Engineering topics

Harry Jones

Publications and source records attributed to Harry Jones.

4 records

NASA NTRS2023

Long Term Human Presence in Space Requires Artificial Gravity and Radiation Shielding

Astronauts who spend many months in microgravity suffer serious health problems including muscle atrophy, cardiovascular deconditioning, bone calcium loss, impaired vision, and immune system changes. Exercise countermeasures have been insufficient to maintain normal human performance. Similar problems can be expected in the partial gravity of the Moon and Mars. Achieving the long-term presence of healthy humans in space requires providing artificial Earth level gravity. This can be done on the Moon and Mars by using horizontally rotating habitats with angled floors, but it is easier in space habitats. Astronauts travelling beyond the protection of the Earth’s magnetic field can suffer harm from cosmic background radiation and occasional strong solar flares. Supporting healthy long-term human lives will require radiation shielding on the Moon and Mars as well as in space. Human space settlement will probably begin with artificial rotating space habitats in Low Earth Orbit (LEO) where they will be shielded from radiation. The earlier anticipated human communities in pressurized domes on the Moon or Mars appear unrealistic because of the now known problems of partial gravity and radiation.

Astronauts↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Preliminary Design of a Downstream Processing System for Protein Production in Space

Biomanufacturing is a promising technology to convert in situ resources into essential products including enzymes, therapeutics, biopolymers and other chemicals required to support deep-space missions that may not be easily supplied or produced by alternative means. In addition to the biomass production operations, vital down-stream steps including biomass harvesting/concentration, cell lysis, protein capture and purification are needed to produce an application-ready product. Commercially available terrestrial processes commonly require complex, heavy equipment and highly trained operators, which are not practical in deep space environments. In this work, we aim to identify approaches required to produce an intracellular, His-tagged recombinant enzyme using E. coli at 1 L production scales within the constraints of a deep-space mission as a model use-case scenario. Based on extensive literature review and commercially available products, we identified candidate technologies and products that could be integrated for deep space biomanufacturing. Different preliminary designs were then compared in terms of total system impacts on up-mass, processing time, and consumables required. Our analysis indicated that a biomass concentrator would significantly reduce the processing time and consumables required for the overall system without a large increase in the total mass. We also identified viable technologies for other steps such as cell lysis and protein purification. Predictions from our trade study will be validated in the laboratory by testing the most promising products with the results used to optimize the design. This research will help transfer technology that is well developed on Earth to a space-ready format to produce biological products from a wide variety of microorganisms that can support deep-space missions.

Biomanufacturing↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Design for Reliability (DfR) in Space Life Support

The engineering process of Design for Reliability (DfR) is well established in the automotive and aerospace industries. DfR should be useful in the future development of space life support systems. DfR is a sequence of tasks that develop system requirements and plan reliability analysis and testing. First and fundamentally, the reliability requirement is defined. Next the system reliability model is developed, often using a reliability block diagram. The overall system reliability requirement is allocated to the subsystems and an estimate of the attainable reliability is made. This expected reliability can be improved by simplifying the design by removing components or by replacing less reliable components. Improving reliability can require difficult compromises, such as reducing performance requirements, increasing budget, or extending testing. The actual system reliability can be determined only by testing, which should continue long enough to provide the required confidence in the measured value. New systems often have unexpected design errors that cause failures in early testing. The usual reliability improvement process of testing, finding the failure modes, and redesigning to remove them reduces the failure rate and is referred to as “reliability growth.” After redesign has been completed, the system should be further tested to determine the actual achieved reliability more accurately. If the final system failure rate is too high, redundant systems can be used to improve overall operational reliability. Adding redundancy simply to increase the one- or two-fault tolerance metric may sometimes reduce reliability. Reliability can be improved in three ways: redesigning the system to include more reliable subsystems and components, reliability growth testing and failure mode removal, and by using parallel redundant systems. DfR should combine these approaches to achieve the required reliability while managing performance, cost, and schedule.

Reliability↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Take Material to Space or Make It There?

Most human missions in space have been brief, lasting only days or weeks, and they have taken all the materials they need. Using the alternate method, the International Space Station recycles water and oxygen, and it is often assumed that future Moon and Mars missions should also recycle their life support materials. The “take or make” decision is primarily based on cost, and making or recycling material on longer space missions can sometimes be less expensive than taking it. Longer missions favor recycling over resupply when the initial cost to provide recycling equipment is less than the cost to provide resupply. Recycling was clearly cheaper than taking material to the space station in the space shuttle era when launch costs were very high. Launch costs have decreased and the take or make decision point has changed. The recent reduction in launch cost by a factor of about twenty-five to fifty makes taking material cost less than making or recycling it for much longer missions. The cost breakeven point when making rather than taking material is less expensive is now much farther out in time than before. Material recycling or in situ production no longer saves cost except for very large or very long missions.

Space manufacturing↗