SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Number of Crew”

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.

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

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

At least 217 records · Page 12

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

NASA NTRS1989

Supersonic aerodynamic characteristics of a proposed Assured Crew Return Capability (ACRC) lifting-body configuration

An investigation was conducted in the Langley Unitary Plan Wind Tunnel at Mach numbers from 1.6 to 4.5. The model had a low-aspect-ratio body with a flat undersurface. A center fin and two outboard fins were mounted on the aft portion of the upper body. The outboard fins were rolled outboard 40 deg from the vertical. Elevon surfaces made up the trailing edges of the outboard fins, and body flaps were located on the upper and lower aft fuselage. The center fin pivoted about its midchord for yaw control. The model was longitudinally stable about the design center-of-gravity position at 54 percent of the body length. The configuration with undeflected longitudinal controls trimmed near 0 deg angle of attack at Mach numbers from 1.6 to 3.0 where lift and lift-drag ratio were negative. Longitudinal trim was near the maximum lift-drag ratio (1.4) at Mach 4.5. The model was directionally stable over Mach number range except at angles of attack around 4 deg at M = 2.5. Pitch control deflection of more than -10 deg with either elevons or body flaps is needed to trim the model to angles of attack at which lift becomes positive. With increased control deflection, the lifting-body configuration should perform the assured crew return mission through the supersonic speed range.

Ware, George M.↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Limitations on the Use of Eye-Tracking Data to Understand Operator Awareness

In the last 20 years, a number of accidents and incidents in commercial aviation have pointed to poor flight crew awareness of basic flight path parameters (e.g., airspeed, bank, pitch). As a result, there is a desire to improve pilot situation awareness and how attention is allocated. Eye-tracking has been a commonly used measure of awareness; it can aid in understanding whether specific indications were fixated, and perhaps how a pilot gathered information (that is, which indications in which sequence). In this paper, we discuss limitations on what eye-tracking data can reveal about pilot awareness and understanding. First, previous studies (e.g., Sarter et al., 2007) have shown that fixation on an indication may not ensure awareness or understanding. Further, an operator may have awareness of information not fixated. Additional measures—such as self-report or control inputs—can help to better establish the extent of pilot awareness and understanding. Second, sequences of fixations (scan patterns) have also become a performance measure. While a small number of recognized scan patterns have been validated for a small set of parameters on the Primary Flight Display (PFD), scan patterns have not been identified to support the broader context of flight path management or flight operations. More important is to understand the full set of drivers underlying the larger pattern of eye fixations; this approach moves away from the idea of well-established scan patterns as a marker of skilled performance and gives a larger role to pilot cognition. Pilots have various reasons to direct attention to specific elements on the interface, such as: - feedback tied to control inputs - a check on compliance with flight path targets - a reaction to an alert or a call out - attempt to understand an unexpected indication - assess progress toward a flight path target The importance of cognition is further implicated in the finding that pilot interviews show that fixating typically is accompanied by expectation; generally, pilots have a strong expectation of what value or indication they will see, which allows more efficient integration of information and an ability to identify indications that suggest an alternative account of the current system state. We will describe a range of eye-tracking measures and how they should and should not be used.

aviation↗

NASA NTRS1987

Space station proximity operations windows: Human factors design guidelines

Proximity operations refers to all activities outside the Space Station which take place within a 1-km radius. Since there will be a large number of different operations involving manned and unmanned vehicles, single- and multiperson crews, automated and manually controlled flight, a wide variety of cargo, and construction/repair activities, accurate and continuous human monitoring of these operations from a specially designed control station on Space Station will be required. Total situational awareness will be required. This paper presents numerous human factors design guidelines and related background information for control windows which will support proximity operations. Separate sections deal with natural and artificial illumination geometry; all basic rendezvous vector approaches; window field-of-view requirements; window size; shape and placement criteria; window optical characteristics as they relate to human perception; maintenance and protection issues; and a comprehensive review of windows installed on U.S. and U.S.S.R. manned vehicles.

