SPACE POWER SYSTEMS FOR THE 21ST CENTURY

Vincent L. Teofilo, Ph.D.

vince.teofilo@lmco.com
(408) 743-2275

Lockheed Martin Space Systems Company

Slide 1
 Outline

‰ Satellite Power Systems

‰ Solar Array-Battery Power

‰ Radioisotope Power

‰ Space Nuclear Reactors

‰ Advanced Concepts
ƒ Fusion
ƒ Matter-Anti-Matter
ƒ Vacuum Energy
• Warp-Drive
• Worm Holes
Corona [1959-70]

10,000 kg of AgO/Zn batteries

TELEVISION INFRARED OBSERVATION SATELLITE

IMU AVHRR
THERMAL CONTROL
IMP PINWHEEL LOUVERS

1100 W SOLAR ARRAY

SAR ANTENNAS

SOA

TED

40 Ah BATTERY MODULES

SAD

ESA
HIRS

SBA

AMSU REA
A1

AMSU-A2
UDA

AMSU-B

SBUV
VRA
Hubble Space Telescope

GaAs/Ge

90 Ah NiH2
Mars Global Surveyor
Mars Climate Orbiter

Characteristic Requirement Capability

Mission Life 5 Years 7 Years +
1 Yr Cruise+AB
2 Years Mapping
2 Years Relay
Orbital Ave 300 W @ Mars 350 W (1600W @ 1AM0
Pwr Perihelion Beginning of Life)
Energy ~ 10,000 DOD (1) 16 A-Hr NiH2 Battery
Storage Cycles (60% Max (70% Max DOD
DOD @ AB End- Capability)
Game)
Bus Voltage 22 – 36Vdc @ 24 – 36 Vdc @ User Load
Range User Load I/F I/F
Redundancy No Mission Single NiH2 Battery has
Critical Single Credible but Low-Risk
Point Failures MCSPF
(MCSPF)
Iridium Satellite

Bus Section

60 Ah NiH2 SPV
Battery

1 kW e
Communications Solar Array
Section
Main Mission
Antenna Panel
Cross Link
Gateway Antenna
Antenna
IKONOS Satellite
Solar Power System
Solar Array Drive
Assemblies
Solar Array Power Regulation Unit
(North & South) Fuse Box Assembly

Power to
Payload &
IN-T3055
HK Loads
Power to
IN-T3049
IN-T3052 Arcjets
Battery (North) Battery (South)
Power to Pyros &
Earth & Sun Sensor
Assemblies

Series Series
Regulator Regulator
Discharge
Solar Charge
Regulator
Array Regulator or Diode
Shunt
(Full Load Load
or
Partial)
Solar
Array Battery Load

= Energy Source/Storage Elements = Optional EPS Elements

A2100 EPS Component
Accommodation

DUAL Ku-band GIMBALLED

(50” diameter) ANTENNA TRANSPONDER SUPORT STRUTS

ACCESS PANELS

SOLAR ARRAY
PANELS (SOUTH)

TRANSPONDER PANEL
(NORTH) includes
PRU & FBA
SOLAR ARRAY
SHEAR-TIE STRUTS

SOUTH BATTERY MODULES

SOLAR ARRAY
PANELS (NORTH)

BASE PANELS TRANSITION

STRUCTURE
NORTH BATTERY MODULES
Ref: A. Salim, IECEC, 2000
Space Solar Cell Development Projections

45% 40-45% in 10-15 years

40% 3rd Generation

35%
2nd Generation Silicon
30%
GaAs
25% Multi-Junction

20%
1st Generation
15%

10%
1971 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020

Year

•3rd generation of Lattice matched multi-junction solar cells will

reach practical limit of 40-45%. IMM cells on kapton are being
developed at 50-100 um thickness
•Thin film nano-crystaline cells will be introduced for cost and
mass –efficiency intitiallly at 13% efficiency with potential for
achieving 20% in 5-10 years using MJ thin film techniques
 Solar Panel Characteristics

BOL Panel
2
PV Cell Technology Efficiency / W/m / Cell W/kg W/kg1
Thin Film [Triple-Junction (TJ)
amorphous Si on 1 mm Poly] 7.5 93 440 352

Thin Film [CIGS on 1.5 mm Al] 13 169 627 502

High Efficiency Si 17.5 128 182 60

GaAs Triple Junction 28 245 291 88

Boeing 100 kW Array (SPW-2006)
GaAs XJ (projected~2009) 34 298 353 107

GaAs TJ on Kapton Substrate 28 245 353 174

1 - Panel with interconnects and substrate or support framing

ATK 10 kW Array (SPW-2006)

