Results for “Crew Safety” — Page 14

NASA NTRS2016

Summary Report for the Technical Interchange Meeting on Development of Baseline Material Properties and Design Guidelines for In-Space Manufacturing Activities

NASA Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) and the Agency as a whole are currently engaged in a number of in-space manufacturing (ISM) activities that have the potential to reduce launch costs, enhance crew safety, and provide the capabilities needed to undertake long-duration spaceflight. The recent 3D Printing in Zero-G experiment conducted on board the International Space Station (ISS) demonstrated that parts of acrylonitrile butadiene styrene (ABS) plastic can be manufactured in microgravity using fused deposition modeling (FDM). This project represents the beginning of the development of a capability that is critical to future NASA missions. Current and future ISM activities will require the development of baseline material properties to facilitate design, analysis, and certification of materials manufactured using in-space techniques. The purpose of this technical interchange meeting (TIM) was to bring together MSFC practitioners and experts in materials characterization and development of baseline material properties for emerging technologies to advise the ISM team as we progress toward the development of material design values, standards, and acceptance criteria for materials manufactured in space. The overall objective of the TIM was to leverage MSFC's shared experiences and collective knowledge in advanced manufacturing and materials development to construct a path forward for the establishment of baseline material properties, standards development, and certification activities related to ISM. Participants were asked to help identify research and development activities that will (1) accelerate acceptance and adoption of ISM techniques among the aerospace design community; (2) benefit future NASA programs, commercial technology developments, and national needs; and (3) provide opportunities and avenues for further collaboration.

Prater, T. J.↗

NASA NTRS2016

3D Printing in Zero G Technology Demonstration Mission: Summary of On-Orbit Operations, Material Testing, and Future Work

Human space exploration to date has been limited to low Earth orbit and the moon. The International Space Station (ISS), an orbiting laboratory 200 miles above the earth, provides a unique and incredible opportunity for researchers to prove out the technologies that will enable humans to safely live and work in space for longer periods of time and venture farther into the solar system. The ability to manufacture parts in-space rather than launch them from earth represents a fundamental shift in the current risk and logistics paradigm for human spaceflight. In particularly, additive manufacturing (or 3D printing) techniques can potentially be deployed in the space environment to enhance crew safety (by providing an on-demand part replacement capability) and decrease launch mass by reducing the number of spare components that must be launched for missions where cargo resupply is not a near-term option. In September 2014, NASA launched the 3D Printing in Zero G technology demonstration mission to the ISS to explore the potential of additive manufacturing for in-space applications and demonstrate the capability to manufacture parts and tools on-orbit. The printer for this mission was designed and operated by the company Made In Space under a NASA SBIR (Small Business Innovation Research) phase III contract. The overarching objectives of the 3D print mission were to use ISS as a testbed to further maturation of enhancing technologies needed for long duration human exploration missions, introduce new materials and methods to fabricate structure in space, enable cost-effective manufacturing for structures and mechanisms made in low-unit production, and enable physical components to be manufactured in space on long duration missions if necessary. The 3D print unit for fused deposition modeling (FDM) of acrylonitrile butadiene styrene (ABS) was integrated into the ISS Microgravity Science Glovebox (MSG) in November 2014 and phase I printing operations took place from November through December of that year. Phase I flight operations yielded 14 unique parts (21 total specimens) that could be directly compared against ground-based prints of identical geometry manufactured using the printer prior to its launch to ISS. The 3DP unit functioned safely and produced specimens necessary to advance the understanding of the critical design and operational parameters for the FDM process as affected by the microgravity environment. From the standpoint of operations, 3DP demonstrated the ability to remove parts from the build-tray on-orbit, teleoperate the printer from the ground, perform critical maintenance functions within defined human factors limits, produce a functional tool that could be evaluated for form/fit/function, and uplink a new part file from the ground and produce it on the printer. The flight parts arrived at NASA Marshall Space Flight Center in Huntsville, Alabama in April 2015, where they underwent months of testing in the materials and processes laboratory. Ground and flight prints completed the following phases of testing: photographic/visual inspection, mass and density evaluation, structured light scanning, XRay and CT, mechanical testing, optical microscopy, scanning electron microscopy, and chemical analysis. This presentation will discuss the results of this testing as well as phase II operations for the printer, which took place in June and July of 2016. Lessons learned from the tech demo and their impacts on the design and development of the second generation 3D printer for ISS, the Additive Manufacturing Facility (AMF) by Made In Space will also be presented. In addition, progress in other elements of NASA's In Space Manufacturing (ISM) initiative such as the on-demand ISM utilization catalog, in-space Recycler ISS Technology Demonstration development, launch packaging recycling, in-space printable electronics, development of higher strength polymeric materials for 3D printing and Additive Construction by Mobile Emplacement (ACME) will also be addressed.