Haines, Richard F.↗

NASA NTRS2000

STS-103 Mission Highlights Resource Tape (2 of 2)

The STS-103 flight crew, Commander Curtis L. Brown, Pilot Scott J. Kelly, Mission Specialists Steven L. Smith, C. Michael Foale, John M. Grunsfeld, Claude Nicollier, and Jean-Francois Clervoy, are seen passing over the Yucatan and Florida Peninsulas. Smith and Grunsfeld replace and change the S-band single transmission cables during the third and final space walk of this mission. Crewmembers are also seen taking video documentation of the solar arrays. Footage presented includes the release of the Hubble Space Telescope, thruster firing and orbit adjust burn over the Central Indian Ocean and Australia. Also shown is the night landing of Discovery at Kennedy Space Center, crew departure from the vehicle, and short statements made by the crew. This is tape 2 of 2; tape 1 has a report number of NONP-NASA-VT-2000036030.

Source record↗

NASA NTRS2008

Ares Integrated Vehicle System Safety Team

NASA is working on the Constellation Program to go to the Moon and beyond. The Program contains a number of projects: a) The Ares I Launch Vehicle for the Orion Crew Module; b) The Ares V Launch Vehicle to launch large payloads into orbit, including the Earth Departure Stage (EDS); d) The Orion vehicle to transport the crew to orbit and to other destinations; and d - The Altair Lunar Lander

Wetherholt, Jon↗

NASA NTRS2017

National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) Partnered Development of Cryogenic Life Support Technologies

Cryogenic life support technology, used by NASA to protect crews working around hazardous gases soon could be called on for a number of life-saving applications as well as the agency's new human spaceflight endeavors. This technology under development in Kennedy Space Center's Biomedical Laboratory has the potential to store more than twice the amount of breathable air than traditional compressed gas systems. The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) is contributing to the funding for this project in the hopes that the liquid air-based systems could change the way workers dependent on life support technologies accomplish their mission, improving their safety and efficiency.

NIOSH↗

NASA NTRS2012

Interval Management with Spacing to Parallel Dependent Runways (IMSPIDR) Experiment and Results

An area in aviation operations that may offer an increase in efficiency is the use of continuous descent arrivals (CDA), especially during dependent parallel runway operations. However, variations in aircraft descent angle and speed can cause inaccuracies in estimated time of arrival calculations, requiring an increase in the size of the buffer between aircraft. This in turn reduces airport throughput and limits the use of CDAs during high-density operations, particularly to dependent parallel runways. The Interval Management with Spacing to Parallel Dependent Runways (IMSPiDR) concept uses a trajectory-based spacing tool onboard the aircraft to achieve by the runway an air traffic control assigned spacing interval behind the previous aircraft. This paper describes the first ever experiment and results of this concept at NASA Langley. Pilots flew CDAs to the Dallas Fort-Worth airport using airspeed calculations from the spacing tool to achieve either a Required Time of Arrival (RTA) or Interval Management (IM) spacing interval at the runway threshold. Results indicate flight crews were able to land aircraft on the runway with a mean of 2 seconds and less than 4 seconds standard deviation of the air traffic control assigned time, even in the presence of forecast wind error and large time delay. Statistically significant differences in delivery precision and number of speed changes as a function of stream position were observed, however, there was no trend to the difference and the error did not increase during the operation. Two areas the flight crew indicated as not acceptable included the additional number of speed changes required during the wind shear event, and issuing an IM clearance via data link while at low altitude. A number of refinements and future spacing algorithm capabilities were also identified.

Baxley, Brian T.↗

NASA NTRS2014

Are Medications Involved in Vision and Intracrancial Pressure Changes Seen in Spaceflight?

