Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Explorers”

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.

At least 235 records · Page 13
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2013

The Antarctic Search for Meteorites: A Model for Deep Space Exploration

In an era of shrinking buying power and reduced flight opportunities, NASA must extract the greatest possible value from all sources of insight into the future of human space exploration. Antarctica is one such source. The history of Antarctic exploration has many political and technical parallels with the development of space, and Antarctica's remoteness and harsh climate make it an excellent proxy for space (e.g., [1,2]). Links between exploration of space and of the Antarctic date back to the International Geophysical Year of 1957-1958, which saw both the launch of Sputnik 1 and the establishment of a station at the South Pole. The Antarctic Search for Meteorites (ANSMET) is an annual expedition to the south polar plateau to collect meteorites. Although its intent is not to simulate a space mission, the handful of astronauts who have participated in ANSMET agree that it is very similar to a long-duration space flight. Independently, NASA and other space agencies have simulated deep space exploration missions in "analog" activities at remote field sites on Earth (e.g., [3]). These include NASA Extreme Environment Mission Operations (NEEMO) [4,5], Desert Research And Technology Studies (Desert RATS) [6,7], and the Pavilion Lake Research Project (PLRP or simply Pavilion Lake) [8]. This report focuses on NEEMO, Desert RATS, and PLRP because of the author's firsthand experience with them. Other noteworthy analogs, such as the arctic Haughton Mars Project and the European Space Agency's underground Cooperative Adventure for Valuing and Exercising human behavior and performance Skills (CAVES), are not treated here. NASA analogs often include fully staffed control centers, astronauts serving as crew, and realistic mission timelines lasting one to two weeks. Analogs have provided key insights into system architectures and operational concepts for the future human exploration of deep space. They have pioneered techniques for human communication with significant speed-of-light delays, for conducting spacewalks on natural objects with negligible surface gravity, and for empowering exploration crews to work with reduced dependence on a ground control center. They have field-tested dozens of emerging technologies including spacewalking tools and full-scale prototype vehicles and habitats. They have provided valuable experience for astronauts preparing for their first space flight, and for flown crewmembers who will take command roles on later flights. Some analogs, especially PLRP, have connected observers in the field with science teams in remotely located control centers to produce high-quality, publishable scientific results. The analogs have accomplished all of this at a tiny fraction of the cost of an actual space flight. This report treats ANSMET as space flight analog. The chapter following this introduction describes ANSMET in depth. The report then presents data on logistics and crew considerations that may be useful for developers of future human space exploration missions. It offers detailed comparisons between ANSMET and past, present, and future space flights on the Space Shuttle, the International Space Station (ISS), and a proposed Mars mission. Those comparisons are intended to complement the work of Eppler [2], who compares ANSMET to the Apollo moon flights. This report also compares ANSMET with the Desert RATS, NEEMO, and PLRP analogs. It then presents observations and makes recommendations related to ANSMET's value as a simulated space mission. The report ends with a short conclusion. The remainder of this introductory chapter provides background material to help readers interpret the rest of the report. It gives brief overviews of Space Shuttle and ISS missions along with information on a notional future human flight to Mars. It also presents the general features of three of NASA's space flight "analog" projects. With those points of reference in place, the chapter concludes with an overview of ANSMET.

Love, Stanley G.↗
NASA NTRS2013

The Single Habitat Module Concept for Exploration - Mission Planning and Mass Estimates

The Single Habitat Module (SHM) concept approach to the infrastructure and conduct of exploration missions combines many new promising technologies with a central concept of mission architectures that use a single habitat module for all phases of an exploration mission. Integrating mission elements near Earth and fully fueling them prior to departure of the vicinity of Earth provides the capability of using the single habitat both in transit to/from an exploration destination and while exploring the destination. The concept employs the capability to return the habitat and interplanetary propulsion system to Earth vicinity so that those elements can be reused on subsequent exploration missions. This paper provides an overview of the SHM concept and the advantages it provides. The paper also provides a summary of calculations of the mass of the Habitat Propulsion System (HPS) needed to get the habitat from low-Mars orbit (LMO) to the surface and back to LMO, and an overview of trajectory and mission mass assessments related to use of a high specific impulse space-based propulsion system. Those calculations led to the conclusion that the SHM concept results in low total mass required and streamlines mission operations to explore Mars (or other exploration destinations).