Prater, Tracie↗

NASA NTRS2017

NASA-STD-6001B Test 1 Upward Flame Propagation; Sample Length Impact on MOC Investigation

Understanding the combustion behavior of materials in the elevated oxygen environments of habitable spacecraft is of utmost importance to crew safety and mission success. Currently, certification for unrestricted flight usage of a material with respect to flammability involves passing the Upward Flame Propagation Test of NASA-STD-6001B (Test 1). This test evaluates materials in a standardized test configuration for two failure criteria: self-extinguishment within 15 cm (6 in.) and the propensity of flame propagation by means of flaming material transfer. By the NASA standard, full-length samples are 30 cm (12 in.) in length; however, factors independent of the test method such as limited material availability or various nonstandard test configurations limit the full pretest sample lengths available for test. This paper characterizes the dependence, if any, of pretest sample length on NASA-STD-6001B Test 1 results. Testing was performed using the Maximum Oxygen Concentration (MOC) Threshold Method to obtain a data set for each sample length tested. In addition, various material types, including cloth (Nomex), foam (TA-301) and solids (Ultem), were tested to investigate potential effects of test specimen types. Though additional data needs to be generated to provide statistical confidence, preliminary findings are that use of variable sample lengths has minimal impact on NASA-STD-6001B flammability performance and MOC determination.

Harper, Susana Tapia↗

NASA NTRS2017

Leveraging Terrestrial Industry for Utilization of Space Resources

NASA's Journey to Mars: Pioneering Next Steps in Space Exploration released in October of 2015 states that NASA is working toward the capability to work, operate, and sustainably live safely beyond Earth. To progress from our current "Earth-Reliant" approach to exploration and eventually become "Earth Independent", we need to first identify resources in space and then learn to use and harvest them to minimize logistics from Earth, reduce costs, and enable sustainable and affordable space transportation and surface operations. Known as In Situ Resource Utilization (ISRU), the collection and conversion of space resources into products such as propellants, fuel cell reactants, and life support consumables can greatly reduce the mass, cost, and risk of space exploration. Also, the ability to perform civil engineering, construction, and manufacturing at sites of exploration can also allow for increased crew safety and sustainable growth in critical infrastructure. Much of what NASA wants to do on the Moon and Mars with respect to harnessing and utilizing space resources has been performed and perfected on Earth over the centuries. While minimizing mass and operating in the vacuum of space may be unique challenges to NASA, both terrestrial industry and NASA face many of the same challenges associated with operating in severe environments, minimizing maintenance and logistics, maximizing performance per unit mass and volume, performing remote and autonomous operations, and integrating hardware from many vendors and countries. In the end, both NASA and terrestrial industry need to obtain a return on the investment for the development and deployment of these capabilities. This paper will first examine what is ISRU and what are the space resources of interest. The paper will than discuss what are NASA's approach, life cycle, and economic considerations for implementing ISRU. The paper will outline the site and infrastructure needs associated with a phased implementation of ISRU into human missions to the Moon and Mars. The paper will than assess what technologies and operations from terrestrial industries are relevant and synergistic with ISRU (from prospecting to product storage), and what challenges and similarities between the two can be exploited. Lastly, the paper will end with a discussion on where do we go from here for industry and NASA to collaborate.

Sanders, Gerald B.↗

NASA NTRS2018

Orion Heat Shield Manufacturing Producibility Improvements for the EM-1 Flight Test Program

This paper describes how the ORION program is incorporating improvements in the heat shield design and manufacturing processes reducing programmatic risk and ensuring crew safety in support of NASA's Exploration missions. The approach for the EFT-1 heat shield utilized a low risk Apollo heritage design and manufacturing process using an Avcoat TPS ablator with a honeycomb substrate to provide a one piece heat shield to meet the mission re-entry heating environments. The EM-1 mission will have additional flight systems installed to fly to the moon and return to Earth. Heat shield design and producibility improvements have been incorporated in the EM-1 vehicle to meet deep space mission requirements. The design continues to use the Avcoat material, but in a block configuration to enable improvements in consistant and repeatable application processes using tile bonding experience developed on the Space Shuttle Transportation System Program.

