There are a number of design issues with propellant depots, as well as several tasks that have not, to date, been tested in space for
on-orbit servicing missions. The design issues include propellant settling and transfer, propellant usage for attitude control and reboots, the maturity of the refrigeration equipment/cryocoolers, and the power and mass required for reduced or zero boiloff depots with refrigeration.
Propellant settling Transfer of liquid propellants in
microgravity is complicated by the uncertain distribution of liquid and gasses within a tank. Propellant settling at an in-space depot is thus more challenging than in even a slight gravity field. ULA plans to use the
DMSP-18 mission to flight-test centrifugal propellant settling as a cryogenic fuel management technique that might be used in future propellant depots. The proposed Simple Depot PTSD mission would use several techniques to achieve adequate settling for propellant transfer.
Refilling After propellant has been transferred to a customer, the depot's tanks will need refilling. Organizing the construction and
launch of the tanker rockets bearing the new fuel is the responsibility of the propellant depot's operator. Since space agencies like NASA hope to be purchasers rather than owners, possible operators include the aerospace company that constructed the depot, manufacturers of the rockets, a specialist space depot company, or an oil/chemical company that refines the propellant. By using several tanker rockets the tankers can be smaller than the depot and larger than the spacecraft they are intended to resupply. Short range chemical propulsion tugs belonging to the depot may be used to simplify docking tanker rockets and large vehicles like Mars Transfer Vehicles. Transfers of propellant between a LEO depot, reachable by rockets from Earth, and the possible deep space ones such as at the
Lagrange Points and Phobos depots could be performed using
Solar electric propulsion (SEP) tugs. Two missions are currently under development or proposed to support propellant depot refilling. • In addition to refueling and servicing
geostationary communications satellites with the fuel that is initially launched with the MDA
Space Infrastructure Servicing vehicle, the SIS vehicle is being designed to have the ability to
orbitally maneuver to
rendezvous with a replacement fuel canister after transferring the of fuel in the launch load, enabling further refueling of additional satellites after the initial multi-satellite servicing mission is complete. • The proposed Simple Depot cryogenic PTSD (Propellant Transfer and Storage Demonstration) mission would uses "remote berthing arm and docking and fluid transfer ports" both for propellant transfer to other vehicles, as well as for refilling the depot up to the full 30 tonne propellant capacity. proposed a method for refilling by collecting atmospheric gases. Moving in
low Earth orbit, at an altitude of around 120 km, Demetriades' proposed depot extracts air from the fringes of the atmosphere, compresses and cools it, and extracts liquid oxygen. The remaining nitrogen is used as propellant for a nuclear-powered
magnetohydrodynamic engine, which maintains the orbit, compensating for atmospheric
drag. There are, however, safety concerns with placing a nuclear reactor in low Earth orbit. Demetriades' proposal was further refined by Christopher Jones and others In this proposal, multiple collection vehicles accumulate propellant gases at around 120 km altitude, later transferring them to a higher orbit. However, Jones' proposal does require a network of
orbital power-beaming satellites, to avoid placing nuclear reactors in orbit. Asteroids can also be processed to provide liquid oxygen.
Orbital planes and launch windows Propellant depots in LEO are of little use for transfer between two low earth orbits when the depot is in a different orbital plane than the target orbit. The
delta-v to make the necessary
plane change is typically extremely high. On the other hand, depots are typically proposed for exploration missions, where the change over time of the depot's orbit can be chosen to align with the departure vector. This allows one well-aligned departure time minimizing fuel use that requires a very precisely-timed departure. Less efficient departure times from the same depot to the same destination exist before and after the well-aligned opportunity, but more research is required to show whether the efficiency falls off quickly or slowly. By contrast, launching directly in only one launch from the ground without orbital refueling or docking with another craft already on orbit offers daily launch opportunities though it requires larger and more expensive launchers. The restrictions on departure windows arise because low earth orbits are susceptible to significant perturbations; even over short periods they are subject to
nodal regression and, less importantly,
precession of perigee. Equatorial depots are more stable but also more difficult to reach. More specifically, the 3-burn departure strategy has been shown to enable a single LEO depot in an
ISS-inclination orbit (51 degrees) to dispatch nine spacecraft to "nine different
interplanetary targets [where the depot need not] perform any phasing maneuvers to align with any of the departure asymptotes ... [including enabling] extending the economic benefits of dedicated
smallsat launch to interplanetary missions".
Specific issues of cryogenic depots Boil-off mitigation Boil-off of
cryogenic propellants in space may be mitigated by both technological solutions as well as system-level
planning and design. From a technical perspective: for a propellant depot with passive insulation system to effectively store
cryogenic fluids, boil-off caused by heating from
solar and other sources must be mitigated, eliminated, It is possible to achieve zero boil-off (ZBO) with cryogenic propellant storage using an active thermal control system. Tests conducted at the NASA
Lewis Research Center's Supplemental Multilayer Insulation Research Facility (SMIRF) over the summer of 1998 demonstrated that a hybrid thermal control system could eliminate boiloff of cryogenic propellants. The hardware consisted of a pressurized tank insulated with 34
layers of insulation, a condenser, and a
Gifford-McMahon (GM) cryocooler that has a cooling capacity of 15 to 17.5 watts (W). Liquid hydrogen was the test fluid. The test tank was installed into a vacuum chamber, simulating space vacuum. In 2001, a cooperative effort by NASA's
Ames Research Center,
Glenn Research Center, and
Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) was implemented to develop ZBO concepts for in-space cryogenic storage. The main program element was a large-scale, ZBO demonstration using the MSFC multipurpose hydrogen test bed (MHTB) – 18.10 m3 L tank (about 1300 kg of ). A commercial cryocooler was interfaced with an existing MHTB spray bar mixer and insulation system in a manner that enabled a balance between incoming and extracted thermal energy. Another NASA study in June 2003 for conceptual Mars mission showed mass savings over traditional, passive-only cryogenic storage when mission durations are 5 days in LEO for oxygen, 8.5 days for methane and 64 days for hydrogen. Longer missions equate to greater mass savings. Cryogenic xenon saves mass over passive storage almost immediately. When power to run the ZBO is already available, the break-even mission durations are even shorter, e.g. about a month for hydrogen. The larger the tank, the fewer days in LEO when ZBO has reduced mass. In addition to technical solutions to the challenge of excessive boil-off of cryogenic rocket propellants, system-level solutions have been proposed. From a systems perspective, reductions in the standby time of the
liquid H2 cryogenic storage in order to achieve, effectively, a
just in time delivery to each customer, matched with the balanced
refinery technology to split the long-term storable feedstock—water—into the
stoichiometric LOX/
LH2 necessary, is theoretically capable of achieving a system-level solution to boil-off. Such proposals have been suggested as supplementing good technological techniques to reduce boil-off, but would not replace the need for efficient technological storage solutions.
Sun shields United Launch Alliance (ULA) has proposed a cryogenic depot which would use a conical sun shield to protect the cold propellants from solar and Earth radiation. The open end of the cone allows residual heat to radiate to the cold of deep space, while the closed cone layers attenuates the radiative heat from the Sun and Earth.
Other issues Other issues are
hydrogen embrittlement, a process by which some metals (including
iron and
titanium) become brittle and fracture following exposure to hydrogen. The resulting leaks make storing cryogenic propellants in zero gravity conditions difficult. == In-space refueling demonstration projects ==