Chambliss, Joe↗
NASA NTRS2013

Technology Needs to Support Future Mars Exploration

The Mars Program Planning Group (MPPG) under the direction of Dr. Orlando Figueroa, was chartered to develop options for a program-level architecture for robotic exploration of Mars consistent with the objective to send humans to Mars in the 2030's. Scientific pathways were defined for future exploration, and multiple architectural options were developed that meet current science goals and support the future human exploration objectives. Integral to the process was the identification of critical technologies which enable the future scientific and human exploration goals. This paper describes the process for technology capabilities identification and examines the critical capability needs identified in the MPPG process. Several critical enabling technologies that have been identified to support the robotic exploration goals and with potential feedforward application to human exploration goals. Potential roadmaps for the development and validation of these technologies are discussed, including options for subscale technology demonstrations of future human exploration technologies on robotic missions.

Mars Program Planning Group (MPPG)↗
NASA NTRS2015

Orion Launch Abort System Performance During Exploration Flight Test 1

The Orion Launch Abort System Office is taking part in flight testing to enable certification that the system is capable of delivering the astronauts aboard the Orion Crew Module to a safe environment during both nominal and abort conditions. Orion is a NASA program, Exploration Flight Test 1 is managed and led by the Orion prime contractor, Lockheed Martin, and launched on a United Launch Alliance Delta IV Heavy rocket. Although the Launch Abort System Office has tested the critical systems to the Launch Abort System jettison event on the ground, the launch environment cannot be replicated completely on Earth. During Exploration Flight Test 1, the Launch Abort System was to verify the function of the jettison motor to separate the Launch Abort System from the crew module so it can continue on with the mission. Exploration Flight Test 1 was successfully flown on December 5, 2014 from Cape Canaveral Air Force Station's Space Launch Complex 37. This was the first flight test of the Launch Abort System preforming Orion nominal flight mission critical objectives. The abort motor and attitude control motors were inert for Exploration Flight Test 1, since the mission did not require abort capabilities. Exploration Flight Test 1 provides critical data that enable engineering to improve Orion's design and reduce risk for the astronauts it will protect as NASA continues to move forward on its human journey to Mars. The Exploration Flight Test 1 separation event occurred at six minutes and twenty seconds after liftoff. The separation of the Launch Abort System jettison occurs once Orion is safely through the most dynamic portion of the launch. This paper will present a brief overview of the objectives of the Launch Abort System during a nominal Orion flight. Secondly, the paper will present the performance of the Launch Abort System at it fulfilled those objectives. The lessons learned from Exploration Flight Test 1 and the other Flight Test Vehicles will certainly contribute to the vehicle architecture of a human-rated space launch vehicle.

McCauley, Rachel↗
NASA NTRS2016

NASA Virtual Institutes: International Bridges for Space Exploration

NASA created the first virtual institute, the NASA Astrobiology Institute (NAI), in 2009 with an aim toward bringing together geographically disparate and multidisciplinary teams toward the goal of answering broad questions in the then-new discipline of astrobiology. With the success of the virtual institute model, NASA then created the NASA Lunar Science Institute (NLSI) in 2008 to address questions of science and human exploration of the Moon, and then the NASA Aeronautics Research Institute (NARI) in 2012 which addresses key questions in the development of aeronautics technologies. With the broadening of NASA's human exploration targets to include Near Earth Asteroids and the moons of Mars as well as the Moon, the NLSI morphed into the Solar System Exploration Research Virtual Institute (SSERVI) in 2012. SSERVI funds domestic research teams to address broad questions at the intersection of science and human exploration, with the underlying principle that science enables human exploration, and human exploration enables science. Nine domestic teams were funded in 2014 for a five-year period to address a variety of different topics, and nine international partners (with more to come) also work with the U.S. teams on a variety of topics of mutual interest. The result is a robust and productive research infrastructure that is not only scientifically productive but can respond to strategic topics of domestic and international interest, and which develops a new generation of researchers. This is all accomplished with the aid of virtual collaboration technologies which enable scientific research at a distance. The virtual institute model is widely applicable to a range of space science and exploration problems.

