electrical energy demand (kilowatts) that could be supplied by the given source. The year 2000 demand utilized to determine the percentages was 10 X 10^2 (^h from the projected Federal Power Commission data previously discussed. The general conclusion to be drawn from Table XI-F-2 is that no single electrical power source will be utilized to the exclusion of other sources. Coal and nuclear (LWR) energy are proven technologies and they will produce almost 75 percent of the nation's electrical energy in 2000. Another significant point is that less than 5 to 6 percent of the total electrical energy will be generated by renewable energy sources, even after the 23 years of development between now and 2000. The 5 to 6 percent does not include SPS, which could provide another approximately 6 percent in 2000 if implemented per JSC scenario "B" (see section III.) Cost Comparisons Figure XI-F-1 shows a summary comparison of the cost of electricity for the various alternatives investigated. The solid line represents the range of actual and estimated costs at the busbar (transmission and distribution costs not included) expressed in 1976 dollars. The actual costs are, of course, associated with the conventional systems (natural gas, oil, coal, nuclear LWR, hydro). In the case of the advanced systems, the costs were derived from available sources that tend to be advocates of the particular technology. Therefore, to some extent the low-end of cost ranges probably reflect considerable optimism with respect to realizable costs. No attempt was made to "adjust" the figures through critical analysis because of the difficulty in obtaining of the required detailed cost parameters utilized by the individual sources. The lower horizontal line marked "Year 1976" is the upper limit of the average coal-fired power generation (26 mills/kwh) and it probably represents the upper limit of the 1976 competitive range. The fuel cost portion of the 26 mills/kwh is 11 mills/kwh, which corresponds to $1.10 per million BTU or $22/ton coal. In some parts of the country, coal costs up to $35/ton in large quantities.
XI-F-2

o
CX -CD ^ CCNJ 0 0

CO 0 QJ fO

-S CD rtJ o
rs. o

< -O >i c: c: .*-> O QJ c uo o tW QJ o cx

Ij fe C 3 QJ

oo o
r-.

3
1 0 0 4- OJ

QJ

o c

vo

in

oo

o o

4-t

o
CJ

in o
4-*

\o

Cc

en c cn O
UJ CD
*/>

en c
M wi
4-* C

en 4J c c
- Q> .
irt O

<^i/i

cn 01 t- c c: o
QJ4J

c
>* Q)

cn

^o
*-*

4-*

^"c

4-*QJ

CX QJ

g "0.

!
CJ QJ CJ QJ

c: <o

*-

*/ 3 QJ U* C
O-r-

*-> C

QJ t CX E O rr~ QJ QJ *>

C QJ C 0

cn cn -^ j= o

cx

u c
0
4-* U QJ

CX

*-

Jt

SE
cs
5 i

J=

| 5? 'cx
U CX

cx tn
QJ

'cx ex </t
QJ

. 3 C *

CX CX 3

ex cx
(/)

o
?5
O f

en tn 01 .
" >^
*c/>

W 4- <U tl -M "^ -

c: c cno c f . O

a
g U

5
c c
0 0

** o -

gc

t/i cr i- o

cn co
rC U*

L.
QJ
4-

ra

>t a

m
CJ

m ^
CJ

i?S ** cx O
CO

4- cn O O

U 0 1 4~>

^~ f C

cn *-

-*

0) 0
l/>

u tn 5 cr
QJ O CO

en u o c ^o o .c ^~
(J

QJ S

1.

c: * o iw
C

4-* QJ o
QJ ^

QJ O 1 E CX

i 3 _c O QJ

cn </> "O

u.

u.

Z en

1C

J z ^j
UJ

oo en
"O * CJ O 4- t. QJ CX B X O

en en
4-*

in cn
CJ O

X
X

Q.

c QJ in v.

CX,

c QJ ct i.

O 4-

o
M

cr ut 01 cx i v* X QJ a

1A 0

cn cn
r

cn c QJ tn

~
,

S en

en

in QJ (. o.