Producibility↗

NASA NTRS2018

In-Space Manufacturing at NASA Marshall Space Flight Center: A Portfolio of Fabrication and Recycling Technology Development for the International Space Station

The in-space manufacturing project at NASA Marshall Space Flight Center seeks to mature the manufacturing capabilities which will be needed on long duration, long endurance human spaceflight missions. The ability to manufacture materials and parts in space rather than launching them from earth has the potential to reduce logistics requirements and enhance crew safety. The International Space Station serves as a unique orbiting test bed for in-space manufacturing technology development for NASA and its commercial partners. This paper provides an overview of the projects currently in the in-space manufacturing technology portfolio and key technology development efforts in the past year.

Prater, Tracie↗

NASA NTRS2016

Synthetic Biologic Membrane

The International Space Station (ISS) is a test bed for the technologies that will be used to travel to Mars and beyond. The lessons learned from operating the ISS provide valuable direction to future research and technology development programs. One of the most critical and complicated subsystems on ISS is the life support system. The life support system keeps the crew alive by recycling both air and water. The ISS water recycling system has been operating since 2009 and one of the main lessons learned is that reliability is a key technology performance metric. In the long run reliability is a key cost driver and is a critical factor in insuring crew safety. For long duration missions such as the exploration of Mars, where resupply of spare parts from Earth is difficult if not impossible, reliability is even more important. This presentation will cover research into improving the reliability of ISS systems. It will discuss research into the development of a biomimetic membrane materials that provides self-regeneration capabilities for water recycling systems. It will also cover research into past failures of the ISS water recycling system caused by astronaut bone loss and the build-up of trace contaminates in the cabin.

Biology↗

NASA NTRS2019

Novel Classifier of Neural Impairment

The proposed research aligns with Ames Core Competency within the area of Intelligent/Adaptive Systems under Human Systems Integration. This will serve as a robust, efficient, and user-friendly human performance assessment tool that could provide immediate neural status of crewmembers in low-orbit and deep space missions. The human operator is a critical element of crew safety and should be evaluated consistently to mitigate potential off-nominal situations propagated from human error. Flagged deficits in oculomotor performance could act as an alert signal for crewmembers to opt out of cognitively demanding tasks or to prevent irreversible compromise in crewmember health.

impairment↗

NASA NTRS2019

NASA’s In-Space Manufacturing Project: Update on Manufacturing Technologies and Materials to Enable More Sustainable and Safer Exploration

NASA’s In-Space Manufacturing (ISM) project seeks to develop the materials, processes, and manufacturing technologies needed to provide an on-demand manufacturing capability for deep space exploration missions. The ability to manufacture and recycle some parts on demand rather than launch them from earth has the potential to reduce logistics requirements on long duration missions and enhance crew safety. With the launch of the first 3D printer (built and operated by Made in Space through a Small Business Innovative Research – SBIR -- contract) to the International Space Station (ISS) in 2014, the ISM project demonstrated the feasibility of operating an on-demand manufacturing system in a microgravity environment. This paper will provide an update on recent advancements in ISM under three key technology areas: manufacturing, recycling, and development of a design database. ISM continues to pursue development of manufacturing technologies for space applications and use the ISS as a critical test bed to prove out these technologies before deploying them on next generation exploration systems. Activities under this focus area include: characterization of materials manufactured using the Additive Manufacturing Facility (AMF), the second generation commercial 3D-printer on ISS, also owned and operated by Made in Space; development of prototype payloads for metal manufacturing through phase II SBIR contracts with Tethers Unlimited, Made in Space, and Ultra Tech Machinery; development of a multi-material fabrication laboratory capable of processing metals and providing inspection of manufactured parts through a Broad Agency Announcement (Techshot, Interlog, and Tethers Unlimited); an in-line sensing system for ISM platforms; and development of higher strength feedstocks for 3D polymer printers. In the area of recycling, the Tethers Unlimited Refabricator payload (an integrated 3D printer and recycler for ULTEM 9085) launched to ISS in November 2018 and began operating in early 2019. This payload represents the first demonstration of on-orbit recycling; down massed specimens will assess material degradation in the polymer over multiple recycling cycles to define limits on material re-use. Other work in the recycling area includes development of common use materials intended to be reused and recycled on space missions (Tethers Unlimited and Cornerstone Research Group) and a sterilization capability for multiple-use materials (ERASMUS from Tethers Unlimited). Concurrent with manufacturing technology and materials development work is creation of a design database, a curated list of parts that can be manufactured using the suite of In-Space Manufacturing capabilities.

