Search NASA⌕ Search

Engineering topics

Robert L. Howard, Jr.

Publications and source records attributed to Robert L. Howard, Jr..

17 records
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2020

Design Variants of a Common Habitat for Moon and Mars Exploration

The Common Habitat is a long-duration habitat concept based on the Skylab II architecture that leverages a single, multi-destination design applicable to microgravity Mars transit, 1/6 g lunar surface, 3/8 g Mars surface, and 1 g Earth. A trade study for the Common Habitat will address vertical versus horizontal internal orientation and a crew size of four or eight crew. This has resulted in the creation of four variants of the Common Habitat: Four Crew Horizontal Configuration, Four Crew Vertical Configuration, Eight Crew Horizontal Configuration, and Eight Crew Vertical Configuration. Design guidelines that shaped the four configurations are discussed, including: mission duration, destinations/missions, pressure vessel, hatches and docking, subsystems and utilities, lander integration and offloading, and eight-crew extensibility. Functional capabilities for crew-related systems are also discussed, including: private habitation, meal preparation, meal consumption, medical operations, exercise, group socialization and recreation, human waste collection, hygiene, logistics, spacecraft monitoring and commanding, mission planning, robotics and teleoperation, scientific research, maintenance and fabrication, and EVA. Each of the four Common Habitat designs will be presented, with a deck-by-deck description of each workstation, crew station, or subsystem along with an assessment of its degree of compliance with the guidelines and functional capabilities. Finally, forward work will be identified that will down-select a single Common Habitat. This includes multiple analyses that will be performed on the four variants, a down-selection process, and design refinement goals for the selected variant.

Habitability↗
NASA NTRS2020

Development of Concept Illustration Variants of the JUMP Lander

The Artemis program is committed to landing humans on the Moon in the 2020s leading to a sustainable lunar presence by the end of the decade. It is challenging to deliver heavy payloads to the lunar surface in support of these goals given currently available Earth launch systems. The payload capacity of the launch systems limits the size of the lunar landers, thereby limiting their cargo capacity. Fortunately, lander cargo capacity can be significantly increased if multiple landers are joined together in space. This concept has been previously introduced as the Joinable Undercarriage to Maximize Payload (JUMP) Lander. Utilizing a JUMP Lander system will increase options and make it easier to comply with directives issued by senior White House leadership to initiate long duration human activity on the Moon. Such activity, by definition, implies extensive habitation, mobility, research, and resource development capability that in turn calls for significant mass delivery to the lunar surface. This paper develops three concept illustration variants of the JUMP Lander. These concepts explore hypergolic, hydrogen, and methane propellant options, as well as the power and thermal rejection systems necessary to enable such lander concepts. The paper also estimates masses for the necessary avionics, structures, and mechanical subsystems. The paper documents the resulting configurations and recommends a JUMP Lander to carry forward in further development.

Lunar Lander↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Recommended Crew Systems Capabilities for a 30 to 90 Day Four-Crew Lunar Surface Mission

For any given surface mission duration, there exists a set of surface capabilities necessary to sustain a four-person crew for the length of time the crew is on the surface. Identifying these capabilities is important to mission planners and spacecraft design engineers responsible for lunar surface habitation elements, who need to know which systems and capabilities must be prioritized for the vehicles they are designing. However, simply identifying the surface capabilities does not necessarily equal a viable surface configuration. These capabilities may or may not satisfy stakeholder expectations or even permit completion of mission objectives. Lunar lander cargo mass constraints are a powerful forcing function that requires significant efforts to reduce the mass of all surface elements, including those supporting crew habitation. The required capabilities do increase as a function of mission duration, but it is a nonlinear growth. There are key points in mission duration, beyond which certain additional capabilities are needed. This forms bands of capability between each point. Within a given band, the same functional capabilities are needed, and the only scaling is that associated with daily consumables. The next higher band requires additional capabilities. This paper will focus on those capabilities needed for missions of 30-90 days. It should be noted that there are some uncertainties interpreting NASA requirements that require capabilities after a certain number of days, as typically this refers to number of days in space, not number of days on the lunar surface. Depending on transportation architecture, the number of days between Earth launch and lunar surface landing may vary, therefore impacting when certain required capabilities are implemented. However, activities to prepare humans for missions to Mars and commercial interest in lunar development may drive progressive increases in surface duration. Missions up to 30 days are expected to follow the initial 6.5-day surface missions and there may be commercial interest in extending to even greater durations. This paper will examine the potential case of a 30-90-day surface mission duration with respect to the systems necessary to support crew living and working on the lunar surface.

