Characterization of Spacesuit Associated Microbial Communities and Their Implications for NASA Missions
No abstract provided
Venkateswaran, Kasthuri↗
Engineering topics
Bell, Mary S.
Publications and source records attributed to Bell, Mary S..
NASA Extreme Environment Mission Operations: Science Operations Development for Human Exploration
The purpose of NASA Extreme Environment Mission Operations (NEEMO) mission 16 in 2012 was to evaluate and compare the performance of a defined series of representative near-Earth asteroid (NEA) extravehicular activity (EVA) tasks under different conditions and combinations of work systems, constraints, and assumptions considered for future human NEA exploration missions. NEEMO 16 followed NASA's 2011 Desert Research and Technology Studies (D-RATS), the primary focus of which was understanding the implications of communication latency, crew size, and work system combinations with respect to scientific data quality, data management, crew workload, and crew/mission control interactions. The 1-g environment precluded meaningful evaluation of NEA EVA translation, worksite stabilization, sampling, or instrument deployment techniques. Thus, NEEMO missions were designed to provide an opportunity to perform a preliminary evaluation of these important factors for each of the conditions being considered. NEEMO 15 also took place in 2011 and provided a first look at many of the factors, but the mission was cut short due to a hurricane threat before all objectives were completed. ARES Directorate (KX) personnel consulted with JSC engineers to ensure that high-fidelity planetary science protocols were incorporated into NEEMO mission architectures. ARES has been collaborating with NEEMO mission planners since NEEMO 9 in 2006, successively building upon previous developments to refine science operations concepts within engineering constraints; it is expected to continue the collaboration as NASA's human exploration mission plans evolve.
Bell, Mary S.↗
Robotic Sample Manipulator for Handling Astromaterials Inside the Geolab Microgravity Glovebox
Future human and robotic sample return missions will require isolation containment systems with strict protocols and procedures for reducing inorganic and organic contamination. Robotic handling and manipulation of astromaterials may be required for preliminary examination inside such an isolation containment system. In addition, examination of astromaterials in microgravity will require constant contact to secure samples during manipulation. The National Space Grant Foundation exploration habitat (XHab) academic innovative challenge 2012 administered through the NASA advanced exploration systems (AES) deep space habitat (DSH) project awarded funding to the University of Bridgeport team to develop an engineering design for tools to facilitate holding and handling geological samples for analysis in a microgravity glovebox environment. The Bridgeport XHab team developed a robotic arm system with a three-finger gripper that could manipulate geologic samples within the existing GeoLab glovebox integrated into NASA's DSH called the GeoLab Robotic Sample Manipulator (see fig. 1 and 2). This hardware was deployed and tested during the 2012 DSH mission operations tests [1].
Bell, Mary S.↗
Experimental Shock Transformation of Gypsum to Anhydrite: A New Low Pressure Regime Shock Indicator
The shock behavior of gypsum is important in understanding the Cretaceous/Paleogene event and other terrestrial impacts that contain evaporite sediments in their targets (e.g., Mars Exploration Rover Spirit detected sulfate at Gusev crater, [1]). Most interest focuses on issues of devolatilization to quantify the production of SO2 to better understand its role in generating a temporary atmosphere and its effects on climate and biota [2,3]. Kondo and Ahrens [4] measured induced radiation emitted from single crystal gypsum shocked to 30 and 40 GPa. They observed greybody emission spectra corresponding to temperatures in the range of 3,000 to 4,000 K that are a factor of 2 to 10 times greater than calculated pressure-density energy equation of state temperatures (Hugoniot) and are high enough to melt gypsum. Chen et al. [5] reported results of shock experiments on anhydrite, gypsum, and mixtures of these phases with silica. Their observations indicated little or no devolatilization of anhydrite shocked to 42 GPa and that the fraction of sulfur, by mass, that degassed is approx.10(exp -2) of theoretical prediction. In another report of shock experiments on calcite, anhydrite, and gypsum, Badjukov et al. [6] observed only intensive plastic deformation in anhydrite shock loaded at 63 GPa, and gypsum converted to anhydrite when shock loaded at 56 GPa but have not experimentally shocked gypsum in a step-wise manner to constrain possible incipient transformation effects. Schmitt and Hornemann [7] shock loaded anhydrite and quartz to a peak pressure of 60 GPa and report the platy anhydrite grains were completely pseudomorphed by small crystallized anhydrite grains. However, no evidence of interaction between the two phases could be observed and they suggested that recrystallization of anhydrite grains is the result of a solid-state transformation. They concluded that significant decomposition of anhydrite requires shock pressures higher than 60 GPa. Gupta et al. [8] reanalyzed the calcite and anhydrite shock wave experiments of Yang [9] using improved equations of state of porous materials and vaporized products. They determined the pressures for incipient and complete vaporization to be 32.5 and 122 GPa for anhydrite GPa which is a factor of 2 to 3 lower than reported earlier by Yang [9]. These studies are not in agreement regarding the onset of sulfate decomposition and documentation of shock effects in gypsum is incomplete.
Bell, Mary S.↗
Relative Shock Effects in Mixed Powders of Calcite, Gypsum, and Quartz: A Calibration Scheme from Shock Experiments
The shock behavior of calcite and gypsum is important in understanding the Cretaceous/Tertiary event and other terrestrial impacts that contain evaporite sediments in their targets. Most interest focuses on issues of devolatilization to quantify the production of CO2 or SO2 to better understand their role in generating a temporary atmosphere and its effects on climate and biota [e.g., papers in 1,2,3,4]. Devolatilization of carbonate is also important because the dispersion and fragmentation of ejecta is strongly controlled by the expansion of large volumes of gas during the impact process as well [5,6]. Shock recovery experiments for calcite yield seemingly conflicting results: early experimental devolatilization studies [7,8,9] suggested that calcite was substantially outgassed at 30 GPa (> 50%). However, the recent petrographic work of [10,11,12] presented evidence that essentially intact calcite is recovered from 60 GPa experiments. [13] reported results of shock experiments on anhydrite, gypsum, and mixtures of those phases with silica. Their observations indicate little or no devolatilization of anhydrite shocked to 42 GPa and that the fraction of sulfur, by mass, that degassed is approx.10(exp -2) of theoretical prediction. In another (preliminary) report of shock experiments on calcite, anhydrite, and gypsum, [14] observe calcite recrystallization when shock loaded at 61 GPa, only intensive plastic deformation in anhydrite shock loaded at 63 GPa, and gypsum converted to anhydrite when shock loaded at 56 GPa. [15] shock loaded anhydrite and quartz to a peak pressure of 60 GPa. All of the quartz grains were trans-formed to glass and the platy anhydrite grains were completely pseudomorphed by small crystallized anhydrite grains. However, no evidence of interaction between the two phases could be observed and they suggest that recrystallization of anhydrite grains is the result of a solid state transformation. [16] reanalyzed the calcite and anhydrite shock wave experiments of [17] using improved equations of state of porous materials and vaporized products. They determined the pressures for incipient and complete vaporization to be 32.5 and 122 GPa for anhydrite and 17.8 and 54.1 GPa for calcite, respectively, a factor of 2 to 3 lower than reported earlier by [17].
Bell, Mary S.↗