Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
Abstract
The next few years promise a unique convergence of NASA aeronautics and space
programs.
NASA planetary science missions are becoming increasingly more
sophisticated. This will ultimately culminate, in part, in the development of planetary
aerial vehicles (PAVs). Early work in this area has principally focused on conceptual
design of fixed-wing aircraft configurations for Mars exploration. However, autonomous
vertical lift vehicles hold considerable potential for supporting planetary science and
exploration missions. This paper discusses in a general sense the technical opportunities
and challenges in developing autonomous vertical lift PAVs. Through this discussion a
vision for using PAVs in planetary exploration is presented.
The Army/NASA Rotorcraft Division -in collaboration with the Center for Mars
Exploration -- at NASA Ames has been
performing initial conceptual design
studies over the past year of a Martian
autonomous rotorcraft for planetary
exploration and science missions (fig. 1).
Initial results have been quite promising.
As a result of this early work, the
authors have generalized their thoughts
regarding the utility of rotorcraft, VTOL
vehicles, and hybrid airships for Mars
exploration and planetary science
missions as a whole.
Introduction
Manned and robotic exploration of the
Solar system planets would be greatly
enhanced through the development and
use of robotic aerial vehicles. Since the
1970s a number of Mars (fixed-wing)
Airplane concepts have been proposed
for Mars exploration.
Presented
at the American
Helicopter
Society
International Vertical Lift Aircraft Design Specialists
Meeting, San Francisco, CA, January 19-21, 2000.
Copyright 2000 by the American Helicopter Society, Inc.
All rights reserved.
Vertical
provide
Opportunities
As noted earlier, work is being pursued
at the Ames Research Centers
Army/NASA Rotorcraft Division on a
Martian autonomous rotorcraft.
Why
not, though, as a next step, a Venusian
VTOL? Or a Jovian flyer? Or, even, a
Mean
Surface
Atmos.
Density
(kg/m3)
Atmos.
Gases
Terrestrial
Type
Planets
&
Moons
Venus
6052
8.87
Earth
6371
9.82
Mars
3390
3.71
Titan
(Saturn
moon)
2575
1.354
735.3 9.21x10
69,200
25.0
165
100,000
0.173
Saturn
57,400
10.6
135
100,000
0.196
Uranus
25,250
8.94
76
100,000
0.365
Neptune 24,500
11.2
72
100,000
0.438
H2 86%
He 13%
H2 96%
He 3%
H2 83%
He 15%
H2 80%
He 19%
Planets
&
Moons
with
Tenuous
Atmospheres
Jupiter
64.79
CO2
96%
N2 3.5%
288.2 101,300
1.23
N2 78%
O2 21%
214
636
1.55x10-2 CO2
95%
N2 2.7%
Ar 1.6%
O2 0.1%
94
149,526
5.55 N2 6598%
Ar<25
%
CH4 210%
Gas
Giant
Planets
!
Mean values noted for planet radii and
gravity to account for the oblateness
of the
planet.
Mars surface temperature,
pressure,
and
density
varies
significantly
spatially
and
temporally;
surface
temperature
range
of
140-300oK;
surface
pressure
636240
Pa.
and condensation
Seasonal CO2 sublimation
at the polar
caps
(particularly
at the
southern
polar cap) is the chief reason for
the
atmospheric
pressure
and
density
variations.
All characteristics
noted for the outer, gasgiant,
planets
in the Solar system
are
defined at effective (mean) planetary
radii
corresponding to 1bar atmospheric pressure.