SSERVI↗
NASA NTRS2004

Lessons Learned Study Final Report for the Exploration Systems Mission Directorate

This report is the final product of a 90-day study performed for the Exploration Systems Mission Directorate. The study was to assemble lessons NASA has learned from previous programs that could help the Exploration Systems Mission Directorate pursue the Exploration vision. It focuses on those lessons that should have the greatest significance to the Directorate during the formulation of program and mission plans. The study team reviewed a large number of lessons learned reports and data bases, including the Columbia Accident Investigation Board and Rogers Commission reports on the Shuttle accidents, accident reports from robotic space flight systems, and a number of management reviews by the Defense Sciences Board, Government Accountability Office, and others. The consistency of the lessons, findings, and recommendations validate the adequacy of the data set. In addition to reviewing existing databases, a series of workshops was held at each of the NASA centers and headquarters that included senior managers from the current workforce as well as retirees. The full text of the workshop reports is included in Appendix A. A lessons learned website was opened up to permit current and retired NASA personnel and on-site contractors to input additional lessons as they arise. These new lessons, when of appropriate quality and relevance, will be brought to the attention of managers. The report consists of four parts: Part 1 provides a small set of lessons, called the Executive Lessons Learned, that represent critical lessons that the Exploration Systems Mission Directorate should act on immediately. This set of Executive Lessons and their supporting rationale have been reviewed at length and fully endorsed by a team of distinguished NASA alumni; Part 2 contains a larger set of lessons, called the Selected Lessons Learned, which have been chosen from the lessons database and center workshop reports on the basis of their specific significance and relevance to the near-term work of the Exploration Directorate. These lessons frequently support the Executive lessons but are more general in nature; Part 3 consists of the reports of the center workshops that were conducted as part of this activity. These reports are included in their entirety (approximately 200 pages) in Appendix G and have significance for specific managers; Part 4 consists of the remainder of the lessons that have been selected by this effort and assembled into a database for the use of the Explorations Directorate. The database is archived and hosted in the Lessons Learned Knowledge Network, which provides a flexible search capability using a wide variety of search terms. Finally, a spreadsheet lists databases searched and a bibliography identifies reports that have been reviewed as sources of lessons for this task. NASA has been presented with many learning opportunities. We have conducted numerous programs, some extremely successful and others total failures. Most have been documented with a formal lessons learned activity, but we have not always incorporated these learning opportunities into our normal modes of business. For example, the Robbins Report of 2001 clearly indicates that many project failures of the past two decades were the result of violating well documented best practices, often in direct violation of management instructions and directives. An overarching lesson emerges: that disciplined execution in accordance with proven best practices is the greatest single contributor to a successful program. The Lessons Learned task team offers a sincere hope that the lessons presented herein will be helpful to the Exploration Systems Directorate in charting and executing their course. The success of the Directorate and of NASA in general depends on our collective ability to move forward without having to relearn the lessons of those who have gone before.

Van Laak, Jim↗
NASA NTRS2016

Graphical Visualization of Human Exploration Capabilities

NASA's pioneering space strategy will require advanced capabilities to expand the boundaries of human exploration on the Journey to Mars (J2M). The Evolvable Mars Campaign (EMC) architecture serves as a framework to identify critical capabilities that need to be developed and tested in order to enable a range of human exploration destinations and missions. Agency-wide System Maturation Teams (SMT) are responsible for the maturation of these critical exploration capabilities and help formulate, guide and resolve performance gaps associated with the EMC-identified capabilities. Systems Capability Organization Reporting Engine boards (SCOREboards) were developed to integrate the SMT data sets into cohesive human exploration capability stories that can be used to promote dialog and communicate NASA's exploration investments. Each SCOREboard provides a graphical visualization of SMT capability development needs that enable exploration missions, and presents a comprehensive overview of data that outlines a roadmap of system maturation needs critical for the J2M. SCOREboards are generated by a computer program that extracts data from a main repository, sorts the data based on a tiered data reduction structure, and then plots the data according to specified user inputs. The ability to sort and plot varying data categories provides the flexibility to present specific SCOREboard capability roadmaps based on customer requests. This paper presents the development of the SCOREboard computer program and shows multiple complementary, yet different datasets through a unified format designed to facilitate comparison between datasets. Example SCOREboard capability roadmaps are presented followed by a discussion of how the roadmaps are used to: 1) communicate capability developments and readiness of systems for future missions, and 2) influence the definition of NASA's human exploration investment portfolio through capability-driven processes. The paper concludes with a description of planned future work to modify the computer program to include additional data and of alternate capability roadmap formats currently under consideration.

