Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Environmental Control”

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 253 records · Page 14
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS1992

Dust protection for environmental control and life support systems in the lunar environment

Lunar dust is pervasive, and requirements for dust protection will affect both hardware design and operations planning for lunar surface systems. On Earth, mechanical problems caused by particulates include erosive and abrasive effects, clogging of mechanical equipment, and impairment of seals and bonds. In addition, dust tends to degrade the heat rejection properties of contaminated surfaces. All these effects have been observed on the lunar surface as well. This paper discusses the potential applicability of current dust protection methods to the problem of dust protection for the environmental control and life support (ECLS) systems of a lunar base, and highlights areas where development may be necessary. A review of dust problems experienced during the Apollo missions and of additional, ground-based experience with lunar dust provides a baseline for identifying operations and areas where dust may be expected to affect the ECLS systems. Current Earth-based methods of dust protection are identified and the impact of differences between the Earth and lunar environments on these methods is evaluated. Finally, integration of dust protection equipment with ECLS systems equipment is discussed.

Fuhs, Susan↗
NASA NTRS2016

NASA Environmental Control and Life Support Technology Development and Maturation for Exploration: 2015 to 2016 Overview

Over the last year, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) has continued to refine the understanding and prioritization of technology gaps that must be closed in order to achieve Evolvable Mars Campaign objectives and near term objectives in the cislunar proving ground. These efforts are reflected in updates to the technical area roadmaps released by NASA in 2015 and have guided technology development and maturation tasks that have been sponsored by various programs. This paper provides an overview of the refined Environmental Control and Life Support (ECLS) strategic planning, as well as a synopsis of key technology and maturation project tasks that occurred in 2014 and early 2015 to support the strategic needs. Plans for the remainder of 2015 and subsequent years are also described.

Schneider, Walter F.↗
NASA NTRS2020

Groundwater Drought: Environmental Controls and Monitoring

Arising from a long-term deficit of precipitation, groundwater drought often lags meteorological drought by months to years, depending on climate and subsurface hydrogeological conditions. Due to the paucity of in situ groundwater data in many parts of the world, global monitoring of groundwater storage variations and drought may be best achieved using satellite observations and/or groundwater time series simulated by hydrological models. The Gravity Recovery and Climate Experiment (GRACE) and GRACE Follow On (GRACE-FO) missions have greatly benefitted the modeling and monitoring of groundwater storage changes and drought at the global scale. In this chapter, we first review environmental controls on the temporal variability of groundwater using in situ data. We then describe an approach that infuses GRACE and GRACE-FO observations into a land surface model for assessing groundwater storage changes and drought globally. We also discuss characteristics of simulated groundwater drought and the limitations of current groundwater drought monitoring approaches.

Bailing Li↗
NASA NTRS2015

International Space Station (ISS) Environmental Control and Life Support (ECLS) System Overview of Events: 2010-2014

Nov 2, 2014 marked the completion of the 14th year of continuous human presence in space on board the International Space Station (ISS). After 42 expedition crews, over 115 assembly & utilization flights, over 180 combined Shuttle/Station, US & Russian Extravehicular Activities (EVAs), the post-Assembly-Complete ISS continues to fly and the engineering teams continue to learn from operating its systems, particularly the life support equipment. Problems with initial launch, assembly and activation of ISS elements have given way to more long term system operating trends. New issues have emerged, some with gestation periods measured in years. Major events and challenges for each U.S. Environmental Control and Life Support (ECLS) subsystem occurring during calendar years 2010 through 2014 are summarily discussed in this paper, along with look-aheads for what might be coming in the future for each U.S. ECLS subsystem.

