Results for “Logistics reduction” — Page 10

NASA NTRS1988

Status of the US Space Station ECLSS and internal TCS

The U.S. Space Station includes many elements and systems. Responsibility for these have been delegated to four NASA centers via a work packaging concept. Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) is responsible for work package one (WPOI) which includes the habitation, laboratory modules, the logistic carrier elements, as well as the environmental control and life support system (ECLSS), the internal thermal control system (ITCS), and the internal audio and video systems. Current status of the ECLSS and internal thermal are the subjects of this paper. The ECLSS is composed of six subsystem groups: the temperature humidity control, the atmosphere control and supply, the air revitalization, water reclamation and management, fecal waste management, and the fire detection and suppression subsystems. The internal TCS consists of all WP01 elements of passive and active thermal measures. The ECLSS and ITCS provide services for the permanently orbiting pressurized modules as well as the pressurized and unpressurized logistics carriers. The logistics carriers are used as ground-to-station ferries for both resupply and initial delivery of selected new equipment and later replacement items. Equipment, which cannot be subjected to the rigors of the space environment, will be carried in the pressurized logistic carrier; while an unpressurized carrier is used to resupply other commodities, such as external fluid consumables. The laboratory module houses the equipment for both payloads and subsystem maintenance and repair. The habitation module is dedicated to providing living and sleeping quarters including a galley, sleeping provisions, hygiene facilities, medical services as well as services for exercise and relaxation. The four nodes that join the two modules at their ends also house electronics as well as work stations and outside viewing cupolas. The airlocks, one providing an emergency hyperbaric chamber capability, are also attached. This assembly constitutes the U.S. provided portion of the initial station. Additional international modules and docking provisions for future attached pressurized payload as well as dual logistic module and growth capabilities are also provided. The primary heat rejection mechanism is achieved via a central set of radiators provided by another work package. The interface with the central TCS at the module heat exchangers defines the active control interface boundary of the ITCS with the central TCS. All internal cooling of the permanent orbital elements are provided via internal active fluid loops within the elements utilizing water as the transport media. Cabin and equipment cooling are provided by forced air flow and cold plate heat sinks. A special active cooling loop is provided in the laboratory module to accommodate experiments and other payloads. Coatings and insulation are used in conjunction with the active components to passively limit heat losses/gains. The most challenging ECLSS new technology issues relate to oxygen and water recovery. Closure of the oxygen loop requires the use of new regenerative CO 2 removal and concentration techniques, CO 2 reduction to convert the CO 2 to water with a waste by-product, and the electrolysis of water to produce breathing oxygen for water recovery. For water recovery three separate loops are currently planned. One loop provides potable water by utilizing a combination of recovered condensate and CO 2 reduction water. A second loop purifies hygiene water from waste from the showers, clothes washer, hygiene/hand wash stations and a dishwasher. The third loop provides hygiene water by the reclamation and purification of urine water. This paper outlines the basic services provided by the ECLSS and ITCS and describes the ECLSS functional distribution throughout the pressurized assembly.

R. Humphries↗

NASA NTRS2004

Strategies for Small Volume Resuscitation: Hyperosmotic-Hyperoncotic Solutions, Hemoglobin Based Oxygen Carriers and Closed-Loop Resuscitation

