SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “team building”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

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

At least 271 records · Page 15

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

NASA NTRS2014

Low-cost, Risk-Reduction Testing of Class D Spacecraft Photovoltaic Systems

The end-to-end verification of a spacecraft photovoltaic power generation system requires light! A low-cost, portable, and end-to-end photovoltaic-system test appropriate for NASAs new generation of Class D missions is presented. High risk, low-cost, and quick-turn satellites rarely have the resources to execute the traditional approaches from higher-class (A-C) missions. The Class D approach, as demonstrated on the Lunar Atmospheric and Dust Environment Explorer (LADEE), utilizes a portable, metal-halide, theatre lamp for an end-to-end photovoltaic system test. While not as precise and comprehensive as the traditional Large Area Pulsed Solar Simulator (LAPSS) test, the LADEE method leverages minimal resources into an ongoing assessment program that can be applied through numerous stages of the mission. The project takes a true Class D approach in assessing the technical value of a costly, high-fidelity performance test versus a simpler approach with less programmatic risk. The resources required are a fraction of that for a LAPSS test, and is easy to repeat due to its portability. Further, the test equipment can be handed down to future projects without building an on-site facility.At the vanguard of Class D missions, the LADEE team frequently wrestled with and challenged the status quo. The philosophy of risk avoidance at all cost, typical to Class A-C missions, simply could not be executed. This innovative and simple testing solution is contextualized to NASA Class D programs and a specific risk encountered during development of the LADEE Electrical Power System (EPS). Selection of the appropriate lamp and safety concerns are discussed, with examples of test results. Combined with the vendors panel-level data and periodic inspection, the method ensures system integrity from Integration and Test (IT) through launch. Following launch, mission operations tools are utilized to assess system performance based on a scant amount of available data.

photovoltaic↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

DO 365 Test Procedure Results and Analysis Discussion

CAL will leverage M&S tools and existing encounter data to evaluate the robustness of the DAA MOPS Test Procedures. Recently, the SC-147 ACAS-Xu team performed an analysis evaluating the Xu implementation against the DAA MOPS test procedures. Several areas of non-compliance were raised, some indicating shortfalls in our DAA test procedures and/or requirements. The ACAS-Xu team is expected to put out a report highlighting these exemptions. This work will build off that ACAS-Xu analysis/report and perform a full characterization of the statistical test procedures and document the findings. Additionally, CAL will provide recommendations for addressing these findings, potentially resulting in changes to test procedures and/or requirements.

ACAS-Xu↗

NASA NTRS2024

Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances Confirmatory Sampling Report, South Repeater Building (SWMU 121), Kennedy Space Center, Florida

This Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS) Confirmatory Sampling (CS) Report was prepared by AECOM Technical Services, Inc. (AECOM) for the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) under Contract 80KSC019D0010, Task Order 80KSC021F0096. The purpose of this report is to document CS activities at the South Repeater Building, Solid Waste Management Unit (SWMU) 121, formerly known as the Area 3 Repeater Building (A3RB). A Phase I SWMU Assessment and Confirmatory Sampling Report (NASA 2019) and a Phase II and III SWMU Assessment and Confirmatory Sampling Report (NASA 2022b) were previously submitted detailing Center-Wide assessment activities performed at the John F. Kennedy Space Center (KSC) in Florida that identified 33 locations of concern and 19 areas of potential concern at KSC associated with the storage, use, or release of materials containing PFAS. A review of the analytical results from investigation derived waste samples collected in 2020 from the South Repeater Building area indicated concentrations of perfluorooctanesulfonic acid (PFOS) were above Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) provisional Groundwater Cleanup Target Levels of 70 nanograms per liter (ng/L) at a concentration of 1,750 ng/L. Following this review, the KSC Fire Chief was contacted; the Chief recalled fighting a brush fire in 1998 in the area, during which an unknown volume of aqueous film-forming foam was used to extinguish the fire. The Phase II and Phase III SWMU Assessment Report recommended this area proceed to CS. Historical results in this area are provided in Appendix A . PFAS CS activities were contracted at the South Repeater Building. Initial CS activities were conducted in accordance with the PFAS Assessment and Mitigation Work Plan (AECOM 2022), which was submitted to the NASA Remediation Project Management team and accepted by the team on November 1 and 8, 2021. The objectives of the PFAS CS were to: - - Confirm and begin to assess the extent of PFAS affected media in the South Repeater Building area. - - Identify locations for groundwater, soil, surface water, and soil core sampling. - - Qualitatively characterize the migration potential of released PFAS to environmental media (soil, groundwater, and surface water). The following activities were completed to meet the PFAS CS objectives: - - Installation of monitoring wells via direct push technology (DPT) and rotosonic techniques - - Groundwater, soil, and surface water sampling - - Collection of soil cores to evaluate site lithology - - Development of initial PFAS plume characterization

