Engineering topics

Mitchell, Kathryn C.

Publications and source records attributed to Mitchell, Kathryn C..

3 records

NASA NTRS2012

CO2 Washout Testing of the REI and EM-ACES Space Suits

When a space suit is used during ground testing, adequate carbon dioxide (CO2) washout must be provided for the suited subject. Symptoms of acute CO2 exposure depend on partial pressure of CO2 (ppCO2), metabolic rate of the subject, and other factors. This test was done to characterize inspired oronasal ppCO2 in the Rear Entry I-Suit (REI) and the Enhanced Mobility Advanced Crew Escape Suit (EM-ACES) for a range of workloads and flow rates for which ground testing is nominally performed. Three subjects were tested in each suit. In all but one case, each subject performed the test twice. Suit pressure was maintained at 4.3 psid. Subjects wore the suit while resting, performing arm ergometry, and walking on a treadmill to generate metabolic workloads of about 500 to 3000 BTU/hr. Supply airflow was varied between 6, 5, and 4 actual cubic feet per minute (ACFM) at each workload. Subjects wore an oronasal mask with an open port in front of the mouth and were allowed to breathe freely. Oronasal ppCO2 was monitored in real time by gas analyzers with sampling tubes connected to the mask. Metabolic rate was calculated from the total CO2 production measured by an additional gas analyzer at the suit air outlet. Real-time metabolic rate was used to adjust the arm ergometer or treadmill workload to meet target metabolic rates. In both suits, inspired CO2 was affected mainly by the metabolic rate of the subject: increased metabolic rate significantly (P < 0.05) increased inspired ppCO2. Decreased air flow caused small increases in inspired ppCO2. The effect of flow was more evident at metabolic rates . 2000 BTU/hr. CO2 washout values of the EM-ACES were slightly but not significantly better than those of the REI suit. Regression equations were developed for each suit to predict the mean inspired ppCO2 as a function of metabolic rate and suit flow rate. This paper provides detailed descriptions of the test hardware, methodology, and results as well as implications for future ground testing in the REI-suit and EM-ACES.

Mitchell, Kathryn C.↗

NASA NTRS2010

Abrasion Testing of Candidate Outer Layer Fabrics for Lunar EVA Space Suits

During the Apollo program, the space suit outer layer fabrics were badly abraded after just a few Extravehicular Activities (EVAs). For example, the Apollo 12 commander reported abrasive wear on the boots, which penetrated the outer layer fabric into the thermal protection layers after less than eight hours of surface operations. Current plans for the Constellation Space Suit Element require the space suits to support hundreds of hours of EVA on the Lunar surface, creating a challenge for space suit designers to utilize materials advances made over the last forty years and improve upon the space suit fabrics used in the Apollo program. A test methodology has been developed by the NASA Johnson Space Center Crew and Thermal Systems Division for establishing comparative abrasion wear characteristics between various candidate space suit outer layer fabrics. The abrasion test method incorporates a large rotary drum tumbler with rocks and loose lunar simulant material to induce abrasion in fabric test cylinder elements, representative of what might occur during long term planetary surface EVAs. Preliminary materials screening activities were conducted to determine the degree of wear on representative space suit outer layer materials and the corresponding dust permeation encountered between subsequent sub -layers of thermal protective materials when exposed to a simulated worst case eight hour EVA. The test method was used to provide a preliminary evaluation of four candidate outer layer fabrics for future planetary surface space suit applications. This Paper provides a review of previous abrasion studies on space suit fabrics, details the methodologies used for abrasion testing in this particular study, and shares the results and conclusions of the testing.

Mitchell, Kathryn C.↗

NASA NTRS2010

Phase VI Glove Durability Testing

The current state-of-the-art space suit gloves, the Phase VI gloves, have an operational life of 25 - 8 hour Extravehicular Activities (EVAs) in a clean, controlled ISS environment. Future planetary outpost missions create the need for space suit gloves which can endure up to 90 - 8 hour traditional EVAs or 576 - 45 minute suit port-based EVAs in a dirty, uncontrolled planetary environment. Prior to developing improved space suit gloves for use in planetary environments, it is necessary to understand how the current state-of-the-art performs in these environments. The Phase VI glove operational life has traditionally been certified through cycle testing consisting of ISS-based tasks in a clean environment, and glove durability while performing planetary EVA tasks in a dirty environment has not previously been characterized. Testing was performed in the spring of 2010 by the NASA Johnson Space Center Crew and Thermal Systems Division to characterize the durability of the Phase VI Glove and identify areas of the glove design which need improvement to meet the requirements of future NASA missions. Lunar simulant was used in this test to help replicate the dirty lunar environment, and generic planetary surface EVA tasks were performed during testing. A total of 50 manned, pressurized test sessions were completed in the Extravehicular Mobility Unit (EMU) using one pair of Phase VI gloves as the test article. The 50 test sessions were designed to mimic the total amount of pressurized cycling the gloves would experience over a 6 month planetary outpost mission. The gloves were inspected at periodic intervals throughout testing, to assess their condition at various stages in the test and to monitor the gloves for failures. Additionally, motion capture and force data were collected during 18 of the 50 test sessions to assess the accuracy of the cycle model predictions used in testing and to feed into the development of improved cycle model tables. This paper provides a detailed description of the test hardware and methodology, shares the results of the testing, and provides recommendations for future work.

Mitchell, Kathryn C.↗