QJ

in oo cn

tQJ

O 4-*

CO CO

**

in g ^

^ UJ

QJ L. Q_

in

in cn n

Z-

CO

c
C QJ
O
I I N

S S \o
\O vo

..-X. O trt

UJ I/I

f O -O 4J

tn c

vo

8
CO

CD CD

in

g
in

.*

Csj

U)

o m

i 1

wT
4-*

C O

t/7fll en o *
13 fO X B .OJ O *
O
4- rt)

c o
r>x : u.

c o
(O jC

c r*. u.
*J OJ

4-* r*.

4-* C R9

o -M"

>>

O L. 1

>

r**

c
o
f

r-.
3^
rt
4-* CX QJ O C O CJ

4-*

C */> U JC O V> O O " QJ *-

c Q) o L, a.

c: at o 1_ a.

C\J

c QJ >
0

4-

U_

u
QJro

U CX O S- O J3 CX

cx

t, u.
CD

d o

is

O VO

o_

dj

QJ v ^

i_

cm

e >o a.

3 CLCJ Q; U CO C ^ O O
*-

O 1_ 4- U Ql ^ > QJ fO

o <*- "^
QJ O tO

Jrf *o cx

(A en

*" S
4-* r- (J

t. J r <O VI

u cn
QJ JC 4- O QJ C9 QJ

r E t JZ

C 3 u L. O

QJ

V*

n> cn

" CD

c o - ce. vi -* u.

0 OC

o on *- u. u.

C O
Vf

as

O 0

u.

U .

TO C 3 O (C3

to
cn c 3c

QJ c QJ
LJ

CX,

QJ in

CO

a.

XI-F-3

fMIM

a. to

ro p <u E

O CJ

miiiiiimii

BK3
-a ra c
jftlilti

-a c

IIUU
o <u O

ifimninimnnimiiimmiimi
iimfffEtffuiuiimi
FBR
to o

u nun

s* 13

a>

05

0) CJJ

o o o

-a

o a.
I CE
to _l
Ll_ I
HH

I
i

i '

CM

Hill

iiumitiii
IIIIIIIIIIIII

O)

g =g S
0

o oo

o *-* nj QJ , o>

53

o >- -

a>

Illl llll

S3

minium
O

B3

|O

ILTV

,o
_ .
CM

CM

ir>

10 jo

in

MMVSIIIUJ ^

XI-F-4

The dashed vertical bars shown in figure XI-F-1 represent the year 2000 cost of electricity for the various alternatives. The projections were obtained by applying the following inflation factors to the 1976 costs: General inflation 4 percent compounded annually Fuel cost portion of fuel-using systems. . . .6 percent compounded annually With the above inflation applied, the year 2000 upper-limit cost of electricity for coal-fired systems increases to about 82 mills/kwh. Note that the hydroelectric, wind and geothernal power are very low cost in comparison with the other systems. These systems do not use fuel and;therefore, are not subject to the differential inflation assumed. Also, the geothermal costs are based on optimistic development of geothermal resources. The existing geothermal geyser power plants (northern California) have low power production costs, which probably biase the geothermal cost estimates to the low side. Hydroelectric power is generally low-cost power where available because (a) there is no fuel charge, (b) capital is relatively high, but is written-off over very long plant lifetimes and (c) maintenance costs are relatively low. The wind power estimates are based on operation in the "fuel saver" mode in conjunction with some other type of power plant in order to provide continuous service. No storage is used; therefore, the system is not a baseload plant. The ground solar electric systems shown are for thermal and photovoltaic conversion concepts derived by JSC for purposes of cost comparison. This was necessary because no complete system cost could be found in the literature. The concepts are, however, based on subsystem technology currently under development. The thermal system utilizes a "power tower" concept with a combination fuel cell-electrolysis cell energy storage system to provide baseload capability. The energy is stored in the form of cryogenic hydrogen (60 hours capacity). The photovoltaic system utilizes the same type of storage system and its capital cost assumes the use of $300 per peak kilowatt solar cells. The plant site location assumed was southwestern United States with an average annual in solution of 2500 kwh/nr total (direct and diffuse). The solar thermal concept was based on 2641 kwh/nr year direct. The year 2000 startup SPS cost range, based on the above inflation factor, is 74 to 294 mills/kwh. The lower range is comparable (actually less than) the coal system cost in 2000 and it is competitive with nuclear (LWR and LMFBR). In its higher estimated cost range, SPS is comparable to nuclear fusion, terrestrial solar electric, and ocean thermal. Figure XI-F-2 is shown to illustrate the effect of fuel cost on cost of electricity for coal, nuclear and oil-fired systems. The cost curves shown do not include inflation. The nominal, maximum, and minimum SPS XI-F-5