The Food and Drug Association Adverse Event Reports (FDA AER) from 2009-2011 were used to create a database from millions of known and suspected medication-related adverse events among the general public. Vision changes, sometimes associated with intracranial pressure changes (VIIP), have been noted in some long duration crewmembers. Changes in vision and blood pressure (which can subsequently affect intracranial pressure) are fairly common side effects of medications. The purpose of this study was to explore the possibility of medication involvement in crew VIIP symptoms. Reports of suspected medication-related adverse events may be filed with the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) by medical professionals or consumers. Quarterly compilations of these reports are available for public download. Adverse Event Reporting System (AERS) reports from 1/1/2009- 6/30/2012 were downloaded and compiled into a searchable database for this study. Reports involving individuals under the age of 18 and older than 65 were excluded from this analysis. Case reports involving chronic diseases such as cancer, diabetes, multiple sclerosis and other serious conditions were also excluded. A scan of the medical literature for medication-related VIIP-like adverse events was used to create a list of suspect medications. These medications, as well as certain medications used frequently by ISS crew, were used to query the database. Queries for use of suspected medications were run, and the nature of the symptoms reported in those cases were tabulated. Symptoms searched in the FDA AERS were chosen to include the typical symptoms noted in crewmembers with VIIP. Vision symptoms searched were: visual acuity reduced, visual impairment, and vitreous floaters. Pressure changes included: abnormal sensation in eye, intracranial pressure increased, intraocular pressure increased, optic neuritis, optic neuropathy, and papilloedema. Limited demographic information is included with the FDA AERS; relevant data were also sorted by age and sex from each report. RESULTS Steroid-containing oral contraceptives had the highest number of reports associated with vision (n=166) and pressure symptoms (n=54). Corticosteroid-containing medications were also high; prednisone, for example, had 137 reports of vision issues and 79 of pressure issues. Pain relievers were also a medication class with vision and pressure-related adverse events reported. Common over-the-counter medications such as acetaminophen, aspirin and ibuprofen each had multiple reports for both vision and pressure symptoms. Antimicrobial medications ciprofloxacin and diflucan were also associated with a number of vision and pressure-related AERS. Unexpectedly, pseudoephedrine and promethazine were mentioned in fewer than 20 reports each over the 3.5 years of data examined. The FDA AERS represents a wealth of data, but there are several limitations to its use. The data are entered by the public or medical professionals, but are not checked for accuracy or completeness and may even be entered multiple times. The causal relationship between a particular adverse event and a particular medication is not tested. The cases represent a broad spectrum of demographics, occupations, and health histories, and thus do not model the astronaut population well. There is no information on the frequency of use of a medication for comparison purposes; it is not possible to assign a rate for any particular adverse event. Nonetheless, there are compelling trends. Use of corticosteroid-containing medications, pain relievers (even over-the-counter), and oral contraceptives were associated with higher numbers of vision- or intracranial pressure-related adverse events. In general, there were more vision problems than pressure problems reported. Certain medications that were once suspected of playing a role in the crew VIIP syndrome, namely pseudoephedrine and promethazine, were found to have extremely low numbers of VIIP-like AERS in the FDA data. However, crew use of corticosteroid-containing medications and pain relievers may warrant additional investigation

Faust, K. M.↗

NASA NTRS2012

An Initial Comparison of Selected Earth Departure Options for Solar Electric Propulsion Missions

Earth departure options such as the location for deployment, aggregation, and crew rendezvous as well as the type of propulsion leveraged for each mission phase effect overall mission performance metrics such as number of critical maneuvers, mass of propellant to achieve departure, and initial mass required in low Earth orbit. This paper identifies and compares a subset of tactical options for deployment, crew rendezvous, and Earth departure that leverage electric propulsion and hybrid chemical electric propulsion with a goal of improving system efficiency. Departure maneuver specific limitations and penalties are then identified for missions to specific targets for human interplanetary missions providing a better understanding of the impact of decisions related to aggregation and rendezvous locations as well as Earth departure maneuvers on overall system performance.

Merrill, Raymond Gabriel↗

NASA NTRS1998

NASA/Mir Phase 1: A Lesson Learned in Long Duration Mission Planning and Operations

The NASA/Mir Phase I Program is a precursor to the assembly and operations of the International Space Station (ISS). The Phase I Program covers a four-year period and encompasses over ten shuttle flights to the Mir, culminating with the flight of STS-91 in June 1998. The Mir-Orbiting Station (Mir-OS) provides an excellent environment, both onboard and on the ground, for learning and studying the characteristics associated with crew-tended operations on long duration missions. By the end of the Phase I program, NASA astronauts will have accumulated over two years of continuous operations experience working and living onboard the Mir-OS. Ground controllers, working in Russia and at remote sites in the United States, will have gained valuable experience in the generation, maintenance, and coordination of the information and products required to support the long duration crew members onboard the Mir-OS. The experience gained by the crew and ground support personnel in the area of long duration mission operations has resulted in a number of factors that need to be considered in the definition and implementation of the processes and products for the ISS. While there are many areas in which experience has been gained, this paper focuses on the lessons learned regarding the level of detail and flexibility of crew timelines. Provided in this paper is an overview of the characteristics associated with long duration mission timeline development and execution, a summary of applicable lessons learned identified and documented through participation in the NASA/Mir Phase I Program, a detailed discussion of "Gross Timelines" as implementation which addresses the lessons learned. Also discussed are the challenges that must be overcome in getting the ISS program to recognize, evaluate, and learn from the crew and ground controller experience gained through participation in the NASA/Mir Phase I Program.

