Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Habitat for Humanity”

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 NTRS1991

JSC Director's Discretionary Fund Program

The JSC Center Director's Discretionary Fund Program 1991 Annual Report provides a brief status of the projects undertaken during the 1991 fiscal year. For this year, four space exploration initiative related issues were focused on: regenerative life support, human spacecraft design, lunar surface habitat, and in situ resource utilization. In this way, a viable program of life sciences, space sciences, and engineering research has been maintained. For additional information on any single project, the individual investigator should be contacted.

Jenkins, Lyle M.↗
NASA NTRS1999

EXPRESS Rack Technology for Space Station

The EXPRESS rack provides accommodations for standard Mid-deck Locker and ISIS drawer payloads on the International Space Station. A design overview of the basic EXPRESS rack and two derivatives, the Human Research Facility and the Habitat Holding Rack, is given in Part I. In Part II, the design of the Solid State Power Control Module (SSPCM) is reviewed. The SSPCM is a programmable and remotely controllable power switching and voltage conversion unit which distributes and protects up to 3kW of 12OVDC and 28VDC power to payloads and rack subsystem components. Part III details the development and testing of a new data storage device, the BRP EXPRESS Memory Unit (BEMU). The BEMU is a conduction-cooled device which operates on 28VDC and is based on Boeing-modified 9GB commercial disk-drive technology. In Part IV results of a preliminary design effort for a rack Passive Damping System (PDS) are reported. The PDS is intended to isolate ISPR-based experiment racks from on-orbit vibration. System performance predictions based on component developmental testing indicate that such a system can provide effective isolation at frequencies of 1 Hz and above.

Davis, Ted B.↗
NASA NTRS2009

Challenges with Deploying and Integrating Environmental Control and Life Support Functions in a Lunar Architecture with High Degrees of Mobility

Visions of lunar outposts often depict a collection of fixed elements such as pressurized habitats, in and around which human inhabitants spend the large majority of their surface stay time. In such an outpost, an efficient deployment of environmental control and life support equipment can be achieved by centralizing certain functions within one or a minimum number of habitable elements and relying on the exchange of gases and liquids between elements via atmosphere ventilation and plumbed interfaces. However, a rigidly fixed outpost can constrain the degree to which the total lunar landscape can be explored. The capability to enable widespread access across the landscape makes a lunar architecture with a high degree of surface mobility attractive. Such mobility presents unique challenges to the efficient deployment of environmental control and life support functions in multiple elements that may for long periods of time be operated independently. This paper describes some of those anticipated challenges.

Bagdigian, Robert M.↗
NASA NTRS2014

Space Launch System Upper Stage Technology Assessment

The Space Launch System (SLS) is envisioned as a heavy-lift vehicle that will provide the foundation for future beyond low-Earth orbit (LEO) exploration missions. Previous studies have been performed to determine the optimal configuration for the SLS and the applicability of commercial off-the-shelf in-space stages for Earth departure. Currently NASA is analyzing the concept of a Dual Use Upper Stage (DUUS) that will provide LEO insertion and Earth departure burns. This paper will explore candidate in-space stages based on the DUUS design for a wide range of beyond LEO missions. Mission payloads will range from small robotic systems up to human systems with deep space habitats and landers. Mission destinations will include cislunar space, Mars, Jupiter, and Saturn. Given these wide-ranging mission objectives, a vehicle-sizing tool has been developed to determine the size of an Earth departure stage based on the mission objectives. The tool calculates masses for all the major subsystems of the vehicle including propellant loads, avionics, power, engines, main propulsion system components, tanks, pressurization system and gases, primary structural elements, and secondary structural elements. The tool uses an iterative sizing algorithm to determine the resulting mass of the stage. Any input into one of the subsystem sizing routines or the mission parameters can be treated as a parametric sweep or as a distribution for use in Monte Carlo analysis. Taking these factors together allows for multi-variable, coupled analysis runs. To increase confidence in the tool, the results have been verified against two point-of-departure designs of the DUUS. The tool has also been verified against Apollo moon mission elements and other manned space systems. This paper will focus on trading key propulsion technologies including chemical, Nuclear Thermal Propulsion (NTP), and Solar Electric Propulsion (SEP). All of the key performance inputs and relationships will be presented and discussed in light of the various missions. For each mission there are several trajectory options and each will be discussed in terms of delta-v required and transit duration. Each propulsion system will be modeled, sized, and judged based on their applicability to the whole range of beyond LEO missions. Criteria for scoring will include the resulting dry mass of the stage, resulting propellant required, time to destination, and an assessment of key enabling technologies. In addition to the larger metrics, this paper will present the results of several coupled sensitivity studies. The ultimate goals of these tools and studies are to provide NASA with the most mass-, technology-, and cost-effective in-space stage for its future exploration missions.

