SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “NASA Program Advanced Human Support Technology”

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.

280 records · Page 16

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

NASA NTRS2019

Recent Advancements in Modeling and Simulation of Entry Systems at NASA

This paper describes recent development of modeling and simulation technologies for entry systems in support of NASA's exploration missions. Mission-tailored research and development in modeling of entry systems occurs across the Agency (e.g., within the Orion and Mars 2020 Programs), however the aim of this paper is to discuss the broad, cross-mission research conducted by NASA's Entry Systems Modeling (ESM) Project, which serves as the Agency's only concerted effort toward advancing entry systems across a range of technical disciplines. Technology development in ESM is organized and prioritized from a system-level perspective, resulting in four broad technical areas of investment: (1) Predictive material modeling, (2) Shock layer kinetics and radiation, (3) Computational and experimental aerosciences, and (4) Guidance, navigation, and control. Investments in thermal protection material modeling are geared toward high-fidelity, predictive models capable of handling complex structures, with an eye toward optimizing design performance and quantifying thermal protection system reliability. New computational tools have been developed to characterize material properties and behavior at the microstructural level, and experimental techniques (molecular beam scattering, micro-computed tomography, among others) have been developed to measure material kinetics, morphology, and other parameters needed to inform and validate detailed simulations. Advancements have also been made in macrostructural simulation capability to enable 3-D system-scale calculations of material response with complex topological features, including differential recession of tile gaps. Research and development in the area of shock layer kinetics has focused on air and CO2-based atmospheres. Capacity and capability of the NASA Ames Electric Arc Shock Tube (EAST) have been expanded in recent years and analysis of resulting data has led to several improvements in kinetic models, while simultaneously reducing uncertainties associated with radiative heat transfer predictions. First-principles calculations of fundamental kinetic, thermodynamic, and transport data, along with state-specific models for non-equilibrium flow regimes, have also yielded new insights and have the potential to vastly improve model fidelity. Aerosciences is a very broad area of interest in entry systems, yet a number of important challenges are being addressed: Coupled fluid-structure simulations of parachute inflation and dynamics; Experimental and computational studies of vehicle dynamics; Multi-phase flow with dust particles to simulate entry environments at Mars during dust storms; Studies of roughness-induced heating augmentation relevant to tiled and woven thermal protection systems; and Advanced numerical methods to optimize computational analyses for desired accuracy versus cost. Guidance and control in the context of entry systems has focused on development of methods for multi-axis control (i.e. pitch and yaw, rather than bank angle alone) of spacecraft during entry and descent. With precision landing requirements driven by Mars human exploration goals, recent efforts have yielded 6-DOF models of multi-axis control with propulsive descent of both inflatable and rigid ellipsled-like architectures.

Barnhardt, Michael D.↗

NASA NTRS2016

Solar System Exploration Research Virtual Institute: Year Three Annual Report 2016