03
O

O
CM

I U_ I tI X

O u
"ci 3

O) S3

U.

i|MVs!lIUJ

jo

XI-F-6

generation costs are shown for reference and, as indicated, they would be independent of fuel costs. Environmental Considerations Table XI-F-2 shows a comparison of the power system alternatives in terms of the environmental factors of land use, water consumption, air pollution (with abatement), waste storage/disposal requirements, and other factors. The values shown are for a 5000 Mw (5 Gw) power plant capacity. The range of land use for the natural gas, oil, coal, and nuclear systems reflects differences in cooling requirements primarily. The larger land requirement is associated with a system that uses a dedicated cooling pond (or lake) for waste heat rejection. The land use factor includes the steady-state land requirements for sufface mining operations, accounting for a 10 year reclamation cycle. The land requirement for wind power is based on an approximation of 40 Mw per square mile in the midwest (ref. 2). The land requirement for SPS is based on a 10km times 14 km rectenna for a 5 Gw output. The water consumption values are for cooling and process requirements. The cooling mode assumed was wet cooling towers where the water is actually lost through evaporation and drift. For once through cooling systems, the cooling water flow requirements would be higher then indicated. The air pollution values shown are for steady-state operation. The ono exception is the SPS where the air pollution values shown originate from rocket propulsion through the atmosphere and apply to the satellite construction period only. The nuclear systems have various levels of radioactive substances emitted to the air as indicated in the table in terms of curies (Ci) per year. Summary Remarks Based on the preceding data and discussion, several general conclusions may be made relative to SPS as follows. 1. To the depth studied, SPS is potentially cost competitive with alternative sources in the year 2000 time period. 2. Inflation of fuel- costs at a higher than general inflation rate improves the competitive position of SPS relative to fuel using systems, i.e., coal, nuclear (LWR), oil/gas. 3. SPS offers environmental advantages of very low air pollution, no major cooling or process water requirements and no significant residual material for storage and/or disposal. Questions regarding microwave effects on the environment require further analysis for resolution. 4. There will continue to be a large mix of power system technologies utilized in the future even though sources such as oil and gas will be curtailed. No single source will dominate the power generation utility field although it appears that about 75 percent of the power will be produced by coal and nuclear energy at the turn of the century. XI-F-7

.53
(U
p_

(A

s in CU =}

^J. O

in
r -M CU
U

4-*

rd

(J

C 0 tn

in

o
rO

n>

cr cu u c: co
0 -

er

j:

L> cn

O ^c

a. -a
tn
i CU CU "C3
3 C IX. 3

cu u

cu

s.

cu u c cu a tn
I

Or

'1 fO
%^

V> J3 3

m cu re cu in o 4-
>

O *r OHr CU
U- C CU

3 <U ro 3 I- 0

-a c:

* j:
ro +J CU O

0 ir- CU

os

CO r-

tn c

a c

ro > u- c =6

-J I .

cu c az ro

u u -o

* 0 Q. (/>
^_

. >^ C

^"io
4-*

0
O

OJ

o
I D O

""v^.

>^

^ O
</>

cr o ^ ,_
O

in

O V. 0 >,

CD ~ro

O >>
CO
0 4J CO <4-

tw

4-> in to "O

in tn cr 0 o a.

to i*-

O t !X IU O OO

in i/i
r

X "3

GJ to

i
(= t/^

O CU CM "O

VO t3 ^3 i/> O
X 0. OJ

<U O
id o l0 0

o h
Li_

cr:

E t/1

i -o
o in

r-

oo 4J rto CM
^ O 4- CO

cu o cno s_
03 O

'~~

0^0 CM 5

O CU
CM Id S
0

in

_J <e
LJ S

C_j

^
3

*-* r^

+- ^.