Holladay, Jon↗
NASA NTRS2017

The Nitty Gritty: How We Make Analogs Work

NASA's Human Research Program (HRP) is becoming increasingly reliant on Isolated, Confined and Controlled (ICC) analogs to accomplish many of its research objectives. Compared to other research platforms, ICC analogs present a unique set of operational challenges that must be addressed in order to ensure a high fidelity research environment. In particular, the Human Exploration Research Analog (HERA) habitat, which is classified as an ICC environment, has been developed over the past three years to accommodate the operational needs of research investigations from each of the HRP Elements. During the development period, various types of requirements have contributed to the current operational model, which strives to achieve the highest possible level of mission fidelity with limited resources. This presentation will focus on the operational aspects of the HERA habitat, with emphasis on how we develop the analog research environment to meet researchers' needs. Specific discussion topics include mission scenario development, operational tasks, mission timeline integration, stressor implementation, console support, and improvements based on lessons learned. The information is intended to help investigators better understand the details behind HERA operations and the benefits to their research goals.

Self, A. L.↗
NASA NTRS2021

Assessment of Biocide Impacts on Life Support (LS) and Extravehicular Activity (EVA) Architectures

The Project Manager for the Human Exploration and Operations Mission Directorate’s Advanced Exploration Systems Life Support Systems (LSS) project, requested a NASA Engineering and Safety Center (NESC) assessment to evaluate potable water system biocide options impacting Gateway, Human Lander Systems, Foundation Surface Habitat, and Exploration Command Module missions. The assessment focused on identifying feasible biocide options, evaluating the impacts of their implementation on crew health, extravehicular activity hardware, and LSS hardware, and conducting a trade on architecture options. This report contains the outcome of the NESC assessment.

Extravehicular Activity; Life Support; NASA Engine↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Science Off the Earth: an Integrated Approach to Science Operations in the Artemis Era and Beyond

Humanity is standing on the cusp of its next giant leap – an international, sustainable, and commercial return to the moon. Unlike the Apollo missions, the expectation that a permanent human presence will be established is well founded. Initially, crewed missions to the lunar surface are expected to last between 6 and 30 days and occur approximately once per year, however the robust suite of landers and orbiting assets proposed by both commercial and government entities provide an opportunity to conduct science research on the moon and in cis-lunar space, 24x7 for many years. In the 50 years since the conclusion of Apollo, NASA’s crewed space science missions have been evolving. This can be seen clearly from Skylab and the Space Shuttle’s Spacelab to the International Space Station (ISS). Presently aboard the ISS, international crews spend nearly half their time working on experiments while many payloads collect science non-stop with either very limited, or no crew interaction. Additionally, a fleet of orbiting experiments complement and validate those investigations performed on the ISS. As the number, variety, and complexity of these investigation increase, it becomes ever more necessary to integrate across the many entities involved to prevent duplication of effort, ensure complementary results, reduce cost, and create a sustainable environment to conduct groundbreaking scientific research in space. In this paper, we examine how the various elements of the Artemis program including NASA’s Lunar Gateway, Commercial Lunar Payload Services (CLPS) endeavor, the Human Landing Systems (HLS), surface habitats, rovers and many more will be operated to ensure interoperability, maximize science return, and enable success for government, commercial and private partners.