Rodgers, Erica M.↗
NASA NTRS2016

Decision Analysis Methods Used to Make Appropriate Investments in Human Exploration Capabilities and Technologies

NASA is transforming human spaceflight. The Agency is shifting from an exploration-based program with human activities in low Earth orbit (LEO) and targeted robotic missions in deep space to a more sustainable and integrated pioneering approach. Through pioneering, NASA seeks to address national goals to develop the capacity for people to work, learn, operate, live, and thrive safely beyond Earth for extended periods of time. However, pioneering space involves daunting technical challenges of transportation, maintaining health, and enabling crew productivity for long durations in remote, hostile, and alien environments. Prudent investments in capability and technology developments, based on mission need, are critical for enabling a campaign of human exploration missions. There are a wide variety of capabilities and technologies that could enable these missions, so it is a major challenge for NASA's Human Exploration and Operations Mission Directorate (HEOMD) to make knowledgeable portfolio decisions. It is critical for this pioneering initiative that these investment decisions are informed with a prioritization process that is robust and defensible. It is NASA's role to invest in targeted technologies and capabilities that would enable exploration missions even though specific requirements have not been identified. To inform these investments decisions, NASA's HEOMD has supported a variety of analysis activities that prioritize capabilities and technologies. These activities are often based on input from subject matter experts within the NASA community who understand the technical challenges of enabling human exploration missions. This paper will review a variety of processes and methods that NASA has used to prioritize and rank capabilities and technologies applicable to human space exploration. The paper will show the similarities in the various processes and showcase instances were customer specified priorities force modifications to the process. Specifically, this paper will describe the processes that the NASA Langley Research Center (LaRC) Technology Assessment and Integration Team (TAIT) has used for several years and how those processes have been customized to meet customer needs while staying robust and defensible. This paper will show how HEOMD uses these analyses results to assist with making informed portfolio investment decisions. The paper will also highlight which human exploration capabilities and technologies typically rank high regardless of the specific design reference mission. The paper will conclude by describing future capability and technology ranking activities that will continue o leverage subject matter experts (SME) input while also incorporating more model-based analysis.

Williams-Byrd, Julie↗
NASA NTRS2017

Exploration Medical Capability System Engineering Introduction and Vision

Human exploration missions to beyond low Earth orbit destinations such as Mars will require more autonomous capability compared to current low Earth orbit operations. For the medical system, lack of consumable resupply, evacuation opportunities, and real-time ground support are key drivers toward greater autonomy. Recognition of the limited mission and vehicle resources available to carry out exploration missions motivates the Exploration Medical Capability (ExMC) Element's approach to enabling the necessary autonomy. The Element's work must integrate with the overall exploration mission and vehicle design efforts to successfully provide exploration medical capabilities. ExMC is applying systems engineering principles and practices to accomplish its integrative goals. This talk will briefly introduce the discipline of systems engineering and key points in its application to exploration medical capability development. It will elucidate technical medical system needs to be met by the systems engineering work, and the structured and integrative science and engineering approach to satisfying those needs, including the development of shared mental and qualitative models within and external to the human health and performance community. These efforts are underway to ensure relevancy to exploration system maturation and to establish medical system development that is collaborative with vehicle and mission design and engineering efforts.

Mindock, J.↗
NASA NTRS2017

Systems Engineering for Space Exploration Medical Capabilities

Human exploration missions to beyond low Earth orbit destinations such as Mars will present significant new challenges to crew health management during a mission compared to current low Earth orbit operations. For the medical system, lack of consumable resupply, evacuation opportunities, and real-time ground support are key drivers toward greater autonomy. Recognition of the limited mission and vehicle resources available to carry out exploration missions motivates the Exploration Medical Capability (ExMC) Element's approach to enabling the necessary autonomy. The Element's work must integrate with the overall exploration mission and vehicle design efforts to successfully provide exploration medical capabilities. ExMC is applying systems engineering principles and practices to accomplish its integrative goals. This paper discusses the structured and integrative approach that is guiding the medical system technical development. Assumptions for the required levels of care on exploration missions, medical system guiding principles, and a Concept of Operations are early products that capture and clarify stakeholder expectations. Mobel-Based Systems Engineering techniques are then applied to define medical system behavior and architecture. Interfaces to other flight and ground systems, and within the medical system are identified and defined. Initial requirements and traceability are established, which sets the stage for identification of future technology development needs. An early approach for verification and validation, taking advantage of terrestrial and near-Earth exploration system analogs, is also defined to further guide system planning and development.