PFAS↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

TPSAS-NF1676L-33992-DND

The CERES Science Team integrates and fuses observations from 6 CERES instruments aboard the Terra, Aqua, S-NPP, and NOAA-20 missions with data from more than 20 other unique data sources. Following the November 2017 launch of CERES Flight Model 6 (FM6) onboard NOAA20, CERES has now amassed over 80 instrument-years of valuable Earth radiation budget data. The rapidly growing volume of CERES data coupled with the introduction of new data products alongside improvements to existing science algorithms fosters the requirement for faster, more flexible, and scalable data production and orchestration. New virtualized, cloud-centric compute hardware hosted by the NASA Langley Research Center’s (LaRC) Atmospheric Sciences Data Center (ASDC) provides an ideal environment for these ever-increasing data production demands for CERES. This poster discusses updates to the implementation of the CERES Data Management Team’s (DMT) CERES AuTomAted job Loading sYSTem (CATALYST), a custom data processing workflow engine for CERES, to use on-demand computing resources to perform automated CERES data production processing in a Linux-based container environment. Linux containers provide CERES the flexibility to build multiple production environments in containers tailored for specific workloads and allow effortless provisioning of resources based on the CERES Science Team’s data production requirements.

Thomas N. Hillyer↗

NASA NTRS2017

Electronics and Software Engineer for Robotics Project Intern

I was assigned to mentor high school students for the 2017 First Robotics Competition. Using a team based approach, I worked with the students to program the robot and applied my electrical background to build the robot from start to finish. I worked with students who had an interest in electrical engineering to teach them about voltage, current, pulse width modulation, solenoids, electromagnets, relays, DC motors, DC motor controllers, crimping and soldering electrical components, Java programming, and robotic simulation. For the simulation, we worked together to generate graphics files, write simulator description format code, operate Linux, and operate SOLIDWORKS. Upon completion of the FRC season, I transitioned over to providing full time support for the LCS hardware team. During this phase of my internship I helped my co-intern write test steps for two networking hardware DVTs , as well as run cables and update cable running lists.

Teijeiro, Antonio↗

NASA NTRS2000

Hardware Development Process for Human Research Facility Applications

The simple goal of the Human Research Facility (HRF) is to conduct human research experiments on the International Space Station (ISS) astronauts during long-duration missions. This is accomplished by providing integration and operation of the necessary hardware and software capabilities. A typical hardware development flow consists of five stages: functional inputs and requirements definition, market research, design life cycle through hardware delivery, crew training, and mission support. The purpose of this presentation is to guide the audience through the early hardware development process: requirement definition through selecting a development path. Specific HRF equipment is used to illustrate the hardware development paths. The source of hardware requirements is the science community and HRF program. The HRF Science Working Group, consisting of SCientists from various medical disciplines, defined a basic set of equipment with functional requirements. This established the performance requirements of the hardware. HRF program requirements focus on making the hardware safe and operational in a space environment. This includes structural, thermal, human factors, and material requirements. Science and HRF program requirements are defined in a hardware requirements document which includes verification methods. Once the hardware is fabricated, requirements are verified by inspection, test, analysis, or demonstration. All data is compiled and reviewed to certify the hardware for flight. Obviously, the basis for all hardware development activities is requirement definition. Full and complete requirement definition is ideal prior to initiating the hardware development. However, this is generally not the case, but the hardware team typically has functional inputs as a guide. The first step is for engineers to conduct market research based on the functional inputs provided by scientists. CommerCially available products are evaluated against the science requirements as well as modifications needed to meet program requirements. Options are consolidated and the hardware development team reaches a hardware development decision point. Within budget and schedule constraints, the team must decide whether or not to complete the hardware as an in-house, subcontract with vendor, or commercial-off-the-shelf (COTS) development. An in-house development indicates NASA personnel or a contractor builds the hardware at a NASA site. A subcontract development is completed off-site by a commercial company. A COTS item is a vendor product available by ordering a specific part number. The team evaluates the pros and cons of each development path. For example, in-bouse developments utilize existing corporate knowledge regarding bow to build equipment for use in space. However, technical expertise would be required to fully understand the medical equipment capabilities, such as for an ultrasound system. It may require additional time and funding to gain the expertise that commercially exists. The major benefit of subcontracting a hardware development is the product is delivered as an end-item and commercial expertise is utilized. On the other hand, NASA has limited control over schedule delays. The final option of COTS or modified COTS equipment is a compromise between in-house and subcontracts. A vendor product may exist that meets all functional requirements but req uires in-house modifications for successful operation in a space environment. The HRF utilizes equipment developed using all of the paths described: inhouse, subcontract, and modified COTS.

