Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “General Mission Analysis Tool”

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.

190 records · Page 11

Analysis of Ice Mass Growth Over Time on the CRM65 Midspan Hybrid Model

The Aeronautics Research Mission Directorate at NASA is developing and applying tools to enable future technologies towards sustainable flight. Aircraft icing has been identified as a potential barrier to entry into service for innovative designs necessitating improvements to computational ice accretion tools. NASA is developing the Glenn Icing Computational Environment (GlennICE) to address deficiencies in the computational modeling capabilities of previously developed ice accretion solvers. To benchmark and improve the ability to model highly three-dimensional ice accretion, high quality validation data against experimental data is required. The CRM65 Midspan Hybrid geometry was previously tested at the NASA Icing Research Tunnel to generate experimental data for swept wing geometries typical for commercial transport aircraft. As a part of a 2018 icing test campaign, experimental data characterizing the relationship between ice accretion time and ice mass growth was obtained and can be leveraged for use in validation of computational tools. The desire for computational ice accretion solvers to predict ice shapes profiles accreted experimentally has often overshadowed the comparison to the mass and bulk volume of ice accreted. To address this deficiency, an analysis is presented in which GlennICE is applied to simulations of the CRM65 Midspan Hybrid model tested in the NASA Icing Research Tunnel. Results from the computational fluid dynamics simulations compared favorably to the experimental pressure coefficient data, thus validating the modeling setup. The experimental data showed excellent repeatability for the 15.0 minute accretion time. The comparisons between the experimental and computational ice mass over time showed good agreement up to 10.0 minutes after which the ice mass was underpredicted. The experimental ice mass was largely linear with some nonlinear data. The bulk volume of ice accreted experimentally compared well to GlennICE for the scanned ice shapes and mean combined cross section ice shapes, but was underpredicted for the maximum combined cross section ice shapes at longer accretion times. The experimental minimum combined cross section, mean combined cross section, and maximum combined cross section profiles when compared to GlennICE show good agreement for the mean combined cross section up to 15.0 minutes. The analyses show that with a single-shot method, GlennICE currently underpredicts the ice mass for longer accretion times, is not able to match the bulk volume of the maximum combined cross section due to dominating scallop features, and future work is required to generate a more generalized ice bulk density model.

Icing↗

Analysis of Ice Mass Growth Over Time on the CRM65 Midspan Hybrid Model

The Aeronautics Research Mission Directorate at NASA is developing and applying tools to enable future technologies towards sustainable flight. Aircraft icing has been identified as a potential barrier to entry into service for innovative designs necessitating improvements to computational ice accretion tools. NASA is developing the Glenn Icing Computational Environment (GlennICE) to address deficiencies in the computational modeling capabilities of previously developed ice accretion solvers. To benchmark and improve the ability to model highly three-dimensional ice accretion, high quality validation data against experimental data is required. The CRM65 Midspan Hybrid geometry was previously tested at the NASA Icing Research Tunnel to generate experimental data for swept wing geometries typical for commercial transport aircraft. As a part of a 2018 icing test campaign, experimental data characterizing the relationship between ice accretion time and ice mass growth was obtained and can be leveraged for use in validation of computational tools. The desire for computational ice accretion solvers to predict ice shapes profiles accreted experimentally has often overshadowed the comparison to the mass and bulk volume of ice accreted. To address this deficiency, an analysis is presented in which GlennICE is applied to simulations of the CRM65 Midspan Hybrid model tested in the NASA Icing Research Tunnel. Results from the computational fluid dynamics simulations compared favorably to the experimental pressure coefficient data, thus validating the modeling setup. The experimental data showed excellent repeatability for the 15.0 minute accretion time. The comparisons between the experimental and computational ice mass over time showed good agreement up to 10.0 minutes after which the ice mass was underpredicted. The experimental ice mass was largely linear with some nonlinear data. The bulk volume of ice accreted experimentally compared well to GlennICE for the scanned ice shapes and mean combined cross section ice shapes, but was underpredicted for the maximum combined cross section ice shapes at longer accretion times. The experimental minimum combined cross section, mean combined cross section, and maximum combined cross section profiles when compared to GlennICE show good agreement for the mean combined cross section up to 15.0 minutes. The analyses show that with a single-shot method, GlennICE currently underpredicts the ice mass for longer accretion times, is not able to match the bulk volume of the maximum combined cross section due to dominating scallop features, and future work is required to generate a more generalized ice bulk density model.