Tracie Prater↗

NASA NTRS2020

Electromagnetic Compatibility Considerations for International Space Station Payload Developers

The International Space Station (ISS) is a laboratory for scientific research, innovative technology development, and global education. The ISS provides a number of facilities and platforms for payload developers and investigators to conduct biological, microgravity, and Earth and space observation science, as well as for performing technology development. Due to the unique nature of the ISS vehicle and its electrical power and data systems, achieving electromagnetic compatibility (EMC) with the vehicle requires special considerations by the payload developer. The ISS electromagnetic interference (EMI) requirements and test methods are based on MIL-STD-461, “Electromagnetic Emissions and Susceptibility Requirements for the Control of Electromagnetic Interference”, Revision C, and MIL-STD-462, “Electromagnetic Interference Characteristics, Measurement of,” respectively. The low source impedance of the test setup requires special considerations when designing or selecting EMI power filters and switched mode power supplies. Many filters, suited for later revisions of MIL-STD-461, will result in non-compliant designs. ISS electrical power system power quality requirements, imposed to protect the stability of the system, can also affect EMI filter design. The selection and use of commercial-off-the-shelf (COTS) equipment for ISS applications requires special considerations to meet both EMC and crew safety requirements. Furthermore, the ISS environment can provide unique immunity challenges; if the payload developer ignores these challenges, the result is a possible loss of science or impact to technology demonstration. The ISS provides a unique opportunity for the science and technology development community. However, in order to be successful, the payload developer must incorporate special EMC considerations, many of which will be presented.

McCollum, Matthew↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

In-Space Manufacturing Systems Development: Using the International Space Station (ISS) as a Testbed for Manufacturing on the Lunar Surface and Mars

In-space manufacturing has the potential to reduce logistics and enhance crew safety on long duration, long endurance missions. This presentation provides an overview of plans for NASA’s in-space manufacturing (ISM) project through 2024. Areas of focus include: 1) on-demand manufacturing of metals, polymers, and electronics, and 2) recycling and reuse. The presentation will highlight current work and technical challenges. Manufacturing technologies will be demonstrated on ISS and transitioned for use on lunar surface missions or other persistent orbital platforms. The work of the ISM project will be key to realizing the goals of sustainable exploration and decreasing dependence on frequent resupply missions.

Tracie Prater↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Going beyond reliability to robustness and resilience in space systems

The words reliability, robustness, and resilience, are often used interchangeably to describe tough and dependable systems but the distinctions between them suggest how to design more serviceable space systems. Reliability is simply the quality of consistently performing well. A system that dependably meets its design requirements in the specified environments is reliable. The designers may not consider themselves responsible for failures under unanticipated conditions. Robustness is the capability of performing without failure under a wide range of conditions, which can go beyond the expected range to include possible off-nominal conditions. Resilience is the ability to recover from or adapt to damaging events, such as failures, accidents, external disruptions, and repurposing. Such changes are usually unanticipated. They often invalidate the usual operating assumptions and cause system failure. Reliability, robustness, and resilience describe dependable performance under increasingly difficult conditions, first the specified environment, then a wider possible environment, and finally unanticipated damaging events. These three are increasingly desirable and increasingly difficult to achieve. Engineering for resilience would design systems that can ignore or repair failures, survive accidents, and recover from disruptions. Increasing the resilience of space systems, the ability to perform after unanticipated events, would greatly increase space crew safety. Improving reliability and robustness can be done by dealing with known sources of problems, but improving resilience requires implementing a general approach to reducing the impact of unknown future events. Two contrasting approaches are reducing system complexity and adding supervisory control. The need for resilience has been claimed for decades but little has been accomplished. Systems designers assume that they understand requirements, technologies, designs, architectures, integration, testing, operations, and environments. The potential problems of changes, failures, accidents, unknown environments, and unknown unknowns are ignored. Systems designers are typically overconfident and ignore the need for robustness and resilience.