Habitat↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Lagrange-Based Options for Relay Satellites to Eliminate Earth-Mars Communications Outages During Solar Superior Conjunctions

Recent conjunction class Mars human mission plans have generally assumed that there will inevitably be periods of communications outages between Earth and Mars. This has significant cost and risk implications for not only Mars missions, but also precursor missions in the lunar environment. But are there ways to avoid these outages? The potential exists for communications to be interrupted by Solar Superior Conjunctions (SSCs). Depending on the communications system, used, there can be communications outages up to as many as 78 days. The higher bandwidth systems experience the greatest outage. If these communications channels are interrupted due to an SSC, there are of course resulting challenges to mission operations. An outage of a few days to a few weeks could allow minor disturbances to become major concerns or even trigger subsystems failures. An inability to consult with the ground at the wrong time could result in loss of mission, loss of an element, or loss of life. Each planet in the solar system has a set of five Lagrange points associated with it and the Sun. At any given point in time, a planet or either its L4 or L5 point is visible to any other planet in the solar system, regardless of the position of the sun relative to the two. Thus, L4 and L5 have high value as relay systems to prevent communications outages. There are four sets of solar Lagrange points that may be of potential use in this study: Mars-Sun L4 and L5 points, Earth-Sun L4 and L5, Venus-Sun L4 and L5, and Mercury-Sun L4 and L5. A candidate relay satellite system will be identified, with consideration of both new technology developments and existing telecommunications satellites. This system may have implications for not only the Mars human mission architectures, but also Gateway and human lunar surface architectures as these other studies are tasked with paving the way to human Mars missions. If Mars communications outages can be eliminated, then the degree of autonomy necessary in Mars and precursor systems may be reduced.

Relay Satellite↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Replication of Segments of STS-94 as a Lunar Surface Mission

The Artemis exploration plan will progress from initial Commercial Lunar Payloads Services (CLPS) landers to human landings to an established surface infrastructure supporting four crew for surface missions of a month or greater. NASA teams are currently working with partners to define the surface assets that will comprise this infrastructure, including habitation and laboratory facilities. However, design engineers often have limited insight into the laboratory capabilities needed inside a pressurized habitat or the demands such a facility will place upon crew availability. The Space Shuttle STS-94 Microgravity Science Laboratory (MSL-1) mission is used as an intravehicular activity science analog for the Surface Habitat. The STS-94 primary physical science instruments and crew activity in support of physical science investigations will be examined. Based on recent reference concepts for the Surface Habitat, options for incorporating the instruments and options for dividing physical science tasks among the Surface Habitat crew are discussed, based on STS94 crew tasks and assumptions for Surface Habitat operations. Crew size considerations are raised along with recommendations to reassess some of the current assumptions. Having shown that STS-94’s physical science investigations can be applied to a lunar surface mission, recommendations are made for increased attention to pressurized laboratory objectives, capabilities, and crew size.

Surface Habitat↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Configuration and Projected Capabilities of the Common Habitat Medical Care Facility