Icing↗

A Summary of NASA Rotary Wing Research: Circa 2008–2018

The general public may not know that the first “A” in NASA stands for Aeronautics. If they do know, they will very likely be surprised that in addition to airplanes, the “A” includes research in helicopters, tiltrotors, and other vehicles adorned with rotors. There is, arguably, no subsonic air vehicle more difficult to accurately analyze than a vehicle with lift-producing rotors. No wonder that NASA has conducted rotary wing research since the days of the NACA and has partnered, since 1965, with the U.S. Army in order to overcome some of the most challenging obstacles to understanding the behavior of these vehicles. Since 2006, NASA rotary wing research has been performed under several different project names [Gorton et al., 2015]: Subsonic Rotary Wing (SRW) (2006–2012), Rotary Wing (RW) (2012–2014), and Revolutionary Vertical Lift Technology (RVLT) (2014–present). In 2009, the SRW Project published a report that assessed the status of NASA rotorcraft research; in particular, the predictive capability of NASA rotorcraft tools was addressed for a number of technical disciplines. A brief history of NASA rotorcraft research through 2009 was also provided [Yamauchi and Young, 2009]. Gorton et al. [2015] describes the system studies during 2009–2011 that informed the SRW/RW/RVLT project investment prioritization and organization. The authors also provided the status of research in the RW Project in engines, drive systems, aeromechanics, and impact dynamics as related to structural dynamics of vertical lift vehicles. Since 2009, the focus of research has shifted from large civil VTOL transports, to environmentally clean aircraft, to electrified VTOL aircraft for the urban air mobility (UAM) market. The changing focus of rotorcraft research has been a reflection of the evolving strategic direction of the NASA Aeronautics Research Mission Directorate (ARMD). By 2014, the project had been renamed the Revolutionary Vertical Lift Technology Project. In response to the 2014 NASA Strategic Plan, ARMD developed six Strategic Thrusts. Strategic Thrust 3B was defined as the “Ultra-Efficient Commercial Vehicles—Vertical Lift Aircraft.” Hochstetler et al. [2017] uses Thrust 3B as an example for developing metrics usable by ARMD to measure the effectiveness of each of the Strategic Thrusts. The authors provide near-, mid-, and long-term outcomes for Thrust 3B with corresponding benefits and capabilities. The importance of VTOL research, especially with the rapidly expanding UAM market, eventually resulted in a new Strategic Thrust (to begin in 2020): Thrust 4—Safe, Quiet, and Affordable Vertical Lift Air Vehicles. The underlying rotary wing analysis tools used by NASA are still applicable to traditional rotorcraft and have been expanded in capability to accommodate the growing number of VTOL configurations designed for UAM. The top-level goal of the RVLT Project remains unchanged since 2006: Develop and validate tools, technologies and concepts to overcome key barriers for vertical lift vehicles. In 2019, NASA rotary wing/VTOL research has never been more important for supporting new aircraft and advancements in technology. 2 A decade is a reasonable interval to pause and take stock of progress and accomplishments. In 10 years, digital technology has propelled progress in computational efficiency by orders of magnitude and expanded capabilities in measurement techniques. The purpose of this report is to provide a compilation of the NASA rotary wing research from ~2008 to ~2018. Brief summaries of publications from NASA, NASA-funded, and NASA-supported research are provided in 12 chapters: Acoustics, Aeromechanics, Computational Fluid Dynamics (External Flow), Experimental Methods, Flight Dynamics and Control, Drive Systems, Engines, Crashworthiness, Icing, Structures and Materials, Conceptual Design and System Analysis, and Mars Helicopter. We hope this report serves as a useful reference for future NASA vertical lift researchers.