Mercury
2438
3.70
Pluto
The
Moon
1151
1737
0.645
1.62
100- <10-12
700
40 ~58x10-6
120-390
--
--
---
N2
--
Titan
Venus
Jupiter
Europa
The Moon
Asteroids
Venus, Mars,
Titan
Jupiter,
Saturn,
Uranus,
Neptune
Mercury,
Pluto, the
Moon,
Europa, and
other moons,
asteroids, and
comets
Neptune
Bodies
Uranus
Planetary
Saturn
Jupiter
Titan
Mars
Earth
Venus
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
Neptune
Bodies
Uranus
Saturn
Planetary
Jupiter
Titan
Mars
Earth
Venus
1E-07
0.000001
0.00001
0.0001
Kinematic
0.001
Viscosity
0.01
0.1
(m^2/sec)
Bodies
Earth
Planetary
Mars
Titan
Venus
10
100
1000
10000
100000
50kg
25kg
PAV Mass = 10kg
Mars
Venus
Bodies
Titan
Earth
Planetary
Bodies
Earth
Planetary
Mars
Titan
Venus
2000
4000
6000
8000
10000
Mars
PAV Mass = 25kg
Bodies
Earth
Planetary
Four-bladed rotor,
Mass = 10kg
Titan
PAV
Venus
1000000
2000000
3000000
4000000
Reynolds Number
Vmin Mach #
Vmax Mach #
Maximum mean
wing lift
coefficient
Maximum mean
rotor lift
coefficient
Wing aspect
ratio, AR
0.1
0.2
0.8
Induced drag
Wing Profile
Drag
0.4
Next, consider
planetary
bodies
(particularly the outer, gas-giant planets)
where the use of fixed-wing, propeller
driven, PAVs to conduct planetary
science
missions
is
sensible.
Extraterrestrial propeller design can be
significantly leveraged by rotary-wing
technology and analysis tools. Figures
6a-e compare wing planform area,
propeller size, disk loading, and power
required for airplane-mode forward-fight
cruise in various planetary atmospheres.
Airframe
parasite drag
Wing Planform
Tail download
for trimmed
flight
Vehicle Cruise
Altitude
Propeller/Rotor
Power
Neptune
Uranus
Saturn
J upiter
Titan
Neptune
Mars
Uranus
50 kg
25 kg
P AV Mass = 10 kg
Saturn
50kg
Mass = 25 kg
Vehicle Mass = 10 kg
Earth
0. E+00 1.E+06 2.E+06 3. E+06 4. E+06 5.E+06 6. E+06 7. E+06 8.E+06
J upiter
Reynolds Nu mber
Titan
Earth
0.01
0.1
10
100
Fig. 6a Wing Planform Area for FixedWing PAVs for Various Planets
Collectively, PAVs for the outer, gasgiant planets require roughly the same
general range of wing planform area.
Further, the outer, gas-giant PAVs
compare fairly well to the wing area
required for equivalent terrestrial fixedwing aircraft (when sizing is based on
vehicle mass, not weight). The Titan and
Mars fixed-wing aerial vehicles are at
opposite extremes with respect to wing
planform area requirements.
Neptune
Uranus
Neptune
50kg
Mas s = 25 kg
Vehicle Mas s = 10 kg
Saturn
U ranus
Jupiter
Saturn
Titan
Jupiter
Mars
Titan
Earth
50 kg
Mass = 25 kg
PAV Mass = 10 kg
Mars
0
0.2
0.4
0. 6
0.8
Earth
20000
25000
Neptune
Uranus
Saturn
Jupiter
Ti tan
M ars
E arth
10 0
15000
10
10000
5000
1000
10
Martian Aviators
As noted earlier, balloons/aerostats (Ref.
19) and Mars Airplanes (Refs. 20-24)
have been proposed for some time for
Mars exploration. Only recently have
vertical
lift
configurations
been
considered.
11
12
600
Design Point
400
200
0
0.4
4.5
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
4
Mtip = 0.5
0.6
0.7
3.5
3
Design Point
2.5
2
1.5
1
0.5
0
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
25
End of Conversion
Mach # = 0.1
Mach # = 0.15
20
Mach # = 0.2
D esign Point
15
10
0
0.4
0. 6
0.8
1.2
13
0.9
600
L /D = 6
L/D = 8
L /D = 10
L/D = 12
Range (Km)
500
400
300
200
100
0
0.15
0 .2
0 .25
0.3
0.35
0.4
0.45
Fuel Fraction
14
3000
Lander Mass
2500
2000
1500
1000
500
0
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
Challenges
Autonomous vertical lift PAVs will be
high-risk and high-payoff development
ventures. Though an impressive and
ever-expanding -- amount of data exists
for the planetary bodies in our solar
system, nonetheless, these data are
barely adequate (at best) for the
purposes of designing and building
PAVs. Such vehicles will need to be
highly adaptive (from a controls and
structures
perspective),
have
conservative performance margins, and
will require high degrees of mission/flight
autonomy to adequately deal with
corresponding levels of uncertainty in
the mission and flight environment. A
list of these and other technical
challenges are summarized below.
