Search NASA⌕ Search

NASA NTRS · 20230000910

Resilient Space Habitat Design Using Safety Controls

Abstract

Space habitats will involve a complex and tightly coupled combination of hardware, software, and humans, while operating in challenging environments that pose many risks, both known and unknown. It will not be possible to design habitats that are immune to failure, nor will it be possible to foresee all possible failures. Rather than aiming for designs where ―failure is not an option,‖ habitats must be resilient to disruptions. We propose an approach to resilient design for space habitats based on the concept of safety controls from system safety engineering. We model disruptions using a state-and-trigger approach, where the space habitat is in one of three distinct states at each time instance: nominal, hazardous, or accident. We use safety controls as ways of preventing a system from entering or remaining in a hazardous or accident state. We develop a safety control option space for the habitat, from which designers can select the set of safety controls that best meet resilience, performance, and other system goals. The safety control option space is likely to be large, accordingly, we design a database that links safety controls to the applicable states and triggers. We demonstrate our approach on the early design stage of a Martian space habitat.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Robert Kitching, Hunter Mattingly, Dale Williams, Karen Marais. 2021-04-15. Resilient Space Habitat Design Using Safety Controls. https://ntrs.nasa.gov/citations/20230000910

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

KEEP EXPLORING

Related reports

Distributed Sensing and Reasoning for Advanced Air Mobility Health Management and Mission Assurance

As envisioned, Advanced Air Mobility (AAM) and Urban Air Mobility (UAM) will introduce new vehicles and operations within the national airspace, moving people and cargo safely and efficiently at a much larger scale than today. Driven by transformative technology and revolutionary aircraft, this movement must still manage technical, regulatory, operational, and policy challenges. NASA’s work in support of AAM and UAM includes, but is not limited to tools, technologies, and architectures for distributed sensing of aircraft, data & reasoning services exchange, Human-Autonomy Teaming (HAT), contingency management, and vehicle health management. This paper builds upon these concepts and evaluates the use of distributed sensing and infrastructure assistance towards health management and mission assurance of UAM vehicles in specific operational scenarios. Through analysis of these example missions, aided by the data produced by the conceptual distributed sensing and reasoning infrastructure, we define opportunities for state estimation, diagnosis, and key decision points affecting the health state of the vehicle and the airspace volume. As a result, we define a number of measurable health state parameters providing relevant information to drive decision-making in contingency situations or feed automation tools in support of operators and managers.

Safety↗

Development of a Novel Helmet Support Assembly for NASA Orion Crew Survival Suit

Orion Spacecraft water landing environments have necessitated the design and testing of a novel Helmet Support Assembly (HSA) as part of the NASA Orion Crew Survival Systems (OCSS) launch and re-entry spacesuit. A series of development sled tests using 5 th female, 50th male, and 95th male Hybrid III Anthropometric Test Devices (ATDs) simulated worst case water landings and identified the need for an integrated suit countermeasure to control the helmet during dynamic loading. Initial prototype countermeasures rigidly restrained the helmet keeping the helmet in place as desired, but led to large force and moment transmission to the upper neck. Further development led to a flexible HSA which used high-strength steel wire contoured to the size-matched ATD thorax and attached to both the front and rear of the neck ring. The selected wire diameter and contoured shape provided some ability to flex under the expected worst-case dynamic loads. The existing shoulder harness was used to restrain the helmet motion during “eyeballs out/down” loading while also attempting to prevent head-to-helmet contact in “eyeballs down” spinal-axis loading. A new small prototype helmet was also developed and tested for the 5th and 50th ATDs with both HSA devices. Dynamic impact tests were conducted on the HIA (Horizontal Impulse Accelerator) at Wright Patterson Air Force Base (WPAFB) under simulated off-nominal landing conditions using a representative Orion seat and 5-point harness. For each ATD size, peak Neck Injury Criteria (Nij) were compared to equivalent sled tests with an unsuited ATD configuration. Adding a helmet without attempting to control motion increased peak Nij values for all ATD sizes. The use of the rigid countermeasure showed decreased peak Nij results for the 5th female, but increased peak Nij values for both 50th configurations and the 95th male ATDs. By comparison, the flexible HSA showed reduced peak Nij values for all ATD sizes. Overall, this series of dynamic impact tests identified a risk of increased crew neck loading when under- or over-restraining the helmet during simulated Orion water landings and also demonstrated an effective strategy to mitigate those loads with a compliant HSA design.

Safety↗