Introduction: Logistic constraints on combat casualty care preclude traditional resuscitation strategies which can require volumes and weights 3 fold or greater than hemorrhaged volume. We present a review of quantitative analyses of clinical and animal data on small volume strategies using 1) hypertonic-hyperosmotic solutions (HHS); 2) hemoglobin based oxygen carriers (HBOCs) and 3) closed-loop infusion regimens.Methods and Results: Literature searches and recent queries to industry and academic researchers have allowed us to evaluate the record of 81 human HHS studies (12 trauma trials), 19 human HBOCs studies (3trauma trials) and two clinical studies of closed-loop resuscitation.There are several hundreds animal studies and at least 82 clinical trials and reports evaluating small volume7.2%-7.5% hypertonic saline (HS) most often combined with colloids, e.g., dextran (HSD) or hetastarch(HSS). HSD and HSS data has been published for 1,108 and 392 patients, respectively. Human studies have documented volume sparing and hemodynamic improvements. Meta-analyses suggest improved survival for hypotensive trauma patients treated with HSD with significant reductions in mortality found for patients with blood pressure < 70 mmHg, head trauma, and penetrating injury requiring surgery. HSD and HSS have received regulatory approval in 14 and 3 countries, respectively, with 81,000+ units sold. The primary reported use was head injury and trauma resuscitation. Complications and reported adverse events are surprisingly rare and not significantly different from other solutions.HBOCs are potent volume expanders in addition to oxygen carriers with volume expansion greater than standard colloids. Several investigators have evaluated small volume hyperoncotic HBOCs or HS-HBOC formulations for hypotensive and normotensive resuscitation in animals. A consistent finding in resuscitation with HBOCs is depressed cardiac output. There is some evidence that HBOCs more efficiently unload oxygen from plasma hemoglobin as well as facilitate RBC unloading. We analyzed one volunteer study, 15 intraoperative trials, and 3 trauma studies using HBOCs. Perioperative studies generally suggest ability to deliver oxygen, but one trauma trial using HBOCs (HemAssist) for treatment of trauma resulted in a dramatic increase in mortality, while an intraoperative trauma study using Polyheme demonstrated reductions in blood use and lower mortality compared to historic controls of patients refusing blood. Transfusion reductions with HBOC use have been modest. Two HBOCs (Hemopure and Polyheme) are now in new or planned large-scale multicenter prehospital trials of trauma treatment. A new implementation of small volume resuscitation is closed-loop resuscitation (CLR), which employs microprocessors to titrate just enough fluid to reach a physiologic target . Animal studies suggest less risk of rebleeding in uncontrolled hemorrhage and a reduction in fluid needs with CLR. The first clinical application of CLR was treatment of burn shock and the US Army. Conclusions: Independently sponsored civilian trauma trials and clinical evaluations in operational combat conditions of different small volume strategies are warranted.

Kramer, George C.↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Gateway at the Crossroads of Sustainable Lunar Exploration

The Gateway Program has made substantial design and development progress toward delivering a small, human-tended lunar space station purposefully designed to enable sustainable human exploration. The Program integrates partners and providers organizationally and physically as part of the spacecraft. The Power and Propulsion Element (PPE) and the Habitation and Logistics Outpost (HALO) with the European System Providing Refueling, Infrastructure and Telecommunications (ESPRIT) HALO Lunar Communications System (HLCS) have begun manufacturing the long lead components and will be launched first as a Co-Manifested Vehicle (CMV). The International Habitat (I-Hab) and ESPRIT Refueling Module (ERM) are passing life cycle milestones and include capabilities key for human crewmembers, such as windows, private sleeping quarters, and galley functions. The Logistics Module (LM) may provide a variety of services to Gateway depending on each mission. Requirements for the airlock have been developed, including requests that it support the integrated spacecraft with functions like augmenting heat rejection capabilities, and interfaces with new spacesuits will soon be developed in more detail. As a critical element of the architecture for solar system exploration, Gateway implements key tenets and features of international interoperability standards necessary to operate with multiple visiting vehicles and lunar assets, especially avionics, communications, and docking. Specific choices such as software architecture and standards, power standards, and robotics standards make it possible to utilize heritage or proprietary technology, yet still operate as one spacecraft. Engineering teams are evaluating many possible future missions to be executed at or utilizing the Gateway. The system architecture protects for an evolvable, extensible, and flexible capability. Designing systems robust enough to serve as a cornerstone of exploration activities for decades while remaining adaptable is not without its challenges. The detailed integration activities have revealed challenges and the need to mature key technologies. Refueling is a key component of achieving long life for Gateway, with unique operations to plan, safety concerns to mitigate, and risk reduction activities to conduct to better understand the system. The constraints and impacts of the design of visiting vehicles is also an important concern, with orientation constraints, control of attitude and orbit of the Gateway with docked visiting vehicles. Tradeoffs between robust maintainable systems and lightweight, compact systems must be balanced. Opportunities still exist for adding additional advanced capabilities to increase and extend Gateway’s benefits, such as intravehicular robotics, autonomous Guidance Navigation and Control (GN&C), and augmented control propulsion, heat rejection, or other services.