LM A2100 Solar Array Wing Assembly
Thin Film Solar PV

‰ Evaporation of elements simultaneously or in a

prescribed sequence,
‰ Sputtering of metals followed by selenization with H2Se,
‰ Reactive sputtering of metals with Se vapor,
‰ Printing of metals from ink precursors followed by selenization
[requires no vacuum]
HIGH-EFFICIENCY III-V Thin MJ CELLS
(SpectroLab)

Triple-junction structures were deposited by metal

organic vapor phase epitaxy (MOVPE) in 4” wafer

thin-cell coupon on a 95-mm radius cylinder.

Ref: D. Law et al., “Lightweight, Flexible, High-efficiency Iii-v

Multijunction Cells”, WCPEC 2006
 Solar Thermal Thermionic Power System
THERMAL
RECEIVER
SECONDARY
CONCENTRATOR
‰ Using a new diffracting concentrator lens
which weighs 0.5 kg/m2

‰ BeO Phase Change Material used to heat TI

elements to provide power during Eclipse
Ø32.4 m

‰Satellite applications at > 30 kWe

THERMIONIC
CONVERTER
‰ NASA MSFC Ground Demo [Clark- STAIF 2006]

THERMIONIC
PRIMARY CONVERTER
PCM
REFLECTOR
THERMAL STORAGE

•Able to Operate in Van Allen Belts

•Volume ~1/2 of SA/Batt Power
•Mass ~1/3 of SA/ Batt Power at 75 W/m2

MSFC Ground Test

Space Battery Cell Comparisons

Li(CF)
x

500 LiSOCl 2

400
ENERGY DENSITY (Wh/l)

LiMnO 2
LiSO 2
Advanced Li Polymer
300
Li-SPE
Ni/MH

200 Ni/H Li-Ion

2
Ni/Cd

AgO/Zn Primary
100
AgO/Zn
Secondary

Pb/PbO

0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400
SPECIFIC ENERGY (Wh/kg)

‰ Current Li Ion batteries using liquid electrolytes provide 100-125- W/kg

‰ Future Li Ion batttery cells with solid electrolytes and nano-structured electrodes will provide
> 200 Wh/kg batteries in 10 years
Potential Spacecraft Energy Sources
2.4 x 10108cal/s-cc

ZPF
Range of Energy Source Applications
Solar Array-Battery Systems vs. Solar Array -
Fuel Cell Hybrid System

50

45

40
Fuel Cell Hybrid
Mass (kg)

35 Batteries - 1 day
Batteries - 1 week
30 Batteries - 1 month
Batteries - 6 months
25 Batteries - 1 year

20

15
200 400 600 800 1000
Peak Power (W) [Teofilo- IECEC 2006]

‰ Fuel Cells are not competitive with eletrochemical energy storage due to
lower charge-discharge efficiency
Radioisotope Power
GPHS RTG

56 kg
20 GPHS
‰ >40 RTGs flown for space science missions
from 3 W to 300 W

‰ Design for Launch Safety against Pu238

release is major cost driver

‰ Uses 20 General Purpose Heat Source Assemblies

To generate 290 W

‰ Currently using of Russian Pu238 but in future

INL to produce Pu238
Planetary Science Mission S/C EPS
 NASA Missions That Have Used RTGs
Power Level Thermoelectrics
Missions Launch Year Type of RTG Per Unit (We) Used
NIMBUS B-1 1968 (Aborted) -- -- --
III 1969 SNAP 19 (1) ~28 PbTe
APOLLO 11 1969 Heater Units -- --
12 1969 SNAP 27 (1) ~73 PbTe
13 1970 (Aborted) -- -- --
14 1971 SNAP 27 (1) ~73 PbTe
15 1971 2 2 2
16 1972 2 2 2
17 1972 2 2 2
PIONEER 10 1972 SNAP 19 (4) ~40 PbTe/TAGS
11 1973 2 2 2
VIKING 1 1975 SNAP 19 (2) ~35 PbTe/TAGS
2 1975 2 2 2
VOYAGER 1 1977 MHW (3) ~150 SiGe
2 1977 2 2 2
GALILEO 1989 GPHS-RTG (2) ~285 SiGe
ULYSSES 1990 GPHS-RTG (2) ~285 SiGe
PATHFINDER 1996 Heater Units -- --
CASSINI 1997 GPHS-RTG (3) ~285 SiGe
Radioisotope Missions
Used safely on 24 missions since 1961
• 8 RTG Earth Orbit missions (Transit, Nimbus, LES)
• 7 RTG planetary missions (Pioneer, Voyager, Ulysses, Galileo, Cassini)
• 5 RTG moon missions (Apollo ALSEP)
• 2 RTG Mars missions (Viking 1&2)
• RHUs used on Apollo 11, Mars Pathfinder & MERs among others