Yamauchi, Gloria K.↗

HEASARC Software Archive

(1) Chandra Archive: SAO has maintained the interfaces through which HEASARC gains access to the Chandra Data Archive. At HEASARC's request, we have implemented an anonymous ftp copy of a major part of the public archive and we keep that archive up-to- date. SAO has participated in the ADEC interoperability working group, establishing guidelines or interoperability standards and prototyping such interfaces. We have provided an NVO-based prototype interface, intending to serve the HEASARC-led NVO demo project. HEASARC's Astrobrowse interface was maintained and updated. In addition, we have participated in design discussions surrounding HEASARC's Caldb project. We have attended the HEASARC Users Group meeting and presented CDA status and developments. (2) Chandra CALDB: SA0 has maintained and expanded the Chandra CALDB by including four new data file types, defining the corresponding CALDB keyword/identification structures. We have provided CALDB upgrades for the public (CIAO) and for Standard Data Processing. Approximately 40 new files have been added to the CALDB in these version releases. There have been in the past year ten of these CALDB upgrades, each with unique index configurations. In addition, with the inputs from software, archive, and calibration scientists, as well as CIAO/SDP software developers, we have defined a generalized expansion of the existing CALDB interface and indexing structure. The purpose of this is to make the CALDB more generally applicable and useful in new and future missions that will be supported archivally by HEASARC. The generalized interface will identify additional configurational keywords and permit more extensive calibration parameter and boundary condition specifications for unique file selection. HEASARC scientists and developers from SAO and GSFC have become involved in this work, which is expected to produce a new interface for general use within the current year. (3) DS9: One of the decisions that came from last year's HEADCC meeting was to make the ds9 image display program the primary vehicle for displaying line graphics (as well as images). The first step required to make this possible was to enhance the line graphics capabilities of ds9. SAO therefore spent considerable effort upgrading ds9 to use Tcl 8.4 so that the BLT line graphics package could be built and imported into ds9 from source code, rather than from a pre-built (and generally outdated) shared library. This task, which is nearly complete, allows us to extend BLT as needed for the HEAD community. Following HEADCC discussion concerning archiving and the display of archived data, we extended ds9 to support full access to many astronomical Web-based archives sites, including HEASARC, MAST, CHANDRA, SKYVIEW, ADS, NED, SIMBAD, IRAS, NVRO, SAO TDC, and FIRST. Using ds9's new internal Web access capabilities, these archives can be accessed via their Web page. FITS images, plots, spectra, and journal abstracts can be referenced, down-loaded, and displayed directly and easily in ds9. For more information, see: http://hea-www.harvard.edu/saord/ds9. Also after the HEADCC discussion concerning region filtering, we extended the Funtools sample implementation of region filtering as described in: http://hea-www.harvard.edu/saord/funtools/regions.html. In particular, we added several new composite regions for event and image filtering, including elliptical and box annuli. We also extended the panda (Pie AND Annulus) region support to include box pandas and elliptical pandas. These new composite regions are especially useful in programs that need to count photons in each separate region using only a single pass through the data. Support for these new regions was added to ds9. In the same vein, we developed new region support for filtering images using simple FITS image masks, i.e. 8-bit or 16-bit FITS images where the value of a pixel is the region id number for that pixel. Other important enhancements to DS9 this year, include supporor multiple world coordinate systems, three dimensional event file binning, image smoothing, region groups and tags, the ability to save images in a number of image formats (such as JPEG, TIFF, PNG, FITS), improvements in support for integrating external analysis tools, and support for the virtual observatory. In particular, a full-featured web browser has been implemented within D S 9 . This provides support for full access to HEASARC archive sites such as SKYVIEW and W3BROWSE, in addition to other astronomical archives sites such as MAST, CHANDRA, ADS, NED, SIMBAD, IRAS, NVRO, SA0 TDC, and FIRST. From within DS9, the archives can be searched, and FITS images, plots, spectra, and journal abstracts can be referenced, downloaded and displayed The web browser provides the basis for the built-in help facility. All DS9 documentation, including the reference manual, FAQ, Know Features, and contact information is now available to the user without the need for external display applications. New versions of DS9 maybe downloaded and installed using this facility. Two important features used in the analysis of high energy astronomical data have been implemented in the past year. The first is support for binning photon event data in three dimensions. By binning the third dimension in time or energy, users are easily able to detect variable x-ray sources and identify other physical properties of their data. Second, a number of fast smoothing algorithms have been implemented in DS9, which allow users to smooth their data in real time. Algorithms for boxcar, tophat, and gaussian smoothing are supported.

White, Nicholas↗

Pre-Mission Input Requirements to Enable Successful Sample Collection by a Remote Field/EVA Team