OO

^
1

O
^^ ^f

tn S-,
> 1CU I/I

t_

.0
i
CM

JJ

u c:
f

CO

to

LO

CO 0

ro

IO

ro

OO

CD

ro

(
1
3

s0- O

Co

</1

CO

S-

o O o
uo 1
1

CO in
1 C -M C OJ
-*-

CD O
CO 0
1

XC

O QJ
4-J

in un

tn o

o o

CSJ

^j-

"^^

(O
c

r-.

*_*

<O

OO

oj _a

Z3
1

U
X UJ

- ra
5- -^

J_

>>
CO CO

CO

_J

0 0 CO

xc

i
O

CO CM

in

CO

CO

in
CO

z ^
r

*~ 18

Id "^

OO

o -a-

1
Q 4 ->

o
tn
LO r

t.
in t/1

ex G
13
t/l

cu o
l_
i~

tn
r

in
r

1 to

3-

^^ - -

^ -

00

*s^

tn c

o ***.
t- cr
-*-

c >> r3 r^

CO

CO

CO

CO

co

^j.

co
r

o
CO I

COO

o o
fM CO
^

IS ' f 1
<U
!5cVJ

CJ c?> "3 O

co
i

in
i
CM

O -^ C

ro i 10

CO

CO CO

in

O ro I

^0

CQ

c\j'.n

or^
in

id
t;
l^

in

CO

r^

l_

4J O

in >> O c

cu U tn
It- C7

u
rd
_P7

id i+-* u
CU CU 0 t"O
O rr Id

8-0 cu
CM -C CM id
jz

tn en tn (/>
+*

o o
r- l/ 3 -O C
-4->

4^
6 0

t- -w a.
CU

r 1-

tu *o

*->
^

*d

^~"
r-

id 2 o
O

CJ

- g: m 2 tu

. . c o

B>

C OC O CO
r~ UI/J ^J

c:
3

O in
tx.

J= 4J o

id ^_ cu
T3 C
*r-

o rd o tn >
T3 1- 4J

JT

E \cu

r o

tn 01

4->

-c to a
id

3 -C J= O r 0. CO

coo

u.

CU

>l

C id CU

r CU 4-

I _1

to

id

XI-F-8

G. RELATED CONTRACTUAL STUDY

A brief review of the preceding alternative power system material was made by a team of experts at Stanford University under contract NAS9-15317 with JSC. The objectives (tasks) of the contract were as follows: 1. Review and assess work previously accomplished by JSC, including supporting data, in alternative power systems in relation to SPS concepts. 2. Provide written and oral comments on the results of the review. The level of effort of this contract was about 8 man days involving four experts during a two-week period in April 1977. The cost of the contractual effort was about $2900 total, including travel costs. The work performed by the Stanford team was as follows: 1. Participated in an oral presentation by JSC at Stanford on March 24, 1977. 2. Review and assessment of written material. 3. Oral presentation of findings to JSC personnel on April 12, 1977. 4. Preparation and submittal of a written report.

'

The significant items reported by Stanford were as follows: 1. The electric energy consumption forecast utilized by JSC (Federal Power Commission, 1970) appears too generous in predicting future levels of use. A more conservative projection such as presented in ERDA Reports No. 48 and 49 or Stanford Research Institute "Solar Energy in America's Future" report was suggested for use. 2. A plausible forecast of electricity cost versus time is an essential datum for a comparative study. The JSC study presents the cost estimates for individual sources but not the medfan price (cost) of a mix of generation sources. 3. The JSC material was somewhat uncritical and tended to accept without reservations the exaggerated optimism of the proponents of certain technologies. The above Stanford comments are accepted as valid criticisms of the JSC material. Section III of this report provides elaboration on the impact of alternative energy demand scenarios (relates to 1 above). Regarding item 2, projection of the median cost of electricity with a generation mix should be pursued in future JSC studies. However, it should be pointed out that such studies require major assumptions regarding the level of utilization of different regions of the country. Inflation, socio-political, and environmental factors also have an effect on system utilization. These.are highly speculative and uncertain considerations. Item 3 above was addressed in section IV of this report.