Mindock, Jennifer↗
NASA NTRS2017

Systems Engineering for Space Exploration Medical Capabilities

Human exploration missions that reach destinations beyond low Earth orbit, such as Mars, will present significant new challenges to crew health management. For the medical system, lack of consumable resupply, evacuation opportunities, and real-time ground support are key drivers toward greater autonomy. Recognition of the limited mission and vehicle resources available to carry out exploration missions motivates the Exploration Medical Capability (ExMC) Element's approach to enabling the necessary autonomy. The Element's work must integrate with the overall exploration mission and vehicle design efforts to successfully provide exploration medical capabilities. ExMC is applying systems engineering principles and practices to accomplish its goals. This paper discusses the structured and integrative approach that is guiding the medical system technical development. Assumptions for the required levels of care on exploration missions, medical system goals, and a Concept of Operations are early products that capture and clarify stakeholder expectations. Model-Based Systems Engineering techniques are then applied to define medical system behavior and architecture. Interfaces to other flight and ground systems, and within the medical system are identified and defined. Initial requirements and traceability are established, which sets the stage for identification of future technology development needs. An early approach for verification and validation, taking advantage of terrestrial and near-Earth exploration system analogs, is also defined to further guide system planning and development.

Mindock, Jennifer↗
NASA NTRS2015

Exploring the Solar System from Wherever You Are

NASA's Solar System Exploration Research Virtual Institute (SSERVI) represents a close collaboration between science, technology and exploration that will enable deeper understanding of the Moon and other airless bodies as we move further out of low-Earth orbit. The Solar System Exploration Research Virtual Institute (SSERVI) focuses on the scientific aspects of exploration as they pertain to the Moon, Near Earth Asteroids (NEA's) and the moons of Mars. The Institute research areas are centered on interdisciplinary, exploration-related science of airless bodies targeted as potential human destinations. Areas of study represent the broad spectrum of lunar, NEA, and Martian moon sciences encompassing investigations of the surface, interior, exosphere, and near-space environments as well as science uniquely enabled from these bodies.The SSERVI central office is based at NASA Ames in Silicon Valley a hot spot for innovative and cost-savings approaches to space exploration and rapid advances in technology development. The administrative staff at the central office forms the organizational hub for the domestic and international teams and enables the virtual collaborative environment. The SSERVI teams are supported jointly from NASA's Science Mission Directorate and Human Exploration and Operations Mission Directorate. Teams are funded for five years. Calls for proposals are issued every 2-3 years to allow overlap between generations of institute teams. Interactions with geographically dispersed teams across the U.S., and global partners, occur easily and frequently in a collaborative virtual environment. This talk will provide a closer look at research being conducted by the current US teams, our 8 international partners and information about future opportunities to participate in SSERVI.

Pendleton, Y. J.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Gateway Program Safety And Mission Assurance Integration - The Future Of Safe Deep Space Human Exploration

This next wave of lunar exploration will be fundamentally different than the past. The goal today is long term human presence in Earth orbit, exploration around the Moon, exploration anywhere on the Moon, and challenging exploration missions beyond the Moon. Sustainability is the key to enabling human expansion across the solar system and bringing back to Earth new knowledge and opportunities, and requires the early engagement of scientific, international, and U.S. commercial interests, innovations, and new approaches. The Gateway’s agile acquisition strategy will shape the entire system life cycle, from design and analysis through production, verification, launch, logistics and operations. This strategy will encourage new ways of doing business to accommodate new techniques, technologies and approaches; improving affordability and maximizing Gateway utility. The full range of acquisition authorities and contracting mechanisms available to NASA will be considered and appropriately tailored in response to the unique demands of each procurement activity. Gateway will provide scientific and research benefits, in addition to providing a sustainable staging location for crewed lunar surface landings and technology demonstrations that help NASA develop the knowledge and technology needed for Mars missions. These payloads are expected to provide operational and scientific benefit for the duration of their stay on Gateway, as the hardware will provide data during the transit to the Gateway and while in lunar orbit as changes in solar activity occur over time. Gateway is designed to support a variety of utilization activities during both crewed and uncrewed periods and is planned for continuous operations throughout its lifetime. These operations include demonstrating key exploration capabilities in a relevant deep space environment, conducting science beyond the influence of Earth, and providing opportunities for Gateway partners and customers for deep space exploration. Located in cislunar orbit, the Gateway capabilities can be further leveraged to enhance lunar and Mars exploration. With the Gateway and other elements of the Artemis Program, NASA is encouraging new ways of doing business to accommodate new techniques, technologies and approaches, consider affordability, and encourage innovation from U.S. industry.