This paper is intended to evaluate the sample collection process with respect to sample characterization and decision making. In some cases, it may be sufficient to know whether a given outcrop or hand sample is the same as or different from previous sampling localities or samples. In other cases, it may be important to have more in-depth characterization of the sample, such as basic composition, mineralogy, and petrology, in order to effectively identify the best sample. Contextual field observations, in situ/handheld analysis, and backroom evaluation may all play a role in understanding field lithologies and their importance for return. For example, whether a rock is a breccia or a clast-laden impact melt may be difficult based on a single sample, but becomes clear as exploration of a field site puts it into context. The FINESSE (Field Investigations to Enable Solar System Science and Exploration) team is a new activity focused on a science and exploration field based research program aimed at generating strategic knowledge in preparation for the human and robotic exploration of the Moon, near-Earth asteroids (NEAs) and Phobos and Deimos. We used the FINESSE field excursion to the West Clearwater Lake Impact structure (WCIS) as an opportunity to test factors related to sampling decisions. In contract to other technology-driven NASA analog studies, The FINESSE WCIS activity is science-focused, and moreover, is sampling-focused, with the explicit intent to return the best samples for geochronology studies in the laboratory. This specific objective effectively reduces the number of variables in the goals of the field test and enables a more controlled investigation of the role of the crewmember in selecting samples. We formulated one hypothesis to test: that providing details regarding the analytical fate of the samples (e.g. geochronology, XRF/XRD, etc.) to the crew prior to their traverse will result in samples that are more likely to meet specific analytical objectives than samples collected in the absence of this premission information. We conducted three tests of this hypothesis. Our investigation was designed to document processes, tools and procedures for crew sampling of planetary targets. This is not meant to be a blind, controlled test of crew efficacy, but rather an effort to recognize the relevant variables that enter into sampling protocol and to develop recommendations for crew and backroom training in future endeavors. Methods: One of the primary FINESSE field deployment objectives was to collect impact melt rocks and impact melt-bearing breccias from a number of locations around the WCIS structure to enable high precision geochronology of the crater to be performed [1]. We conducted three tests at WCIS after two full days of team participation in field site activities, including using remote sensing data and geologic maps, hiking overland to become familiar with the terrain, and examining previously-collected samples from other islands. In addition, the team members shared their projects and techniques with the entire team. We chose our "crew members" as volunteers from the team, all of whom had had moderate training in geologic fieldwork and became familiar with the general field setting. The first two tests were short, focused tests of our hypothesis. Test A was to obtain hydrothermal vugs; Test B was to obtain impact melt and intrusive rock as well as the contact between the two to check for contact metamorphism and age differences. In both cases, the test director had prior knowledge of the site geology and had developed a study-specific objective for sampling prior to deployment. Prior to the field deployment, the crewmember was briefed on the sampling objective and the laboratory techniques that would be used on the samples. At the field sites (Fig. 2), the crewmember was given 30 minutes to survey a small section of outcrop (10-15 m) and acquire a suite of three samples. The crewmember talked through his process and the test director kept track of the timeline in verbal cues to the crewmember. At the conclusion, the team member conducting the scientific study appraised the samples and train of thought. Test C was a 90-minute EVA simulation using two crewmembers working out of line-of-sight in communication with a science backroom. The science objectives were determined by the science backroom team in advance using a Gigapan image of the outcrop (Fig. 1). The science team formulated hypotheses for the outcrop units and created sampling objectives for impact-melt lithologies; the science team turned these into a science plan, which they communicated to the crew in camp prior to crew deployment. As part of the science plan, the science team also discussed their sample needs in depth with the crewmembers, including laboratory methods, objectives, and samples sizes needed. During the deployment, the two crewmembers relayed real-time information to the science backroom by radio with no time delay. Both the crew and science team re-evaluated their hypotheses and science plans in real-time. Discussion: Upon evaluation, we found that the focused tests (Tests A and B) were successful in meeting their scientific objectives. The crewmember used their knowledge of how the samples were to be used in further study (technique, sample size, and scientific need) to focus on the sampling task. The crewmember was comfortable spending minimal time describing and mapping the outcrop. The crewmember used all available time to get a good sample. The larger test was unsuccessful in meeting the sampling objectives. When the crewmembers began describing the lithologies, it was quickly apparent that the lithologies were not as the backroom expected and had communicated to the crew. When the outcrop wasn't as expected, the crew members instinctively switched to field characterization mode, taking significant time to characterize and map the outcrop. One crew member admitted that he "kind of lost track" of the sampling strategy as he focused on the basic outcrop characterization. This is the logical first step in a field geology campaign, that a significant amount of time must be spent by the crew and backroom to understand the outcrop and its significance. Basic field characterization of an outcrop is a focused activity that takes significant time and training [2, 3]. Sampling of representational lithologies can be added to this activity for little cost [4]. However, we have shown that identification of unusual or specific samples for laboratory study also takes significant time and knowledge. We suggest that sampling of this type be considered a separate activity from field characterization, and that crewmembers be trained in sampling needs for different kinds of studies (representative lithologies vs. specialized samples) to acquire a mindset for sampling similar to field mapping. Sampling activities should be given a significant amount of specifically allocated time in scheduling EVA activities; and in the better case, that sampling be done as a second activity to a previously studied outcrop where both crew and backroom are comfortable with its context and characteristics. Our hypothesis posited that crewmember knowledge of how the samples would be used upon return would aid them in choosing relevant samples. Our testing bore this hypothesis out to some extent. We therefore recommend that crewmember training should include exposure to the laboratory techniques and analyses that will be used on the samples to foster this knowledge. There is also the potential for increasing crewmember contextual knowledge real-time in the field through the introduction of in situ geochemical technologies such as field portable XRF. The presence of field portable geochemical technology could enable the astronauts to interrogate the samples for K abundance real-time, ensuring they could collect valuable and dateable samples [5]. Though simulations such as these can teach us a fair bit about decision making processes and timeline building, one EVA participant noted that when he wasn't collecting "real" samples, he wasn't at his best. This effect suggests that higher-fidelity studies involving truly remote participants conducting actual scientific studies merit further attention to capture lessons for application to future crew situations.

sample collection↗

Performance Comparison of Wireless Sensor Network Standard Protocols in an Aerospace Environment: ISA100.11a and ZigBee