Hagopian, Jeff↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

NextSTEP Appendix A Modular ECLSS Effort Lessons Learned

NASA’s Artemis program provides the first steps for earth-independent exploration starting with crewed habitats in cislunar space and progressing toward crewed landings on the lunar surface that will prepare systems and crews for the exploration of Mars. The Next Space Technology for Exploration Partnerships (NextSTEP) is a public-private partnership model that facilitates commercial development of deep space exploration capabilities in support of more extensive human spaceflight missions in and beyond cislunar space. NASA issued the original NextSTEP Broad Agency Announcement (BAA) to U.S. industry in late 2014 and issued the second BAA (NextSTEP-2) in April 2016. The first appendix under NextSTEP-2, Appendix A, focused on developing deep space habitation concepts, engineering design and development, and risk reduction efforts leading to a habitation capability in cislunar space. NASA solicited concepts to develop and refine the evolvable, modular architecture, functional allocation options, standards, and common interfaces required to enable interoperability of the aggregate system to provide long duration deep space transit habitation, specifically enhancements and testing of deep space Environmental Control and Life Support Systems (ECLSS). Collins Aerospace, formerly UTC Aerospace Systems (UTAS), was awarded a Phase 1 and subsequent Phase 2 contract to “develop concepts that group ECLS systems into logical modules maximizing the use of common components and the development of unique methods and design concepts that support in-flight maintenance and repair for future exploration systems.” This paper summarizes the work accomplished under this effort, the lessons that can be applied to development of forthcoming habitation elements, and the gaps remaining to achieve a more resilient, maintainable, repairable and adaptable system capable of installation on a wide variety of habitat platforms. A primary accomplishment of this effort is the development and maturation of a modular palletization concept to enable standard rack interfaces, post-launch outfitting, and decoupling of structural supports that withstand launch environments from those needed for lower on-orbit loads in order to reduce installed mass and repurposing of panels within the habitat. In the course of the effort, Collins assessed numerous architecture trades, including the use of condensing and noncondensing heat exchangers, the ability of modular units to accommodate various habitat volumes and thermal loading, and the most appropriate order of and timing of delivery of regenerative ECLSS hardware to orbital habitats. In addition to the modularity of hardware elements, Collins developed software approaches for distributed/modular command, control, and communication systems and innovative Bayesian fault detection and isolation techniques. Finally, the effort explored advanced maintainability and supportability concepts including the definition of maintenance units (MUs) in place of the traditional Orbital Replacement Units (ORUs), increasing parts commonality to reduce the number and type of spare parts, the use of augmented reality to guide crews during maintenance and repair procedures, and how crews would prepare for and recover from long durations of habitat dormancy. Now that the NextSTEP Modular ECLSS effort has come to a close, it’s important to identify the lessons learned and where they can be leveraged to improve NASA’s broader program of ECLSS technology development and demonstration and ultimately how they can increase the performance of future surface and orbital habitats.

NextSTEP↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

NextSTEP Appendix A Modular ECLSS Effort Lessons Learned

NextSTEP↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Soyuz Landing Risk Characterization

