Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Apollo Crew Module”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

173 records · Page 10
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2020

Lessons Learned from Recent Space Flight Assessments

This paper highlights four space flight assessments, each with an important lesson. The first assessment points to the challenge of material substitution for weight saving. Space Shuttle’s external tank stringers were changed from Al 2024 to Al 2090 without comprehensive analysis. Lack of understanding the low Short-Transverse (S-T) strength associated with Al 2090 led to widespread cracking. The second assessment addresses the failure to understand that time-dependent relationships and loading interactions of multiple disciplines can lead to non-conservative results. An aerodynamic test article of the Orion Multi-Purpose Crew Vehicle (MPCV) Launch Abort System (LAS) was analyzed for worst-case single discipline loads, showing positive structural margins. When disciplines were combined with time dependent loading, the analysis resulted in negative margins. The third assessment highlights the pitfalls of putting blind trust in historical architecture. The MPCV re-entry heat shield adopted the Apollo design approach despite fundamental differences between the two designs (e.g., the underlying substructure design, material differences, scale, and geometry). Manufacturing resulted in cracking along seams of the cured MPCV heat shield and produced lower mechanical properties of the Avcoat witness panels. Subsequently, the design was changed to a block architecture, which introduced unperceived technical, cost, and schedule risk. The fourth assessment shows how the lack of a comprehensive investigation of design modifications and inappropriate Finite Element Analyses (FEA) can lead to trouble. A mass reduction campaign eliminated highly critical internal struts on the ISS Node-1 pressurized module based on inadequate and uncorrelated FEA. High strains were noted and ignored as a modeling aberration. A system level high fidelity FEA discovered large plastic strains in the gussets of all four radial ports. These findings initiated a full-scale test campaign, new test correlated assembly-level FEA, and significant design modifications.

James P Smith↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

In-Situ Surface Construction of Infrastructure

In situ resources offer an opportunity to reduce the amount of items brought from Earth when exploring moons and planets. Utilizing those resources requires energy that comes with a cost. In the case of human missions to Mars, trading surface power for launch mass is beneficial for propellant and consumables required to sustain human pioneering and settlement on the planet’s surface. However, In Situ Resource Utilization (ISRU) can mean far more than propellant production and consumables replacement for missions beyond Low Earth Orbit. NASA’s Systems Capability Leader-ship Team (SCLT) for ISRU created a work break-down structure based on functions identified in roadmaps pertaining to human exploration. That WBS includes Prospecting, Extraction, Processing, Construction, Manufacturing, and Energy. Over the years, NASA has developed some capabilities and technologies for prospecting, extraction, and processing carbon dioxide and water on Mars into propellants and life support consumables. However, that is a small subset of the ISRU needs that are coming to light with NASA’s push to return to the Moon for extended periods of time. For instance, astronauts require shielding from Ga-lactic Cosmic Rays and nuclear radiation and protection from the low temperatures and pressures in Space. Surface assets including crew, landers, and ascent modules can be damaged by surface ejecta during landing and launch operations on the Moon and Mars. Creating shielding, berms, and pads requires movement of large volumes and stabilization of regolith in the context of a civil engineering construction project. Because of the multi-disciplinary nature of the aerospace systems needed for human exploration, SCLT on ISRU created an ISRU Construction Integrated Steering Group that combines expertise among several NASA Principal Technologists and Capabilities Leaders for exploring options, assessing opportunities, and developing requirements for construction and manufacturing on the Moon and Mars NASA’s new program to develop Lunar landers for small, mid, and large payload deliveries to the Lunar surface leading to human missions by 2025 spawned an investigation into plume surface interactions caused by the lander during descent and ascent. The trade space to resolve this issue includes regolith stabilization via landing pad construction techniques and lander nozzles characteristics due to vehicle systems design. Some data exists from the Apollo missions but more is required for the missions ahead. The purpose of this paper [1] is to outline an approach for developing requirements that can guide systems designs while taking advantage of flight opportunities in NASA’s plans to return to the Moon.

