Mark Wollen, Victor Bakke, and James Baker

Innovative Engineering Solutions, El Cajon, California

NASA Flexible Screen Propellant Management

Device (PMD) Demonstration With Cryogenic

Liquid

NASA/CR—2012-217406

April 2012

10-RPT-1002-ENG
NASA STI Program . . . in Profi le

Since its founding, NASA has been dedicated to the 

advancement of aeronautics and space science. The 

NASA Scientifi c and Technical Information (STI) 

program plays a key part in helping NASA maintain 

this important role.

The NASA STI Program operates under the auspices 

of the Agency Chief Information Offi cer. It collects, 

organizes, provides for archiving, and disseminates 

NASA’s STI. The NASA STI program provides access 

to the NASA Aeronautics and Space Database and 

its public interface, the NASA Technical Reports 

Server, thus providing one of the largest collections 

of aeronautical and space science STI in the world. 

Results are published in both non-NASA channels 

and by NASA in the NASA STI Report Series, which 

includes the following report types:

• TECHNICAL PUBLICATION. Reports of 

completed research or a major signifi cant phase 

of research that present the results of NASA 

programs and include extensive data or theoretical 

analysis. Includes compilations of signifi cant 

scientifi c and technical data and information 

deemed to be of continuing reference value. 

NASA counterpart of peer-reviewed formal 

professional papers but has less stringent 

limitations on manuscript length and extent of 

graphic presentations.

• TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM. Scientifi c 

and technical fi ndings that are preliminary or 

of specialized interest, e.g., quick release 

reports, working papers, and bibliographies that 

contain minimal annotation. Does not contain 

extensive analysis.

• CONTRACTOR REPORT. Scientifi c and 

technical fi ndings by NASA-sponsored 

contractors and grantees.

• CONFERENCE PUBLICATION. Collected 

papers from scientifi c and technical 

conferences, symposia, seminars, or other 

meetings sponsored or cosponsored by NASA.

• SPECIAL PUBLICATION. Scientifi c, 

technical, or historical information from 

NASA programs, projects, and missions, often 

concerned with subjects having substantial 

public interest.

• TECHNICAL TRANSLATION. Englishlanguage translations of foreign scientifi c and 

technical material pertinent to NASA’s mission.

Specialized services also include creating custom 

thesauri, building customized databases, organizing 

and publishing research results.

For more information about the NASA STI 

program, see the following:

• Access the NASA STI program home page at 

http://www.sti.nasa.gov

• E-mail your question via the Internet to help@

sti.nasa.gov

• Fax your question to the NASA STI Help Desk 

at 443–757–5803

• Telephone the NASA STI Help Desk at

 443–757–5802

• Write to:

 NASA Center for AeroSpace Information (CASI)

 7115 Standard Drive

 Hanover, MD 21076–1320
Mark Wollen, Victor Bakke, and James Baker

Innovative Engineering Solutions, El Cajon, California

NASA Flexible Screen Propellant Management

Device (PMD) Demonstration With Cryogenic

Liquid

NASA/CR—2012-217406

April 2012

10-RPT-1002-ENG

National Aeronautics and

Space Administration

Glenn Research Center

Cleveland, Ohio 44135

Prepared under Contract NNC08CA80C
Available from

NASA Center for Aerospace Information

7115 Standard Drive

Hanover, MD 21076–1320

National Technical Information Service

5301 Shawnee Road

Alexandria, VA 22312

Available electronically at http://www.sti.nasa.gov

Trade names and trademarks are used in this report for identifi cation 

only. Their usage does not constitute an offi cial endorsement, 

either expressed or implied, by the National Aeronautics and 

Space Administration.