Bauer, Liz↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Real-Time Science Decisioning During High Tempo-High Intensity Mission Operations and the Role of Analogs

Introduction: NASA’s VIPER mission presents a unique operational paradigm within the history of robotic spaceflight. The proximity of the Moon to the Earth and the terrain elements (surface characteristics, light/shadow dynamics, communication links) of the lunar South Polar landing site create unprecedented operational conditions between these two planetary bodies. Apollo era lunar science and exploration included humans in situ to operate instruments and assimilate observational inputs in real-time. Previous lunar orbital missions have worked to operational timescales, e.g., decisional timelines and communication exchanges, that were weeks in length. Mars rover missions have worked to operational timescales, e.g., decisional timelines and communication exchanges between Mars and Earth, that were hours, days, and weeks in length. In the case of the VIPER mission, our operational decisioning for rover driving and instrument commanding will be compressed to minute-scale timeframes. These operational conditions directly impact the manner and speed with which the VIPER Science Team (VST) is required to synthesize and analyze data and produce timely science-driven decisions throughout surface mission operations. The VST shall provide mission enhancing scientific input to guide rover traverse planning and drill site confirmation and selection throughout surface operations. Further, the VST input will be of vital importance to the mission’s ability to maximize science return and to meet broader NASA objectives for future lunar in-situ resource utilization (ISRU)and exploration activities. The VST co-located in the Mission Science Center (MSC) will be responsive to the tactical operational cadence of the Mission Operations Center (MOC) and will provide further strategic and Long-Term Planning (LTP) guidance to the mission. The VIPER Science Operations & Integration(SO&I)team has developed an architecture that is focused on the infusion of science-decisioning into the operational framework and execution cadence of VIPER. NASA analog research has played a significant role in the construction of the VIPER science operations systems. As an example, the SO&I team has led analog missions that have focused on bringing together expertise in the sciences (natural, applied and social) and in operations in service of learning how to build and hold together interdisciplinary work environments and what tools are needed to support high tempo, high intensity integrated decisioning. These experiences have provided an essential foundation of knowledge to the VIPER team. Those analogs that specifically influenced the VIPER science operations construct were identified through a process of comparative analysis to prioritize those that offered relevance in whole or in part, and those that did not. The analog research output that provided extensibility to the VIPER science operations architecture included remote teams of humans and robots in cooperation (synchronous and asynchronous) with simulated earthbound systems, engineering and science teams, and the integrated assembly of tools that supported scientific analysis and data synthesis and provided infrastructure for the remote testing framework. Analogs which included real-time data monitoring, synthesis, visualization and access in a democratized and operationalized manner were of particular interest to the development of the VIPER MSC toolset both in terms of the technology and the processes used to develop the supporting infrastructure. We anticipate that each subsequent mission to the lunar south pole, whether with robots or humans, will be able to optimize science and exploration return by evolving strategies to infuse real-time collaborative science-decisioning. Furthermore, these efforts will result in a foundation for science operations development in support of human-robotic exploration of deep space and Mars. NASA analogs can continue to provide the opportunity to prepare, test and iterate on the operational concepts and tools that will support these ever-expanding space exploration efforts. Our presentation will include an overview of the VIPER Science Operations & Integration development process and specifics on what aspects of analog research have had a significant impact on our work systems.