Helen Vaccaro↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Harnessing Artificial Intelligence for Medical Diagnosis and Treatment During Space Exploration Missions

From May 8th to June 9th, 2023, I had the opportunity to participate in an experiential learning experience at Johnson Space Center in Houston, TX with Exploration Medical Capability (ExMC), an element of the NASA Human Research Program. During this research experience, I was not only able to work on the above titled research project, but also gain an immense exposure to the field of aerospace medicine, make numerous connections within the field, tour NASA facilities, as well as travel to the Aerospace Medical Association Annual Conference (AsMA) in New Orleans. To briefly introduce my project, it is well understood that the medical capabilities available to crew medical officers (CMOs) on the International Space Station will be different than the capabilities available and needed during deep space exploration missions to the Moon, Mars, and beyond. Ground support is particularly limited due to distance, communication delays (or lack of communication), and lack of resupply. Therefore, to support medical care by CMOs on these missions, robust clinical decision support systems (CDSSs) must be designed. The recent publication and public launch of generative artificial intelligence (AI) tools based upon large language models (LLM) such as ChatGPT provides the opportunity to create a smart assistant for onboard triage, diagnosis, and treatment of medical conditions. Ultimately, the overall purpose of the project was to research what AI tools currently exist or are in development, and to see how they might be implemented onboard during exploration class spaceflights of the future. The ExMC element is actively developing several tools to be used in preparation for and during deep space exploration missions. One of those tools, known as IMPACT, is a probabilistic risk assessment model which can be used to propose a desired medical system (based on mass and volume) and suggest the clinical outcomes likely to occur for a design reference mission (DRM). The group recently presented the IMPACT model and a DRM of interest titled “Modified Long Duration Lunar Orbital and Lunar Surface” (mLDLOLS) at the recent AsMA conference. The mLDLOLS mock mission is a 9 month and 6-day deep space exploration mission consisting of time in Moon’s orbit (3 months on the Gateway space station), on the lunar surface (3 months within habitat), and another 3 months on Gateway before return to Earth. For this DRM, IMPACT ultimately outlined a preferred medical system that was then associated with medical conditions considered to be most likely based on frequency, most likely to cause astronaut task time loss (TTL), most likely to cause return to definitive care (RTDC), and most likely cause loss of crew life (LOCL). IMPACT also highlighted the medical capabilities/skills that would be required to care for those medical conditions, such as performing a history of present illness or musculoskeletal exam with ultrasound. The primary objective of the project was to perform a survey of the AI tools and systems applicable to the conditions outlined for the proposed mLDLOLS mission. Using PubMed (including most relevant MeSH terms) and Google Scholar, we then created a robust annotated bibliography organized by condition. The 56-page and over 500 reference annotated bibliography was subsequently used to create a review outline that would become the basis for drafting of a future publication. For the review outline, we took those medical conditions researched within the annotated bibliography (condition-based approach) and deployed a systems-based approach, combining those medical conditions and related tools into ten categories. These categories included general/all-purpose CDSSs, tools to diagnose or manage respiratory, dermatologic, neurologic, auditory and vestibular, ophthalmic, musculoskeletal, infection-associated, and gynecologic conditions, as well as tools that could be deployed in the setting of trauma/emergency. With the completion of the 30-page outline, we then began drafting the review paper. To conclude the research experience, I presented the findings from our survey to the ExMC Clinical and Science team. With these objectives, I ultimately learned about the number of AI tools that exist today to assist medical professionals with the triage, diagnosis, and management of several medical conditions. These tools can span from chatbot assistants to help triage knee pain to vision transformer models that can identify ophthalmic conditions based on ocular surface images captured with a cell phone. We also highlighted the current gaps that exist in the literature alongside the advancements that are needed to make the desired CDSS for deep space exploration missions. With this experience, I certainly confirmed an existing career goal and identified several additional skills needed to become an aerospace medical doctor including knowledge of critical care in an extreme medicine setting, aerospace engineering and human integration systems, artificial intelligence, machine learning, and risk models. I also identified numerous transferable skills for this career goal including the basic knowledge of medicine (MD), deployment of the scientific method for critical thought about new scientific questions (PhD), review of published literature, including creating an annotated bibliography (PhD), as well as detailed scientific writing (PhD). The results of my research will likely guide the design of an all-encompassing onboard medical assistant for use during deep space exploration missions of the future. I plan on sharing the outcomes from this experience with my peers at a student seminar in the Fall semester on August 30th. During the seminar, I will detail the project, my experience at NASA and AsMA, as well as offer best practice guidelines for students entertaining similar experiences or careers. In conclusion, I would like to thank the WVU School of Medicine, Research and Graduate Education office, as well as NASA ExMC for the unwavering support of this life-changing experience.