Level of Review: This material has been technically reviewed by NASA technical management.
Table of Contents

Abstract/Executive Summary............................................................................................... 1

1 Introduction and Overview............................................................................................ 2

2 Screen Forming Process................................................................................................. 3

3 Cryogenic Test Apparatus.............................................................................................. 4

3.1 Initial Design Concept............................................................................................ 4

3.1.1 Overview.............................................................................................................. 4

3.1.2 Fabrication ........................................................................................................... 6

3.1.3 Testing ................................................................................................................ 11

3.1.4 Problems Encountered..................................................................................... 11

3.2 Redesigned Test Apparatus ................................................................................. 12

3.2.1 Overview............................................................................................................ 12

3.2.2 Fabrication ......................................................................................................... 13

3.2.3 Testing ................................................................................................................ 16

4 Conclusions/Recommendations................................................................................. 21

5 References...................................................................................................................... 21

NASA/CR—2012-217406 iii
List of Figures

Figure 1. Flexible Screen PMD Concept in Spherical Propellant Tank .......................... 3

Figure 2. Screen Forming Tool (Close-up) ........................................................................ 4

Figure 3. Screen Forming Tool (In-use)............................................................................. 4

Figure 4. Test Apparatus Plumbing Diagram..................................................................... 5

Figure 5. Test Apparatus Manual Control Valves.............................................................. 6

Figure 6. Polycarbonate PMD CAD Model....................................................................... 6

Figure 7. Test Apparatus Stand ........................................................................................... 7

Figure 8. Inner Support Ring............................................................................................... 7

Figure 9. End Cap ................................................................................................................. 8

Figure 10. Opposite End Cap.............................................................................................. 8

Figure 11. Inner retaining ring and PMD Screen.............................................................. 9

Figure 12. Test Apparatus Front View............................................................................. 10

Figure 13. Test Apparatus Side View................................................................................ 10

Figure 14. Test Apparatus End Cap View ....................................................................... 11

Figure 15. Initial Spring Loading Mechanism Below Screen .......................................... 11

Figure 16. New PMD test device render and assembled unit......................................... 13

Figure 17. View of Window in Test Apparatus................................................................ 14

Figure 18. Top View of Apparatus prior to Close-out................................................... 14

Figure 19. Original Spring Loading Mechanism............................................................... 15

Figure 20. Redesigned Spring Loading Mechanism........................................................ 15

Figure 21. Fully Assembled Final Test Apparatus............................................................ 16

Figure 22. Test Results with 200x1400 Screen and Heavy Spring Force Setting........ 18

Figure 23. Test Results with 325x2300 Screen and Reduced Spring Force Setting ..... 19

Figure 24. Test Results Showing Details of Forced Breakdown and Resealing........... 19

Figure 25. Example of Cyclic Testing Over 1 Hour Duration...................................... 20

NASA/CR—2012-217406 iv
Abstract/Executive Summary

NASA GRC awarded IES a contract extension (contract number 4200236839) to 

demonstrate and evaluate a new, flexible screen propellant management device 

(PMD) concept with liquid nitrogen. The concept was developed while working on a 

lunar ascent and descent vehicle PMD study for GRC, which is documented in IES 

Report # 09-RPT-1004-ENG, “Cryogenic Propellant Management Device – 

Conceptual Design Study,” 30 April 2009. While evaluating various options for liquid 

methane and liquid oxygen propellant management for these lunar missions, IES 

conceived the flexible screen device as a potential simple alternative, and performed 

some proof-of-concept tests using water with internal funding.

Under the contract extension (Option A), an LN2 test apparatus was designed and 

fabricated, and improved screen forming tooling was built. Initial attempts to test 

with the first LN2 test apparatus were unsuccessful due to leakage problems with the 

test apparatus. IES provided additional funding to redesign and build an improved 

test apparatus, and the second test apparatus worked successfully.

Problems were encountered with the first screen specimens because the spring 

settings were too stiff to allow the screen to deflect as intended. These problems were

solved by reducing the deflection spring force settings, improving the load application 

configuration, and selecting a finer mesh screen (325x2300 vs 200x1400).

Once these modifications were made, the device functioned very well, and as 

intended. The finer mesh screen was actually easier to form than the coarser mesh 

screen, and very low spring forces were more than adequate to return the screen to its 

fully expanded position. Hence the device can be made to operate with considerable 

margin between the screen bubble point pressure and the required deflection 

pressure. No significant degradation in the screen bubble point was observed either 

due to the screen stretching process or due to cyclic fatigue during testing.