Wireless Sensor Networks (WSNs) can provide a substantial benefit in spacecraft systems, reducing launch weight and providing unprecedented flexibility by allowing instrumentation capabilities to grow and change over time. Achieving data transport reliability on par with that of wired systems, however, can prove extremely challenging in practice. Fortunately, much progress has been made in developing standard WSN radio protocols for applications from non-critical home automation to mission-critical industrial process control. The relative performances of candidate protocols must be compared in representative aerospace environments, however, to determine their suitability for spaceflight applications. In this paper, we will present the results of a rigorous laboratory analysis of the performance of two standards-based, low power, low data rate WSN protocols: ZigBee Pro and ISA100.11a. Both are based on IEEE 802.15.4 and augment that standard's specifications to build complete, multi-hop networking stacks. ZigBee Pro targets primarily the home and office automation markets, providing an ad-hoc protocol that is computationally lightweight and easy to implement in inexpensive system-on-a-chip components. As a result of this simplicity, however, ZigBee Pro can be susceptible to radio frequency (RF) interference. ISA100.11a, on the other hand, targets the industrial process control market, providing a robust, centrally-managed protocol capable of tolerating a significant amount of RF interference. To achieve these gains, a coordinated channel hopping mechanism is employed, which entails a greater computational complexity than ZigBee and requires more sophisticated and costly hardware. To guide future aerospace deployments, we must understand how well these standards relatively perform in analog environments under expected operating conditions. Specifically, we are interested in evaluating goodput -- application level throughput -- in a representative crewed environment in the presence of varying levels of 802.11g Wi-Fi traffic. To do so, we use the NASA Johnson Space Center Wireless Habitat Testbed (WHT), a metallic, habitation-sized module designed for co-existence testing of wireless systems. In its quiescent state, the sealed WHT provides an RF-quiet environment to which we can selectively add interfering systems; it also provides a realistic level of multi-path self-interference for systems under investigation. In our test, we deploy two representative five node networks, configured in a star topology with all nodes reporting directly to a WSN gateway. Each ZigBee network WSN node is built using a Texas Instruments (TI) CC2530 system-on-a-chip radio running TI's ZigBee Pro Z-stack. Each ISA100.11a network node is built using a Nivis VersaNode 210 system-on-a-chip radio. In both cases, radios interface with TI MSP430-F5438 microcontroller implementing a common test application. Interference is provided by a D-link 802.11g Wi-Fi router transporting traffic generated using the Iperf network testing tool. For the single-channel ZigBee network, effects of both direct and indirect Wi-Fi interference are evaluated. For the channel-hopping ISA100.11a network, effects of interference from multiple Wi-Fi routers configured in non-overlapping 802.11g channels are evaluated. Our results show that, in general, the more lightweight ZigBee network performs well at low interference levels, but performance degrades as interference increases. Conversely, the more complex and costly ISA100.11a network continues to perform well as Wi-Fi interference levels increase.

Wagner, Raymond S.↗

Integrated Simulation Design Challenges to Support TPS Repair Operations

During the Orbiter Repair Maneuver (ORM) operations planned for Return to Flight (RTF), the Shuttle Remote Manipulator System (SRMS) must grapple the International Space Station (ISS), undock the Orbiter, maneuver it through a long duration trajectory, and orient it to an EVA crewman poised at the end of the Space Station Remote Manipulator System (SSRMS) to facilitate the repair of the Thermal Protection System (TPS). Once repair has been completed and confirmed, then the SRMS proceeds back through the trajectory to dock the Orbiter to the Orbiter Docking System. In order to support analysis of the complex dynamic interactions of the integrated system formed by the Orbiter, ISS, SRMS, and SSMS during the ORM, simulation tools used for previous ‘nominal’ mission support required substantial enhancements. These upgrades were necessary to provide analysts with the capabilities needed to study integrated system performance. Prevalent throughout this ORM operation is a dynamically varying topology. In other words, the ORM starts with the SRMS grappled to the mated Shuttle/ISS stack (closed loop topology), moves to an open loop chain topology consisting of the Shuttle, SRMS, and ISS, and then, at the repair configuration, extends the chain topology to one consisting of the Shuttle, SMS, ISS, and SSRMS/EVA crewman. The resulting long dynamic chain of vehicles and manipulators may exhibit significant motion between the Shuttle worksite and the EVA crewman due to the system flexibility throughout the topology (particularly within the SRMS/SSRMS joints and links). Since the attachment points of both manipulators span the flexible structure of the ISS, simulation analysis may also need to take that into consideration. Moreover, due to the lengthy time duration associated with the maneuver and repair, orbital effects become a factor and require the ISS vehicle control system to maintain active attitude control. Several facets of the ORM operation make the associated analytical efforts different from previous mission support, including: (1) the magnitude of the SRMS handled payload (Le., Orbiter class), (2) the orbital effects induced on the integrated system consisting of the large Shuttle and ISS masses connected by a light flexible SRMS, (3) long duration environmental consequences due to the lengthy operational times associated with the maneuver and repair of the TPS, (4) active attitude control (as opposed to free drift) interacting with the SRMS and SSRMS manipulators (also due to the length of the maneuver and repair), (5) relative dynamics between the EVA crewman and thc worksite influenced by the extended flexible topology. In order to meet these analysis challenges, an ORM simulation architecture was developed leveraging upon numerous pre-existing simulation elements to analyze the various subsystems individually. For example, core manipulator subsystem simulations for both the SRMS and SSRMS were originally combined to provide the dual-arm dynamics topology simulation (in the absence of orbital dynamics and vehicle control). This capability was later merged with the simulation used to analyze SRMS loading with a heavy payload in the orbital environment with an active payload control system (in this case, the ISS Attitude Control System (ACS)), configured for the ORM. The resulting worksite dynamics simulation, based off of the modified ORM simulation, provided the extended topological chain of vehicles and manipulators, while taking into account the orbital effects of both the Shuttle and ISS (as well as its ACS). Verification and validation (V&V) of these integrated simulations became a challenge in itself. A systematic approach needed to be developed such that integration simulation results could be tested against previous constituent simulations upon which these simulations were built. General V&V categories included: (1) core orbital state propagation, (2), stand-alone SRMS, (3) stand-alone SSRMS, (4) stand-alone ISS ACS, (5) integrated Shuttle, SRMS, ISS (with active ACS) in the orbital environment, and (5) dual-arm SRMS/SSRMS dynamics topology. Integrated simulation V&V run suites were created and correlated to verification runs from subsystem simulations, in order to establish the validity of the results. This paper discusses the simulation design challenges encountered while developing simulation capabilities to mirror the ORM operations. The paper also describes the incremental build approach that was utilized, starting with the subsystem simulation elements and integration into increasing more complex simulations until the resulting ORM worksite dynamics simulation had been assembled. Furthermore, the paper presents an overall integrated simulation V&V methodology based upon a subsystem level testing, integrated comparisons, and phased checkout.