Molly S Anderson↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Gateway at the Crossroads of Sustainable Lunar Exploration

The Gateway Program has made substantial design and development progress toward delivering a small, human-tended lunar space station purposefully designed to enable sustainable human exploration. The Program integrates partners and providers organizationally and physically as part of the spacecraft. The Power and Propulsion Element (PPE) and the Habitation and Logistics Outpost (HALO) with the European System Providing Refueling, Infrastructure and Telecommunications (ESPRIT) HALO Lunar Communications System (HLCS) have begun manufacturing the long lead components and will be launched first as a Co-Manifested Vehicle (CMV). The International Habitat (I-Hab) and ESPRIT Refueling Module (ERM) are passing life cycle milestones and include capabilities key for human crewmembers, such as windows, private sleeping quarters, and galley functions. The Logistics Module (LM) may provide a variety of services to Gateway depending on each mission. Requirements for the airlock have been developed, including requests that it support the integrated spacecraft with functions like augmenting heat rejection capabilities, and interfaces with new spacesuits will soon be developed in more detail. As a critical element of the architecture for solar system exploration, Gateway implements key tenets and features of international interoperability standards necessary to operate with multiple visiting vehicles and lunar assets, especially avionics, communications, and docking. Specific choices such as software architecture and standards, power standards, and robotics standards make it possible to utilize heritage or proprietary technology, yet still operate as one spacecraft. Engineering teams are evaluating many possible future missions to be executed at or utilizing the Gateway. The system architecture protects for an evolvable, extensible, and flexible capability. Designing systems robust enough to serve as a cornerstone of exploration activities for decades while remaining adaptable is not without its challenges. The detailed integration activities have revealed challenges and the need to mature key technologies. Refueling is a key component of achieving long life for Gateway, with unique operations to plan, safety concerns to mitigate, and risk reduction activities to conduct to better understand the system. The constraints and impacts of the design of visiting vehicles is also an important concern, with orientation constraints, control of attitude and orbit of the Gateway with docked visiting vehicles. Tradeoffs between robust maintainable systems and lightweight, compact systems must be balanced. Opportunities still exist for adding additional advanced capabilities to increase and extend Gateway’s benefits, such as intravehicular robotics, autonomous Guidance Navigation and Control (GN&C), and augmented control propulsion, heat rejection, or other services.

Molly S Anderson↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Analysis and Optimization of Test Plans for Advanced Exploration Systems Reliability and Supportability

Future crewed exploration missions beyond Low Earth Orbit (LEO) will operate farther from Earth and be logistically isolated for longer than any previous human spaceflight mission. Under these conditions, supportability and reliability willbestronger drivers of mission mass and risk than they have been in the past. Items with high failure rates, or uncertain failure rates, can result in high spares mass requirements and/or high risk on deep space missions. Testing is a critical element of system development which provides the opportunity to identify and resolve design issues, defects, or other failure modes before they cause problems during a mission. Reliability growth programs can reduce failure rates by identifying and remove failure modes via design changes, and long-duration life testing can provide valuable data to reduce failure rate estimate uncertainty and verify (to some level of confidence) that components are as reliable as expected. Testing activities take time and resources, however, and must be incorporated into program plans in order to be fully effective. This paper presents an integrated reliability test plan analysis and optimization methodology, which has been used to inform Advanced Exploration Systems (AES) Life Support Systems (LSS) ground test planning for future missions. The methodology determines the optimal number of test units to purchase and allocation of test time –split between reliability growth and uncertainty reduction testing –across a given set of items in order to minimize spares mass for a given mission under constraints on total test cost and schedule. Model outputs also include expected spares mass after testing and the expected number of modifications or refurbishments during testing, both of which can inform program planning. Discussion of the model, conclusions, and future work are also presented.