NASA's Solar System Exploration Research Virtual Institute (SSERVI) is pleased to present the 2016 Annual Report. Each year brings new scientific discoveries, technological breakthroughs, and collaborations. The integration of basic research and development, industry and academic partnerships, plus the leveraging of existing technologies, has further opened a scientific window into human exploration. SSERVI sponsorship by the NASA Science Mission Directorate (SMD) and Human Exploration and Operations Mission Directorate (HEOMD) continues to enable the exchange of insights between the human exploration and space science communities, paving a clearer path for future space exploration. SSERVI provides a unique environment for scientists and engineers to interact within multidisciplinary research teams. As a virtual institute, the best teaming arrangements can be made irrespective of the geographical location of individuals or laboratory facilities. The interdisciplinary science that ensues from virtual and in-person interactions, both within the teams and across team lines, provides answers to questions that many times cannot be foreseen. Much of this research would not be accomplished except for the catalyzing, collaborative environment enabled by SSERVI. The SSERVI Central Office, located at NASA Ames Research Center in Silicon Valley, California, provides the leadership, guidance and technical support that steers the virtual institute. At the start of 2016, our institute had nine U.S. teams, each mid-way through their five-year funding cycle, plus nine international partnerships. However, by the end of the year we were well into the selection of four new domestic teams, selected through NASA's Cooperative Agreement Notice (CAN) process, and a new international partnership. Understanding that human and robotic exploration is most successful as an international endeavor, international partnerships collaborate with SSERVI domestic teams on a no-exchange of funds basis, but they bring a richness to the institute that is priceless. The international partner teams interact with the domestic teams in a number of ways, including sharing students, scientific insights, and access to facilities. We are proud to introduce our newest partnership with the Astrophysics and Planetology Research Institute (IRAP) in Toulouse, France. In 2016, Principal Investigator Dr. Patrick Pinet assembled a group of French researchers who will contribute scientific and technological expertise related to SSERVI research. SSERVI's domestic teams compete for five-year funding opportunities through proposals to a NASA CAN every few years. Having overlapping proposal selection cycles allows SSERVI to be more responsive to any change in direction NASA might experience, while providing operational continuity for the institute. Allowing new teams to blend with the more seasoned teams preserves corporate memory and expands the realm of collaborative possibilities. A key component of SSERVI's mission is to grow and maintain an integrated research community focused on questions related to the Moon, Near-Earth asteroids, and the moons of Mars. The strong community response to CAN-2 demonstrated the health of that effort. NASA Headquarters conducted the peer-review of 22 proposals early in 2017 and, based on recommendations from the SSERVI Central Office and NASA SSERVI program officers, the NASA selecting officials determined the new teams in the spring of 2017. We are pleased to welcome the CAN-2 teams into the institute, and look forward to the collaborations that will develop with the current teams. The new teams are: The Network for Exploration and Space Science (NESS) team (Principal Investigator (PI) Prof. Jack Burns/U. Colorado); the Exploration Science Pathfinder Research for Enhancing Solar System Observations (ESPRESSO) team (PI Dr. Alex Parker/Southwest Research Institute); the Toolbox for Research and Exploration (TREX) team (PI Dr. Amanda Hendrix/ Planetary Science Institute); and the Radiation Effects on Volatiles and Exploration of Asteroids & Lunar Surfaces (REVEALS) team (PI Prof. Thomas Orlando/ Georgia Institute of Technology). In this report, you will find an overview of the 2016 leadership activities of the SSERVI Central Office, reports prepared by the U.S. teams from CAN-1, and achievements from several of the SSERVI international partners. Reflecting on the past year's discoveries and advancements serves as a potent reminder that there is still a great deal to learn about NASA's target destinations. Innovation in the way we access, sample, measure, visualize, and assess our target destinations is needed for further discovery. At the same time, let us celebrate how far we have come, and strongly encourage a new generation that will make the most of future opportunities.

Pendleton, Yvonne↗

NASA NTRS2014

Design Concepts for a Small Space-Based GEO Relay Satellite for Missions Between Low Earth and near Earth Orbits