Gentry, Gregory J.↗
NASA NTRS2016

Exergy Based Analysis for the Environmental Control and Life Support Systems of the International Space Station

When optimizing the performance of complex systems, a logical area for concern is improving the efficiency of useful energy. The energy available for a system to perform work is defined as a system's energy content. Interactions between a system's subsystems and the surrounding environment can be accounted for by understanding various subsystem energy efficiencies. Energy balance of reactants and products, and enthalpies and entropies, can be used to represent a chemical process. Heat transfer energy represents heat loads, and flow energy represents system flows and filters. These elements allow for a system level energy balance. The energy balance equations are developed for the subsystems of the Environmental Control and Life Support (ECLS) system aboard the International Space Station (ISS). The use of these equations with system information would allow for the calculation of the energy efficiency of the system, enabling comparisons of the ISS ECLS system to other systems as well as allows for an integrated systems analysis for system optimization.

Clem, Kirk A.↗
NASA NTRS2009

Constellation Program Thermal and Environmental Control and Life Support System Status: 2009 - 2010

The Constellation Program (CxP) consists of spacecrafts, launch vehicles, and support systems to execute the Exploration Architecture. The Program is currently divided into three distinct phases. The first phase is to develop a vehicle to provide limited cargo resupply capability and allow crew member rotation to the International Space Station (ISS). The second phase is to support the return of humans to the moon. The final phase is currently envisioned to allow the delivery of humans and cargo to Mars for an extended time. To implement this phased approach the CxP is currently working on the first vehicle and support systems to replace the Space Shuttle and allow continued access to space. This paper provides a summary of the CxP Thermal and Environmental Control and Life Support (ECLS) work that that has occurred across the different parts of the Program in support of these three phases over the past year.

Williams, David E.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Utilizing Gaps and Key Performance Parameters to Inform NASA Environmental Control and Life Support and Human Health and Performance Capability Technology Decisions

Human spaceflight is a complex endeavor requiring multiple capabilities for transportation, crew health, scientific goals, and safe return to Earth. The difference between spaceflight proven capabilities and those needed for future exploration architectures is defined as a capability gap. Capability gaps are not technology specific. Each capability gap is approachable with a wide array of technologies that have unique benefits and challenges. Determining what a capability’s relevant and distinguishing key performance parameters (KPPs) are for a mission is critical. Mass, power, and volume are always constrained and important, but defining these in a way normalized by performance is challenging. Additionally, KPP definition for reliability, dormancy, and integration needs are very important and still evolving. This paper provides the approach of the Environmental Control and Life Support – Crew Health and Performance (ECLSS-CHP) System Capability Leadership Team (SCLT) has used to define gaps and KPPs in support of the NASA’s Capabilities Integration Team data call objectives. The nine ECLSS-CHP capability areas are decomposed to capabilities with ~76 gaps and supported with KPPs. Rather than defining very detailed gaps, ECLSS-CHP defines high-level gaps to be technology agnostic. Within a gap, detailed KPPs are defined to both compare technologies and measure progress within a technology over time. Ideally, KPPs are clearly defined, widely communicated both internally and externally, and provide a common nomenclature to describe the state of the art and the degree of improvement required for exploration missions. KPPs help define when the gap is closed, and the core mission objectives can be accomplished. Further technology improvements to enhance the capability, as measured by improved KPPs, must then be weighed against investments in open capability gaps that prevent NASA from achieving its exploration missions. It is uncommon that a technology maturation to improve all the relevant KPPs simultaneously but using KPPs is a critical technology investment decision making component. In addition to traditional technology selections, KPPs are informing how investments in ground testing prior to and in parallel with ISS technology demonstrations are required to improve reliability KPPs. The collection of all major technology activities within a capability area are captured on technology roadmaps to communicate how diverse program activities are coordinated to close gaps and infuse into exploration mission needs. A selection of ECLSS-CHP gaps and KPPs and their formulation, current state, and how they inform capability roadmap planning are discussed.