D S S Lim↗

NASA NTRS2021

ATTRACTOR: Autonomy Teaming and TRAjectories for Complex Trusted Operational Reliability

Autonomous systems (AS) are crucial to realizing the vision of new, complex transportation modes, such as advanced air mobility (AAM) and urban air mobility (UAM). A chief barrier to induction of AS into aviation is insufficient understanding of AS reliability in time-critical and safety-critical environments—an obstacle to certification. ATTRACTOR is aimed at building a basis for certification of classes of autonomous cyber-physical-human systems (CPHS) via establishing metrics and models of trustworthiness and trust in multi-agent team interactions, analyzable trajectories, explainability of computational algorithms (explainable artificial intelligence, or XAI), and persistent modeling and simulation, in the context of missions planning and operation. By “building a basis for certification,” we mean acquiring an understanding of when a system is trustworthy and developing computable means to estimate trustworthiness and trust in order to eventually inform functional requirements that contribute to certification. The outcomes are applicable not just to aviation but to all domains that rely on autonomous systems.

Autonomy↗

NASA NTRS2009

Ikhana: Unmanned Aircraft System Western States Fire Missions. Monographs in Aerospace History, Number 44

In 2006, NASA Dryden Flight Research Center, Edwards, Calif., obtained a civil version of the General Atomics MQ-9 unmanned aircraft system and modified it for research purposes. Proposed missions included support of Earth science research, development of advanced aeronautical technology, and improving the utility of unmanned aerial systems in general. The project team named the aircraft Ikhana a Native American Choctaw word meaning intelligent, conscious, or aware in order to best represent NASA research goals. Building on experience with these and other unmanned aircraft, NASA scientists developed plans to use the Ikhana for a series of missions to map wildfires in the western United States and supply the resulting data to firefighters in near-real time. A team at NASA Ames Research Center, Mountain View, Calif., developed a multispectral scanner that was key to the success of what became known as the Western States Fire Missions. Carried out by team members from NASA, the U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service, National Interagency Fire Center, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Federal Aviation Administration, and General Atomics Aeronautical Systems Inc., these flights represented an historic achievement in the field of unmanned aircraft technology.

Western States fire missions↗

NASA NTRS1976

Report of the Joint Scientific Mission Definition Team for an infrared astronomical satellite

The joint effort is reported of scientists and engineers from the Netherlands, the United Kingdom, and the United States working as a team for the purpose of exploring the possibility of a cooperative venture. The proposed mission builds upon experience gained from the successful Astronomical Netherlands Satellite (ANS). This satellite will be in a polar orbit at an altitude of 900 km. It will carry an 0.6 m diameter telescope cooled with helium to a temperature near 10K. An array of approximately 100 detectors will be used to measure the infrared flux in four wavelength bands centered at 10, 20, 50, and 100 microns. Sources will be located on the sky with positional accuracy of 1/2 arcminute. The instrument should be able to investigate the structure of extended sources with angular scales up to 1.0 deg. The entire sky will be surveyed and the full lifetime of the mission of about one year will be necessary to complete the survey. Special observational programs will also be incorporated into the mission.

Source record↗

NASA NTRS1984

Issues in Developing a Normative Descriptive Model for Dyadic Decision Making

Most research in modelling human information processing and decision making has been devoted to the case of the single human operator. In the present effort, concepts from the fields of organizational behavior, engineering psychology, team theory and mathematical modelling are merged in an attempt to consider first the case of two cooperating decisionmakers (the Dyad) in a multi-task environment. Rooted in the well-known Dynamic Decision Model (DDM), the normative descriptive approach brings basic cognitive and psychophysical characteristics inherent to human behavior into a team theoretic analytic framework. An experimental paradigm, involving teams in dynamic decision making tasks, is designed to produce the data with which to build the theoretical model.

Serfaty, D.↗

NASA NTRS2009

Low Impact Docking System (LIDS)

Since 1996, NASA has been developing a docking system that will simplify operations and reduce risks associated with mating spacecraft. This effort has focused on developing and testing an original, reconfigurable, active, closed-loop, force-feedback controlled docking system using modern technologies. The primary objective of this effort has been to design a docking interface that is tunable to the unique performance requirements for all types of mating operations (i.e. docking and berthing, autonomous and piloted rendezvous, and in-space assembly of vehicles, modules and structures). The docking system must also support the transfer of crew, cargo, power, fluid, and data. As a result of the past 10 years of docking system advancement, the Low Impact Docking System or LIDS was developed. The current LIDS design incorporates the lessons learned and development experiences from both previous and existing docking systems. LIDS feasibility was established through multiple iterations of prototype hardware development and testing. Benefits of LIDS include safe, low impact mating operations, more effective and flexible mission implementation with an anytime/anywhere mating capability, system level redundancy, and a more affordable and sustainable mission architecture with reduced mission and life cycle costs. In 1996 the LIDS project, then known as the Advanced Docking Berthing System (ADBS) project, launched a four year developmental period. At the end of the four years, the team had built a prototype of the soft-capture hardware and verified the control system that will be used to control the soft-capture system. In 2001, the LIDS team was tasked to work with the X- 38 Crew Return Vehicle (CRV) project and build its first Engineering Development Unit (EDU).

