Search Results

ESA and NASA agencies agreed to run an interface compatibility test at the EADS facility between the Columbus flight module and a duplicate ground unit of a currently on-orbit US International Standard Payload Rack, the Human Research Facility (HRF) Flight Prototype Rack (FPR). The purpose of the test was to demonstrate the capability to run US payloads inside the European ISS module Columbus. One of the critical aspects to be verified to ensure suitable operations of the two systems was the combined performance of the hydraulic controls resident in the HRF and Columbus coolant loops. A hydraulic model of the HRF FPR was developed and combined with the Columbus Active Thermal Control System (ATCS) model. Several coupled thermal-hydraulic test cases were then performed, preceded by mathematical analysis, required to predict safe test conditions and to optimize the Columbus valve configurations.

A final test activity was carried out to complete the verification of the Environmental Control System (ECS) performances by experimentally reproducing the thermal hydraulic behaviour of the Environmental Control & Life Support Subsystem (ECLSS) section integrated in the overall Module, expected on analytical basis. A previous test campaign (called Columbus ECS PFM Test) carried out in EADS-Bremen in spring 2003 and described in paper number 2004-01-2425 showed some contradictory data concerning the air loop behaviour. These incoherent test results were related to the environmental and geometrical cabin loop conditions during the on-ground 1g test and to improper position of the sensor measuring the cabin temperature. For this reason a partial repetition of the test has been performed. In particular, this experimental campaign was focused on the verification of the cabin air temperature control, as a consequence of the Temperature Control Valve (TCV) movement.

The Automated Transfer Vehicle (ATV) Thermal Control System (TCS) has the task to ensure the required internal environment at level of pressurized module and to thermally control the not pressurised modules and installed equipment, using passive and active control means, in response to the relevant applicable requirements. The ATV vehicle is assially subdivided into three main modules: the Integrated Cargo Carrier (ICC), the Equipped Avionics Bay (EAB) and the Equipped Propulsion Bay (EPB). Each of these modules present elaborated and specific thermal design solutions, to satisfy the different required operative tasks. The extensive thermal analysis campaign performed at ATV vehicle level and in progress for the next Qualification Review (QR) to justify and support the thermal control design solutions and verification status is described.