In-Situ↗
NASA NTRS2007

Definition and Development of Habitation Readiness Levels (HRLs) for Planetary Surface Habitats

One could argue that NASA has never developed a true habitat for a planetary surface, with only the Lunar Module from the 1960's-era Apollo Program providing for a sparse 2 person, 3 day capability. An integral part of NASA's current National Vision for Space Exploration is missions back to the moon and eventually to Mars. One of the largest leaps i11 lunar surface exploration beyond the Apollo lunar missions will be the conduct of these extended duration human missions. These missions could range from 30 to 90 days in length initially and may eventually range up to 500 days in length. To enable these extended duration human missions, probably the single-most important lunar surface element is the Surface Habitat. The requirements that must be met by the Surface Habitat will go far beyond the safety, performance and operational requirements of the Lunar Module, and NASA needs to develop a basis for making intelligent, technically correct habitat design decisions. This paper will discuss the possibilities of the definition and development of a Habitation Readiness Level (HRL) scale that might be mapped to current Technology Readiness Levels (TRLs) for technology development. HRLs could help measure how well a particular technology thrust is advanced by a proposed planetary habitat concept. The readiness level would have to be measured differently than TRLs, and may include such milestones as habitat design performance under simulated mission operations and constraints (including relevant field testing), functional allocation demonstrations, crew interface evaluation and post-occupancy evaluation. With many concepts for planetary habitats proposed over the past 20 years, there are many strategic technical challenges facing designers of planetary habitats that will support NASA's exploration of the moon and Mars. The systematic assessment of a variety of planetary habitat options will be an important approach and will influence the associated requirements for human design, volumetrics, functionality, systems hardware and operations.

Connolly, Janis H.↗
NASA NTRS2013

Development of the Orion Crew-Service Module Umbilical Retention and Release Mechanism

The Orion CSM umbilical retention and release mechanism supports and protects all of the cross-module commodities between the spacecrafts crew and service modules. These commodities include explosive transfer lines, wiring for power and data, and flexible hoses for ground purge and life support systems. The mechanism employs a single separation interface which is retained with pyrotechnically actuated separation bolts and supports roughly two dozen electrical and fluid connectors. When module separation is commanded, either for nominal on-orbit CONOPS or in the event of an abort, the mechanism must release the separation interface and sever all commodity connections within milliseconds of command receipt. There are a number of unique and novel aspects of the design solution developed by the Orion mechanisms team. The design is highly modular and can easily be adapted to other vehiclesmodules and alternate commodity sets. It will be flight tested during Orions Exploration Flight Test 1 (EFT-1) in 2014, and the Orion team anticipates reuse of the design for all future missions. The design packages fluid, electrical, and ordnance disconnects in a single separation interface. It supports abort separations even in cases where aerodynamic loading prevents the deployment of the umbilical arm. Unlike the Apollo CSM umbilical which was a destructive separation device, the Orion design is resettable and flight units can be tested for separation performance prior to flight.Initial development testing of the mechanisms separation interface resulted in binding failures due to connector misalignments. The separation interface was redesigned with a robust linear guide system, and the connector separation and boom deployment were separated into two discretely sequenced events. These changes addressed the root cause of the binding failure by providing better control of connector alignment. The new design was tuned and validated analytically via Monte Carlo simulation. The analytical validation was followed by a repeat of the initial test suite plus test cases at thermal extremes and test cases with imposed mechanical failures demonstrating fault tolerance. The mechanism was then exposed to the qualification vibration environment. Finally, separation testing was performed at full speed with live ordnance.All tests of the redesigned mechanism resulted in successful separation of the umbilical interface with adequate force margins and timing. The test data showed good agreement with the predictions of the Monte Carlo simulation. The simulation proved invaluable due to the number of variables affecting the separation and the uncertainty associated with each. The simulation allowed for rapid assessment of numerous trades and contingency scenarios, and can be easily reconfigured for varying commodity sets and connector layouts.