The Common Habitat is a large, long-duration habitat being explored as part of a conceptual study (not an active NASA program) that uses an SLS core stage Liquid Oxygen (LOX) tank as its primary structure. It is intended for use on the Moon as part of a permanently occupied outpost, on Mars as part of an outpost that will be occupied for hundreds of days at a time, and in deep space as part of the Deep Space Exploration Vehicle where it will support crewed missions up to 1200 days in duration. A study of internal orientation and crew size resulted in a Common Habitat configuration sized for a crew of eight with a three-deck horizontal orientation. Additional work outside the scope of this paper is developing a vertical translation system, a crew mobility aids system based on wearable gecko-derived grippers, and a crew seating/restraint system. These systems are all assumed for use in conjunction with the Medical Care Facility, which is needed to maintain crew well-being during these missions, where distance from Earth precludes the possibility of evacuation to Earth. This paper describes recent improvements in the Common Habitat Medical Care Facility and associated benefits for crew survivability in long duration missions beyond Earth orbit. These improvements were made with the assistance of a NASA Pathways intern whose experience includes a tour of duty in Afghanistan as an Army combat medic with the 691st GHOST-T, attached to the 1st and 7th US Special Forces Groups as part of Operation Freedom’s Sentinel, where he helped provide far-forward surgical capabilities in austere combat environments. The initial baseline Medical Care Facility was developed working in conjunction with University of Houston Space Architecture graduate students. The facility was placed on the upper deck of the Common Habitat in a location that provided privacy, operational volume, and was close to the vertical translation pathway. The notional outfitting repurposed component CAD models from unrelated studies and notionally indicated a level of care roughly equivalent to that aboard the International Space Station. The CAD modeling provided notional stowage volumes, a deployable surface, some fixed equipment, an ultrasound, and a potentially reconfigurable treatment table. While this facility is clearly a competent arrangement, it was desired to leverage available expertise and upgrade the station given the vast distances from Earth to be experienced by the Common Habitat. Key driving requirements applied to the upgrade included to provide NASA’s Medical Level of Care V, offer enhanced telemedicine capabilities, provide patient physical accommodation, provide caregiver access to the patient from all sides, include sliding pocket doors for access to hygiene and to the Vertical Translation System, and to add any additional capability possible for the best achievable medical care. The first step in the facility upgrade was to quantify the current medical inventory on the International Space Station and ensure that sufficient stowage volume was present for this purpose. To that end, the ISS medical kits were reviewed, and eight full size mid deck lockers were placed in the facility. A number of additional devices were also added, based on the co-author’s combat medic experience. Also, two fixed shelves and one horizontal work surface were added to the Medical Care Facility, with the shelves providing storage space for the additional devices and the work surface providing a location for the caregiver to work or stage equipment. Four display monitors were added to the wall above the horizontal work surface, supporting data display, telemedicine, conferencing, or other needs. The existing treatment table was replaced with a mobile surgical stretcher-chair. Two additional doors were added to the Medical Care Facility. One leads directly to the hygiene compartment, allowing it to support medical operations in addition to providing galley/wardroom support. The other door leads directly into the Vertical Translation System. The wall adjacent to the subsystems bay was moved, adding additional volume to the Medical Care Facility. This improved caregiver access to the patient and allowed for a larger number of caregivers to be present. It also provided options for relocation of support equipment relative to the patient as needed. In the upgraded Medical Care Facility, the Surgical Stretcher-Chair and the Vertical Translation System can work together to provide incapacitated crew member transport from a site of injury on any deck of the Common Habitat to the Medical Care Facility. It can also support patient treatment in a variety of positions including a variety of sitting postures and a supine posture at a variety of pitch angles. The facility can also support caregiver office work for review of examination results, private consultation, inventory and maintenance, and a variety of other purposes. A forward activity will be to conduct evaluations of the Medical Care Facility with different medical scenarios. Additionally, ambient and task lighting selections remain as forward work. The eight middeck lockers can be augmented to use as portable equipment carts, similar to a manner in which maintenance facility stowage was used as portable carts during the NASA Desert Research and Technology Studies in the Constellation Program. Trash accommodation will also need forward work to assess, including provision for wet trash, dry trash, and biological waste. It will be important to assess a redesign of the surgical stretcher-chair. The commercial version used in the upgrade can only enable vertical translation in the seated configuration, requiring the patient to bend both hips and knees. A possible redesign of the chair will allow for vertical translation without requiring any bending at the hip or knees. Also, the commercial version is wheeled, making it mobile in gravity but unanchored in microgravity. Work will be needed to adapt the chair for gravity-independent performance. The hygiene compartment can be redesigned to serve both as a medical scrub facility and for galley hand washing. Pending sufficient volume, it may also be possible to place sanitation equipment in this location to clean medical tools. Finally, most space architectures have never allowed for more than one incapacitated crew member, but several scenarios could potentially injure two or more crew in the same incident. This facility could be assessed to determine its present ability to address two or more injured crew in parallel and determine the potential upper limit for number of treatable crew in a multi-crew injury scenario, or to treat polytrauma of a single patient.