Life Support↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Utilizing Gaps and Key Performance Parameters to Inform NASA Environmental Control and Life Support and Human Health and Performance Capability Technology Decisions

Human spaceflight is a complex endeavor requiring a multitude of capabilities for transportation, crew health, scientific goals, and safe return to Earth. The difference between spaceflight proven capabilities and those needed for a particular mission is defined as a capability gap. Capability gaps are not technology specific. Each capability gap is approachable with a wide array of technologies that have unique benefits and challenges. Determining what a capability’s relevant and distinguishing key performance parameters (KPPs) are for a mission is critical. Mass, power, and volume are always constrained and important, but defining these in a way normalized by performance is challenging. Additionally, KPP definition for reliability, dormancy, and integration needs are very important and still evolving. This paper provides the approach of the Environmental Control and Life Support – Crew Health and Performance (ECLSS-CHP) System Capability Leadership Team (SCLT) to defining gaps and KPPs in support of the NASA’s Capabilities Integration Team data call objectives. The nine ECLSS-CHP capability areas are decomposed to capabilities, gaps, and KPPs. Rather than defining very detailed gaps, ECLSS-CHP defines high-level gaps to be technology agnostic. Within a gap, detailed KPPs are defined to both compare technologies and measure progress within a technology over time. Ideally, KPPs are clearly defined, widely communicated both internally and externally, and provide a common nomenclature to describe the state of the art and the degree of improvement required for exploration missions. KPPs help define when the gap is closed and the core mission objectives can be accomplished. Further technology improvements to enhance the capability, as measured by improved KPPs, must then be weighed against investments in open capability gaps that prevent NASA from achieving its exploration missions. It is uncommon that a technology maturation to improve all the relevant KPPs simultaneously but using KPPs is a critical technology investment decision making component. In addition to traditional technology selections, KPPs are informing how investments in ground testing prior to and in parallel with ISS technology demonstrations are required to improve reliability KPPs. The collection of all major technology activities within a capability area are captured on technology roadmaps to communicate how diverse program activities are coordinated to close gaps and infuse into exploration mission needs. A selection of ECLSS-CHP gaps and KPPs and their formulation, current state, and how they inform capability roadmap planning are discussed. The paper will contain a summary of the approximately 60 gaps. Gaps are classified as to their type (architecture, knowledge, technology, developmental, or engineering) depending on the magnitude of the gap. The paper will provide brief overviews of a few major technology challenges and the technologies being considered, but will reference detailed papers for a more thorough treatment of the challenges and state of the art. Data analysis of the gaps is in work and results are not currently available for this abstract. It is anticipated the paper will include examples of select KPPs with descriptions as to why these are the relevant measures. Additionally some KPPs will be graphically presented over time to show progress to date and when performance targets need to be achieved to support exploration missions. Graphical summaries of how gaps closures with near term mission elements support follow-on mission elements will be provided.

Life Support↗
NASA NTRS2012

Cargo Commercial Orbital Transportation Services Environmental Control and Life Support Integration

The International Space Station s (ISS) largest crew and cargo resupply vehicle, the Space Shuttle, retired in 2011. To help augment ISS resupply and return capability, NASA announced a project to promote the development of Commercial Orbital Transportation Services (COTS) for the ISS in January of 2006. By December of 2008, NASA entered into space act agreements with SpaceX and Orbital Sciences Corporation for COTS development and ISS Commercial Resupply Services (CRS). The intent of CRS is to fly multiple resupply missions each year to ISS with SpaceX s Dragon vehicle providing resupply and return capabilities and Orbital Science Corporation s Cygnus vehicle providing resupply capability to ISS. The ISS program launched an integration effort to ensure that these new commercial vehicles met the requirements of the ISS vehicle and ISS program needs. The Environmental Control and Life Support System (ECLSS) requirements cover basic cargo vehicle needs including maintaining atmosphere, providing atmosphere circulation, and fire detection and suppression. The ISS-COTS integration effort brought unique challenges combining NASA s established processes and design knowledge with the commercial companies new initiatives and limited experience with human space flight. This paper will discuss the ISS ECLS COTS integration effort including challenges, successes, and lessons learned.

