Skip to content

FO Cryogenic Propellant Management Cluster

Last updated: Session 41, 2026-04-07

Session 41 update: Artemis II launched April 1, 2026 — the first crewed mission beyond LEO in 53 years. The ICPS helium pressurization system (the exact physics studied in this cluster's FO projects) is what sent the crew to the Moon. See dedicated topic page: FO Technologies and Artemis II. Creare 4th FO project [145006] (two-phase pumped loop) details expanded — Creare now covers the full thermal management triad: liquid acquisition, heat rejection, and active heat transport.

Session 20 corrections: Mudawar 2→4 projects ([155235] spray HTC + [106638] cryo two-phase, both active with GRC Hartwig co-I). Chung 4→5 projects ([89415] chilldown). Collicott 9→15 projects (6 more discovered). Additional cryo-adjacent projects: [158521] MIT/Bucci surface boiling, [158460] Georgia Tech/Romero-Calvo thermomagnetic propellant positioning (Crosby co-I), [184147] Carthage MUTT acoustic ullage (Romero-Calvo co-I). UMD/Kim boiling cluster: [106578], [89349], [12472] (3 projects). The total cryo-adjacent project count is now 30+.


Summary

Flight Opportunities hosts a coherent cluster of 30+ projects addressing cryogenic propellant management — the physics of storing, transferring, gauging, and handling cryogenic fluids (LH2, LOX, LN2, LCH4) in reduced gravity. This isn't a formal program but an emergent research community: the same PIs, co-Is, and NASA engineers appear across multiple projects, and their publications cite each other. Together they form the experimental data foundation for Artemis cryogenic architecture.

Why this matters: Artemis missions require storing cryogenic propellants for weeks to months in cislunar space and on the lunar surface. Ground-based data doesn't predict reduced-gravity behavior (no buoyancy → different boiling, sloshing, pressurization, and gauging physics). FO's parabolic flights are the only affordable way to generate this data before committing to orbital experiments or flight hardware.


The Cluster Map

Core Research Groups (FO projects with deep investigation pages)

Group PI(s) FO Project(s) Focus KB Page
UF Chung Jacob Chung 106616, 106713 Tank coatings to reduce boiloff; pool boiling + He pressurization uf-chung-cryogenics.md
Aerospace Corp Samuel Darr 106642 Helium subsurface pressurization in reduced gravity aerospace-corp-cryogenics.md
Mudawar/Purdue Issam Mudawar 184140 Complete cryogenic pool boiling curve (nucleate → CHF → film) mudawar-thermal.md
Creare LLC Thomas Conboy 155234, 158702 Liquid Acquisition Device (LAD) + freeze-tolerant radiator creare-lad.md
GRC RF Gauging Gregory Zimmerli 12177, 91405 RF mass gauging → RRM3 ISS demo + Perseverance CFM grc-cryogenic-power.md
GRC FSP Thermal Marc Gibson 12184, 93976 Heat pipes + heat spreader for Fission Surface Power radiators grc-cryogenic-power.md
Carthage MPG Kevin Crosby 94131 + 6 more Modal propellant gauging (non-invasive tank vibration) carthage-college-mpg.md
Purdue Slosh Steven Collicott 106651, 106602, 106630, 106718 Propellant slosh dynamics + cryogenic bubble nucleation in LADs purdue-collicott-slosh.md

Additional Cryogenic FO Projects (shallow-scanned, Session 19)

Project PI Center/Org Focus TRL
106735 (ARCTIC) Jason Hartwig (GRC) Glenn Research Center Cryogenic chilldown + tank transfer methods 4→6
106745 (ECT) Jed Storey (KSC) Kennedy Space Center Electrical Capacitance Tomography mass gauging 4→6
106626 Boris Khusid (NJIT) New Jersey Inst. of Technology Cryogenic flow stability during refueling 4→6
106641 Emilio Baglietto (MIT) Massachusetts Inst. of Technology CFD boiling models for cryo fluid management 4→6
106677 Kevin Supak (SwRI) Southwest Research Institute Large-scale LAD (tapered channel, surface tension) 4→6
106620 Kevin Crosby (Carthage) Carthage College MPG during on-orbit refueling + transfer 6→7
12176 Jungho Kim (UMD) University of Maryland Electric field effects on pool boiling — see UMD heat transfer cluster (4 FO projects, ISS MABE+MPBE downstream) 4→4
91413 (ECVT) Jason Hartwig (GRC) Goddard (GSFC) ECVT propellant gauging (zero TRL gain: 4→4) 4→4
106708 Unknown Goddard (GSFC) Microgap flow boiling for thermal management 4→6
106704 Unknown Goddard (GSFC) EHD boiling heat transfer 5→6
91381 (EHeM) Unknown Glenn Research Center Heat Melt Compactor (waste → water recovery) 4→6

Total: ~27 FO projects touching cryogenic/thermal propellant management across the portfolio.