MER (2003)
Voyager Spacecraft
Galileo Spacecraft
Advanced Stirling Radioisotope
Generator
DESIGN FEATURES

Power: 112 We (BOM)

94 We (14 yrs)

Mass: 20 kg

System Efficiency: 30%

Dimensions: 88.9cm (length

26.7 (tip-tip)

Voltage: 28 + 0.2 Vdc

Fuel: 2 GPHS modules

Re-Programed: April 2006 to utilize

Advanced Stirling
Radioisotope Thermophotvoltaic

NASA Funded Development

Creare Tested 100 We Engineering Test unit
Uses two GPHS modules producing
500Wt
Demonstrated Integrated System
Efficiency 17%
Design Mass of 7.0 kg with Radiators for
specific energy of 14 W/kg
Space Nuclear Reactors

Coolant Out

Shield

‰ Fast Spectrum Reactors (>500keV)

With high power density for compactness
Fuel and Reflector
‰ External reflectors for mechanical simplicity Moderator

‰ LiH Shield for low mass

Coolant In
Space Nuclear Reactor History

1st Space Nuclear Initiative1950-74

500 We SNAP-10A 1965

5 kWe TOPAZ

SOVIET SPACE
Nuclear Initiative
>30 reactors flown
using TE and TI(2)
SP-100 Technolgy developed in 2nd Space Nuclear Initiative 1983-95 1969-89 1.5 to 5 kWe
Nuclear Thermal Propulsion

‰ 1 GWt nuclear reactor heats hydrogen to 2200-3000K

‰ Generates 15,000 to 75,000 lb thrust in burns up to an hour
‰ Can be configured to also provide steady state electrical power of
50-100kWe – Bimodal or Trimodal designs
‰ 20 Reactor/Rockets designed, built and tested 1959-72 in Rover/Nerva Program
for ~$1.4B before termination in 1974 to fund Space Shuttle development
STAR-C Thermionic Reactor

STAR WARS STIMULATED SMALL REACTOR CONCEPTS

‰ Solid Graphite Core with Thermionic

elements Heated to 1800 K and rejecting heat
to heat pipe radiator at 1000K 9000-1000 K

‰ 40 kWe unit ~1100 kg with PC and Radiator

‰ Conversion Efficiency of 16% with

TH = 1800K and TC= 1000 K

Develop High Efficiency Nano Technogy

TI Convertors with Lower TH and TC
Gas Cooled Reactor

Development Issue: He-Xe gas coolant replenishment over life

Heat Pipe Reactor
‰ Fission power is generated in uranium fuel-pins. The power is conducted to
heatpipes which transfer the power to an ex-core power conversion system
(orintermediate HX).

‰ Heatpipes provide the efficiency of 2-phase liquid-metal heat transfer in a

passive, simple, well-characterized volume.

‰ HX can interface with any conversion system or heat pipes can go directly to
thermo-electric or thermophotvoltaic power conversion system.

‰ 100 kWe Reactor/Shield Mass ~ 1000 kg

‰ Combined with Stirling engine yields specific power of 50 W/kg

Jupiter Icy Moons Orbiter Space Craft

2003 Notional Concept (JPL)

2001 A Space Odyssey (Universal Studios)

Proposed JIMO Configuration

SP100 STYLE ATLAS HLV

130KWe REACTOR 5 M FAIRING

XENON TANK
11314 Kg
DEPLOYABLE
FLAT RADIATOR
TE CONV
90 M2
12 PLCS

PMAD
HIGH GAIN ANTENNA
4 BOXES
3.00 METER

NEXT THRUSTER
36 PLCS (18/SIDE)

STOWED RADIATOR
2 PLCS

MISSION/ DEPLOYING BOOM

AVIONICS
MODULE
Projected Power Source Comparisons

100
aCIGS SA/Adv. Li SPE [2020]

80
Specific Power [W/kg]

TI Solar Thermal [2015]

60

40 TJ aSi SA/Li Ion Polymer [2012]

HPR/Stirling

SA/Li Ion Batt [2008 ]