INTRODUCTION United States On-orbit Segment (USOS) astronauts have been returning to Earth from the International Space Station (ISS) aboard the Russian Soyuz vehicle since 2003. The energetics associated with Soyuz landings are comparable to our next generation of US space vehicles (Orion, Crew Dragon, and Starliner). Soyuz also lands crew in a similar state of spaceflight deconditioning that is anticipated using the future vehicles. A number of injuries have now been observed during these Soyuz landings. Currently it is unknown how Soyuz landing accelerations and the numbers and types of associated injuries relate to the new occupant protection requirements levied upon future space vehicles. Understanding this relationship will allow better quantification of the risk of injury for future spacecraft designs. METHODS An estimate of injury occurrence during Soyuz landings has been determined using data contained in NASA flight medicine databases and supplemented with data collected from crew members and flight surgeons. At the time of this abstract, 96 USOS astronauts have returned to Earth in the Soyuz (59 US, 31 International Partner, and 6 spaceflight participants). Of that total, data from 80individual crew landings has been collected through this study as of September 2023. Injuries are classified either as contusions/abrasions, Class I (minor, no medical follow-up), Class II (moderate, medical follow-up necessary), Class III (severe), or Class IV (life threatening). Current NASA occupant protection standards are primarily based on the Multi-axial Dynamic Response Index (MDRI), which is a simple lumped-parameter spring, mass, damper model tuned to human impact responses in three orthogonal axes. RESULTS Using what is known about Soyuz landing dynamics from airborne and drop test data, the MDRI predicts essentially no Class IV or III injuries, < 1% Class II injuries, and < 5% Class I injuries. Approximately one-third of all USOS crewmembers for whom data has been gathered have suffered some sort of injury related to landing in the Soyuz vehicle. Most of these injuries fall into the contusion/abrasion category (21.3%) (n.b. This is the percent for whom contusion/abrasion was the worst injury. Those with class I or II injuries typically also received contusions/abrasions). Class I injuries have been sustained by 5.0% of all crew, and Class II injuries have been observed in 3.8%. No Class III or IV injuries have been sustained to date. Forty-three injuries have been documented, with some crewmembers sustaining more than one injury in a single landing. The knee was the most likely area of injury (n=9), followed by the back (n=8), then the arm (n=7). CONCLUSION Soyuz landing dynamics are the most comparable analog environment for the anticipated loads associated with Orion and commercial crew vehicle landings. The MDRI under predicts the percentage of Class II injuries experienced during Soyuz landings, but it is better at predicting Class I injury occurrences. However, if contusions/abrasions are included in the minor injury Class I category, then the MDRI vastly under predicts those injuries as well. Given this data, it is important to re-evaluate the expected injury rates for future vehicles and work toward improving the predictive tools for spaceflight use. Spaceflight deconditioning may account for some of the under prediction, and work is ongoing to assess the relationship between landing injuries and impact tolerance changes due to spaceflight deconditioning. Future work includes expanding this study to involve private space missions on new vehicles to better characterize the effects of time in flight, suit and seat design, and vehicle dynamics.

N Newby↗

NASA NTRS2000

Orbiter Capability for Providing Water to the International Space Station according to the Most Probable Flight Attitudes

Water to be generated by, delivered to, and processed by the International Space Station (ISS) is a critical Environmental Control and Life Support (ECLS) element, especially for the early ISS missions. A significant portion of the water required by the ISS shall be provided by the Shuttle Transportation System (STS) Orbiter. The balance of water generated by the Orbiter Fuel Cells (FC), minus that water consumed by the Orbiter Flash Evaporator System (FES) and crew, is available for transfer to the ISS. During later missions, crew respired and perspired water, as well as effluent water from the Orbiter LiOH canisters, will be collected as condensate and available for transfer to the ISS. Orbiter radiator performance provides the most variance in determining the amount of net Orbiter water available for transfer to the ISS. As radiator performance decreases, the dependence upon the FES (and FC water) increases for rejecting Orbiter waste heat. Generally, radiator performance decreases as the ISS assembly size increases (especially as solar arrays are added), and also as beta angle increases. ISS solar array deployment necessitates the use of models with articulating solar arrays (for Earth local-vertical attitudes), as array position dramatically affects Orbiter radiator performance. Recent developments in the relaxation of beta angle limitations have also increased the complexity and difficulty of providing water to the ISS. Other factors that may hinder the ability to transfer water are the number of empty Contingency Water Containers (CWCs) available, duration of open-hatch time, crew activity timeline, and full CWC storage capability. A parametric study has been accomplished that provides a quick-reference table for determining expected water generation rates for ISS missions 2A.2 through 7A.1. An hourly Orbiter water generation rate is reported according to a matrix that consists of: (1) (six) significant changes in ISS assembly configuration; (2) (four) beta angles (0 deg. , +37 deg., +53 deg. , and +75 deg.); (3) the (three) most representative ISS attitudes (XPOP-O, XPOP-180 and +XVV); (4) (four) Orbiter radiator configurations (both stowed, starboard deployed, port deployed, and both deployed) and (5) the (two) conditions (radiator inlet temperatures and fuel cell power) most consistent with sleep and wake periods. Those permutations of higher probability of occurrence than others have been identified. Another parametric study has been accomplished that provides a quick-reference table for determining expected water generation rates for ISS assembly complete missions. An hourly Orbiter water generation rate is reported according to a matrix that consists of: (1) (seven) beta angles (-75 deg., -60 deg., -30 deg., 0 deg., +30 deg., +60 deg., and +75 deg.); (2) the (nine) PYR angles that define the corners of the envelope; (3) (four) Orbiter radiator configurations (both stowed, starboard deployed, port deployed, and both deployed) and (4) the (two) conditions (radiator inlet temperatures and fuel cell power) most consistent with sleep and wake periods.