Ryan A. Lacinski↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Exploration Atmosphere Demonstration of A Multi-Functional Integrated Medical Device (Tempus Pro)

INTRODUCTION The Exploration Medical Capability (ExMC) element within the Human Research Program and the Exploration Medical Integrated Product Team (XMIPT) within the Mars Campaign Office seek to advance medical system design and risk-informed decision-making for exploration missions. This includes assessment of candidate devices and their compatibility within a variety of increasingly Earth-independent medical scenarios. The Tempus Pro (Remote Diagnostic Technologies, Ltd., Philips Corp., Farnborough, UK) is a commercial-off-the-shelf (COTS), multi-functional integrated medical device capable of vital signs monitoring, with built-in procedure support (iAssist), patient record and telemedicine communication features, and medical imaging (e.g., camera, laryngoscope, ultrasound) that meets multiple exploration medical capability needs. One of several hypobaric atmospheres being considered for exploration vehicles is 8.2 psi with 34% oxygen. To assess the useability of the Tempus Pro in such environments by individuals without formal medical training, the unit was tested in May and June of 2023 at the Johnson Space Center 20-Foot Exploration Atmosphere Chamber in conjunction with the Exploration Atmospheres-2 (EA-2) study. TECHNOLOGY DEMONSTRATION Eight subjects in the EA-2 study were assigned roles as the caregiver or patient – or both in the case of a self-exam – and caregivers were asked to place sensors for 3-Lead ECG, non-invasive blood pressure (NIBP), pulse oximetry (SpO2), and temperature using Tempus Pro’s iAssist. Depending on the procedure, additional tasks included an oropharyngeal exam of the throat with the laryngoscope and capturing ultrasound images of a cardiac subxiphoid view or of the user’s choice from a pre-specified list. Scenarios ranged from remote-guided to fully autonomous operations and surveyed the effectiveness of support, amount of support desired, and importance of support by type (e.g., written crew procedures, iAssist and device guidance, remote console guidance, etc.). Feedback from the subjects and the support personnel was also gathered to inform future designs for training and support and to determine what operations are plausible given different levels of each. An unweighted NASA task load index (TLX) was used to profile the demands of using the device, however the sample size does not support statistics. The research was exploratory in nature and qualitative information was the main goal. Calibration checks on the Tempus Pro were conducted before and after chamber testing to ensure the device was in useable condition. RESULTS All subjects performed their tasks successfully and found the Tempus Pro easy to use with the support provided. The calibration checks outside the chamber showed that the Tempus Pro remained unchanged and measurements inside the chamber were within normal values. Caregivers taking the NASA TLX reported mean scores ≤ 41/100 showing the tasks to be undemanding and less demanding with repeated use (~20/100). Novice users were able to easily connect sensors and take vital signs with the guidance from Tempus Pro’s iAssist feature. For more complex tasks, such as the oropharyngeal exam and ultrasound image acquisition, guidance beyond iAssist was needed, primarily from a supporting physician. Feedback on the importance of support types varied by person and scenario but greater than 50% of the support used by each was non-native to the device. Overall opinions were positive, but the ultrasound users expressed a lack of confidence in their results and 3 out of 4 desired more time, training, or support. Subjects found the sensors to be comfortable and comparable to prior experiences with such devices, except for the blood pressure cuff, which squeezed too tightly for uncomfortably long periods. Many observations provoked discussion, especially regarding ultrasound, that will aide decisions about future demonstrations.