20

0
10 20 30 40 50 60 80 100
Spacecraft Bus Power, kWe

Current and future Advanced Solar Power Systems are more mass efficient
then nuclear reactor power systems
Space-based Solar Power (SBSP)

‰ Renewed interest in an old idea given

today’s perspectives
ƒ Peak oil, global environmental
concerns, and growing world-wide
energy demand
‰ Attractive option within future energy
portfolio
ƒ Very few clean, safe, inexhaustible,
reliable, and affordable alternatives
‰ Significant changes in recent years
enabling improved
SBSP economics
ƒ Technology advancements, emerging
applications, and market pricing
realities

CPV selected for high efficiency (>40%)

But impact of radiator for cooling cells
provides net W/kg << planar with IMM cells
Progress in Magnetic Confinement Fusion

DT Terrestrial Controlled Fusion requires (1) periodic vacuum

confinement and thermal blanket structural Material
replacement and (2) breeding sufficient tritium to replace that
consumed. This makes it uneconomical for commercial power
generation. Advanced fuels (d,α3) and (p,B11) would eliminate
Such requirements but require much higher confinement
conditions obtainable by magnetic fields > 30 Tesla.
Inertial Electrostatic Confinement IEC

Fusion Reactions vs Grid Bias

Magnetically Channeled Spherical IEC propulsion Experiment

University Of Wisconsin IEC Experimental Facility

See: http://fti.neep.wisc.edu/publist?which=fdm50
Inertial Electrostatic Confinement Space Thruster

Plasma Jet Grid

Xe Propellant Estimated Performance

Thrust = 34 mN, Isp = 3000 s, Accelerating = 500 W, ηt ~
62-68% , Voltage = 600V
p-B11 Propellant Estimated Performance

Thrust= > 1 N , Isp >104s , V = 150kV , ηt > 1 N

Miley et al, Technolgy of Fusion Energy, 2008
Magneto-Inertial Fusion (MIF)

‰ plasma density intermediate between

Material Liner conventional MFE and ICF
• Solid ‰ Avoid huge, steady-state magnets of
• Liquid conventional MFE,
• Gaseous ‰ Avoid the problem of extremely high
pulsed power (1000’s TW) Compact
reactor
‰ Offers potentially a low-cost R&D path
Target Plasma
‰ Lawson’s criteria excess
energy, n τ > 1014 s.m-3

Magnetic field
used to insulate
the target plasma
from the liner
 Magneto-Kinetic Compression MIF

Magnetic BURN CHAMBER

(Dch ~ 5 cm) Flowing Liquid Metal Heat Exchanger/ Breeder
Expansion Chamber
Accelerator Source

1m

~ 20 m
10-30 m

Advantages over ITER tokamak Energy required to achieve

• Minimum B field at highest plasma pressure (β~1) fusion conditions is transferred
• Simple linear system – reactor wall is a steel pipe to FRC plasmoid from array of
axially sequenced coils.
• Variable output power ~ 10-100 MW not multi-GW
• Burn chamber well separated from plasmoid
formation/heating.
• Direct electric power conversion with expansion of
fusion heated plasmoid (Brayton cycle - η > 90%)
• Low mass system directly applicable to space
propulsion
• Key physics and scaling have been demonstrated
Current experiment to create
• Developmental cost orders of magnitude less - initial FRC plasmoid for
Proof-of-Principle experiment ~ 3 M$ / year fusion breakeven experiment
Interplanetary Fusion Propulsion
3
10
Chem
0.1 (kW/kg)
Fission
PHYSICS DEMO
1.0
Tech Development
2
10
Ground DEMO
10.0
FLIGHT DEMO

Fusion 100.0
MANNED MISSION
1
10 3 4 5 6
10 10 10 10
Effective Exhaust Velocity, Ve (m/s) 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040

Reactions: d + t = He(3.52 Mev) + n (14 MeV)

d + He3 = He4 + p [ 18.3 MeV]
Lawson Criteria: n τ > 1014 sec exceeded through
steady state and pulsed magnetic confinement
Interstellar Anti-matter Propulsion

Fuel Mass for round-trip to Alpha Centauri at 0.1 c: 0.01 Msc / 0.1 (conversion eff.) = 0.1 Msc

For 100 ton Space Ship 10 tons of anti-protons cost $1021

~ 3 ng of p- produced /yr in 2002
Dark Energy and Matter

General Relativity Equation: ¨r/r = 4πG ( ρ + 3p) /3

Normal matter creates gravitational attraction and slows down cosmological expansion. Dark matter also
causes attraction. For vacuum the situation is opposite: positive vacuum energy anti-gravitates, i.e.
creates gravitational repulsion and its density is constant.
QUANTUM VACUUM ENERGY FIELD