Session 19 discoveries: Three new cluster nodes found in shallow pass: - NJIT [106626] has co-I Thomas Conboy (Creare) — direct network link between NJIT and Creare - MIT [106641] has co-I Jason Hartwig (GRC) — another Hartwig connection - Carthage [106620] is an 8th Carthage MPG project (TRL 6→7, on-orbit refueling gauging)


The People Network

The cryogenic cluster is bound together by shared co-investigators and collaborators:

Jason Hartwig (GRC) ──── co-I on Aerospace Corp [106642] (Darr)
    │                    co-I on MIT CFD Boiling [106641] (Baglietto)
    │                    PI on ARCTIC [106735]
    │                    Published with Chung (UF) on microfilm coatings
    │
Samuel Darr (Aerospace) ── co-I on UF Chung [106616] (Taliaferro shared)
    │                       PI on [106642]
    │
Jacob Chung (UF) ──────── 30-year NASA cryo program
    │                      Published with Hartwig (GRC)
    │                      NASA Exceptional Public Service Medal 2024
    │
Thomas Conboy (Creare) ── PI on Creare LAD [155234] + Radiator [158702]
    │                      co-I on NJIT cryo stability [106626] (Khusid)
    │
Boris Khusid (NJIT) ───── PI on EHD phase separation [91373]
    │                      PI on cryo flow stability [106626]
    │                      Two FO projects spanning EHD + cryo domains
    │
Eric Hurlbert (JSC) ────── co-I on Carthage MPG [106670, 106631, 106620]
    │                       NASA propulsion systems lead
    │                       Bridge from FO data → mission requirements
    │
Issam Mudawar (Purdue) ── complementary to FBCE (ISS flow boiling)
    │                      co-I Collicott on nearby slosh projects
    │
Steven Collicott (Purdue) ─ [106602] = cryogenic bubble nucleation in LADs
                             Direct relevance to Creare LAD work

Session 19 update: The network is denser than initially mapped. Conboy (Creare) and Khusid (NJIT) are connected through [106626], and Hartwig (GRC) extends to MIT [106641]. These aren't isolated researchers — they form a ~12-person collaboration network spanning 5 institutions and 2 NASA centers.

Key observation: This is not a set of isolated experiments. The researchers know each other, cite each other, and serve as co-Is on each other's projects. Jason Hartwig (GRC) is the most connected node — he appears on the Aerospace Corp project, published with Chung, and runs his own ARCTIC project. Eric Hurlbert (JSC) is the mission-requirements bridge for Carthage's gauging work.


Technology Landscape

The cluster covers four fundamental cryogenic challenges for Artemis:

1. Boiloff and Heat Transfer

How does cryogenic propellant behave thermally in reduced gravity?

Problem FO Projects Key Result
Tank surface boiling Chung [106616, 106713] Coatings + flow pulsing reduce boiloff; 6+ publications
Pressurization physics Darr [106642] 19-case He subsurface pressurization dataset; npj Microgravity 2025
Pool boiling curve Mudawar [184140] First complete cryo pool boiling curve in reduced gravity; Phase III follow-on
Chilldown + transfer Hartwig [106735] Cryogenic transfer methods for tank fill/drain in low-g
Flow boiling GSFC [106708, 106704] Microgap and EHD boiling approaches

2. Propellant Gauging

How much propellant is left in a tank when you can't settle it?

Approach FO Projects Key Result
RF modal gauging Zimmerli [12177, 91405] RRM3 ISS demo + Perseverance CFM citation; 9-year arc
Acoustic modal gauging (MPG) Crosby [7 projects] IM-3 lunar lander development; Airbus commercialization; TechLeap $500K
ECT gauging Storey [106745] Electrical capacitance tomography; TRL 4→6
ECVT gauging Hartwig [91413] ECVT approach; TRL 4→4 (zero gain — approach may not work in low-g)

Three competing gauging approaches are being matured through FO: RF resonance (GRC), acoustic modal (Carthage), and capacitance tomography (KSC). This is healthy technology competition — the approaches have different trade-offs (RF needs antennas inside the tank, MPG works externally, ECT needs electrode arrays).