XI-G-1

REFERENCES

il.

"Initial Technical, Environmental, and Economic Evaluation of Space Solar Power Concepts, NASA, Johnson Space Center, Report JSC-11568, Aug. 31, 1976.

2. "Energy AlternativesA Comparative Analysis," The Science and Public Policy Program, University of Oklahoma, Norman, Oklahoma, May 1975. 3. Energy. Magazine summer/fall, 1976 issue, Vol. 1, No. 4, pp. 16-17. 4. Electrical World magazine. December 15, 1976, pp. 58-62. 5. Scientific American, Vol. 236, No. 3, March 1977,pp. 26-35. 6. Nuclear Engineering International, February 1977,pp, 42-51. 7. Science, Vol. 193, August 1976, pp. 630-631. 8. Mechanical Engineering. Vol. 96, No. 12, December 1974, pp. 12-20. 9. "Comparative Evaluation of Phase II Results from the Energy Conversion Alternative Study (EGAS)," NASA TMX-718551, February 1976. 10. "Geothertnal Energy," Edward R. Berman, Noyes Data Corporation, Park Ridge, New Jersey, 1975. 11. "Geothermal Energy Technology Assessment," Paul N. Cheremisinoff and Angelo C. Morresl, Technomic Publishing Co., Inc., Westport, Conneticut, 1976.

12. "Conference on Research for the Development of Geothermal Energy Resources," Jet Propulsion Laboratory/California Institute of Technology, December 31, 1974.

US GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 1977-771015/1599

National Aeronautics and Space Administration Lyndon B Johnson Space Center Houston Texas 77058
JSC

Distribution list

AA AT BC2 BV2 LS CA CB DA EA
EA2 EA4 EA7

Office of the Director Technical Planning Ofc Program Procurement Div Schedule Planning and Integration Ofc Flight Operations Dir Astronaut Ofc Life Sciences Dir Engineering and Development
Dir

ECF N NT

NASA Headquarters S Fordyce R Ginter R LaRock H Calahan S Wanson

J Disher T Ha

Energy Research and Development Administration (ERDA) 20 Massachusetts Avenue Washington, DC 20545
So|ar H Marvin

MT MTE MTG

9'er M Savage
ARC

F Koomanoff (5) j Madewe|l ASGA D Beattie

BER M Mmthorn
DTO

EC ED EE EG EJ EL EP ER ES EW EX

Assistant Dir for Program Support Assistant Dir for Program Development Technical Assistant for Technology Crew Systems Div Experiment Systems Div Tracking and Communications Development Div Control Systems Development
Div

Director DFRC Director GSFC Director

JPL

H Wasson

100

Avionics Systems Engineering

Dw

100 238 528 277 202

v

Director R Dickinson R Caputo

KSC

.. , >

EZ FA
FM2

Space Environment Test Div Propulsion and Power Div Future Programs Ofc Structures and Mechanics Div Spacecraft Design Div Engineering Analysis Div Systems Evaluation Ofc Data Systems and Analysis
Dir

CD

Director
LRC

';

0100
364

246E
190

Director C Tynan A Guastaferra E Kruszewski LeRC Director J Ward R Schuh F Teren MSFC Director J Murphy C Guttman (5) K Fikes
WFC

Flight Planning Br FM15 Technology Development Ofc Center Operations Dir JA Technical Services Div JH Safety, Reliability and Quality NA Assurance Dir Shuttle Payload Integration PA and Development Program
Ofc

0100 49-4 100-1 DA01 PA01 PS01 PD01

, RA
SA SC SN WA

White Sands Space and Life Sciences Dir Science Payloads Div Lunar and Planetary Sciences
Div

Manager

Program Operations Ofc