Separation↗
NASA NTRS2006

NASA Crew and Cargo Launch Vehicle Development Approach Builds on Lessons from Past and Present Missions

The United States (US) Vision for Space Exploration, announced in January 2004, outlines the National Aeronautics and Space Administration's (NASA) strategic goals and objectives, including retiring the Space Shuttle and replacing it with new space transportation systems for missions to the Moon, Mars, and beyond. The Crew Exploration Vehicle (CEV) that the new human-rated Crew Launch Vehicle (CLV) lofts into space early next decade will initially ferry astronauts to the International Space Station (ISS) Toward the end of the next decade, a heavy-lift Cargo Launch Vehicle (CaLV) will deliver the Earth Departure Stage (EDS) carrying the Lunar Surface Access Module (LSAM) to low-Earth orbit (LEO), where it will rendezvous with the CEV launched on the CLV and return astronauts to the Moon for the first time in over 30 years. This paper outlines how NASA is building these new space transportation systems on a foundation of legacy technical and management knowledge, using extensive experience gained from past and ongoing launch vehicle programs to maximize its design and development approach, with the objective of reducing total life cycle costs through operational efficiencies such as hardware commonality. For example, the CLV in-line configuration is composed of a 5-segment Reusable Solid Rocket Booster (RSRB), which is an upgrade of the current Space Shuttle 4- segment RSRB, and a new upper stage powered by the liquid oxygen/liquid hydrogen (LOX/LH2) J-2X engine, which is an evolution of the J-2 engine that powered the Apollo Program s Saturn V second and third stages in the 1960s and 1970s. The CaLV configuration consists of a propulsion system composed of two 5-segment RSRBs and a 33- foot core stage that will provide the LOX/LED needed for five commercially available RS-68 main engines. The J-2X also will power the EDS. The Exploration Launch Projects, managed by the Exploration Launch Office located at NASA's Marshall Space Flight Center, is leading the design, development, testing, and operations planning for these new space transportation systems. Utilizing a foundation of heritage hardware and management lessons learned mitigates both technical and programmatic risk. Project engineers and managers work closely with the Space Shuttle Program to transition hardware, infrastructure, and workforce assets to the new launch systems, leveraging a wealth of knowledge from Shuffle operations. In addition, NASA and its industry partners have tapped into valuable Apollo databases and are applying corporate wisdom conveyed firsthand by Apollo-era veterans of America s original Moon missions. Learning from its successes and failures, NASA employs rigorous systems engineering and systems management processes and principles in a disciplined, integrated fashion to further improve the probability of mission success.

Dumbacher, Daniel L.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Preparing for Lunar Exploration: Geology and Field Training for Astronauts

NASA astronauts will soon return to the Moon, this time to the lunar south pole. Astronauts will perform traverses, make geologic observations, and collect samples to return to Earth. Lessons from Apollo show that science returns were optimized because crews were well-trained in both spacewalk operations and field geology. In that spirit, our team of geologists introduced a revised geologic training program for in-coming NASA astronauts that includes classroom activities and fieldwork and is split over 2 years. Year 1 focuses on an introduction to geologic concepts capped by a field exercise. Year two focuses on climate change, the Moon, other planets, and additional fieldwork. Our geology curriculum supports astronaut observations from the ISS and is the foundation for future Artemis geology training, which will include lunar science and increasingly complex field training in planetary-relevant locations. A final piece of our training program provides geology and field mapping experiences for NASA engineers, flight controllers, and managers, to help them understand the principles of fieldwork and relevance to lunar exploration. The Year 1 geology training must be an effective introduction for astronauts who have little or no background in geology. We focus the training around a narrowly defined field problem and use a week of classroom training to prepare the astronauts with the specific skills and background they need to carry out a field exercise on volcanic features, structures, and landforms of the Taos Plateau, New Mexico. Classroom modules are hands-on, using satellite imagery, maps, analog models, and samples, and provide the astronauts with specific and relevant experience in how to make observations and describe what they see, recognize, and interpret patterns, infer processes from products, and analyze relationships to build a story based on evidence from a variety of data sources. At the end of each classroom day, astronauts work in teams to build a preliminary geologic map of the field area, adding new observations and interpretations as they learn about topics in the classroom. Each team’s bucket list of target areas to visit helps shape their investigations during their week in the field. On the final day in the field, each astronaut team presents a geologic map, cross section, and geologic interpretation