Harry W Jones↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Going Beyond Reliability to Robustness and Resilience in Space Life Support Systems

The words reliability, robustness, and resilience are often used interchangeably to describe tough and dependable systems but the distinctions between them suggest how to design more serviceable space systems. Reliability is simply the quality of consistently performing well. A system that dependably meets its design requirements in the specified environment is reliable. The designers may not consider themselves responsible for failures under unanticipated conditions. Robustness is the capability of performing without failure under a wide range of conditions, which can go beyond the expected range to include possible off-nominal conditions. Resilience is the ability to recover from or adapt to unanticipated damaging events, such as failures, accidents, external disruptions, and repurposing. Such changes can invalidate the usual operating assumptions and cause system failure. Reliability, robustness, and resilience describe dependable performance under increasingly difficult conditions, first the specified environment, then a wider possible environment, and finally unanticipated damaging conditions. These three qualities are increasingly desirable and increasingly difficult to achieve. Engineering for resilience would design systems that can ignore or repair failures, survive accidents, and recover from unanticipated disruptions. Increasing the resilience of space systems would greatly increase space crew safety. Improving reliability and robustness requires dealing with known problems, but improving resilience requires implementing a general approach to reducing the impact of unknown future events. The need for robustness and resilience has been stated for decades but little has been done. Systems designers often assume that they understand everything they need to know. The potential failures caused by changes, failures, accidents, unknown environments, and unknown unknowns can be ignored. Such overconfidence can lead to neglect of reliability, robustness, and resilience.

Harry W. Jones↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

More Data Needed for Failure Rate Estimation, Validation, and Uncertainty Reduction

The currently planned schedule for advanced Environmental Control and Life Support System (ECLSS) development and test activities to support human exploration missions is unlikely to generate sufficient data to enable statistically-supportable, precise Orbital Replacement Unit (ORU) failure rate estimates to meet existing crew safety expectations. Accurate and precise failure rate estimates are critical for missions beyond Low Earth Orbit (LEO) because current risk mitigation approaches –namely regular resupply and rapid abort capabilities –will not be available. Safe operations will depend on mission planners’ ability to accurately forecast spares demand and efficiently provide the necessary resources. However, even after more than a decade of International Space Station (ISS) ECLSS operations, a significant amount of uncertainty remains in failure rate estimates. Uncertain or inaccurate failure rates result in increased risk and spares mass. A Bayesian estimation approach, such as the one currently implemented by the ISS Program, can reduce uncertainty by incorporating engineering judgement into failure rate estimates. However, experience on the ISS and with other complex systems shows that these prior failure rate estimates are often inaccurate. In addition, prior estimates are typically point values; some level of uncertainty must be added to convert these into probability distributions for Bayesian updating, and there are several potential methods for doing so. Due to the low rate of data collection, any inaccuracy in theseprior estimates currently hasa strong influence on the end result. This paper examines the challenges associated with failure rate estimation, validation, and uncertainty reduction in the context of ECLSS development for beyond-LEO missions. A variety of techniques for generating and updating Bayesian priors are discussed and evaluated using both real-world and simulated data. Potential solutions for improving failure rate estimation, including testing additional units, are analyzed and discussed, and a set of recommendations are provided for next-generation system development activities.

Reliability↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

More Data Needed for Failure Rate Estimation, Validation, and Uncertainty Reduction