Common Habitat↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Habitability Insights from Selected NASA Habitat Mockup Testing Campaigns

In 2004, President Bush announced his Vision for Space Exploration, causing NASA to look beyond Low Earth Orbit. While the resulting Constellation Program was cancelled, a focus on expanding beyond LEO has continued to this day. Since 2005, multiple habitat concepts have been developed for the Moon, Mars, or deep space. Some of these concepts were mocked up in virtual or physical form and used in habitability testing campaigns. This paper provides an understanding of the value of two decades of habitability testing and highlights key insights obtainable only through human interaction with a vehicle concept design. The focus of this paper will be limited to primarily habitation work conducted primarily at or by the Johnson Space Center in support of active space habitat development programs or studies and is further limited to fixed habitats and will not discuss mobile habitats such as pressurized rovers.

Lunar Surface Habitation↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Fabrication of Gecko Mobility Aids for Deep Space Exploration

Spacecraft large enough for crew to move around inside them have traditionally used handrails and foot restraints to enable crew mobility. The mass of this hardware can become significant in large spacecraft such as ISS or a Mars Transit Habitat. The Common Habitat study also determined that handrails and foot restraints in a multi-gravity habitat are trip hazards when the habitat is in a gravity environment. ISS crew have noted risks of breaking ankles and wrists when using handrails for translation and have noted places where not enough handrails are present. Robotic gecko-derived grippers developed by JPL to retrieve satellites can be adapted to crew-worn pads that can adhere to surfaces to enable crew translation in microgravity. This project will fabricate prototypes of crew clothing augmented with gecko pads.

Restraints and Mobility Aids↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Science Capabilities of the Common Habitat

The Common Habitat is the primary habitable element in a conceptual architecture feasibility study for long-duration space exploration with an eight-person crew size. On lunar or planetary surfaces, the Common Habitat forms the core of a Surface Base Camp. In microgravity, the Common Habitat is the core of the Deep Space Exploration Vehicle (DSEV), an in-space transportation spacecraft. The Common Habitat employs a horizontal orientation that is divided internally into a lower deck, mid deck, and upper deck, roughly separating outfitting into individual, work, and group functions. On a planetary surface, the habitat is incorporated into a base camp, located near the south pole in the case of the Moon. The Mars base camp is currently location agnostic. Each base camp is divided into habitation, landing, resource production, and power zones. In microgravity, the habitat is incorporated into the Deep Space Exploration Vehicle, a vessel capable of transporting the crew within the inner solar system. In addition to crew and teleoperated control of external science assets, the Common Habitat employs a suite of life and physical science laboratory systems to enable it to support science investigations across a variety of destination environments, primarily featuring the Moon and Mars, along with the intervening interplanetary space. Other potential destinations include Near Earth Asteroids and Venus and Earth orbits. Located in the aft starboard section of the Common Habitat mid deck, the life science laboratory supports primarily biology and human research. In its baseline configuration, the laboratory includes horizontal work surfaces, freezers, multiple gloveboxes, sample transfer/exposure capability, large instruments, and reconfigurable ISPR-compatible payload bays. The Medical Care Facility and exercise facility can also support life science research. In the aft port section of the mid deck, the physical science laboratory supports physics, chemistry, materials science, geology, and remote sensing (including astrophysics, heliophysics, Earth science, planetary science, and meteorology). It provides a baseline of similar ISPR-compatible payload bays and adds additional freezers, including those for cryogenic sample storage, a remote sensing workstation, more gloveboxes, also with sample transfer/exposure, combustion chambers, fluid mechanics chambers, and a gas chromatograph. It leverages the Command & Control Center for teleoperations of mobile science assets. Both laboratories are highly modular, with the ability to swap out both payloads and instruments on an as-needed basis. The integrated science outfitting of the Common Habitat positions its crew to contribute to all of NASA’s Moon to Mars science objectives and extend human understanding into the inner solar system.