LaBauve, Tobie E.↗

NASA NTRS2014

Low-Cost, Class D Testing of Spacecraft Photovoltaic Systems Can Reduce Risk

The end-to-end verification of a spacecraft photovoltaic power generation system requires light! A lowcost, portable, and end-to-end photovoltaic-system test appropriate for NASA's new generation of Class D missions is presented. High risk, low-cost, and quick-turn satellites rarely have the resources to execute the traditional approaches from higher-class (A-C) missions. The Class D approach, as demonstrated on the Lunar Atmospheric and Dust Environment Explorer (LADEE), utilizes a portable, metalhalide, theatre lamp for an end-to-end photovoltaic system test. While not as precise and comprehensive as the traditional Large Area Pulsed Solar Simulator (LAPSS) test, the LADEE method leverages minimal resources into an ongoing assessment program that can be applied through numerous stages of the mission. The project takes a true Class D approach in assessing the technical value of a costly, highfidelity performance test versus a simpler approach with less programmatic risk. The resources required are a fraction of that for a LAPSS test, and is easy to repeat due to its portability. Further, the test equipment can be handed down to future projects without building an on-site facility. At the vanguard of Class D missions, the LADEE team frequently wrestled with and challenged the status quo. The philosophy of risk avoidance at all cost, typical to Class A-C missions, simply could not be executed. This innovative and simple testing solution is contextualized to NASA Class D programs and a specific risk encountered during development of the LADEE Electrical Power System (EPS). Selection of the appropriate lamp and safety concerns are discussed, with examples of test results. Combined with the vendor's panellevel data and periodic inspection, the method ensures system integrity from Integration and Test (I&T) through launch. Following launch, mission operations tools are utilized to assess system performance based on a scant amount of available data.

power systems↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

The Nasa SRA Process as It Relates to Open-Source Workflows Developed for GeneLab Data Processing

To release open, standards-compliant processed data sets in the Open Science Data Repository (OSDR), the GeneLab Data Processing team works with the scientific community through the OSDR Analysis Working Groups to design and build open-source data processing pipelines. Once baselined internally, these pipelines are wrapped into workflows and published on the NASA GeneLab Data Processing public GitHub repository along with detailed instructions for installation and use. Each workflow must be approved through NASA's Software Release Authorization (SRA) process prior to publishing. However, the SRA process lacks sufficient documentation and clarity regarding which forms are applicable for new open-source software that utilizes publicly available 3rd party tools, and the SRA process can take several months to complete, making sharing software outside of NASA cumbersome and in contradiction with the concept of Open Science. Furthermore, the SRA process was designed as a one-size fits all approach and thus many of the questions asked are not applicable to our open-source workflows. Here we describe the software provided on the NASA GeneLab Data Processing GitHub repository, summarize our experiences with the SRA process to release these software, and propose a more stream-lined approach for review of open-source projects.

Software Release Authorization↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

The NASA SRA Process as it Relates to Open-Source Workflows Developed for GeneLab Data Processing

Software Release Authorization↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Making Better Use of Satellite Data: The Satellite Needs Working Group

The U.S. Group on Earth Observations (USGEO) initiated in 2016 the Satellite Needs Working Group (SNWG) to identify and communicate the Earth observation needs of U.S. federal agencies. The SNWG identifies such needs through a biennial survey followed by interviews and follow-up discussions by the satellite Earth data providers of the U.S. Government: the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), and the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). Solutions and services are identified that leverage current or upcoming satellite missions to meet the identified needs; implementation of services that are estimated to significantly increase the level of satisfaction of multiple U.S. agencies are funded by NASA. The SNWG process has resulted in the implementation of numerous services that have impacted operations of not only U.S. agencies but of academic and international institutions as well. Notable examples include the Harmonized Landsat Sentinel-2 project that leverages European Space Agency (ESA) and NASA satellite assets to generate a global, analysis-ready, surface reflectance product with a temporal resolution of two days; the Airborne Data Management Group that curates and provides access to relevant resources, information and data from existing and past NASA field campaigns; and the Dynamic Surface Water Extent product which consists of harmonized but independent water extents derived from both from optical and radar data. These and other products are hosted at the NASA Distributed Active Archive Centers (DAACs) for free and open access. The SNWG Management Office at NASA’s Interagency Implementation and Advanced Concepts Team (IMPACT) manages the implementation of selected solutions and, importantly, NASA’s response to the needs of federal agencies through a Stakeholder Engagement Program. The impact of implemented services and solutions is hampered without efforts to build capacity around the use of the services. The Stakeholder Engagement Program ensures relevant training and outreach to SNWG agencies in collaboration with each solution implementation team.