The main purpose of the Small Space-Based Geosynchronous Earth orbiting (GEO) satellite is to provide a space link to the user mission spacecraft for relaying data through ground networks to user Mission Control Centers. The Small Space Based Satellite (SSBS) will provide services comparable to those of a NASA Tracking Data Relay Satellite (TDRS) for the same type of links. The SSBS services will keep the user burden the same or lower than for TDRS and will support the same or higher data rates than those currently supported by TDRS. At present, TDRSS provides links and coverage below GEO; however, SSBS links and coverage capability to above GEO missions are being considered for the future, especially for Human Space Flight Missions (HSF). There is also a rising need for the capability to support high data rate links (exceeding 1 Gbps) for imaging applications. The communication payload on the SSBS will provide S/Ka-band single access links to the mission and a Ku-band link to the ground, with an optical communication payload as an option. To design the communication payload, various link budgets were analyzed and many possible operational scenarios examined. To reduce user burden, using a larger-sized antenna than is currently in use by TDRS was considered. Because of the SSBS design size, it was found that a SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket could deliver three SSBSs to GEO. This will greatly reduce the launch costs per satellite. Using electric propulsion was also evaluated versus using chemical propulsion; the power system size and time to orbit for various power systems were also considered. This paper will describe how the SSBS will meet future service requirements, concept of operations, and the design to meet NASA users' needs for below and above GEO missions. These users' needs not only address the observational mission requirements but also possible HSF missions to the year 2030. We will provide the trade-off analysis of the communication payload design in terms of the number of links looking above and below GEO; the detailed design of a GEO SSBS spacecraft bus and its accommodation of the communication payload, and a summary of the trade study that resulted in the selection of the Falcon 9 launch vehicle to deploy the SSBS and its impact on cost reductions per satellite. ======================================================================== Several initiatives have taken place within NASA1 and international space agencies2 to create a human exploration strategy for expanding human presence into the solar system; these initiatives have been driven by multiple factors to benefit Earth. Of the many elements in the strategy one stands out: to send robotic and human missions to destinations beyond Low Earth Orbit (LEO), including cis-lunar space, Near-Earth Asteroids (NEAs), the Moon, and Mars and its moons.3, 4 The time frame for human exploration to various destinations, based on the public information available,1,4 is shown in Figure 1. Advance planning is needed to define how future space communications services will be provided in the new budget environment to meet future space communications needs. The spacecraft for these missions can be dispersed anywhere from below LEO to beyond GEO, and to various destinations within the solar system. NASA's Space Communications and Navigation (SCaN) program office provides communication and tracking services to space missions during launch, in-orbit testing, and operation phases. Currently, SCaN's space networking relay satellites mainly provide services to users below GEO, at Near Earth Orbit (NEO), below LEO, and in deep space. The potential exists for using a space-based relay satellite, located in the vicinity of various solar system destinations, to provide communication space links to missions both below and above its orbit. Such relays can meet the needs of human exploration missions for maximum connectivity to Earth locations and for reduced latency. In the past, several studies assessed the ability of satellite-based relays working above GEO in conjunction with Earth ground stations. Many of these focused on the trade between space relay and direct-to-Earth station links5,6,7. Several others focused on top-level architecture based on relays at various destinations8,9,10,11,12. Much has changed in terms of microwave and optical technology since the publication of the referenced papers; Ka-band communication systems are being deployed, optical communication is being demonstrated, and spacecraft buses are becoming increasingly more functional and operational. A design concept study was undertaken to access the potential for deploying a Small Space-Based Satellite (SSBS) relay capable of serving missions between LEO and NEO. The needs of future human exploration missions were analyzed, and a notional relay-based architecture concept was generated as shown in Fig. 1. Relay satellites in Earth through cis-Lunar orbits are normally located in stable orbits requiring low fuel consumption. Relay satellites for Mars orbit are normally selected based on the mission requirement and projected fuel consumption. Relay satellites have extreme commonalities of functions between them, differing only in the redundancy and frequencies used; therefore, the relay satellite in GEO was selected for further analysis since it will be the first step in achieving a relay-based architecture for human exploration missions (see Fig.Figure 2). The mission design methodology developed by the Collaborative Modeling for Parametric Assessment of Space Systems (COMPASS) team13 was used to produce the satellite relay design and to perform various design trades. At the start of the activity, the team was provided with the detailed concept of the notional architecture and the system and communication payload drivers.

Relay Satellites↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Summary of Technical Interchange Meetings (TIMs) Designed to Enable Earth Independent Medical Operations (EIMO)