Lunar Suface↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Surface Transportation of the Common Habitat from Lander to Habitation Zone

The Common Habitat Architecture is a feasibility study surrounding the use of an SLS core stage liquid oxygen tank as the pressure vessel for a long-duration habitat intended for use in multiple gravity environments. The Common Habitat is used within this study as the primary habitation element in both Moon and Mars surface base camps. The Common Habitat Architecture offloads the Common Habitat from its lander and transports it to a Habitation Zone instead of leaving the habitat integrated with the lander. In this study, the Landing Zone is assumed to be approximately 3.5 kilometers from the Habitation Zone. Given the physical size and estimated 90-ton mass of the Common Habitat, a four-week trade study encompassing Moon and Mars lander identification, offloading, surface transport, and emplacement was conducted in February 2021 to assess whether there are any credible options for landing the Common Habitat on the Moon or Mars and deliver it to its intended point of use. Constrained to use only public data, the study applied subject matter expert opinion to each component of the study. The surface transportation component of the trade study assumes the habitat has been successfully offloaded from its lander and is at a point of handover to the surface transportation system. It is assumed that there are no crew present, and all human operations are performed remotely by Mission Control personnel. Three core cargo handling elements from prior NASA studies were used as the basis from which to derive surface transportation options – the Chariot, the All-Terrain Hex-Limbed Extra-Terrestrial Explorer, and the Lightweight Surface Manipulator System. Variations and hybrid combinations of these elements were used to develop transportation options for the Moon and Mars, given different habitat masses. Ultimately, several potentially feasible solutions were identified, and a solution was recommended that is common to both the Moon and Mars, with the potential to use a dissimilar system as a backup during lunar Common Habitat delivery. Next steps for sizing and additional development and analysis of the recommended surface transportation system are included as forward work.

Surface Mobility↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Gecko Mobility Aids for a Common Habitat Architecture

Spacecraft large enough for crew to move around inside them have traditionally used handrails and foot restraints to enable crew mobility. The mass of this hardware can become significant in large spacecraft such as the Common Habitat. Additionally, handrails and foot restraints in a multi-gravity habitat are trip hazards when the habitat is in a gravity environment. Further, ISS crew have noted risks of breaking ankles and wrists when using handrails for translation and have noted places where not enough handrails are present. Robotic gecko-derived grippers developed by JPL to retrieve satellites can be adapted to crew-worn pads that can adhere to surfaces to enable crew translation in microgravity. This technology will help to eliminate the need for handrails and foot restraints for mobility in crewed microgravity spacecraft cabins. It has the potential to achieve significant mass reductions in future space habitats, with application to suborbital flight, LEO, cislunar space, interplanetary space, the Moon, and Mars. Additionally, it can prevent crew injury and discomfort. Project goals and objectives are to prepare gecko uniform prototypes for use in multi-gravity testing and conduct initial investigations into human factors of postures and motions needed for intravehicular activity (IVA) translation and restraint in multiple gravity environments, without the use of handrails or foot restraints. Gecko grippers have been tested for use as robotic end effectors terrestrially, on microgravity aircraft, and aboard the ISS. Using the grippers as a body-mounted system to achieve IVA crew mobility is a new application that has not been pursued outside of this effort. This work will continue paper studies performed by NASA student interns by developing physical prototypes of spacecraft crew uniforms with gecko-derived body-mounted grippers. Clothing prototypes may include long sleeves, short sleeves, long pants, shorts, gloves, and/or booties equipped with gecko gripper pads. Forward work is to test these uniforms in a 1g environment to verify that the design does not introduce obstructions, trip hazards, or other consequences when used in terrestrial gravity. Based on the 1g test results, the uniform prototypes will be refined, and a test plan developed for testing at 0g, (1/6)g, and (3/8)g.

