Engineering topics

Arno, Roger D.

Publications and source records attributed to Arno, Roger D..

8 records

NASA NTRS2000

Artificial Gravity for Mars Missions: The Different Design and Development Options

One of the major impediments to human Mars missions is the development of appropriate countermeasures for long term physiological response to the micro-gravity environment. A plethora of countermeasure approaches have been advanced from strictly pharmacological measures to large diameter rotating spacecraft that would simulate a 1-g environment (the latter being the most conservative from a human health perspective). The different approaches have significantly different implications not only on the overall system design of a Mars Mission Vehicle (MMV) but on the necessary earth-orbiting platform that would be required to qualify the particular countermeasure system. it is found that these different design options can be conveniently categorized in terms of the order of magnitude of the rotation diameter required (100's, 10's, 1's, 0 meters). From this, the different mass penalties associated with each category can be generally compared. The overall objective of the countermeasure system should be to maximize crew safety and comfort, minimize exercise protocol time (i.e., the time per day that each crew member would have to participate in the exercise/countermeasure), maximize countermeasure effectiveness, and minimize the associated system mass penalty of the Mars Mission Vehicle (in terms of fraction of IMLEO - Injected Mass in Low Earth Orbit).

Murbach, Marcus↗

NASA NTRS1991

Facilities for animal research in space

The animal facilities used aboard or designed for various spacecraft research missions are described. Consideration is given to the configurations used in Cosmos-1514 (1983) and Cosmos-1887 (1987) missions; the reusable Biosatellite capsule flown three times by NASA between 1966 and 1969; the NASA's Lifesat spacecraft that is being currently designed; the Animal Enclosure Module flown on Shuttle missions in 1983 and 1984; the Research Animal Holding Facility developed for Shuttle-Spacelab missions; the Rhesus Research Facility developed for a Spacelab mission; and the Japanese Animal Holding Facility for the Space Station Freedom. Special attention is given to the designs of NASA's animal facilities developed for Space Station Freedom and the details of various subsystems of these facilities. The main characteristics of the rodent and the primate habitats provided by these various facilities are discussed.

Bonting, Sjoerd L.↗

NASA NTRS1990

Facilities for animal research in space with special reference to Space Station Freedom

The facilities being planned for animal research on Space Station Freedom are considered in the context of the development of animal habitats from early ballistic and orbital flights to long-term missions aimed at more detailed scientific studies of the effects of space conditions on the vertebrate organism. Animal habitats are becoming more elaborate, requiring systems for environmental control, waste management, physiological monitoring, as well as ancillary facilities such as a 1-G control centrifuge and a glovebox. Habitats in use or to be used in various types of manned and unmanned spacecraft, and particularly those planned for Space Station Freedom, are described. The characteristics of the habitats are compared with each other and with current standards for animal holding facilities on the ground.

Bonting, Sjoerd L.↗

NASA NTRS1990

Research centrifuge accommodations on Space Station Freedom

Life sciences research using plants and animals on the Space Station Freedom requires the ability to maintain live subjects in a safe and low stress environment for long durations at microgravity and at one g. The need for a centrifuge to achieve these accelerations is evident. Programmatic, technical, and cost considerations currently favor a 2.5 meter diameter centrifuge located either in the end cone of a Space Station Freedom node or in a separate module. A centrifuge facility could support a mix of rodent, plant, and small primate habitats. An automated cage extractor could be used to remove modular habitats in pairs without stopping the main rotor, minimizing the disruption to experiment protocols. The accommodation of such a centrifuge facility on the Space Station represents a significant demand on the crew time, power, data, volume, and logistics capability. It will contribute to a better understanding of the effects of space flight on humans, an understanding of plant growth in space for the eventual production of food, and an understanding of the role of gravity in biological processes.

Arno, Roger D.↗

NASA NTRS1989

Life science research objectives and representative experiments for the space station

A workshop was convened to develop hypothetical experiments to be used as a baseline for space station designer and equipment specifiers to ensure responsiveness to the users, the life science community. Sixty-five intra- and extramural scientists were asked to describe scientific rationales, science objectives, and give brief representative experiment descriptions compatible with expected space station accommodations, capabilities, and performance envelopes. Experiment descriptions include hypothesis, subject types, approach, equipment requirements, and space station support requirements. The 171 experiments are divided into 14 disciplines.

Johnson, Catherine C.↗

NASA NTRS1988

Bioisolation on the Space Station

Animal research on the Space Station presents the need for bioisolation, which is here defined as instrumental and operational provisions, which will prevent the exchange of particles greater than 0.3-micron size and microorganisms between crew and animals. Current design principles for the Biological Research Project thus call for: (1) use of specific pathogen-free animals; (2) keeping animals at all times in enclosed habitats, provided with microbial filters and a waste collection system; (3) placing habitats in a holding rack, centrifuge, and workbench, all equipped with particulate and odor filters, (4) washing dirty cage units in an equipment cleaner, with treatment and recycling of the water; (5) designing components and facilities so as to ensure maximal accessibility for cleaning; and (6) defining suitable operational procedures. Limited ground tests of prototype components indicate that proper bioisolation can thus be achieved.

Bonting, Sjoerd L.↗

NASA NTRS1987

Accommodating life sciences on the Space Station

The NASA Ames Research Center Biological Research Project (BRP) is responsible for identifying and accommodating high priority life science activities, utilizing nonhuman specimens, on the Space Station and is charged to bridge the gap between the science community and the Space Station Program. This paper discusses the approaches taken by the BRP in accomodating these research objectives to constraints imposed by the Space Station System, while maintaining a user-friendly environment. Consideration is given to the particular research disciplines which are given priority, the science objectives in each of these disciplines, the functions and activities required by these objectives, the research equipment, and the equipment suits. Life sciences programs planned by the Space Station participating partners (USA, Europe, Japan, and Canada) are compared.

Arno, Roger D.↗

NASA NTRS1986

Science and payload options for animal and plant research accommodations aboard the early Space Station

The resources to be allocated for the development of the Initial Operational Capability (IOC) Space Station Animal and Plant Research Facility and the Growth Station Animal and Plant Vivarium and Laboratory may be limited; also, IOC accommodations for animal and plant research may be limited. An approach is presented for the development of Initial Research Capability Minilabs for animal and plant studies, which in appropriate combination and sequence can meet requirements for an evolving program of research within available accommodations and anticipated budget constraints.

Hilchey, John D.↗