Our initial goal of 100+ cycles at cryogenic temperatures could not be met due to 

budgetary and test apparatus limitations. However, an estimated 30 to 50 deflection 

cycles, and approximately 3 to 5 thermal cycles, were performed on the final screen 

specimen, prior to and between formally recorded testing. These cycles included 

some “abusive” pressure cycling, where gas or liquid was driven through the screen at 

NASA/CR—2012-217406 1
rates that produced differential pressures across the screen of several times the bubble 

point pressure. No obvious performance degradation or other changes were observed 

over the duration of testing.

In summary, it is felt by the author that these simple tests validated the feasibility of 

the flexible screen PMD concept for use with cryogenic propellants.

Recommendations for further work would be to 1) design and fabricate a full scale, 

flight-representative, flexible screen PMD, 2) install it in a flight-representative 

propellant tank for ground testing, and then 3) seek flight demonstration 

opportunities to prove out the concept in a low-gravity or zero-gravity environment.

1 Introduction and Overview

This report documents work performed for NASA Glenn Research Center (GRC) 

under an Option A extension to a prior contract. The original contract involved a 

study of various propellant management devices for lunar descent and ascent vehicle 

concepts using cryogenic propellants. The contract extension was exercised to 

evaluate a Flexible Screen Propellant Management Device (PMD) using liquid 

nitrogen. Significant background regarding the flexible screen concept is contained in 

the original report (Innovative Engineering Solutions report # 09-RPT-1004-ENG, 

“Cryogenic Propellant Management Device – Conceptual Design Study,” 30 April 

2009), and the reader should review that report for background information.

Figure 1 below provides a very brief review of the concept as it would be installed in a 

spherical tank. Basically, the device functions by using a screen that has been prestretched into a spherical shape, and is then preloaded with a spring mechanism to 

“inflate” with liquid when the screen is in contact with liquid contained in the tank. If 

liquid is extracted from the device (or lost through evaporation) when the screen is 

not in contact with liquid in the tank, then the screen will deflect to accommodate this 

propellant loss without breaking down and admitting vapor. The device is therefore 

classified as a partial communication PMD. Preliminary work indicated that the 

device as envisioned should be capable of retaining between 4 and 5 % of the volume 

of a spherical tank between the fully expanded and fully contracted positions, as 

shown in Figure 1.

NASA/CR—2012-217406 2
IES PMD volume vs screen deflection

0

0.005

0.01

0.015

0.02

0.025

0.03

0.035

0.04

0.045

0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4

screen deflection, inches

PMD volume/tank volume

EXPANDING SCREEN

CONTRACTING 

SCREEN

PMD volume = spherical segment of 

height 6.5 inches and base diameter 40.2 

inches.

Screen deflection measured at center of 

screen.

Main LO2 tank diameter = 6.0 feet.

Flexible Screen in Inflated Position

Flexible Screen in Propellant 

Depletion Position

Figure 1. Flexible Screen PMD Concept in Spherical Propellant Tank

2 Screen Forming Process 

The PMD Screen forming process consisted of inflating screen mesh using shop air in 

a custom-built screen forming device (See Figures 2 and 3, below). The screen was 

first cut and placed inside a plastic bag to stop any air leakage through the mesh 

during inflating and was then clamped with the device’s circular clamp. The clamp

held the screen mesh in place while one enclosed side of the mesh was pressurized 

using shop air. The mesh was allowed to inflate and deform until a near spherical 

shape was observed. A few initial screen articles were allowed to burst to determine 

the strength characteristics of the screen mesh. The final undamaged mesh was then 

removed from the device and installed in the PMD for testing. 