Rotor Aeromechanics
Inadequate planetary atmospheric
data and/or modeling may exist to
design vehicles with
required
performance.
15
16
Propulsion
Outside of Earth, there is very little
free oxygen in other planetary
atmospheres.
Therefore, new
propulsion systems will have to be
devised that do not rely on oxygen (or
Deployment
PAVs
will be subjected
to
considerable constraints regarding
17
airships
for
18
employed.
Uncertainties in mission
definition, planetary environment, and
the vehicle design/analysis characteristics
could result in inaccurate simulation
results
and
mission
feasibility
assessments.
Acceptable vehicle
performance will have to be graded not
on the basis of pilot ratings but other
mission success criteria.
Mission
Requirements
I nitial Vehicle
Co nfiguration
De finition
Rot or Pe rformance
- Hover & Climb
- Propeller/Pr oprotor Airplane-Mode
(if applicable)
- Forward - Flight Helicopter-Mode
Airframe/Vehicle
Aerodynamics
Detailed W eight
Estimates
PAV Stability &
Control
Flight Control & Au tonomous System
M ission/Flight Computer Pe rformance, Power, and Weight
Deployment & Aeroshell Packa ging
Vehicle Delta Performance & Weight
Penalties
O rbital Mechanics
Spacecraft Design
Mission Cost
No
Mission
Reqs. Met?
Ye s
Detailed Design
19
Additional Considerations
In order to maximize the science return
from robotic PAVs it may also be
necessary to examine and implement the
development
of
hybrid
vehicles,
symbiotic robotic systems, and/or
overall collections or communities of
robots and astronauts.
It may be that hybrid vehicles will need
to be developed to fully expedite
planetary exploration. One such hybrid
vehicle may combine flight with surface
locomotion capability. Visionaries in the
early twentieth century proposed the
development of vehicles that combined
the features of airplanes and automobiles
for terrestrial personal transportation.
There may be a greater need to develop
such hybrid (flight and surface
locomotion) vehicles for extraterrestrial
applications. Another hybrid vehicle
that might deserve attention from PAVs
designers is a vehicle that combines
rocket propulsion with rotary-wing lift
to optimize overall vehicle performance.
Traditional concepts of rocket and aerial
propulsion may fall by the way-side by
necessity, as will the concepts of
independent/separate surface-locomotion
and aerial vehicles, for extraterrestrial
applications.
20
PAV
advanced
autonomous
software/hardware technology is also
applicable for terrestrial UAVs;
Fixed-wing,
propeller
driven
planetary aerial vehicles (leveraging
rotary-wing technologies) could
potentially be developed not only for
Mars, Venus, and Titan but also for
the outer, gas-giant planets;
Acknowledgments
Concluding Remarks
The support of the NASA Ames
Aerospace Directorate and the Center
Director's Discretionary
Fund
is
gratefully acknowledged. Thanks must
also be given to Mr. George Price and
Mr. Christopher Van Buiten of Sikorsky
21
References
1. Lodders, K. and Fegley, Jr., B., The
Planetary Scientists Companion,
Oxford University Press, 1998.
2. Beatty,
J.K., Peterson,
C.C.,
Chaiken, A., Editors, The New Solar
System, 4th Ed.,
Cambridge
University Press, 1998.
22
Surface,
18th
International
Symposium on Space Technology
and Science, Kagoshima, Japan, May
1992, pg. 1759-1764.
23