Testing↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Analysis and Optimization of Test Plans for Advanced Exploration Systems Reliability and Supportability

Future crewed exploration missions beyond Low Earth Orbit (LEO) will operate farther from Earth and be logistically isolated for longer than any previous human spaceflight mission. Under these conditions, supportability and reliability willbestronger drivers of mission mass and risk than they have been in the past. Items with high failure rates, or uncertain failure rates, can result in high spares mass requirements and/or high risk on deep space missions. Testing is a critical element of system development which provides the opportunity to identify and resolve design issues, defects, or other failure modes before they cause problems during a mission. Reliability growth programs can reduce failure rates by identifying and remove failure modes via design changes, and long-duration life testing can provide valuable data to reduce failure rate estimate uncertainty and verify (to some level of confidence) that components are as reliable as expected. Testing activities take time and resources, however, and must be incorporated into program plans in order to be fully effective. This paper presents an integrated reliability test plan analysis and optimization methodology, which has been used to inform Advanced Exploration Systems (AES) Life Support Systems (LSS) ground test planning for future missions. The methodology determines the optimal number of test units to purchase and allocation of test time –split between reliability growth and uncertainty reduction testing –across a given set of items in order to minimize spares mass for a given mission under constraints on total test cost and schedule. Model outputs also include expected spares mass after testing and the expected number of modifications or refurbishments during testing, both of which can inform program planning. Discussion of the model, conclusions, and future work are also presented.

Testing↗

NASA NTRS2011

Crew Health and Performance Improvements with Reduced Carbon Dioxide Levels and the Resource Impact to Accomplish Those Reductions

Carbon dioxide (CO2) removal is one of the primary functions of the International Space Station (ISS) atmosphere revitalization systems. Primary CO2 removal is via the ISS s two Carbon Dioxide Removal Assemblies (CDRAs) and the Russian carbon dioxide removal assembly (Vozdukh); both of these systems are regenerable, meaning that their CO2 removal capacity theoretically remains constant as long as the system is operating. Contingency CO2 removal capability is provided by lithium hydroxide (LiOH) canisters, which are consumable, meaning that their CO2 removal capability disappears once the resource is used. With the advent of 6 crew ISS operations, experience showing that CDRA failures are not uncommon, and anecdotal association of crew symptoms with CO2 values just above 4 mmHg, the question arises: How much lower do we keep CO2 levels to minimize the risk to crew health and performance, and what will the operational cost to the CDRAs be to do it? The primary crew health concerns center on the interaction of increased intracranial pressure from fluid shifts and the increased intracranial blood flow induced by CO2. Typical acute symptoms include headache, minor visual disturbances, and subtle behavioral changes. The historical database of CO2 exposures since the beginning of ISS operations has been compared to the incidence of crew symptoms reported in private medical conferences. We have used this database in an attempt to establish an association between the CO2 levels and the risk of crew symptoms. This comparison will answer the question of the level needed to protect the crew from acute effects. As for the second part of the question, operation of the ISS s regenerable CO2 removal capability reduces the limited life of constituent parts. It also consumes limited electrical power and thermal control resources. Operation of consumable CO2 removal capability (LiOH) uses finite consumable materials, which must be replenished in the long term. Therefore, increased CO2 removal means increased resource use, with increased logistical capability to maintain necessary resources on board ISS. We must strike a balance between sufficiently low CO2 levels to maintain crew health and CO2 levels which are operationally feasible for the ISS program

