11th International Planetary Probe Workshop (2014)
pdf
TRAJECTORY OPTIMIZATION WITH ADAPTIVE DEPLOYABLE ENTRY AND PLACEMENT
TECHNOLOGY ARCHITECTURE. H. Saranathan1,2, S. Saikia1,2, M. J. Grant2, J. M. Longuski2, 1Graduate Stu-
dent, 2School of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Purdue University, West Lafayette, Indiana 47907-2045,
1
hsaranat@purdue.edu.
Introduction: A comparison of results of trajecto-
ry optimization for Adaptive Deployable Entry and
Placement Technology (ADEPT) using different con-
trol strategies is presented in this paper. Current entry,
descent, and landing (EDL) systems for Mars are based
on technology developed for the Viking program in the
1970s, which has a landed payload mass limit of about
1.2 metric tons. However, large scale scientific and
human exploration missions need an order of magni-
tude higher landed-mass capability. The challenges of
delivering heavy payloads to Mars are explained in
references [1,2]. Two important limitations of current
EDL technology stem from insufficient drag decelera-
tion. 1) The vehicle does not slow down sufficiently
for a soft landing, especially at high Mars Orbiter La-
ser Altimeter (MOLA) altitudes. 2) The vehicle flies
much faster at lower altitudes, resulting in higher heat-
ing.
The key to tackle both the challenges is to reduce
the ballistic coefficient, which has the added advantage
of lowering peak g-load. In this investigation, the ben-
efits of the ADEPT architecture are qualified via tra-
jectory optimization. Results indicate that this architec-
ture is capable of delivering high-mass payloads onto
Mars surface (~70t) with sufficiently low final velocity
while satisfying relatively low constraints in g-loading
and heat rate.
Figure 1: ADEPT in stowed configuration allows
for packaging within the launch vehicle fairing. The
deployed configuration is used for entry [3].
ADEPT: NASA has funded the study of deploya-
ble hypersonic decelerator systems including ADEPT
[3] that can deliver large payloads to the surface of
Mars. The concept is akin to an umbrella. Figure 1
shows ADEPT concept in stowed, deployed and land-
ing configurations. In its stowed configuration, it con-
forms to the payload fairing dimensions. The structure
is deployed in Earth orbit or just before transit to Mars.
Unlike the traditional Viking architecture, the deployed
ADEPT structure has a much larger aerodynamic drag
8072.
surface area that compensates for the heavier mass and
reduces ballistic coefficient. Supersonic retropropul-
sion is used to further slow down the vehicle. The
structure that holds the aero surface is reoriented for
landing.
Vehicle control: A 4-bar linkage gimbaling mech-
anism is used to reorient the deployed aeroshell with
respect to the center of mass (c.m.) to redirect the lift
vector, giving the capability to control the vehicle dur-
ing EDL. This mechanism is illustrated in Figure 2.
This paper employs an additional control methodology,
wherein the level of deployment of the aerodynamic
decelerator can be controlled. At 0 degrees angle of
attack (AoA), this method results in drag modulation.
Figure 2: Illustration of gimbaling mechanism and
the resultant center of mass shift [3].
Alternatively, the 4-bar linkage mechanism can be
replaced by a rigid structure that permanently orients
the aerodynamic decelerator in a single direction with
respect to c.m. This introduces a c.m. shift with respect
to the aeroshell and the trim AoA can be controlled by
varying the level of deployment of the aerodynamic
decelerator. This also provides indirect control over
both lift and drag coefficients, which are coupled with
one another. This method reduces the complexity of
the control system and incurs mass savings because it
eliminates the need for an active gimbaling mecha-
nism.
The ability of ADEPT to a achieve very low ballis-
tic coefficient also results in low peak g-load during
entry. Preliminary results indicate that g-loads as low
as 2 g’s can be achieved. This is advantageous for both
human exploration and science missions that consist of
sensitive payloads.
References: [1] Andrews D. G., et al. (2009)
NASA/Contractor Report-2009-NNL08AA35C. [2]
Drake B. G. (2009) NASA-SP-2009-566. [3] Venka-
tapathy E. (2011) AIAA 2011-2608.