NASA/CR—2012-217406 3
Figure 2. Screen Forming Tool (Close-up)

Figure 3. Screen Forming Tool (In-use)

3 Cryogenic Test Apparatus

 

3.1 Initial Design Concept

3.1.1 Overview

The initial design concept for the test apparatus used fully polycarbonate construction 

to allow for clear viewing of the screen article. See Figures 4, 5, and 6, and Table 1 for 

details of the design and plumbing. The device was designed to have a low static 

pressure (< 10 PSIG) while allowing a ∆P to build across the screen. The 

polycarbonate PMD was designed with a three layer construction consisting of an 

NASA/CR—2012-217406 4
outer gas cavity, a LN2 cold wall, and the inner chamber. The outer wall consisted of 

multiple layers of Mylar sheeting to cut down convection from ambient air to the 

inner LN2 cold wall chamber. This would reduce the frosting on the outer window to 

allow for visual inspection to the inner chamber containing the screen article. The 

cold wall of the device was filled with LN2 during testing to intercept heat from the 

surrounding to allow for undisturbed LN2 flow in the inner chamber. The inner 

chamber, which houses the screen article, can be pressurized on one side with He (g) 

to impose a ∆P across the screen. The other side can be filled with LN2 or drained at 

will to simulate fuel use.

Figure 4. Test Apparatus Plumbing Diagram

Table 1. PMD Piping Diagram Symbols

Identifier: Function: Description:

Vcwv1 Valve Cold wall vent 1

Vcwv2 Valve Cold wall vent 2

Vpmdf Valve PMD fill

Vpmdd Valve PMD drain

Vpmdv Valve PMD vent

Vtankd Valve Tank drain

Vtankv Valve Tank vent

VpressHe Valve Tank helium pressurization

Pcw Pressure transducer Cold wall cavity

Pt Pressure transducer Tank pressure

Ppmd Pressure transducer PMD internal pressure

DP Pressure transducer Differential across screen

NASA/CR—2012-217406 5
Figure 5. Test Apparatus Manual Control Valves

Figure 6. Polycarbonate PMD CAD Model

3.1.2 Fabrication

The polycarbonate PMD was built using extruded Polycarbonate cylinder shells as 

well as flat sheets of polycarbonate for endcaps. Below are some of the specific pieces 

constructed along with a short description of their function.

Figure 7 shows the stand, which allowed the test apparatus to be swiveled. 

NASA/CR—2012-217406 6
Figure 7. Test Apparatus Stand

Figure 8 shows the inner chamber support ring for the screen. 

Figure 8. Inner Support Ring

Below (Figures 9 and 10) are two pieces of the end assembly. The main hub (right) 

holds the walls in place with concentric grooves cut in the piece. The vent holes can 

be seen which allow the filling and draining of LN2 into and out of the cold wall 

chamber. There is also a pressure transducer hole on each side to measure the ∆P 

across the screen during testing.

NASA/CR—2012-217406 7
Figure 9. End Cap

 

 

Figure 10. Opposite End Cap

NASA/CR—2012-217406 8
Figure 11 shows a picture of the inner retaining ring for the diaphragm assembly and 

the mesh article (in plastic bag) after coming out of the forming device.

Figure 11. Inner retaining ring and PMD Screen

Figures 12, 13, and 14 below show the completely assembled PMD test apparatus. 

Figure 15 shows the spring mechanism that pushes against the screen to deflect the 

screen into the fully inflated position. In the spring mechanism, the 6 aluminum 

pieces are formed into a circular radius (to match the fully inflated screen) which 

maximizes the volume of the lower chamber when the screen is fully expanded. The 

springs are low enough below the sides of the mesh not to interfere with its flexure in 

the contracting direction (while expending fuel). The screen is capable of attaining a 

nearly spherical shape in either direction. 

NASA/CR—2012-217406 9
Figure 12. Test Apparatus Front View

Figure 13. Test Apparatus Side View

NASA/CR—2012-217406 10
Figure 14. Test Apparatus End Cap View

Figure 15. Initial Spring Loading Mechanism Below Screen

3.1.3 Testing

Checkout testing using water showed the screen performing as expected. Difficulties 

encountered with this test apparatus when switching to LN2 are discussed below.

NASA/CR—2012-217406 11
The main problem encountered with the initial polycarbonate test apparatus was 

leaking from the flange joints. Although the device sealed completely at ambient 

temperatures, once cooled to cryogenic temperatures, leakage was excessive. This was

most likely caused by a combination of the differential shrinkage and the lower than 

recommended compression stress on the joint sealant itself. Repeated attempts to 

make this test apparatus seal adequately were unsuccessful, and it was decided to 

undertake a major redesign.

