Search NASASearch

NASA NTRS · 20200010667

Using Open Innovation in Reducing Risk to Crews

Abstract

In the exploration of destinations outside of Earth's neighborhood, specifically Mars, scientific and engineering inquiries have occurred by two means; observations from satellites and observations by landed spacecraft. Satellite observations (Mariner, MRO, Mars Odyssey, provide global-scale spatial and temporal data while landed spacecraft (Viking, Mars Pathfinder, Spirit, Opportunity, Phoenix Mars Lander) investigate highly localized areas of the surface of the planet. In preparation for human exploration, extensive knowledge of the surface and atmospheric environments should be known before the first human leaves Earth. The primary goal of performing reconnaissance on Mars on a sub-global scale is to know as much as possible about the environment to which crews will be subjected. At the current rate of launching and landing probes to Mars, it will take a very long time to understand the surface and atmospheric conditions associated with the regions where prospective crews may land. Meanwhile electronics and electrical systems are rapidly getting smaller. One can argue that to acquire the knowledge of the region, one must take hundreds, maybe thousands of measurements simultaneously. One means to perform such a task is to deploy a swarm of sensors. Such a swarm would perform an in-situ assessment of the region. Imagine a close flyby mission to Mars for example, where mini- to micro-sensors are deposited into the atmosphere over half an orbit or more. The sensors, captured by the atmospheric drag and Martian gravity slowly descend buffeted about by Martian winds and weather until they settle on the surface a great time later (think of how long dust takes to settle). As they descend they communicate a vast array of data; temperature, chemistry, pressure, radiation dose, electric or magnetic properties from a region of the planet and an individual sensor need not measure the same quantity as its neighbors. Initially, they could move at the whim of the environment but later versions could have locomotion or propulsion mechanisms. Humans wouldn't need to decide where the sensors go, the sensors do that for themselves. This is a key strength of a sensor swarm. The intelligence relies on the group not on a decision maker on earth. Real time sensor inputs direct what the swarm considers most interesting to investigate resulting in emergent behavior. We issued a $20,000 challenge to the global innovators to provide solutions as to how such a swarm could be initialized and by what protocols and methodologies by which they operate. Over 400 innovators from 49 countries took a look at the problem, with three receiving partial awards for solutions.

Keep this discovery

BibTeXRIS

Mel Ferebee. Using Open Innovation in Reducing Risk to Crews. https://ntrs.nasa.gov/citations/20200010667

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related reports

Scaling Real Estate Development Innovation With Emerging Local Area Developers

These case studies provide tangible examples within the development field that show how true innovation in real estate and property development hinges on shaping and optimizing diverse connections and relationships to create widely available, market-viable, and high-performance buildings.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI

The Relevance of the VIPER Mission to NASA’s Artemis Human Exploration of the Moon

NASA has ambitious plans to send astronaut crews to the south polar region of the Moon and explore this lunar terrain with humans for the first time through a series of Artemis missions. Artemis will provide economic benefits, drive technological advancement, and inspire the next generation of explorers. Simultaneously, Artemis presents a unique opportunity for humans to conduct high-priority planetary science in situ in the south polar region of the Moon. Prior to human exploration, landed robotic precursor investigations can provide valuable information to reduce risk and maximize discovery and productivity of subsequent crewed missions. NASA’s Volatiles Investigating Polar Exploration Rover (VIPER) is a robotic mission designed to explore and characterize the lunar south polar region prior to crewed Artemis landed missions. VIPER is designed to explore multiple thermal regimes to characterize the lunar polar environment and regolith properties, and to explore for surface and subsurface ices. Each of these objectives are key for both scientific investigation and to detect and assess volatile deposits to support in situ resource utilization (ISRU) and a sustained human presence on the Moon. VIPER would also operate with a real-time mission operations architecture with relevance and feed-forward to Artemis crewed operations on the lunar surface. VIPER would provide key information regarding the lunar environment, scientific exploration, technologies, and real-time operations to optimize the valuable surface exploration time of Artemis crew members while simultaneously reducing risk to crew and increasing health and human safety on the lunar surface.

Jennifer L Heldmann

Risks of Depress as a Fire Suppression Technique in Spacecraft

Spacecraft are designed to prevent fires through careful material selection and configuration control combined with electrical design controls and isolation of ignition sources. Despite these best efforts, fire risk still exists due to the potential for configuration changes with the introduction of crew and the potential for a ‘failure of imagination’ by designers in anticipating all fuel and ignition sources. Therefore, fire suppression is a critical capability for any crewed spacecraft as a last resort for crew survival. Many spacecraft suppression methods have relied on fire suppressants such as compressed carbon dioxide, nitrogen, and water. A proposed alternative is depressurization of the cabin as a method to extinguish a fire. Limited testing was conducted during Skylab and showed that depress could result in stirring the air flow and aggravating a fire before extinguishing. However, limited information was available on how the test was conducted. To better characterize the approach, testing was conducted at NASA’s White Sands Test Facility to evaluate the effect of depressurization on material extinguishment. The results showed that depressurization does not provide a safe and effective fire suppression capability. The testing approach, results, and conclusions are described and discussed.

Toni Griego