Spectral Energy Density Planck ( 1911)

ρ (ν, Τ) = 8πν2 [hν/(ε hν/κΤ − 1) + hν/2 ]

c3
Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle: ΔxΔv < h
Min Energy at T = 0 : hν/2 for each EM harmonic mode
up to Planck Frequency νp = 1.9 x 1043 Hz

Casimir Force
ρ p = 2π2c /G2h = 10109 J/cc

‰ Einstein, Nernst study zero-point energy (1913-16)

‰ Casimir identifies Quantum Zero point Field (ZPF) as

source of force between parallel plates (1948)

‰ Thought experiment by Forward shows principle of

tapping zero-point energy (1984).

‰ USAF Study identified ZPF experiments for further

study (1996).

‰ Casimir Force definitively measured by Lamoreaux

(1997) and to 1% by Mohideen (2003)

‰ Newton’s Laws derived from Maxwell’s Equations by

Haisch, Rueda and Puthoff (Phys. Rev 1994) and
(Anal.Physik- 2005)
Quantum Vacuum Plasma Thruster (QVPT)?

‰ The local quantum vacuum density is related to local matter density?

- [ H. White STAIF 2007]
ρ m _ local
ρ vac _ local = ρ vac = ρ m _ local ρ vac
ρ vac
‰ A QVPT, in principle, can be likened to a conventional plasma thruster that
uses crossed E and B fields to induce a plasma drift in the propellant which
for the vacuum field are p+-p- and e+-e- pairs.
‰ The difference arises in the fact that a QVPT uses quantum vacuum
fluctuations as the fuel source mitigating the need to carry propellant.
‰ This suggests much higher ISP is available for QVPT systems limited only by
supply power storage densities.

Shawyer EM Drive for Chinese QVPT

Energy for Warp Drive

‰ By creating the energy equivalent of negative mass the space in front of a

space ship can be contracted and that behind expanded with energy:
E = -3.5 x 1030 kg x vs/c Alcubierre Warp Bubble

or x c2 = ( 3 x 106m/s)2
E = -3.15 x 1042 Joules
for each factor of the speed of light
‰ Vacuum energy of ρp = 10109 J/cc may be more then enough to provide the
mass equivalence energy to Warp Space.
‰ However, current vacuum energy extraction concepts may be limited to <
106J/cc and Cosmological expansion dark energy pressure attributed to
vacuum energy is limited to: ~ 10-10 J/cc
‰ Kip Thorne et al. proposed “transferable worm holes” in hyper space can
be created with Negative or vacuum energy [Phys. Rev. Let. 1988].
‰ Visser et al. proved conditions require little negative energy [Phys. Rev. Let.
2003].
 Optically Squeezed Laser Light
Produces Worm Hole in Hyper Space
+
+ Standing Wave in Sodium Chamber causes
+
+ rapid variations in optical properties of wave and
+ Positive Energy optical properties of the sodium induces rapid
+ Pulses reflections of pulses
+
+
Rotating / Redirector +
Mirror System
- + - + - + - + -
-
Laser & -
LiNbO3 -
Resonator -
-
Negative Energy -
-
Pulses -
-

Reference: Davis STAIF (2006), Ries Phys.Rev Let. (2003 )

Conclusions
‰ Solar Power Systems will be utilized for spacecraft power well into the 21st
century with advances to > 50 W/kg

‰ Advanced Radioisotope Power Systems will be needed for Lunar

exploration using Stirling or TPV energy conversion

‰ Nuclear reactors may be need for manned Lunar or Mars bases after ~
2020

‰ Nuclear Thermal Propulsion development interrupted in 1974 may be

continued for more efficient manned space transportation

‰ Fusion power/propulsion may supplant nuclear fission due to greater

safety and implemeted early for replacing HCTs

‰ Worm holes may be the only possible method to explore the universe
Future R&D in Advanced Space Power Sources

‰ Development of advanced thin film PV and Li Ion batteries

‰ Development of Solar Thermal Thermionic Power system for high

power applications

‰ Development of nuclear reactors and for Lunar Bases and Space

Craft power/propulsion [2006-2030]

‰ Research and Develop Space Fusion Power/Propulsion

Technology [2006-2040]

‰ Research Physics and Technology for Interstellar Space Travel

[2006- 2???]
See: AIAA Frontiers in Propulsion Science [http://www.aiaa.org/content.cfm?pageid=360&id=1743 ]