Geology↗
NASA NTRS2015

Forward Bay Cover Separation Modeling and Testing for the Orion Multi-Purpose Crew Vehicle

Spacecraft multi-body separation events during atmospheric descent require complex testing and analysis to validate the flight separation dynamics models used to verify no re-contact. The NASA Orion Multi-Purpose Crew Vehicle (MPCV) architecture includes a highly-integrated Forward Bay Cover (FBC) jettison assembly design that combines parachutes and piston thrusters to separate the FBC from the Crew Module (CM) and avoid re-contact. A multi-disciplinary team across numerous organizations examined key model parameters and risk areas to develop a robust but affordable test campaign in order to validate and verify the FBC separation event for Exploration Flight Test-1 (EFT-1). The FBC jettison simulation model is highly complex, consisting of dozens of parameters varied simultaneously, with numerous multi-parameter interactions (coupling and feedback) among the various model elements, and encompassing distinct near-field, mid-field, and far-field regimes. The test campaign was composed of component-level testing (for example gas-piston thrusters and parachute mortars), ground FBC jettison tests, and FBC jettison air-drop tests that were accomplished by a highly multi-disciplinary team. Three ground jettison tests isolated the testing of mechanisms and structures to anchor the simulation models excluding aerodynamic effects. Subsequently, two air-drop tests added aerodynamic and parachute elements, and served as integrated system demonstrations, which had been preliminarily explored during the Orion Pad Abort-1 (PA-1) flight test in May 2010. Both ground and drop tests provided extensive data to validate analytical models and to verify the FBC jettison event for EFT-1. Additional testing will be required to support human certification of this separation event, for which NASA and Lockheed Martin are applying knowledge from Apollo and EFT-1 testing and modeling to develop a robust human-rated FBC separation event.

Ali, Yasmin↗
NASA NTRS2017

The Quest for Engineering Innovation at NASA's Marshall Space Flight (MSFC)

A recent NASA team, chartered to examine innovation within the Agency, captured the meaning of the word innovation as the "application of creative ideas to improve and generate value for the organization". The former NASA Administrator Charles Bolden shared his own thoughts about innovation in a memo with all employees that stated, "At NASA, we are dedicated to innovation, bold ideas, and excellence." Innovation turns out to be one of the major driving forces behind the work produced at NASA. It seems failure is often what has driven NASA to be more innovative. Fifty years ago, the Apollo 1 tragedy killed three astronauts when fire erupted in their command module. NASA had to bear the responsibility of such loss and at the same time work smarter in order to obtain the dream to reach the moon by the end of the 1960s. Through this circumstance, NASA engineers developed a revolutionary replacement for the combustible nylon astronaut suits so the Apollo program could continue. A material called Beta Cloth was born. This material was used to produce noncombustible space suits for all Apollo astronauts, enabling the United States to ultimately land 12 Americans on the moon. Eventually this material was used as the roof system in the Denver International Airport, showing relevance and applications of NASA innovations to real-world need. Innovative ideas are also driven by the need to accomplish NASA missions and to improve the way we produce our products. MSFC engineers are advancing technologies in additive manufacturing of liquid rocket engines in order to reduce the number of parts, design time, and the cost of the engines. NASA is working with academia to eliminate the need for miles of sensor cables by investigating innovations in wireless sensors. In order to enable future exploration missions to Mars, MSFC engineers are pursuing innovative approaches in diverse areas such as the use of ionic liquids for life support systems and composite cryogenic tanks, very low leakage valves to contain propulsion fluids, and natural, non-toxic inhibitors to eliminate the buildup of biofilms in the water systems planned for future crewed Mars missions. Although results are encouraging, we cannot rest on our past accomplishments. In order to overcome breathtaking technical challenges in space exploration, we must continue to promote a culture supporting growth, breakthroughs and disruptive innovations.