3.2 Redesigned Test Apparatus

3.2.1 Overview

The new concept design for the test apparatus was functionally identical to the first 

design, but consists of a welded aluminum frame with small, flat polycarbonate 

windows which are easier to seal. Bolts with belleville washers were placed around the 

windows to allow for continued stress on the joint sealant down to cryogenic 

temperatures (factor of safety ≈ 1.2). The outer polycarbonate cavity windows were 

evacuated with a vacuum pump (< 1 PSIA) to reduce the heat transfer due to 

convection between the cold wall and the atmosphere. This combined with a small 

fan resulted in no frosting of the windows during testing for extended periods. The 

device consists of an inner chamber which houses the screen test article, and an outer 

cold wall space which is filled with LN2. Figure 16 below shows a rendering of the 

completed model as well as the fabricated device.

3.1.4 Problems Encountered

NASA/CR—2012-217406 12
Figure 16. New PMD test device render and assembled unit.

3.2.2 Fabrication

The aluminum-body PMD was fabricated from 6061-T6 tooling plate. The pieces 

were then welded together to form the complete structures. The end caps of the 

boxes were bolted down with Gore Joint SealantTM used to seal the joints. Figures 17, 

18, and 19 show some of the specific pieces constructed along with a short 

description of their function.

NASA/CR—2012-217406 13
Figure 17. View of Window in Test Apparatus

Figure 18. Top View of Apparatus prior to Close-out

Figures 19 and 20, below, (looking up from the bottom of screen) show the original 

and modified spring loading mechanism design. The final design (Figure 20) was 

more stable and easier to assemble than the first design. It also appeared to provide 

somewhat better load distribution, although there was no easy method to quantify 

this.

NASA/CR—2012-217406 14
Figure 19. Original Spring Loading Mechanism

Figure 20. Redesigned Spring Loading Mechanism

NASA/CR—2012-217406 15
Figure 21 shows a picture of the completely assembled, fully-insulated PMD testing 

device.

Figure 21. Fully Assembled Final Test Apparatus

3.2.3 Testing

The flexible screen was tested in the redesigned test apparatus with water, isopropyl 

alcohol, and LN2. Initial water tests showed operation as expected. The screen 

deflected fully, as expected, before breakdown occurred. Initial testing of the 200 × 

1400 screen mesh with LN2 indicated a breakdown pressure close to what is expected 

for LN2 (∆P ≈ 0.26). However, no screen deflection was observed, apparently 

because the differential pressure required to deflect the screen was greater than the 

LN2 bubble point pressure. This was resolved by forming test specimens of finer 

mesh (325x2300 versus 200x1400), adjusting the springs to achieve a lower spring 

force, and improving the design of the spring loading mechanism as previously 

discussed and shown in Figure 20. With these changes, the device functioned as 

intended, and a very large margin between screen bubble point and deflection 

NASA/CR—2012-217406 16
pressures was found to be possible, while still maintaining adequate spring deflection 

force to fully inflate the screen.

Significant test results are shown in Figure 22 through 25. All pressures are in English 

units of lbf/in^2, and time is in seconds, unless otherwise noted. Differential 

pressure is x100.

Figure 22 shows initial results with the coarser mesh (200x1400) screen and spring 

forces set too high to achieve significant screen deflection prior to screen breakdown. 

The tank is pressurized (at approximately 220 sec) to sub cool the liquid by 

approximately 16 psi, and liquid is then slowly extracted from beneath the screen. 

Measured differential pressure slowly rises due to the dropping hydrostatic liquid head 

as liquid is extracted. Once liquid is depleted from above the screen, differential 

pressure rapidly reaches the screen bubble point pressure and breakdown occurs (time 

approximately 320 sec).

Figure 23 shows similar test conditions as in Figure 22, after switching to the finer 

mesh screen and reducing the applied spring force. Here, the tank above the screen 

becomes completely drained at approximately 220 seconds, and the screen deflects as 

the differential pressure rises from approximately 0.03 to 0.06 psid. Full deflection is 

reached at approximately 250 seconds, at which point the screen differential pressure 

rapidly reaches the bubble point pressure. A breakdown and resealing cycle then 

develops as liquid continues to be drained. It is noteworthy that a substantial 

reduction in differential pressure across the screen must occur before the screen 

reseals. This is generally inconsequential to the operation of the device, since a 

functioning PMD of this type should never be driven to breakdown in normal 

operation. The characteristic does indicate, however, that substantial hysteresis may 

be present between breakdown and resealing, and/or there might be a significant time 

interval required for resealing to occur. These breakdown and resealing cycles are 

better shown in Figure 24.