Thermal Protection System↗

ISS Technology Demonstrations for Future Spaceflight Medical Systems

Throughout the history of human spaceflight, crewmembers have experienced various in-flight medical conditions including illness and injury. Planned missions to the Moon and Mars will require capabilities to maintain the health of future space travelers. Mass, power, and volume available in the vehicles and habitats for these missions will be severely constrained; resupply of resources will be limited or non-existent, as will opportunities for evacuation to Earth. Furthermore, ground-based support will be hampered by communication latencies and blackouts. These vehicle and mission constraints will necessitate a medical system that has been efficiently planned, providing on-board procedural guidance in addition to a variety of medical devices and consumable resources. Medical capabilities required for the diagnosis and treatment of potential medical conditions during future spaceflight missions may include real-time health monitoring, medical imaging, and biomarker analyses ( e.g., blood or urine). Terrestrial medicine shares these needs, thus many of these medical capabilities could likely be satisfied by Commercial-Off-The-Shelf (COTS) devices and methodologies; however, in some cases the unique space environment and increased mission duration will drive the need to modify technologies and the way care is provided. NASA’s Human Research Program (HRP) Exploration Medical Capability (ExMC) Element and Mars Campaign Office’s Exploration Medical Integrated Product Team (XMIPT) are working together to decrease medical risk during exploration missions. Flight-tested medical diagnostic and treatment technologies are necessary to effectively manage medical conditions relevant to exploration missions while meeting vehicle constraints, integrating with medical decision-support tools, and enabling increasingly Earth-independent operations. Several projects have leveraged the ISS as a testbed for exploration, including 1) i n- situ blood analysis, 2) medical inventory, 3) intravenous fluid generation, and 4) autonomous medical procedure guidance. Management of several in-flight medical conditions, such as bacterial and viral infections and acute radiation syndrome, is dramatically improved with ability to assess blood cell populations, electrolytes, and metabolites. I n December 2020 and January 2021 ExMC performed an ISS technology demonstration (Tech Demo) of the HemoCue® WBC DIFF analyzer (HemoCue, Brea, CA), a COTS device that was modified to enable functionality in a spaceflight environment. This Tech Demo marked the first time that hematology measurements were successfully performed real-time in microgravity. Also modified and demonstrated was the reusable Handheld Electrolytes and Lab Technology for Humans (rHEALTH) ONE analyzer (rHEALTH, Bedford, MA), which uses flow cytometry and sheath-based hydrodynamic focusing methodologies. The rHEALTH ONE ISS Tech Demo in May 2022 demonstrated test results obtained in-flight matched those on the ground. NASA currently relies on crew self-reporting to manage and maintain medical inventory on ISS.The ability to maintain an accurate inventory becomes more critical during long duration missions since the crew will need to be increasingly autonomous in finding and utilizing medical items, including those scenarios when alternative treatments need to be considered due to limited or no resupply. HRP’s Medical Consumables Tracking (MCT) project was developed by ZIN Technologies, Inc. (Cleveland, OH), and demonstrated real-time tracking of medical supplies aboard the ISS between December 2016 and July 2018. The MCT system design utilized Radio Frequency Identification Device (RFID) technology to perform automated inventory and was installed in the Crew Health Care System (CHeCS) Resupply Stowage Rack (RSR). The challenge of limited shelf life, exacerbated by the lack of resupply opportunities, affects a plethora of medical system components including consumables, pharmaceuticals, and intravenous (IV) fluid. In 2010, ExMC funded ZIN Technologies, Inc. (Cleveland, OH), to develop the Intravenous Fluid Generation (IVGEN) system. IV fluids were successfully generated with IVGEN using the potable water supply on ISS during ISS Expedition 23. The XMIPT is in the process of developing a miniaturized version of the original IVGEN hardware for a future Tech Demo aboard the ISS. Current ISS medical operations rely heavily on preflight training and real-time remote guidance, both of which become impractical or impossible for exploration missions. The primary goal of the Autonomous Medical Officer Support (AMOS) Software Tech Demos on ISS was to confirm telemedical proof-of-concept for autonomous medical imaging in an operational setting. This novel software tool shifts emphasis from preflight training and real-time remote guidance to in-flight just-in-time instruction, a new and necessary paradigm for crew medical autonomy. AMOS introduces a novel, streamlined skill management concept for exploration missions featuring comprehensive training and guidance modules for ultrasound examinations using the ISS Ultrasound 2 (a modified GE Vivid-q™; General Electric HealthCare, Chicago, IL). With no prior crew training or remote guidance, two Tech Demos on the ISS (April 2020 and June 2022) resulted in high quality, clinically useful image sets. We will provide a review of historical, current, and planned medical devices and technologies considered for inclusion within future spaceflight medical systems and summarize hardware development activities and medical device tech demos conducted on the ISS.