Science Operations↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Science Off the Earth: An Integrated Approach to Science Operations in the Artemis Era and Beyond

Humanity is standing on the cusp of its next giant leap – an international, sustainable, and commercial return to the moon. Unlike the Apollo missions, the expectation that a permanent human presence will be established is well founded. Initially, crewed missions to the lunar surface are expected to last between 6 and 30 days and occur approximately once per year, however the robust suite of landers and orbiting assets proposed by both commercial and government entities provide an opportunity to conduct science research on the moon and in cis-lunar space, 24x7 for many years. In the 50 years since the conclusion of Apollo, NASA’s crewed space science missions have been evolving. This can be seen clearly from Skylab and the Space Shuttle’s Spacelab to the International Space Station (ISS). Presently aboard the ISS, international crews spend nearly half their time working on experiments while many payloads collect science non-stop with either very limited, or no crew interaction. Additionally, a fleet of orbiting experiments complement and validate those investigations performed on the ISS. As the number, variety, and complexity of these investigation increase, it becomes ever more necessary to integrate across the many entities involved to prevent duplication of effort, ensure complementary results, reduce cost, and create a sustainable environment to conduct groundbreaking scientific research in space. In this paper, we examine how the various elements of the Artemis program including NASA’s Lunar Gateway, Commercial Lunar Payload Services (CLPS) endeavor, the Human Landing Systems (HLS), surface habitats, rovers and many more will be operated to ensure interoperability, maximize science return, and enable success for government, commercial and private partners.

Science Operations↗
NASA NTRS2015

Mars Surface Habitability Options

This paper reports on current habitability concepts for an Evolvable Mars Campaign (EMC) prepared by the NASA Human Spaceflight Architecture Team (HAT). For many years NASA has investigated alternative human Mars missions, examining different mission objectives, trajectories, vehicles, and technologies; the combinations of which have been referred to as reference missions or architectures. At the highest levels, decisions regarding the timing and objectives for a human mission to Mars continue to evolve while at the lowest levels, applicable technologies continue to advance. This results in an on-going need for assessments of alternative system designs such as the habitat, a significant element in any human Mars mission scenario, to provide meaningful design sensitivity characterizations to assist decision-makers regarding timing, objectives, and technologies. As a subset of the Evolvable Mars Campaign activities, the habitability team builds upon results from past studies and recommends options for Mars surface habitability compatible with updated technologies.

human spaceflight↗
NASA NTRS2013

Telerobotics for Human Exploration: Enhancing Crew Capabilities in Deep Space

Future space missions in Earth orbit, to the Moon, and to other distant destinations offer many new opportunities for exploration. But, astronaut time will always be limited and some work will not be feasible or efficient for humans to perform manually. Telerobots, however, can complement human explorers, performing work under remote control from Earth, orbit or nearby habitats. A central challenge, therefore, is to understand how humans and remotely operated robots can be jointly employed to maximize mission performance and success. This presentation provides an overview of the key issues with using telerobots for human exploration.

telerobotics↗
NASA NTRS2015

Marshall Space Flight Center Research and Technology Report 2015

The investments in technology development we made in 2015 not only support the Agency's current missions, but they will also enable new missions. Some of these projects will allow us to develop an in-space architecture for human space exploration; Marshall employees are developing and testing cutting-edge propulsion solutions that will propel humans in-space and land them on Mars. Others are working on technologies that could support a deep space habitat, which will be critical to enable humans to live and work in deep space and on other worlds. Still others are maturing technologies that will help new scientific instruments study the outer edge of the universe-instruments that will provide valuable information as we seek to explore the outer planets and search for life.

Keys, A. S.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Future Homes in Space: Development of Concepts for Exploration Space Habitats