Figure 23 also shows that the screen remains well sealed when outflow is stopped 

prior to breakdown with the screen deflected (see the time interval from 

approximately 300 to 480 seconds).

Finally, Figure 25 provides an example of repetitive cycling of the screen, including 

high positive and negative pressure differential as the screen is driven between fully 

NASA/CR—2012-217406 17
inflated and collapsed positions. Bubble point performance and other operational 

characteristics showed no changes as the result of any cyclic fatigue imposed by all of 

the testing (approximately 30 to 50 deflection cycles, and 3 to 5 thermal cycles).

LN2 PMD Test1-26-10 ContinuedC

-30

-20

-10

0

10

20

30

40

50

0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700

Time, seconds

T, P

Ullage P

Screen DP*100

Pressurize tank with Helium

Tank drained to expose screen, screen reaches bubble 

point and is unable to deflect due to spring force 

setting

Liquid level dropping

Figure 22. Test Results with 200x1400 Screen and Heavy Spring Force Setting

NASA/CR—2012-217406 18
PMD LN2 Test Attempt 1 16 Feb 2010

-50

-40

-30

-20

-10

0

10

20

30

40

50

0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500

Time, seconds

Pressure, lbf/sq in

Ullage P

Screen DP*100

Fill complete

Pressurize ullage with Helium

Drain tank through PMD

Tank empty, screen deflection starts

Screen fully deflected, draining continues

Breakdown/resea

l cycles

Drain stopped, screen reseals

Screen drained until 

fully deflected without 

b kd

Drain stopped

Begin refill

Figure 23. Test Results with 325x2300 Screen and Reduced Spring Force Setting

PMD LN2 Test Attempt 1 16 Feb 2010

-20

-10

0

10

20

30

40

50

200 210 220 230 240 250 260 270 280 290 300

Time, seconds

Pressure, lbf/sq in

Ullage P

Screen DP*100

Tank empty, screen deflection starts

Screen fully deflected, draining continues

Closeup of Breakdown/Reseal Cycles

Closeup of Breakdown/Reseal Cycles

Figure 24. Test Results Showing Details of Forced Breakdown and Resealing

NASA/CR—2012-217406 19
Consistent bubble-point following multiple cycles with “abusive” pressure levels

-100

-80

-60

-40

-20

0

20

40

60

80

100

0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000

Time, seconds

Pressure, lbf/sq in

Ullage P

Screen DP*100

Figure 25. Example of Cyclic Testing Over 1 Hour Duration

NASA/CR—2012-217406 20
4 Conclusions/Recommendations

Once test apparatus difficulties were resolved and adjustments to the spring loading 

mechanism were performed, the flexible screen PMD concept functioned as 

anticipated in all respects. It appears that substantial margin can be maintained 

between screen bubble point pressure and screen full deflection pressure, yet still have 

adequate spring force to fully re-inflate the deflected screen. Furthermore, although 

test duration was limited and cyclic testing not recorded rigorously for these tests, it 

appears that screen degradation due to mechanical or thermal cyclic fatigue will not be 

a serious problem.

Even the simple screen forming tooling used for this study easily yielded test 

specimens capable of nearly 1 inch vertical deflection per 3.5 inches radius, and did 

not appear to degrade screen bubble point measurably (indeed, post stretching bubble 

point was in most cases as high or higher than pre-stretching bubble point!). Further 

refinement of the forming tooling is recommended if even greater deflection range is 

desired. Furthermore, screen preparation such as annealing and then heat treating 

before and after the forming process might provide additional benefits.