James, John T.↗

NASA NTRS2016

Green Propellant Landing Demonstration at U.S. Range

The Green Propellant Loading Demonstration (GPLD) was conducted December 2015 at Wallops Flight Facility (WFF), leveraging work performed over recent years to bring lower toxicity hydrazine replacement green propellants to flight missions. The objective of this collaboration between NASA Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC), WFF, the Swedish National Space Board (SNSB), and Ecological Advanced Propulsion Systems (ECAPS) was to successfully accept LMP-103S propellant at a U.S. Range, store the propellant, and perform a simulated flight vehicle propellant loading. NASA GSFC Propulsion (Code 597) managed all aspects of the operation, handling logistics, preparing the procedures, and implementing the demonstration. In addition to the partnership described above, Moog Inc. developed an LMP-103S propellant-compatible titanium rolling diaphragm flight development tank and loaned it to GSFC to act as the GPLD flight vessel. The flight development tank offered the GPLD an additional level of flight-like propellant handling process and procedures. Moog Inc. also provided a compatible latching isolation valve for remote propellant expulsion. The GPLD operation, in concert with Moog Inc. executed a flight development tank expulsion efficiency performance test using LMP-103S propellant. As part of the demonstration work, GSFC and WFF documented Range safety analyses and practices including all elements of shipping, storage, handling, operations, decontamination, and disposal. LMP-103S has not been previously handled at a U.S. Launch Range. Requisite for this activity was an LMP-103S Risk Analysis Report and Ground Safety Plan. GSFC and WFF safety offices jointly developed safety documentation for application into the GPLD operation. The GPLD along with the GSFC Propulsion historical hydrazine loading experiences offer direct comparison between handling green propellant versus safety intensive, highly toxic hydrazine propellant. These described motives initiated the GPLD operation in order to investigate the handling and process safety variances in project resources between LMP-103S and typical in-space propellants. The GPLD risk reduction operation proved successful for many reasons including handling the green propellant at a U.S. Range, loading and pressurizing a flight-like tank, expelling the propellant, measuring the tank expulsion efficiency, and most significantly, GSFC propulsion personnel's new insight into the LMP-103S propellant handling details.

Propellant↗

NASA NTRS2016

Green Propellant Loading Demonstration at U.S. Range

The Green Propellant Loading Demonstration (GPLD) was conducted December 2015 at Wallops Flight Facility (WFF), leveraging work performed over recent years to bring lower toxicity hydrazine replacement green propellants to flight missions. The objective of this collaboration between NASA Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC), WFF, the Swedish National Space Board (SNSB), and Ecological Advanced Propulsion Systems (ECAPS) was to successfully accept LMP-103S propellant at a U.S. Range, store the propellant, and perform a simulated flight vehicle propellant loading. NASA GSFC Propulsion (Code 597) managed all aspects of the operation, handling logistics, preparing the procedures, and implementing the demonstration. In addition to the partnership described above, Moog Inc. developed an LMP-103S propellant-compatible titanium rolling diaphragm flight development tank and loaned it to GSFC to act as the GPLD flight vessel. The flight development tank offered the GPLD an additional level of flight-like propellant handling process and procedures. Moog Inc. also provided a compatible latching isolation valve for remote propellant expulsion. The GPLD operation, in concert with Moog Inc. executed a flight development tank expulsion efficiency performance test using LMP-103S propellant. As part of the demonstration work, GSFC and WFF documented Range safety analyses and practices including all elements of shipping, storage, handling, operations, decontamination, and disposal. LMP-103S has not been previously handled at a U.S. Launch Range. Requisite for this activity was an LMP-103S Risk Analysis Report and Ground Safety Plan. GSFC and WFF safety offices jointly developed safety documentation for application into the GPLD operation. The GPLD along with the GSFC Propulsion historical hydrazine loading experiences offer direct comparison between handling green propellant versus safety intensive, highly toxic hydrazine propellant. These described motives initiated the GPLD operation in order to investigate the handling and process safety variances in project resources between LMP-103S and typical in-space propellants. The GPLD risk reduction operation proved successful for many reasons including handling the green propellant at a U.S. Range, loading and pressurizing a flight-like tank, expelling the propellant, measuring the tank expulsion efficiency, and most significantly, GSFC propulsion personnel's new insight into the LMP-103S propellant handling details.