NASA’s Artemis campaign seeks to return humans to the moon and establish a sustained presence on the lunar surface. This session will emphasize how habitation capabilities on the moon and in cislunar space can potentially contribute to the sustainability objectives of Artemis. Habitable elements represent opportunities to enable longer duration stays, increase the number of crew members present, enhance science and utilization activities, drive technology development for future Mars exploration, perform analog missions, and fuel economic opportunities for US industry. Panelists include Paul Kessler (NASA Marshall Space Flight Center, deputy lead for lunar surface habitation); Andrew Choate (NASA Marshall Space Flight Center, Mars habitation lead); Krystofer Dudzinski (NASA Marshall Space Flight Center, a space architect within the MSFC Advanced Concepts Office); and Larry Toups (retired from NASA Johnson Space Center, currently an adjunct professor at University of Houston in space architecture). The panel is moderated by Tracie Prater (NASA Marshall Space Flight Center, Habitation Systems Development Office). The panel will begin with an overview of the history of habitation concepts and an academic perspective on general considerations in space habitat design (Larry Toups). Paul Kessler and Andrew Choate will introduce NASA’s principle of “architecting from the right” to help define objectives for Artemis missions, needs/characteristics, use cases, and functions (as published in the agency’s Architecture Definition Document) and provide perspective on how this principle informs habitation concept development work. NASA panelists will discuss key engineering challenges identified for developing, deploying, and operating habitable assets on the lunar surface and/or in deep space. These may include dust mitigation, outfitting of inflatable softgoods (for concepts which may use softgoods as a primary structural material), survival in lunar darkness, human health and performance considerations, maintenance/repair/sparing, and autonomy. These identified challenges represent risks for habitation systems development and relate closely to capability gaps identified by the agency. While the work of NASA Marshall Space Flight Center’s habitation development office is primarily focused on habitats which are launched from earth pre-integrated (referred to as Class I in the framework previously developed by NASA space architects Kennedy/Cohen) or launched from earth and deployed at the point of use (Class II), there is also extensive work in NASA, academia, and companies on constructed habitats, which would be built on a planetary surface using indigenous resources (Class III habitats). Panelist Krystopher Dudzinski will discuss potential evolutionary pathways from Class I and Class II habitats to Class III habitats, unique and common architectural challenges within each habitat class, and key gaps in implementing Class III habitats from an architectural perspective. NASA panelists and the moderator will also provide an overview of partnership opportunities and avenues for further engagement to advance habitation systems for the SpaceCom audience. NASA is currently developing notional concepts for a lunar surface habitat and Mars transit habitat, which will be discussed during this panel session and used as examples. These concepts represent options for habitation system design and are a point of departure. They do not represent a final plan or formal recommendation on the part of the agency. Based on the most recent analysis cycle, NASA’s lunar surface habitat (SH) concept nominally supports two crew members for 30 days, with the capacity to support four crew during a surge period where crew will swap between the SH and another surface asset, such as a pressurized rover. This example design has a metallic airlock for ingress/egress and the upper portion is an inflatable material system which serves as the habitation module. The notional interior of the habitat is a three-deck layout/configuration which supports all crew mission functions, including exercise, stowage, extravehicular activity (EVA), sleep, hygiene waste collection, maintenance and repair, and meal preparation. Under analysis assumptions for habitation, the Mars Transit Habitat (TH) concept would support four crew on an up to 1,200 day Mars mission. One option for the concept is to initially dock Transit Habitat at Gateway, where it can be used to increase the duration of crew stays in cislunar space and perform shakedown and analog missions prior to a Mars departure. One challenge in longer duration missions which involve both surface exploration and transit is understanding crew adaptation when transitioning between partial gravity and microgravity environments. TH at Gateway offers an opportunity to study this transition and in doing so reduce risks associated with future Mars exploration. Like lunar SH, the most recent analysis cycle concept of a Mars TH is a hybrid structure design, with a metallic section supporting EVAs, axial/radial docking, and Safe Haven capabilities, and an inflatable softgoods structure for the primary habitation function. Interior layouts to optimize crew usability and livability are currently under trade. The panel will include presentation material, but also seeks to engage the audience in a highly interactive conversation regarding the potential role for habitation in future exploration initiatives. Potential topics for discussion include the influence of the crew experience on habitation systems design and livability/usability considerations, the benefits of space habitation development in terrestrial applications, and challenges and opportunities in “feeding forward” lunar surface habitation systems development to Mars exploration.