Duchesne, Stephanie↗
NASA NTRS2010

Commercial Orbital Transportation Cargo Services Environmental Control and Life Support Integration

The International Space Station s (ISS) largest crew and cargo resupply vehicle, the Space Shuttle, will retire in 2011. To help augment ISS resupply and return capability, NASA announced a project to promote the development of Commercial Orbital Transportation Services (COTS) for the ISS in January of 2006. By December of 2008, NASA entered into space act agreements with SpaceX and Orbital Sciences Corporation for COTS development and ISS Commercial Resupply Services (CRS). The intent of CRS is to fly multiple resupply missions each year to ISS with SpaceX s Dragon vehicle providing resupply and return capabilities and Orbital Science Corporation s Cygnus vehicle providing resupply capability to ISS. The ISS program launched an integration effort to ensure that these new commercial vehicles met the requirements of the ISS vehicle and ISS program needs. The Environmental Control and Life Support System (ECLSS) requirements cover basic cargo vehicle needs including maintaining atmosphere, providing atmosphere circulation, and fire detection and suppression. The ISS-COTS integration effort brought unique challenges combining NASA s established processes and design knowledge with the commercial companies new initiatives and limited experience with human space flight. This paper will discuss the ISS ECLS COTS integration effort including challenges, successes, and lessons learned.

Duchesne, Stephanie↗
NASA NTRS2018

Environmental Control System Development

Since before the first men landed on the moon, human beings have aspired to reach farther into space, to discover and answer the great mysteries that exist beyond imagination. To reach where no one has gone before. To able to see all the wonderful things that can be found in space and that only satellites have revealed to us during all this time. Considering the last trip to the moon, mankind has been evolving and improving their technology to reach destinations whose distances had been impossible to transit. To reach that goal, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) has designed and developed the largest and most powerful rocket ever created by the human race, the Space Launch System - better known as the SLS. To be able to send this large rocket to space, Kennedy Space Center (KSC) is doing upgrades to their existing facilities and equipment. At Launch Pad 39B, they are setting up a new Environmental Control System (ECS) developed to supply the rocket with the correct gases and mixtures that will be needed for the rocket to launch. The ECS is similar to an air conditioning unit. The main functionality of it is to supply the SLS with the correct gas mixture for it to launch. Also the ECS has been required to reduce or eliminate the possibility of a complete system failure. The system is part of the Ground Support Equipment (GSE) for the SLS that will be going to the Moon and Mars.

Flores Arroyo, Elvin A.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Utilizing Gaps and Performance Measures to Inform NASA Environmental Control and Life Support Systems and Crew Health and Performance Technology Decisions

Human spaceflight is a complex endeavor requiring multiple capabilities for transportation, crew health, scientific goals, and safe return to Earth. The difference between spaceflight proven capabilities and those needed for future exploration architectures is defined as a capability gap. Capability gaps are not technology specific. Each capability gap may be closed with a wide array of technologies that have unique benefits and challenges. Determining what a capability’s relevant and distinguishing key performance parameters (KPPs) are for a mission is critical. Mass, power, and volume are always constrained and important, but defining these in a way normalized by performance is very important. KPP definition for reliability, dormancy, and integration needs are hard to define but critical. Outside of technical considerations, the programmatic factors of the estimated time to develop the technology and how the technology validation objectives are matured are strong considerations in which technologies should be pursued and how they should leverage earlier mission elements. The Environmental Control and Life Support (ECLSS) and Crew Health and Performance (CHP) capability areas are decomposed to high level gaps. While KPPs should be technology agnostic, they can be used to both compare technologies and measure progress of technology development over time. KPPs help define when the gap is closed, and the core mission objectives can be accomplished. Proposed technology improvements to enhance a capability should balance improved KPPs and against investments in other capabilities that are not yet closed. A selection of gaps, KPPs, and validation objectives and their formulation, current state, and how they inform capability roadmap planning are discussed.