Turner, James E.↗
NASA NTRS2018

Semi-Autonomous Rodent Habitat for Deep Space Exploration

NASA has flown animals to space as part of trailblazing missions and to understand the biological responses to spaceflight. Mice traveled in the Lunar Module with the Apollo 17 astronauts and now mice are frequent research subjects in LEO on the ISS. The ISS rodent missions have focused on unravelling biological mechanisms, better understanding risks to astronaut health, and testing candidate countermeasures. A critical barrier for longer-duration animal missions is the need for humans-in-the-loop to perform animal husbandry and perform routine tasks during a mission. Using autonomous or telerobotic systems to alleviate some of these tasks would enable longer-duration missions to be performed at the Deep Space Gateway. Rodent missions performed using the Gateway as a platform could address a number of critical risks identified by the Human Research Program (HRP), as well as Space Biology Program questions identified by NRC Decadal Survey on Biological and Physical Sciences in Space, (2011). HRP risk areas of potentially greatest relevance that the Gateway rodent missions can address include those related to visual impairment (VIIP) and radiation risks to central nervous system, cardiovascular disease, as well as countermeasure testing. Space Biology focus areas addressed by the Gateway rodent missions include mechanisms and combinatorial effects of microgravity and radiation. The objectives of the work proposed here are to 1) develop capability for semi-autonomous rodent research in cis-lunar orbit, 2) conduct key experiments for testing countermeasures against low gravity and space radiation. The hardware and operations system developed will enable experiments at least one month in duration, which potentially could be extended to one year in duration. To gain novel insights into the health risks to crew of deep space travel (i.e., exposure to space radiation), results obtained from Gateway flight rodents can be compared to ground control groups and separate groups of mice exposed to simulated Galactic Cosmic Radiation (at the NASA Space Radiation Lab). Results can then be compared to identical experiments conducted on the ISS. Together results from Gateway, ground-based, and ISS rodent experiments will provide novel insight into the effects of space radiation.

deep space gateway↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Engineering the Interface: Advanced Surface Technologies for Lunar Dust Management and Equipment Longevity

Through the Artemis program, NASA intends to develop a sustainable human foothold on the Moon, ultimately paving the way for crewed exploration of Mars. The Moon's hostile environment poses numerous obstacles, including exposure to radiation, temperature extremes, micrometeoroid threats, and particularly the persistent problem of lunar dust. Lunar dust impacts nearly every aspect of surface operations through adhesion and abrasion mechanisms, with contamination from anthropogenic activities (landing, rovers) far outweighing natural phenomena. Multiple adhesion pathways contribute to surface contamination in the lunar environment, including van der Waals forces, electrostatic forces, chemical reaction, and magnetic forces from elemental iron deposits. Sharp asperities from micrometeoroid bombardment and atmospheric absence increase interaction potential and enable mechanical interlocking. Low cohesion between dust particles exacerbates these challenges, as minimal interaction potential between dust and nearby surfaces overcomes particle cohesion, causing contamination. Lunar dust adhesion mitigation technologies can be categorized as either active, requiring external energy, or passive, relying on intrinsic material properties. Ultrasonic and electrodynamic technologies have been developed to the highest technology readiness level for active approaches. Passive strategies primarily focus on surface chemistry and topography modifications. At NASA Langley Research Center, approaches include surface migration agents to reduce surface energy, topographical modification using laser ablation patterning, and tailored surface conductivity to reduce intrinsic adhesion force. Performance has been evaluated using custom-built ultrasonic and centrifuge instruments. Plume-surface interactions from lunar landers can propel micrometer-sized particles at velocities up to 1000 m s-1.8 These particles pose risks to landers, habitats and infrastructure, leading to erosion, degradation, and reduced component lifespan. A panel recovered from Surveyor III was determined to have been severely abraded because of lunar dust displaced from the Apollo 12 lunar module that landed 160 m away. The performance of metallic surfaces has been evaluated via high velocity single particle impact using the laser-induced project impact test (LIPIT) facility at the University of Utah. Peridynamics modeling, a form of continuum mechanics that uses a nonlocal approach enabling greater simulation capabilities of crack initiation and fracture, has also been utilized to gain greater insight into material response during impact events. Lunar dust contamination challenges extend to power generation systems and moving equipment. Cables, rotation stages, and other mechanisms may experience limited range of motion and reduced lifetime due to dust infiltration. NASA Langley Research Center has evaluated traditional aerospace alloys, softgoods, wear resistant ceramics, and several polymer and polymer composite materials. Test methods have included traditional techniques like Taber abrasion testing, as well as designed test configurations developed in the DUSTE (dust, ultraviolet radiation, and space thermal environmental) chamber that reproduce mechanism functions in operational environment. Beyond laboratory experiments, several flight experiments have been conducted. Materials were exposed to the low Earth orbit environment on the Materials International Space Station Experiment (MISSE) and to the lunar surface environment through the Aegis Aerospace Regolith Adherence Characterization (RAC) payload and the Honeybee Robotics PlanetVac payload. Determining lunar dust's impact on surface exploration and habitation requires comprehensive experimental and computational capabilities combined with lessons learned from initial lunar activities. Identifying the greatest environmental challenges and developing mitigation technologies provides the clearest path toward successfully, expeditiously, and efficaciously completing NASA's mission. This presentation will discuss ongoing efforts at NASA Langley Research Center and collaborator contributions to these critical objectives.