space habitats↗
NASA NTRS2012

Developing a Habitat for Long Duration, Deep Space Missions

One possible next leap in human space exploration for the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) is a mission to a near Earth asteroid (NEA). In order to achieve such an ambitious goal, a space habitat will need to accommodate a crew of four for the 380-day round trip. The Human Spaceflight Architecture Team (HAT) developed a conceptual design for such a habitat. The team identified activities that would be performed inside a long-duration, deep space habitat, and the capabilities needed to support such a mission. A list of seven functional activities/capabilities was developed: individual and group crew care, spacecraft and mission operations, subsystem equipment, logistics and resupply, and contingency operations. The volume for each activity was determined using NASA STD-3001 and the companion Human Integration Design Handbook (HIDH). Although, the sum of these volumes produced an over-sized spacecraft, the team evaluated activity frequency and duration to identify functions that could share a common volume without conflict, reducing the total volume by 24%. After adding 10% for growth, the resulting functional pressurized volume was calculated to be a minimum of 268 cu m (9,464 cu ft) distributed over the functions. The work was validated through comparison to Mir, Skylab, the International Space Station (ISS), Bigelow Aerospace s proposed habitat module, and NASA s Trans-Hab concept. Using HIDH guidelines, the team developed an internal layout that (a) minimized the transit time between related crew stations, (b) accommodated expected levels of activity at each station, (c) isolated stations when necessary for health, safety, performance, and privacy, and (d) provided a safe, efficient, and comfortable work and living environment.

Rucker, Michelle A.↗
NASA NTRS2007

Toxicity of Lunar and Martian Dust Simulants to Alveolar Macrophages Isolated from Human Volunteers

NASA is planning to build a habitat on the Moon and use the Moon as a stepping stone to Mars. JSC-1, an Arizona volcanic ash that has mineral properties similar to lunar soil, is used to produce lunar environments for instrument and equipment testing. NASA is concerned about potential health risks to workers exposed to these fine dusts in test facilities. The potential toxicity of JSC-1 and a Martian soil simulant (JSC-Mars-1, a Hawaiian volcanic ash) was evaluated using human alveolar macrophages (HAM) isolated from volunteers; titanium dioxide and quartz were used as reference dusts. This investigation is a prerequisite to studies of actual lunar dust. HAM were treated in vitro with these test dusts for 24 h; assays of cell viability and apoptosis showed that JSC-1 and TiO2 were comparable, and more toxic than saline control, but less toxic than quartz. HAM treated with JSC-1 or JSC-Mars 1 showed a dose-dependent increase in cytotoxicity. To elucidate the mechanism by which these dusts induce apoptosis, we investigated the involvement of the scavenger receptor (SR). Pretreatment of cells with polyinosinic acid, an SR blocker, significantly inhibited both apoptosis and necrosis. These results suggest HAM cytotoxicity may be initiated by interaction of the dust particles with SR. Besides being cytotoxic, silica is known to induce shifting of HAM phenotypes to an immune active status. The immunomodulatory effect of the simulants was investigated. Treatment of HAM with either simulant caused preferential damage to the suppressor macrophage subpopulation, leading to a net increase in the ratio of activator (RFD1+) to suppressor (RFD1+7+) macrophages, a result similar to treatment with silica. It is recommended that appropriate precautions be used to minimize exposure to these fine dusts in large-scale engineering applications.

Latch, Judith N.↗
NASA NTRS2016

Sizing a Common Habitat for Multiple Environments and Mission Durations

A human mission to Mars and other deep space destinations will require a consistent habitation strategy that applies to disparate environments preferably using multiples of identical hardware. The crew will endure high-g forces during launch, microgravity during transit, and various partial gravities on the destination planet, moon, or asteroid. Habitable volume will likely need to be broken up into smaller modules that do not exceed the capacity of launch vehicles and entry-descent-landing technologies. Though it may be possible to design a different unique, optimized habitat for each environment that the crew may encounter, it is more likely that space agencies and other mission sponsors will only have the resources to develop and produce single multi-use hardware that can be used equally well in all environments, with minimal adaptation by the crew. When sizing habitable volume, mission duration and number of crew become important factors to consider. For example, a pressurized rover cabin may only need to support two crew members for a few days at a time, requiring less volume than a habitat that must support the same number of persons for an entire year. In this study the authors consider constraining factors such as launch vehicle capacity, mission duration, crew size, and Mars lander capacity and study how to divide total pressurized volume, subsystems, equipment, consumables, and supplies into multiple manifests. Preference has been given to solutions that use multiples of identical modules over unique optimized volumes. For example at one extreme, can all the habitat pressure vessels, logistic modules, Mars ascent stage cabins, rover cabins, and airlocks be constructed from multiples of the same small-diameter cylindrical modules? On the other extreme, can logistics, habitation volume, mobility, all be enclosed in a single monolithic volume habitat design? Though there may be advantages and disadvantages to either extreme, the conclusion of this study is that most functions can be distilled into two sizes for hardware: multiples of large diameter modules that generally stay in one place, and multiples of smaller volume cabins that can be moved around or function as cockpits for ascent stages, support vehicles, rovers, airlocks, and logistics delivery.