remote sensing↗

NASA NTRS2011

NASA Planning for Orion Multi-Purpose Crew Vehicle Ground Operations

The NASA Orion Ground Processing Team was originally formed by the Kennedy Space Center (KSC) Constellation (Cx) Project Office's Orion Division to define, refine and mature pre-launch and post-landing ground operations for the Orion human spacecraft. The multidisciplined KSC Orion team consisted of KSC civil servant, SAIC, Productivity Apex, Inc. and Boeing-CAPPS engineers, project managers and safety engineers, as well as engineers from Constellation's Orion Project and Lockheed Martin Orion Prime contractor. The team evaluated the Orion design configurations as the spacecraft concept matured between Systems Design Review (SDR), Systems Requirement Review (SRR) and Preliminary Design Review (PDR). The team functionally decomposed prelaunch and post-landing steps at three levels' of detail, or tiers, beginning with functional flow block diagrams (FFBDs). The third tier FFBDs were used to build logic networks and nominal timelines. Orion ground support equipment (GSE) was identified and mapped to each step. This information was subsequently used in developing lower level operations steps in a Ground Operations Planning Document PDR product. Subject matter experts for each spacecraft and GSE subsystem were used to define 5th - 95th percentile processing times for each FFBD step, using the Delphi Method. Discrete event simulations used this information and the logic network to provide processing timeline confidence intervals for launch rate assessments. The team also used the capabilities of the KSC Visualization Lab, the FFBDs and knowledge of the spacecraft, GSE and facilities to build visualizations of Orion pre-launch and postlanding processing at KSC. Visualizations were a powerful tool for communicating planned operations within the KSC community (i.e., Ground Systems design team), and externally to the Orion Project, Lockheed Martin spacecraft designers and other Constellation Program stakeholders during the SRR to PDR timeframe. Other operations planning tools included Kaizen/Lean events, mockups and human factors analysis. The majority of products developed by this team are applicable as KSC prepares 21st Century Ground Systems for the Orion Multi-Purpose Crew Vehicle and Space Launch System.

Letchworth, Gary↗

NASA NTRS2016

Human Exploration System Test-Bed for Integration and Advancement (HESTIA) Support of Future NASA Deep-Space Missions

The Engineering Directorate at the NASA - Johnson Space Center is outfitting a 20-Foot diameter hypobaric chamber in Building 7 to support future deep-space Environmental Control & Life Support System (ECLSS) research as part of the Human Exploration System Test-bed for Integration and Advancement (HESTIA) Project. This human-rated chamber is the only NASA facility that has the unique experience, chamber geometry, infrastructure, and support systems capable of conducting this research. The chamber was used to support Gemini, Apollo, and SkyLab Missions. More recently, it was used to conduct 30-, 60-, and 90-day human ECLSS closed-loop testing in the 1990s to support the International Space Station and life support technology development. NASA studies show that both planetary surface and deep-space transit crew habitats will be 3-4 story cylindrical structures driven by human occupancy volumetric needs and launch vehicle constraints. The HESTIA facility offers a 3-story, 20-foot diameter habitat consistent with the studies' recommendations. HESTIA operations follow stringent processes by a certified test team that including human testing. Project management, analysis, design, acquisition, fabrication, assembly and certification of facility build-ups are available to support this research. HESTIA offers close proximity to key stakeholders including astronauts, Human Research Program (who direct space human research for the agency), Mission Operations, Safety & Mission Assurance, and Engineering Directorate. The HESTIA chamber can operate at reduced pressure and elevated oxygen environments including those proposed for deep-space exploration. Data acquisition, power, fluids and other facility resources are available to support a wide range of research. Recently completed HESTIA research consisted of unmanned testing of ECLSS technologies. Eventually, the HESTIA research will include humans for extended durations at reduced pressure and elevated oxygen to demonstrate very high reliability of critical ECLSS and other technologies.

Marmolejo, Jose↗