Astronaut health and performance↗

Using X-Ray Computed Tomography to Catalog Rock Fragments in Apollo Drive Tube 73002

Overview: The Apollo missions collected 382 kg of rock, regolith, and core samples from six locations on the nearside of the Moon. Approximately 84% by mass of the Apollo collection remains in pristine condition within the curation facility at Johnson Space Center (i.e., never allocated, continuously stored in dry-N2 purged cabinets, exposure history restricted to Teflon, stainless steel, and Al-metal). Although most Apollo samples have been well characterized, there are several types of samples that have remained wholly or largely unstudied since their return, and/or that have been cu-rated under special conditions, e.g., frozen samples, samples stored in He-purged environment, and previously unopened drive tubes. NASA solicited proposals for the Apollo Next Generation Sample Analysis Pro-gram (ANGSA), and 9 teams were selected to study a subset of the unopened and frozen samples [1]. The first sample opened as part of the ANGSA pro-gram was drive tube 73002. This was originally a ~30 cm long, 4 cm diameter drive tube collected on a land-slide deposit near Lara Crater at the Apollo 17 landing site. It was part of a ~60 cm long double drive tube collected, and the bottom half of the tube (73001) was sealed under vacuum on the Moon [2]. Prior to opening sample 73002, the sample was imaged with a high resolution X-ray Computed Tomography (XCT) scan of the entire tube [3], which provided invaluable information during the dissection process [4]. In addition to the pre-dissection XCT scans, individual >4 mm particles were separated from the 73002 regolith during processing and scanned at high resolution by XCT. Here we pre-sent the initial lithologic classification of 134 individual >4 mm rock fragments separated from the 73002 core during the dissection process. Methodology: Drive tube 73002 was manually dissected in 0.5 cm depth intervals in three passes (Fig. 1) [4,5]. Each interval from pass 1 and 2 was sieved to <1 mm and >1 mm size fractions, and >1 mm particles were further manually subdivided into 1-2, 2-4, 4-10, and >10 mm size fractions. Pass 3 was not sieved, but >10 mm clasts were separated manually. Each 4-10 mm and >10 mm fragment was individually weighed, triply bagged in Teflon, and scanned by XCT. There are 60 rock fragments in Pass 1, 64 rock fragments in Pass 2 (from the 4-10 mm and >10 mm size fractions), and 8 rock fragments from Pass 3 (>10 mm size fraction). Each individually bagged rock fragment was scanned using the 180 kV nano-focus transmission source on the Nikon XTH 320 XCT system at NASA Johnson Space Center [6]. Scanning conditions varied considerably for individual particles, in large part be-cause of the large variation in size (0.008-19.623 g). All scans fell within the following range of scan conditions: 2.8-20.6 um voxel size; 90-155 kV voltage; 18-39 uA current; 1891-3141 projections; and 902-2000 slices. Results and Discussion: The 132 rock fragments from sample 73002 fall into the following general cat-gories: agglutinates (n = 6); basalts (13); impact melts (5); impact melt breccias (IMB; 42); regolith breccias (62); and soil breccias (4); see Figure 2 for representative examples of each lithology. Within most of these broad lithologic groups are recognizable subgroups. For example, a significant portion of regolith breccia fragments contain some agglutinate-like glass (n = 9) or are dilithologic (7) because they contain a single large clast (~50% or more by volume). Subgroups can be based on similarities to previously identified lunar lithologies, such as high-Ti basalts (9) and VLT basalts (4; Fig. 3), or based on commonly seen features within the fragments, such as poikilitic ilmenite IMB (10), ilmenite-lath IMB (12), or vesicular IMB (11) “groups”. Particles in the same “group” are not necessarily intended to be genetically related, but rather identify particles that are similar and that follow-up studies can classify in more detail [7]. Conclusion: Identification of lithologies based on XCT is a powerful tool, but a more absolute classification will sometimes require additional textural information from thin sections (e.g., glassy-matrix regolith vs. impact-melt vs. granulitic breccia) or quantitative mineral compositions (e.g., basalt vs. monomict breccia).