Dunaway, Brian↗

NASA NTRS1981

Eastern Airlines LOFT program

Beginning with scenario design and development issues, Eastern Airlines committed itself to the full four-hour LOFT training format without the additional time for specific maneuvers. Abnormals and emergency conditions, pacing, and quiet periods are included in the scenarios which are written for the instructor to follow verbatim. Simulator capabilities, performance assessment; training vs. checking; crew composition and scheduling; satisfactory completion; the use of video performance printouts; the number of instructors; instructor training and standardization; and initial, transition, and upgrade training are discussed.

Beach, B. E.↗

NASA NTRS2002

Alternative Metrics for Evaluating the Resilence of Advanced Life Support Systems

Ensuring the safety of the crew is a key performance requirement of a life support system. However, a number of conceptual and practical difficulties arise when devising metrics to concretely measure the ability of a life support system to maintain critical functions in the presence of anticipated and unanticipated faults. Resilience is a dynamic property of a life support system that depends on the complex interactions between faults, controls and system hardware. We review some of the approaches to understanding the robustness or resilience of complex systems being developed in diverse fields such as ecology, software engineering and cell biology and discuss their applicability to regenerative life support systems. We also consider how approaches to measuring resilience vary depending on system design choices such as the definition and choice of the nominal operating regime. Finally, we explore data collection and implementation issues such as the key differences between the instantaneous or conditional and average or overall measures of resilience. Extensive simulation of a hybrid computational model of a water revitalization subsystem (WRS) with probabilistic, component-level faults provides data about off-nominal behavior of the system. The data are used to consider alternative measures of resilience as predictors of the system's ability to recover from component-level faults.

Bell, Ann Maria↗

NASA NTRS2012

Ventilator Technologies Sustain Critically Injured Patients

Consider this scenario: A soldier has been critically wounded in a sudden firefight in a remote region of Afghanistan. The soldier s comrades attend to him and radio for help, but the soldier needs immediate medical expertise and treatment that is currently miles away. The connection between medical support for soldiers on the battlefield and astronauts in space may not be immediately obvious. But when it comes to providing adequate critical care, NASA and the military have very similar operational challenges, says Shannon Melton of NASA contractor Wyle Integrated Science and Engineering. Melton works within Johnson Space Center s Space Medicine Division, which supports astronaut crew health before, during, and after flight. In space, we have a limited number of care providers, and those providers are not always clinicians with extensive medical training. We have limited room to provide care, limited consumables, and our environment is not like that of a hospital, she says. The Space Medicine Division s Advanced Projects Group works on combining the expertise of both clinicians and engineers to develop new capabilities that address the challenges of medical support in space, including providing care to distant patients. This field, called telemedicine, blends advanced communications practices and technologies with innovative medical devices and techniques to allow caregivers with limited or no medical experience to support a patient s needs. NASA, just by its nature, has been doing remote medicine since the beginning of the Space Program, says Melton, an engineer in the Advanced Projects Group. Since part of NASA s mandate is to transfer the results of its technological innovation for the benefit of the public, the Agency has worked with doctors and private industry to find ways to apply the benefits of space medicine on Earth. In one such case, a NASA partnership has resulted in new technologies that may improve the quality of emergency medicine for wounded soldiers on the battlefield and regular civilians.

Source record↗

NASA NTRS2015

Shielding Development for Nuclear Thermal Propulsion

Radiation shielding analysis and development for the Nuclear Cryogenic Propulsion Stage (NCPS) effort is currently in progress and preliminary results have enabled consideration for critical interfaces in the reactor and propulsion stage systems. Early analyses have highlighted a number of engineering constraints, challenges, and possible mitigating solutions. Performance constraints include permissible crew dose rates (shared with expected cosmic ray dose), radiation heating flux into cryogenic propellant, and material radiation damage in critical components. Design strategies in staging can serve to reduce radiation scatter and enhance the effectiveness of inherent shielding within the spacecraft while minimizing the required mass of shielding in the reactor system. Within the reactor system, shield design is further constrained by the need for active cooling with minimal radiation streaming through flow channels. Material selection and thermal design must maximize the reliability of the shield to survive the extreme environment through a long duration mission with multiple engine restarts. A discussion of these challenges and relevant design strategies are provided for the mitigation of radiation in nuclear thermal propulsion.

Caffrey, Jarvis A.↗