Green Propellant↗

NASA NTRS2023

Palmer Station, Antarctica: A Ground-Based Spaceflight Analog Suitable for Validation of Biomedical Countermeasures for Deep Space Missions

Astronauts are known to exhibit a variety of immunological alterations during spaceflight including changes in leukocyte distribution and plasma cytokine concentrations, a reduction in T-cell function, and subclinical reactivation of latent herpesviruses. These alterations are most likely due to mission-associated stressors including circadian misalignment, microgravity, isolation, altered nutrition, and increased exposure to cosmic radiation. Some of these stressors may also occur in terrestrial situations. This study sought to determine if crewmembers performing overwinter deployment at Palmer Station, Antarctica displayed similar immune alterations. The larger goal was to validate a ground analog suitable for the evaluation of countermeasures designed to protect astronauts during future deep space missions. For this pilot study, plasma, saliva, hair, and health surveys were collected from Palmer Station, Antarctica winterover participants at baseline, and at five overwinter timepoints. Twenty-six subjects consented to participate over the course of two seasons. Initial sample processing was performed at Palmer, and eventually stabilized samples were returned to the Johnson Space Center for analysis. A white blood cell differential was performed (real time) using a fingerstick blood sample to determine alterations in basic leukocyte subsets throughout the winterover. Plasma and saliva samples were analyzed for 30 and 13 cytokines, respectively. Saliva was analyzed for cortisol concentration and three latent herpesviruses (DNA by qPCR), EBV, HSV1, and VZV. Hair samples were analyzed for several hormones, as a measure of stress over prolonged periods of time. Voluntary surveys related to general health and adverse clinical events were distributed to participants. It is noteworthy that due to logistical constraints due to COVID-19, the baseline samples for each season were collected in Punta Arenas, Chile, after long international travel and during isolation. Therefore, the palmer pre mission samples may not reflect a true normal ‘baseline’. Minimal alterations were observed in leukocyte distribution during overwinter. The mean percentage of monocyte concentration elevated at one timepoint. Plasma G-CSF, IL1RA, MCP-1, MIP-1β, TNFα and VEGF were decreased during at least one overwinter timepoint, whereas RANTES was significantly increased. No statistically significant changes were observed in mean saliva cytokine concentrations. Salivary cortisol was substantially elevated throughout the entire winterover compared to baseline. Compared to shedding levels observed in healthy controls (23%), the percentage of participants who shed EBV was higher throughout all winterover timepoints (52-60%). Five subjects shed HSV1 during at least one timepoint throughout the season compared to no subjects shedding during pre-deployment. Finally, VZV reactivation, common in astronauts but exceptionally rare in ground-based stress analogs, was observed in one subject during pre-deployment and a different subject at WO2 and WO3. These pilot data, somewhat influenced by the COVID-19 situation, do suggest that participants at Palmer Station do undergo immunological alterations similar to, but likely in reduced magnitude, as those observed in astronauts. We suggest that overwinter at Palmer Station may be suitable test analog for spaceflight biomedical countermeasures designed to mitigate clinical risks for deep space missions.