The currently planned schedule for advanced Environmental Control and Life Support System (ECLSS) development and test activities to support human exploration missions is unlikely to generate sufficient data to enable statistically-supportable, precise Orbital Replacement Unit (ORU) failure rate estimates to meet existing crew safety expectations. Accurate and precise failure rate estimates are critical for missions beyond Low Earth Orbit (LEO) because current risk mitigation approaches –namely regular resupply and rapid abort capabilities –will not be available. Safe operations will depend on mission planners’ ability to accurately forecast spares demand and efficiently provide the necessary resources. However, even after more than a decade of International Space Station (ISS) ECLSS operations, a significant amount of uncertainty remains in failure rate estimates. Uncertain or inaccurate failure rates result in increased risk and spares mass. A Bayesian estimation approach, such as the one currently implemented by the ISS Program, can reduce uncertainty by incorporating engineering judgement into failure rate estimates. However, experience on the ISS and with other complex systems shows that these prior failure rate estimates are often inaccurate. In addition, prior estimates are typically point values; some level of uncertainty must be added to convert these into probability distributions for Bayesian updating, and there are several potential methods for doing so. Due to the low rate of data collection, any inaccuracy in theseprior estimates currently hasa strong influence on the end result. This paper examines the challenges associated with failure rate estimation, validation, and uncertainty reduction in the context of ECLSS development for beyond-LEO missions. A variety of techniques for generating and updating Bayesian priors are discussed and evaluated using both real-world and simulated data. Potential solutions for improving failure rate estimation, including testing additional units, are analyzed and discussed, and a set of recommendations are provided for next-generation system development activities.

Reliability↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Going Beyond Reliability to Robustness and Resilience in Space Life Support Systems

The words reliability, robustness, and resilience are often used interchangeably to describe tough and dependable systems but the distinctions between them suggest how to design more serviceable space systems. Reliability is simply the quality of consistently performing well. A system that dependably meets its design requirements in the specified environment is reliable. The designers may not consider themselves responsible for failures under unanticipated conditions. Robustness is the capability of performing without failure under a wide range of conditions, which can go beyond the expected range to include possible off-nominal conditions. Resilience is the ability to recover from or adapt to unanticipated damaging events, such as failures, accidents, external disruptions, and repurposing. Such changes can invalidate the usual operating assumptions and cause system failure. Reliability, robustness, and resilience describe dependable performance under increasingly difficult conditions, first the specified environment, then a wider possible environment, and finally unanticipated damaging conditions. These three qualities are increasingly desirable and increasingly difficult to achieve. Engineering for resilience would design systems that can ignore or repair failures, survive accidents, and recover from unanticipated disruptions. Increasing the resilience of space systems would greatly increase space crew safety. Improving reliability and robustness requires dealing with known problems, but improving resilience requires implementing a general approach to reducing the impact of unknown future events. The need for robustness and resilience has been stated for decades but little has been done. Systems designers often assume that they understand everything they need to know. The potential failures caused by changes, failures, accidents, unknown environments, and unknown unknowns can be ignored. Such overconfidence can lead to neglect of reliability, robustness, and resilience.

Harry W. Jones↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Fire on the Moon: Solid Fuel Combustion Experiments

As NASA plans to return people to the Moon for extended durations, we present an experiment concept to understand fire and material flammability there. A small combustion chamber would be used to conduct the first-ever combustion tests on another world. Multiple fuel samples are to be individually burned in Lunar gravity, with cameras and other sensors recording flame characteristics. The main hypothesis is that some materials burning in Lunar-g are more flammable than on Earth. The reason is that buoyant flow has two counteracting effects on material flammability. Increasing gravity level permits more fresh oxygen to be supplied to the flame, but if the buoyant speed is too high, combustion chemistry and increased cooling hinder combustion. This has important implications for the current 1-g material screening method used by NASA. Oxygen limits for upward and downward spread on the Moon will be compared to 1-g values. Earth-based partial gravity facilities (drop towers, aircraft, and sounding rockets) will be used to refine the experiment and provide some limited-duration data. Measured flame characteristics in 1-g and Lunar-g will be compared to a detailed model. These will refine pressure-gravity scaling relations that will then be applied to other g-levels. The work directly addresses knowledge gaps in flammability and crew safety as defined in several NASA strategic documents.

Fire↗

NASA NTRS2021

Research Questions and Challenges for Improved Spacecraft Fire Detection

This paper describes challenges and recommendations for research to improve spacecraft fire detection. Because crew safety is critical to every spaceflight mission, effective fire detectors must detect a wide variety of fires to ensure the success of future space exploration. Fire emissions are affected by fuel type, heating conditions, gravity and exploration atmosphere. Advances in sensing technology provide a promising basis for future detectors, which must selectively detect a broad variety of fires. Addressing these areas will secure the success of future lunar and deep space missions.

Claire Fortenberry↗