Recommendations for future work (other than the screen forming refinements 

mentioned above) would be to design and fabricate a larger scale device, 

representative of flight-like hardware, and install this in a flight-representative 

cryogenic propellant tank, followed by ground testing, and eventually flight testing in 

a low or zero-g environment. Further refinements and alternatives for applying the 

inflation load on the screen should also be considered for the next device (although 

the simple spring loading mechanism currently employed seemed to work very well). 

5 References 

IES Report # 09-RPT-1004-ENG, “Cryogenic Propellant Management Device – 

Conceptual Design Study,” Mark Wollen, Fred Merino, John Schuster, Christopher 

Newton, 30 April 2009

NASA/CR—2012-217406 21
REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE Form Approved 

OMB No. 0704-0188 

The public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 1 hour per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the 

data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this 

burden, to Department of Defense, Washington Headquarters Services, Directorate for Information Operations and Reports (0704-0188), 1215 Jefferson Davis Highway, Suite 1204, Arlington, VA 22202-4302. 

Respondents should be aware that notwithstanding any other provision of law, no person shall be subject to any penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information if it does not display a currently valid OMB 

control number. 

PLEASE DO NOT RETURN YOUR FORM TO THE ABOVE ADDRESS. 

1. REPORT DATE (DD-MM-YYYY)

01-04-2012 

2. REPORT TYPE

Final Contractor Report 

3. DATES COVERED (From - To)

4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE

NASA Flexible Screen Propellant Management Device (PMD) Demonstration With 

Cryogenic Liquid 

5a. CONTRACT NUMBER

NNC08CA80C 

5b. GRANT NUMBER

5c. PROGRAM ELEMENT NUMBER

6. AUTHOR(S)

Wollen, Mark; Bakke, Victor; Baker, James 

5d. PROJECT NUMBER

5e. TASK NUMBER

5f. WORK UNIT NUMBER

WBS 095240.04.02.22.03 

7. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES)

Innovative Engineering Solutions 

8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION

 REPORT NUMBER

E-18053 

9. SPONSORING/MONITORING AGENCY NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES)

National Aeronautics and Space Administration 

Washington, DC 20546-0001 

10. SPONSORING/MONITOR'S

 ACRONYM(S)

NASA 

11. SPONSORING/MONITORING

 REPORT NUMBER

NASA/CR-2012-217406 

12. DISTRIBUTION/AVAILABILITY STATEMENT

Unclassified-Unlimited 

Subject Category: 20 

Available electronically at http://www.sti.nasa.gov 

This publication is available from the NASA Center for AeroSpace Information, 443-757-5802

13. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES

14. ABSTRACT

While evaluating various options for liquid methane and liquid oxygen propellant management for lunar missions, Innovative Engineering 

Solutions (IES) conceived the flexible screen device as a potential simple alternative to conventional propellant management devices 

(PMD). An apparatus was designed and fabricated to test flexible screen devices in liquid nitrogen. After resolution of a number of issues 

(discussed in detail in the paper), a fine mesh screen (325 by 2300 wires per inch) spring return assembly was successfully tested. No 

significant degradation in the screen bubble point was observed either due to the screen stretching process or due to cyclic fatigue during 

testing. An estimated 30 to 50 deflection cycles, and approximately 3 to 5 thermal cycles, were performed on the final screen specimen, 

prior to and between formally recorded testing. These cycles included some “abusive” pressure cycling, where gas or liquid was driven 

through the screen at rates that produced differential pressures across the screen of several times the bubble point pressure. No obvious 

performance degradation or other changes were observed over the duration of testing. In summary, it is felt by the author that these simple 

tests validated the feasibility of the flexible screen PMD concept for use with cryogenic propellants.

15. SUBJECT TERMS

Cryogenics; Fluid management; Propellant tanks 

16. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF: 17. LIMITATION OF

 ABSTRACT

UU 

18. NUMBER

 OF 

 PAGES

29 

19a. NAME OF RESPONSIBLE PERSON

STI Help Desk (email:help@sti.nasa.gov) 

a. REPORT

U 

b. ABSTRACT

U 

c. THIS 

PAGE

U 

19b. TELEPHONE NUMBER (include area code)

443-757-5802 

Standard Form 298 (Rev. 8-98)

Prescribed by ANSI Std. Z39-18