Space↗

DOE OSTI2024

Woody Feedstock 2022 State of Technology Report

The U.S. Department of Energy promotes production of advanced liquid transportation fuels from lignocellulosic biomass by funding fundamental and applied research that advances the state of technology (SOT). As part of its involvement in this mission, Idaho National Laboratory completes an annual SOT report for n th -plant and 1 st -plant woody biomass feedstock logistics. The purpose of the SOT is to provide the status of feedstock supply system technology development for woody biomass to biofuels relative to technical targets and cost goals from specific design cases, based on data and experimental results. Conventional feedstock supply systems need to be modified to meet the demands of conversion pathways, specifically to have the ability to adjust the quality of the raw biomass materials. Advanced systems incorporate innovative methods of material handling, preprocessing and supply chain configuration. In advanced designs, variability of the raw biomass can be reduced to produce feedstocks of a uniform format, moving toward biomass commoditization. Against this backdrop, the 2022 Woody SOT for low-ash woody feedstocks utilizes feedstock fractionation by incorporating technologies that can separate the biomass into its anatomical fractions (wood, bark, needle, and extrinsic ash) to reduce impurities and attempt to maximize the retention of usable fractions that satisfy downstream quality considerations. By using a series of air classification steps, this strategy can reduce the extrinsic ash in forest residues, separate out a majority of the incoming needles (which can be supplied to alternate markets), and maximize the retention of whitewood in the usable fraction. The fractionated forest residues are then mixed with clean-pine chips in a 50-50 blend to prepare the feedstock for the desired conversion pathway. The n th -plant analysis estimated the delivered cost for the feedstock at $\$$69.23/dry ton (2016$\$$) which represents a $\$$6.64/dry ton decrease compared to the cost estimate of the 2021 Woody SOT supply system for low-ash woody feedstocks. The quality requirements in the 2022 Woody SOT were identical to those of the 2021 Woody SOT at = 1.00 wt % ash and = 50.51 wt% carbon. The cost savings derive primarily from reductions in dry matter losses during air classification. The GHG emissions for the n th -plant analysis were estimated at 178.39 kg CO2e/dry ton compared to 178.71 kg CO 2 e/dry ton in the 2021 Woody SOT, a decrease of 0.32 kg CO2e/dry ton. The small change stems from an increase in emissions attributed to preprocessing and slightly larger savings in emissions from transportation. In the 1 st -plant analysis of the 2022 Woody SOT system, the average throughput was estimated to be approximately 2,128 dry tons/day or 96.51% of the name plate capacity. During the simulation the daily throughput ranged from 1,090 dry tons/day to 2,200 dry tons/day, or 49.43% to 99.75% of the daily nameplate capacity. After the year of operation 722,403 tons of processed feedstock were produced in total without regard to quality considerations (99.64% of the annual nameplate capacity). The variability in throughput was primarily caused by equipment failures in the system. Regular failures, downtime caused by routine maintenance per manufacturer guidelines, contributed to a majority 62.50% of failures and 62.60% of downtime. Failures due to wear were the other cause of disruption within the system, impacting the rotary shear and orbital screen and accounting for 37.50% of the failures and 37.40% of the total downtime. Ultimately the system was on stream for 87.84% during the simulation period, which is only 2.16 percentage points below the nth-plant assumption for on-stream time. The production cost of the system averaged $\$$71.66/dry ton. The costs ranged from a minimum of $\$$71.23/dry ton to a maximum of $\$$2,115.30/dry ton. When dry matter losses (disposed low-quality fractions as well as other losses such as in grinders) were considered the costs increased to an average of $\$$75.11/dry ton with a minimum of $\$$74.69/dry ton and a maximum of $\$$2,136.86/dry ton...