Life Support↗
NASA NTRS2011

Commercial Crew Development Environmental Control and Life Support System Status

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Commercial Crew Development (CCDev) Project was a short term Project that was managed within the Commercial Crew and Cargo Program Office (C3PO) to help develop and demonstrate a small number of key human spaceflight capabilities in support of moving towards a possible commercial crew transportation system to low earth orbit (LEO). It was intended to foster entrepreneurial activities with a few selected companies. The other purpose of the Project was to try to reduce some of the possible risk with a commercial crew transportation system to LEO. The entrepreneurial activities were encouraged with these few selected companies by NASA providing only part of the total funding to complete specific tasks that were jointly agreed to by NASA and the company. These joint agreements were documented in a Space Act Agreement (SAA) that was signed by NASA and the company. This paper will provide an overview of the CCDev Project and it will also discuss in detail the Environmental Control and Life Support (ECLS) tasks that were performed under CCDev.

Williams, David E.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Utilizing Gaps and Performance Measures to Inform NASA Environmental Control and Life Support Systems and Human Health and Performance Capability Technology Decisions

Human spaceflight is a complex endeavor requiring multiple capabilities for transportation, crew health, scientific goals, and safe return to Earth. The difference between spaceflight proven capabilities and those needed for future exploration architectures is defined as a capability gap. Capability gaps are not technology specific. Each capability gap may be closed with a wide array of technologies that have unique benefits and challenges. Determining what a capability’s relevant and distinguishing key performance parameters (KPPs) are for a mission is critical. Mass, power, and volume are always constrained and important, but defining these in a way normalized by performance is very important. KPP definition for reliability, dormancy, and integration needs are hard to define but critical. Outside of technical considerations, the programmatic factors of the estimated time to develop the technology and how the technology validation objectives are matured are strong considerations in which technologies should be pursued and how they should leverage earlier mission elements. The Environmental Control and Life Support (ECLSS) and Crew Health and Performance (CHP) capability areas are decomposed to high level gaps. While KPPs should be technology agnostic, they can be used to both compare technologies and measure progress of technology development over time. KPPs help define when the gap is closed, and the core mission objectives can be accomplished. Proposed technology improvements to enhance a capability should balance improved KPPs and against investments in other capabilities that are not yet closed. A selection of gaps, KPPs, and validation objectives and their formulation, current state, and how they inform capability roadmap planning are discussed.

Life Support↗
NASA NTRS1986

Quality assurance procedures for environmental control and monitoring in plant growth facilities. Report of the North Central Regional 101 Committee on Growth Chamber Use

This report includes procedures for ensuring the quality of the environment provided for plant growth in controlled environment facilities. Biologists and engineers may use these procedures for ensuring quality control during experiments or for ensuring quality control in the design of plant growth facilities. Environmental monitoring prior to and during experiments is included in these procedures. Specific recommendations cover control, acquisition, and calibration for sensor types for the separate parameters of radiation (light), temperature, humidity, carbon dioxide, and air movement.

NASA Discipline Number 61-10↗
NASA NTRS1962

Regenerative Environmental Control Systems for Manned-Lunar Spacecraft

The historic earth orbital flight of the Mercury space capsule on February 20, 1962 has illustrated that man has the capability of creating instrumentation and equipment which permit him to survive outside the protective earth atmosphere which, in time, has served both as a shield and a barrier. Because of this great achievement man need no longer restrict himself to earth-space but may direct his resources to expand his zone of operation to earth-moon space. However, in order to exploit this new frontier many problems must be solved which are not mere extensions or extrapolations of those already treated. The problem associated with providing man with an adequate environment for extended periods in the earth's atmosphere, earth-moon space and on the lunar surface is indeed extensive. Trapped radiation, solar flare activity, meteoroid bombardment, solar radiation and the hard vacuum of space are no longer merely phenomena. of scientific interest; they describe the operating environment of manned earth-lunar spacecraft. In order that man may effectively operate in the earth-moon space, myriads of systems and subsystems of varying types and functions must be devised and integrated into an efficient, reliable man-machine complex. This paper will consider only one small aspect of this problem--that is, the problem of providing man with an adequate gaseous and thermal environment in earth-lunar spacecraft. Control of atmospheric gases in manned sealed environments will be treated in Part I. Part II treats thermal regulation and atmosphere control requirements of mobile life support systems for lunar exploration.

Control↗