3. Liquid Acquisition

How do you ensure vapor-free propellant reaches the engine in zero-g?

Problem FO Projects Key Result
LAD mesh screen design Conboy [155234] Hybrid mesh LAD validated in microgravity; delivered to GRC for LH2 testing
Bubble nucleation in LADs Collicott [106602] Cryogenic bubble behavior in screen-channel LADs; ISS follow-up data

4. Thermal Control for Surface Power

How do you reject heat from nuclear power systems at 1/6 g?

Problem FO Projects Key Result
Heat pipe limits Gibson [12184] Ti-water heat pipes for FSP radiators; lunar gravity data
Heat spreader Gibson [93976] Stirling convertor interface for FSP
Freeze-tolerant radiator Conboy [158702] Radiator that survives lunar night freeze/thaw cycles

Downstream Impact Summary

Group Highest Downstream Impact $ Tracked
GRC RF Gauging RRM3 ISS demo + Perseverance CFM (confirmed mission infusion) — (NASA internal)
Carthage MPG IM-3 NOVA-C lunar lander (active development) + Airbus commercialization ~$2.9M
GRC FSP Thermal Fission Surface Power 2028 demo (active program feed) — (NASA internal)
Creare LAD Artemis cryo propellant management (program-level) $60M+ (Creare portfolio)
UF Chung NASA Exceptional Public Service Medal + Artemis data foundation — (academic)
Aerospace Corp npj Microgravity publication + Artemis design data — (FFRDC)
Mudawar/Purdue STTR Phase III ($366.6K, Apr 2026) ~$2.5M total
Purdue Slosh Virgin Galactic flight + Purdue 1 crewed mission (2027) — (academic)

Why FO Is Uniquely Suited for Cryogenics

  1. Parabolic flights are the only affordable reduced-gravity cryogenic testbed. ISS experiments cost 10-100× more and have years-long queues. Drop towers provide only seconds. Parabolic flights give 20-25 seconds of low-g per parabola with real cryogenic fluids — enough for boiling, pressurization, and gauging experiments.

  2. The data gap is real and documented. Multiple NASA technical memoranda cite the lack of reduced-gravity cryogenic data as a design risk for Artemis. FO's cryogenic cluster is systematically closing these gaps.

  3. The community is self-reinforcing. Researchers who fly FO cryogenic experiments become the expert reviewers and co-Is for the next round. The cluster grows by knowledge accumulation, not by program direction — FO provides the platform, and the cryogenic community self-organizes around it.

  4. Three gauging approaches ensure competition. Having RF, acoustic, and ECT approaches all maturing through FO means NASA isn't betting on one technology. Each has different failure modes and integration requirements.


Open Questions

  • Which gauging approach will Artemis select? Carthage MPG has the strongest commercial/mission traction (IM-3, Airbus), but GRC RF gauging has ISS flight heritage (RRM3). ECT is the youngest.
  • Does Hartwig's ARCTIC data change Artemis chilldown procedures? The ARCTIC project completed Aug 2024 — has the data been incorporated into Artemis cryogenic transfer planning?
  • Mudawar Phase III timeline: The $366.6K Phase III started April 2026. The pool boiling correlations it produces will be the first complete dataset for cryo designers. When will they be published?
  • Collicott [106602] + Creare LAD connection: Collicott studies cryogenic bubble nucleation in LADs; Creare builds LADs. Is there a direct collaboration, or parallel independent work?

Cross-References


Sources

  • All TechPort project records cited above
  • ARCTIC library item: Hartwig et al., "An advance in transfer line chilldown heat transfer of cryogenic propellants in microgravity using microfilm coating," npj Microgravity (2021), DOI: 10.1038/s41526-021-00149-5
  • Darr et al., npj Microgravity (2025), DOI: 10.1038/s41526-025-00504-w
  • Crosby et al., Acta Astronautica (2019), DOI: 10.1016/j.actaastro.2019.01.050
  • Session 19, 2026-04-06