Howe, A Scott↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

NASA’s Moon to Mars (M2M) Transit Habitat (TH) Refinement Point of Departure (PoD) Design

As NASA prepares for the next human footsteps on the lunar surface, the Agency is already looking ahead to systems that will enable a sustained human presence on the lunar surface and mission to Mars, including a lunar Surface Habitat and Mars Transit Habitat (TH). This paper describes the latest NASA government reference design for the TH and how it will support NASA's Moon to Mars human exploration architecture. First, it will serve as a test and demonstration platform in lunar orbit, demonstrating capabilities required for long-duration microgravity human spaceflight as part of the lunar-Mars analog missions. Then, the TH will also serve as a major Mars habitation exploration element to support the crew during their transit from the lunar orbit to Mars and returning them safely to lunar orbit. This paper will cover several considerations contributing to the latest habitat design refinement, including data on the TH's concept of operations, system functional definition, subsystem assumptions, notional interior layouts, a detailed mass and volume breakdown, and trade studies and analyses required to close identified technology/ development/architecture gaps. In addition to a technical description of the TH, this paper describes how the current TH government reference design will achieve many of the current lunar and Mars mission goals. Additionally, there are many assumed technological advances needed to support the prescribed mission phases leading up to the crewed mission to Mars in the late 2030s. The paper will describe many of the TH systems requiring further technology development and identify architectural solutions to achieve these mass, reliability, autonomy, and crew health targets. As a whole, the data in the paper shows that a TH meeting the 43 metric tons launch mass/trans-Mars injection burn limits specified by the Evolvable Mars Campaign is achievable near the desired timeframe with moderate strategic investments including maintainable life support systems, re-purposable structures and packaging, and lightweight exercise modalities. It also identifies operational and technological options to reduce this mass to less than 41 metric tons, including staging of launch structure/packaging and alternate structural materials. The resulting design detail and data contained in this paper are intended to help teams across NASA and potential commercial, academic, or international partners understand the current performance targets of the Transit Habitat and vehicle interface considerations imposed by the latest Moon to Mars mission scope.

Habitation Systems↗
NASA NTRS1991

The use of Antarctic analogs for the Space Exploration Initiative

Potential approaches to the use of the Antarctic as an analog to the lunar and Mars planetary surface segments of the SEI are reviewed. It is concluded that a well-planned and sustained program of ground-based research and testing in environments analogous to the moon and Mars is a rational method for reducing the risks associated with human space missions. Antarctica may provide an ideal setting for testing critical technologies (habitat design, life support, and advanced scientific instrumentation), studying human factors and physiology, and conducting basic scientific research similar to and directly relevant to that planned for the SEI.

Roberts, Barney↗
NASA NTRS1992

Testing a Mars science outpost in the Antarctic dry valleys

Field research conducted in the Antarctic has been providing insights about the nature of Mars in the science disciplines of exobiology and geology. Located in the McMurdo Dry Valleys of southern Victoria Land (160 deg and 164 deg E longitude and 76 deg 30 min and 78 deg 30 min S latitude), research outposts are inhabited by teams of 4-6 scientists. It is proposed that the design of these outposts be expanded to enable meaningful tests of many of the systems that will be needed for the successful conduct of exploration activities on Mars. Although there are some important differences between the environment in the Antarctic dry valleys and on Mars, the many similarities and particularly the field science activities, make the dry valleys a useful terrestrial analog to conditions on Mars. Three areas have been identified for testing at a small science outpost in the dry valleys: (1) studying human factors and physiology in an isolated environment; (2) testing emerging technologies (e.g. innovative power management systems, advanced life support facilities including partial bioregenerative life support systems for water recycling and food growth, telerobotics, etc.); and (3) conducting basic scientific research that will enhance understanding of Mars while contributing to the planning for human exploration. It is suggested that an important early result of a Mars habitat program will be the experience gained by interfacing humans and their supporting technology in a remote and stressful environment.

Andersen, D. T.↗