R. S. Miller↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Exploration Exercise System (EES) Physiology

Exploration class missions will be required to have an exercise device that is lightweight, has a small footprint, and is capable of providing enough physical stimulus and exercise variability to be an effective countermeasure against muscle, bone, aerobic fitness, and sensorimotor loss that results from the microgravity environment. Ground studies, inflight studies, and results analyses are required to inform Moon2Mars Design Reference Missions (DRMs) and vehicle designs. This activity encompasses two related projects, an evaluation study called Zero T2 and a requirements development for an exploration treadmill (ET). Exploration class missions’ mass/power/volume restrictions have resulted in the development of exercise devices that are motorized and flywheel-based to provide both aerobic and resistive training on one platform. These devices provide a variety of full body resistance exercise options as well as rowing and cycling for aerobic exercise, but do not provide ambulatory exercise via a treadmill. Because a treadmill has been available for use on the ISS since 2001, we do not understand the efficacy of exploration exercise modalities on muscle performance, aerobic fitness, bone health, or sensorimotor performance. A retrospective study was performed to quantify the association between total exercise (including specific contributions of treadmill exercise) and functional performance upon landing. Due to the relatively small variation in treadmill usage inflight, there is a need to do a controlled study where inflight crewmembers will not use the ISS treadmill (called T2) for the duration of their flights. There will be 3 arms to the Zero T2 study: 1) participants use all currently available exercise platforms aboard ISS (control group), 2) participants use only ARED and CEVIS, and 3) participants use only European Enhanced Exploration Device (E4D). (Please see the TechPort Entry for Exploration Exercise System Development for further detail on the E4D.) This study started in Oct 2020 and will continue through Sep 2027. In a parallel effort, a team will be developing requirements for an exploration treadmill. This project will be broken into two phases. Phase 1 will develop and implement energy prediction models based on available in-flight exercise data to quantify energy expenditure during 0g treadmill running. Phase 2 will then use the available biomechanical and metabolic evidence from Phase 1 to determine the hardware specification requirements essential to providing the desired exercise stimulus. Subject Matter Experts (SMEs) will then leverage the Standardized Process for Evaluating Exercise Devices (SPEED) developed by the team to 1) assess available technologies for candidate treadmills which meet defined requirements, 2) perform hands-on evaluations of top candidates, 3) provide evaluation outcomes and recommendations to developers. This project will begin in 2025 and continue through Sep 2030.

Kent Lawrence Kalogera↗
NASA NTRS2015

NASA SSERVI Contributions to Lunar Science and Exploration

NASA's Solar System Exploration Research Virtual Institute (SSERVI) represents a close collaboration between science, technology and exploration that will enable deeper understanding of the Moon and other airless bodies as we move further out of low-Earth orbit. The new Solar System Exploration Research Virtual Institute (SSERVI) will focus on the scientific aspects of exploration as they pertain to the Moon, Near Earth Asteroids (NEAs) and the moons of Mars. The Institute focuses on interdisciplinary, exploration-related science centered around all airless bodies targeted as potential human destinations. Areas of study reported here will represent the broad spectrum of lunar, NEA, and Martian moon sciences encompassing investigations of the surface, interior, exosphere, and near-space environments as well as science uniquely enabled from these bodies. We will provide a detailed look at research being conducted by each of the 9 domestic US teams as well as our 7 international partners. The research profile of the Institute integrates investigations of plasma physics, geology/geochemistry, technology integration, solar system origins/evolution, regolith geotechnical properties, analogues, volatiles, ISRU and exploration potential of the target bodies.

Exploration↗
NASA NTRS2016

Sample Handling and Instruments for the In-Situ Exploration of Ice-Rich Planets

NASA's key science goals for the exploration of the solar system seek a better understanding of the formation and evolutionary processes that have shaped planetary bodies and emphasize the search for habitable environments. Efforts are also made to detect and quantify resources that could be used for the support of human exploration. These themes call for chemistry and physical property observations that may be best approached by in situ measurements. NASA's planetary missions have progressively evolved from remote reconnaissance to in situ exploration with the ultimate goal to return samples. This chapter focuses on the techniques, available or in development, for advanced geophysical and chemical characterization of icy bodies, especially Mars polar areas, Enceladus, Titan, Europa, and Ceres. These astrobiological targets are the objects of recent or ongoing exploration whose findings are driving the formulation of new missions that involve in situ exploration. After reviewing the overall objectives of icy body exploration (Section 9.1) we describe key techniques used for addressing these objectives from surface platforms via geophysical observations (Section 9.2) and chemical measurements (Section 9.3).

planets↗