09 BIOMASS FUELS↗

NASA NTRS2015

High Performance EVA Glove Collaboration: Glove Injury Data Mining Effort

Human hands play a significant role during Extravehicular Activity (EVA) missions and Neutral Buoyancy Lab (NBL) training events, as they are needed for translating and performing tasks in the weightless environment. Because of this high frequency usage, hand and arm related injuries are known to occur during EVA and EVA training in the NBL. The primary objectives of this investigation were to: 1) document all known EVA glove related injuries and circumstances of these incidents, 2) determine likely risk factors, and 3) recommend interventions where possible that could be implemented in the current and future glove designs. METHODS: The investigation focused on the discomforts and injuries of U.S. crewmembers who had worn the pressurized Extravehicular Mobility Unit (EMU) spacesuit and experienced 4000 Series or Phase VI glove related incidents during 1981 to 2010 for either EVA ground training or in-orbit flight. We conducted an observational retrospective case-control investigation using 1) a literature review of known injuries, 2) data mining of crew injury, glove sizing, and hand anthropometry databases, 3) descriptive statistical analyses, and finally 4) statistical risk correlation and predictor analyses to better understand injury prevalence and potential causation. Specific predictor statistical analyses included use of principal component analyses (PCA), multiple logistic regression, and survival analyses (Cox proportional hazards regression). Results of these analyses were computed risk variables in the forms of odds ratios (likelihood of an injury occurring given the magnitude of a risk variable) and hazard ratios (likelihood of time to injury occurrence). Due to the exploratory nature of this investigation, we selected predictor variables significant at p≤0.15. RESULTS: Through 2010, there have been a total of 330 NASA crewmembers, from which 96 crewmembers performed 322 EVAs during 1981-2010, resulting in 50 crewmembers being injured inflight and 44 injured during 11,704 ground EVA training events. Of the 196 glove related injury incidents, 106 related to EVA and 90 to EVA training. Over these 196 incidents, 277 total injuries (126 flight; 151 training) were reported and were then grouped into 23 types of injuries. Of EVA flight injuries, 65% were commonly reported to the hand (in general), metacarpophalangeal (MCP) joint, and finger (not including thumb) with fatigue, abrasion, and paresthesia being the most common injury types (44% of total flight injuries). Training injuries totaled to more than 70% being distributed to the fingernail, MCP joint, and finger crotch with 88% of the specific injuries listed as pain, erythema, and onycholysis. Of these training injuries, when reporting pain or erythema, the most common location was the index finger, but when reporting onycholysis, it was the middle finger. Predictor variables specific to increased risk of onycholysis included: female sex (OR=2.622), older age (OR=1.065), increased duration in hours of the flight or training event (OR=1.570), middle finger length differences in inches between the finger and the EVA glove (OR=7.709), and use of the Phase VI glove (OR=8.535). Differentiation between training and flight and injury reporting during 2002-2004 were significant control variables. For likelihood of time to first onycholysis injury, there was a 24% reduction in rate of reporting for each year increase in age. Also, more experienced crewmembers, based on number of EVA flight or training events completed, were less likely to report an onycholysis injury (3% less for every event). Longer duration events also found reporting rates to occur 2.37 times faster for every hour of length. Crewmembers with larger hand size reported onycholysis 23% faster than those with smaller hand size. Finally, for every 1/10th of an inch increase in difference between the middle finger length and the glove, the rate of reporting increased by 60%. DISCUSSION: One key finding was that the Series 4000 glove had a lower injury risk than the Phase VI, which provides a platform for further evaluation. General interventions that reduce hand overexertion and repetitive use exposure through tool development, procedural changes and shorter exposures may be one mitigation path, but due to the way the training event times were reported, we cannot provide a guideline for a specific event duration change. When the finger length was different from the glove length, the risk of injury increased indicating that the use of larger finger take-ups could be contributing to injury and therefore may not be recommended. Prior to this investigation, there was one previous investigation indicating hand anthropometry may be related to onycholysis. We found different hand anthropometry variables indicated by this investigation as compared to the prior, specifically differences in middle finger length compared to glove finger length, which point more towards a sizing issue than a specific anthropometry issue. Additionally, although this investigation has identified sizing as an issue, the force and environmental-related variables of the EVA glove that could also cause injury were not accounted for.

Reid, C. R.↗