Restraints and Mobility Aids↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

The Repair Maintenance and Fabrication Facility in the Common Habitat Architecture

The Common Habitat Architecture seeks to increase the habitability of long-duration human spaceflight systems. A key aspect of this is vehicle survivability. Missions beyond low Earth orbit need onboard capabilities for Repair, Maintenance, And Fabrication (RMAF) to overcome potential contingency scenarios. Strategies employed in historic human spaceflight such as redundancy management, reliability, sparing, orbital replacement units, and aborts may be insufficient by themselves. Based on subject matter input, a list of 53 critical failures defining a set of incidents that can render a key spacecraft subsystem inoperable were generated. A subsequent analysis found that a robust in-space RMAF system capable of performing 14 key functions can potentially repair a subsystem plagued by any of these failures. An ancillary benefit is this capability may provide psychological benefits to the crew, by enabling greater self-sufficiency in earth-independent problem solving. A basic RMAF facility has been defined for the Common Habitat, consisting of five workstations. A work bench and computer workstation provide a multipurpose horizontal work surface, computing interface, and tools storage. A CNC machining center provides a subtractive manufacturing capability for metals and plastics. A multi-material 3D printing facility provides additive manufacturing capabilities for plastic, metals, and printed electronics. A welding facility is used for joining metal components where a higher strength is needed than can be achieved with fasteners or adhesives. A glovebox facility is used to perform work that is too hazardous for any of the other workstations. This may include hardware brought in from outside the spacecraft that could potentially contaminate the cabin environment. Forward work includes considering the accommodation of additional manufacturing processes not modeled in the current system, assessing the ability of systems to operate in partial gravity and microgravity environments, incorporation of the system into the Common Habitat Computer Aided Design (CAD) model, bottoms-up mass estimating, and a crew time analysis.

Habitat↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Rapid Assessment of a Lunar Surface Laboratory Module

Johnson Space Center has piloted an innovation team known as the Forge to perform rapid turnaround, concurrent engineering studies. The Forge is intended to be able to pull together a team of strategically selected domain experts to innovatively solve a specified problem within a short period of time. The Forge’s inaugural project was the development of a Lunar Surface Laboratory Module concept. The lab module is intended as an option for the NASA Lunar Architecture Team and may allow for increased science productivity and return on investment than with only the Surface Habitat. The Forge team developed two concepts, a stationary laboratory and a mobile laboratory. Human factors evaluations have been conducted to determine the acceptability of the resulting design concepts. The human factors evaluations conducted include a card sort evaluation of the laboratories by science discipline and the System Usability Scale (SUS). The card sort is focused subject matter expert expectations for the relative positioning of the laboratory functional areas, determining whether a given lab area should be adjacent to, or separated from, another. The SUS will focus on layout efficiency. Both will use human factors personnel and both life and physical scientists as subject matter experts. Each of these evaluations will focus primarily on objective data with limited subjective comments, reducing the time required for processing responses. The results of the card sort and SUS evaluations and their implications will be discussed. Based on the evaluation data, an overall acceptability of the Lunar Surface Laboratory Module produced by the Forge study can be determined. Lessons learned and recommendations for future use of human factors rapid assessment processes in early design trades will also be provided.

Human Factors↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Initial Testing Results and Forward Design Considerations for the Tri-Rotor Hand Controller

The Lunar Terrain Vehicle (LTV) is one of the key elements of NASA’s Artemis return to the Moon. As an unpressurized rover, the LTV hand controller must take into account the limitations of the spacesuit worn by the crew as well as lessons learned operating the Apollo Lunar Roving Vehicle and preliminary NASA simulations. Because the NASA Ground Test Unit (GTU) design features omnidirectional steering, NASA engineers developed the TriRotor is an innovation to minimize crew fatigue and discomfort. NASA conducted a series of tests, initially with 3D printed mockup controllers, and expanding to a functional prototype used in an LTV video wall simulation. The Tri-Rotor compared favorably with legacy Apollo T-Handles, though numerous test subject comments were collected to improve the controller’s usability. Several options to improve the Tri-Rotor’s usability are also discussed, along with opportunities to test the Tri-Rotor in Virtual Reality, a motion table, and in field analogs.