Surface Engineering↗
NASA NTRS2018

Orion Optical Navigation Progress Toward Exploration: Mission 1

Optical navigation of human spacecraft was proposed on Gemini and implemented successfully on Apollo as a means of autonomously operating the vehicle in the event of lost communication with controllers on Earth. It shares a history with the "method of lunar distances" that was used in the 18th century and gained some notoriety after its use by Captain James Cook during his 1768 Pacific voyage of the HMS Endeavor. The Orion emergency return system utilizing optical navigation has matured in design over the last several years, and is currently undergoing the final implementation and test phase in preparation for Exploration Mission 1 (EM-1) in 2019. The software development is being worked as a Government Furnished Equipment (GFE) project delivered as an application within the Core Flight Software of the Orion camera controller module. The mathematical formulation behind the initial ellipse fit in the image processing is detailed in Christian. The non-linear least squares refinement then follows the technique of Mortari as an estimation process of the planetary limb using the sigmoid function. The Orion optical navigation system uses a body fixed camera, a decision that was driven by mass and mechanism constraints. The general concept of operations involves a 2-hour pass once every 24 hours, with passes specifically placed before all maneuvers to supply accurate navigation information to guidance and targeting. The pass lengths are limited by thermal constraints on the vehicle since the OpNav attitude generally deviates from the thermally stable tail-to-sun attitude maintained during the rest of the orbit coast phase. Calibration is scheduled prior to every pass due to the unknown nature of thermal effects on the lens distortion and the mounting platform deformations between the camera and star trackers. The calibration technique is described in detail by Christian, et al. and simultaneously estimates the Brown-Conrady coefficients and the Star Tracker/Camera interlock angles. Accurate attitude information is provided by the star trackers during each pass. Figure 1 shows the various phases of lunar return navigation when the vehicle is in autonomous operation with lost ground communication. The midcourse maneuvers are placed to control the entry interface conditions to the desired corridor for safe landing. The general form of optical navigation on Orion is where still images of the Moon or Earth are processed to find the apparent angular diameter and centroid in the camera focal plane. This raw data is transformed into range and bearing angle measurements using planetary data and precise star tracker inertial attitude. The measurements are then sent to the main flight computer's Kalman filter to update the onboard state vector. The images are, of course, collected over an arc to converge the state and estimate velocity. The same basic technique was used by Apollo to satisfy loss-of-comm, but Apollo used manual crew sightings with a vehicle-integral sextant instead of autonomously processing optical imagery. The software development is past its Critical Design Review, and is progressing through test and certification for human rating. In support of this, a hardware-in-the-loop test rig was developed in the Johnson Space Center Electro-Optics Lab to exercise the OpNav system prior to integrated testing on the Orion vehicle. Figure 2 shows the rig, which the test team has dubbed OCILOT (Orion Camera In the Loop Optical Testbed). Analysis performed to date shows a delivery that satisfies an allowable entry corridor as shown in Figure 3.

Holt, Greg N.↗