R A Zeigler↗

In-Lab Rapid Analytical Detection of Lunar Volatiles By Universal Gas Analyzer With Comparison to GC-MS System

Introduction: The curation of permanently shadowed regions (PSRs) [1] on the lunar surface is centered around studies based upon the observed volatiles from the LCROSS mission [2]. The rapid detection of important volatile gases and vapors present in planetary bodies and Astromaterials by a standalone analytical device is an area of intense research interest in our group and Planetary Exploration & Astromaterials Research Laboratory (PEARL) facility and this work is relevant to the future preparation of viable lunar simulants for testing curation efforts down the road. The groundbreaking results obtained from the LCROSS Mission [2] open the requirements for the direct detection of volatiles present in regolith materials collected from the lunar surface. The mass spectrometry of volatile chemicals is a general technique that utilizes a set of instruments that creates charged ions from a gaseous chemical species and measures the intensities vs. mass-to-charge ratio (m/z) [3]. In this context, we discuss in-lab experimental results and procedures for rapid qualitative analysis of main LCROSS volatiles (water, H2S, NH3, CO2, and CH3OH) by a Universal Gas Analyzer (UGA) instrument. Additionally, the instrument performance was evaluated by measuring the isotopic abundance ratio of atmospheric Ar-40 to Ar-36 present in room air since, argon is a relevant gas in planetary studies as it can provide an insight and reference point to isotope studies [4]. Additional, cross comparisons were attempted and made between the two instruments to develop a robust analytical technique by comparing mass spectral data for H2S headspace samples with a Trace-1310/ ISQ 7000 (ThermoFisher Scientific.) GC-MS system. Background: The benchtop UGA System is equipped with an SRS UGA 300 quadrupole mass spectrometer designed and built by Stanford Research Systems [5]. This system can be configured for several types of gaseous chemical analysis. The inlet line continuously samples gases at low flow rates (several milliliters per minute) through a capillary limiting the intake pressure making the instrument ideal for online analysis of select gases and/or room atmosphere. Moreover, in our current UGA system, a change in composition at the inlet can be detected in about 200 milliseconds and a complete spectrum is acquired (for a range of 1-100 amu) in under 45 sec with masses measured at rates up to 25 msec per point [5]. This system provides a quick upstream analytical data that we can then compare to results obtained by our GC-MS system. Sample Preparation: Small volume (2-4 mL) of analyte sample was taken in a 10 mL glass vial and sealed with a crimped cap and purged with pure Ar or N2 gas to displace air from the top. The headspace sample was scanned by the UGA instrument at analog, histogram, and pressure vs. time modes. The isotopic abundance ratio for 40Ar-to-36Ar was estimated by measuring partial pressure vs. time scans and setting the mass at 40 and 36 respectively. Results and Discussions: In this work, we have investigated the applicability of the UGA system by qualitative analysis of a series of LCROSS volatiles measured individually. Fig. 1 demonstrates a set of vertically offset spectra for the partial pressures measured as a function of mass-to-charge (m/z) ratios. The average acquisition time for each spectrum was less than a minute suggesting that the UGA system is ideal for quick analysis of geochemical volatiles. For the cross-comparison, we analyzed an H2S headspace sample by a Trace-1310/ISQ-7000 system and compared mass spectral data with previously measured UGA histogram scan data (Fig. 2). In both cases, major peak positions are the same, however, the intensities of fragment ions ([1H132S]+ and [32S]+) are higher for UGA suggesting that the fragment ionization process is stronger in UGA compared to that of GC-MS. To investigate how the integrated area under each chromatogram varies with the headspace sample volume, a set of five H2S headspace samples with increasing volumes was analyzed by the GC-MS system (Fig. 3, inset). A small volume (e.g., 200 to 1000 µL) of H2S/H2O vapor was withdrawn from a 20 mL stock sample vial containing ~5 mL of 0.4% H2S in water by a gas-tight syringe and added to another 20 mL vial filled with argon and analyzed by the GC-MS system. Finally, the UGA detector sensitivity was evaluated by calculating the atmospheric 40Ar-to-36Ar isotopic abundance ratio in room air by running a partial pressure vs. time scan with setting the atomic mass at 40, and 36. Fig. 4(a) shows a ~25 min duration “P vs. time” scan for 40Ar (plot for 36Ar is not shown). The partial pressure values (~100 points) were corrected by subtracting the corresponding background pressure value for 37Ar and utilized to calculate 40Ar-to-36Ar isotopic abundance ratios as shown by Fig. 4b. The average isotopic abundance ratio is ~306 with a 2*STDEV ~13. This abundance ratio is significantly close to the previously reported value of 298.56 [6] and the ratio obtained by our GC-MS system (303 for a UHP grade Ar sample). Conclusions: Our study strongly evidenced that the benchtop UGA system is a valuable analytical tool for the detection of major LCROSS volatiles. The rapid scanning capability, the inexpensiveness of the whole system, and impressive detection sensitivity prove its worthiness as an essential device for advanced geochemical applications. Moreover, cross comparisons with the GC-MS provide important bridges into advanced curatorial efforts into the future. References: [1] Bickel, V.T., et al. (2021) Nat Commun 12, 5607. [2] Colaprete, A., et al. (2010) Science, 330, 463-468. [3] Glavin, D. P. et al. (2012) 2012 IEEE Aerospace Conference, 1-11. [4] Willett, C. D., et al. (2022) Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta 329, 119-134. [5] Operation Manual and Programming Reference. (2018) Universal gas Analyzers, Stanford Research Systems. [6] Lee, J. Y., et al. (2006) Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta 70, 4507–4512. Notes: (4 figures are attached with text as shown by the attached file)

Curation↗