Hand Controller↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Design Considerations for LTV HITL Testing of Pressurized Suited Crew on a Motion-Based Platform

The upcoming NASA Lunar Terrain Vehicle (LTV) will succeed the Apollo Lunar Roving Vehicle, performing both surface exploration and logistics transfer in NASA’s return to the Moon. Human-in-the-Loop (HITL) testing will play a key role in refining the design of the LTV, ensuring its usability and ability to accommodate the astronaut population. A motion-based platform and a lunar terrain and lighting model can simulate the conditions of the lunar south pole region. It can be used by NASA to conduct HITL testing in concert with HITL testing of the drivable Ground Reference Unit (GTU) concept vehicle. The dynamic motion of the platform combined with the mobility restrictions of pressurized suits could help improve NASA understanding of vehicle-suit-astronaut interfaces. NASA human factors practitioners have proposed multiple HITL test series to use the motion-based platform in conjunction with testing of the GTU in hopes that lessons learned can be applied to help select a commercial partner to develop the Artemis LTV.

LTV↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

A Crew Seat for Human Exploration in Multiple Gravity Environments

This work attempts to develop a single crew seating solution that is applicable across a range of gravity environments encountered by spacecraft proposed in several conceptual spacecraft architectures. All of these spacecraft will need to provide some sort of stationary accommodation for the crew for performing various activities such as work in science laboratories, maintenance and repair facilities, medical care facilities, and spacecraft operations centers, as well as for basic habitation in crew quarters, entertainment / relaxation facilities, and crew dining facilities. Depending on the spacecraft or architecture, this stationary accommodation may be experienced continuously in microgravity, such as would be the case for the Deep Space Exploration Vehicle. Alternately, it could be in continuous lunar or Martian gravity, such as the Common Habitat base camps. It could experience fractional gravity, such as a Pressurized Rover for In-Space Missions at a Near Earth Asteroid or one of the Martian moons. It could alternate between artificial gravity and microgravity, such as the Nautilus-X. It could alternate between microgravity and lunar or Martian gravity, such as the SpaceX Starship Human Landing System or the Blue Origin Blue Moon Block 2 Human Landing System. Or it could be in continuous Earth gravity, such as ground trainer systems. Prior human spaceflight systems for stationary accommodation have been focused on microgravity applications. These systems have their own limitations and cannot be used in a gravity environment. A public crowdsourcing campaign generated dozens of ideas, which ultimately generated a Gecko Mobility Aids system for crew translation and the Multi-Gravity Crew Seat (MGCS) for stationary accommodation. The MGCS functions in gravity as a traditional terrestrial seat, performing functions of load for the overall body and forearms, as well as head and neck load relief while positioning the body within range of an intended task. In microgravity, the MGCS functions as a body restraint, securing the body against inadvertent drifting by applying a restraining pressure at the front and back of the thighs, shoulders, and back. The initial MGCS concept was developed in a NASA hackathon and was refined through a review of dozens of terrestrial seating styles. Additionally, a review of anthropometry and biomechanics data related to the neutral body posture was conducted to help inform the microgravity configuration of the MGCS. A series of CAD models were iteratively developed, with subject matter expert reviews leading to design improvements. A scale model was constructed and used with a humanoid model to demonstrate MGCS accommodation of a human-like body in both gravity and microgravity modes. Work to develop a full-scale protype of the MGCS is discussed, including design and fabrication of the headrest, arm rest, seat back, seat pan, seat base, and the conversion mechanisms. A 1-g human-in-the-loop evaluation of the prototype assessed the acceptability of performing seated activities in the MGCS, collecting data on the usability, comfort, and ease of ingress/egress. Based on the evaluation results, design modifications needed for reduced gravity testing are documented and initial work is indicated for a reduced gravity test plan.

Restraints and Mobility Aids↗