The Exploration Medical Capability Element (ExMC) in NASA’s Human Research Program hosted a series of TIMs in 2023-2024 designed to stimulate discussion around specific topics with the goal of enabling EIMO. In context of the thematic constituent elements of EIMO, namely pre-mission planning, acute/emergent/prolonged medical decision making, supply/resource management and task load management, subject matter experts from industry, academia and government (NASA and other Agencies) provided valuable and actionable guidance and recommendations. Earth-based medical experts will remain indispensable for pre-mission planning, however, management of acute/emergent medical contingencies will require a gradual transition of medical care and decision making from terrestrial to space-based assets to enable support of astronaut health and performance and reduce overall mission risk. Key to achieving these enhancements is providing an integrated data system platform capable of utilizing multiple data streams in concert with a variety of on-board databases and passive monitoring of video and wearable sensors to enable a multi-modal, agentic AI-based clinical decision support system (CDSS) to support crew medical officer (CMO) medical decision-making. The EIMO series of TIMs (I-V) have proven to be instructive and portend a significant paradigm shift will be necessary to maintain crew health and performance on exploration class missions. Importantly, since the expected paradigm shift will be significantly different from the methods of operation that have been employed for the majority of missions from the inception of human spaceflight to date, any proposed methods must be deployed in the setting of ongoing operations early and be “tested, reviewed and practiced” while reliable back-up is available to facilitate an Enterprise-wide level of comfort and acceptance. Serious constraints on data transmission coupled with a large and expanding universe of on-board medical informatics data streams will necessitate implementation of a CDSS to supplant the current reliance on support provided by ground-based SMEs. Establishment of trust in the system by CMO/crew and the ground-based medical support team will be essential. Co-development of a CDSS with industry partners will assure that state of the art tools can be employed, and industry efficiencies can be leveraged. Training regimens, materials and tools must evolve to be responsive (just-in-time training) and facilitate autonomous execution of procedures. Proficiency metrics should be established and be based on validated competencies or milestones as opposed to a prescribed number of training hours. Training should be prioritized for broad, translatable skills that have universal application across a variety of medical conditions. Repetition was deemed to be the key to achieving proficiency and emphasis should lie in procedural training which is known to extinguish more rapidly than diagnostic skills. Advanced tools, e.g., extended reality, can provide more realistic and effective training. Use of advanced probabilistic risk assessment tools will be essential to optimize the medical system capability while carefully balancing risk relative to mass/power/volume limitations. Importance of factoring use-life of medical supplies and maintaining awareness of redundancy and opportunity to re-purpose under off nominal situations was emphasized. Consideration of adopting optimized performance standards vs. “good-enough” performance thresholds is warranted. The use of legacy systems as opposed to creating new systems may be preferable. Managing task load and associated cognitive load will be essential to maintain operational safety and behavioral health. ExMC aspires to create a shared EIMO paradigm and strategic vision for advancing medical system design through novel technologies, training, protocols, and support capabilities, built upon the spirit of successful strategies and innovations over the past six decades of space medicine operations.

Jay Lemery↗

NASA NTRS2022

Recommendations on the Use of Commercial-Off-The-Shelf (COTS) Electrical, Electronic, and Electromechanical (EEE) Parts for NASA Missions - Phase II

This assessment had two Phases. Phase I captured NASA Centers’ current practices for commercial-off-the-shelf (COTS) Electrical, Electronic, and Electromechanical (EEE) parts 1 used in spaceflight systems and ground support equipment (available at https://ntrs.nasa.gov/citations/20205011579) [ref. 1]. The Phase II report provides guidance for selecting and using COTS parts in NASA missions. The approaches proposed in this report differ from current agency practices. This top-level executive summary touches on these new approaches for using COTS parts but does not provide the detailed information that is critical in understanding the rationale behind these new approaches. Readers will need to read the entire report to gain full understanding and effectively use the recommendations herein. NASA’s historical approach to selecting and applying parts has been to define certain parts, primarily specific classes of military specification (MIL-SPEC) parts, as “standard”, leaving all others, including COTS parts, as nonstandard. Standard parts typically are used without further testing (“use-as-is”). Nonstandard parts are subjected to initial screening and subsequent lot acceptance testing of representative samples from each procured lot per MIL-SPEC or similar requirements. Decades later, top-tier commercial part manufacturers have evolved significant manufacturing, statistical control, and technological improvements that can now provide parts as reliable or more reliable than MIL-SPEC parts, when used within their datasheet limits. Concurrently, the space science and exploration community’s needs demand technological advances unavailable with MIL-SPEC parts. This ongoing change necessitates using COTS parts for space missions. Properly selected COTS parts in appropriate applications can offer performance and supply availability advantages compared to MIL-SPEC parts. Their utility and demonstrated reliability result from large volumes and automated production and testing processes. However, careful review and a thorough understanding of their specifications (i.e., datasheet limitations) is needed, and verifying that manufacturer specifications and reliability meet space hardware application needs are necessary. This report recommends MIL-SPEC screening and non-radiation-related lot acceptance testing be reduced or eliminated in cases where evidence of sufficient quality and reliability exists for COTS parts. The extent of NASA's insight into COTS manufacturers and the amount and nature of the needed evidence will differ by mission and will likely be driven by a mission's resources and associated risk posture. To facilitate this goal, two new terminologies have been defined and described: “Industry Leading Parts Manufacturer (ILPM)” and “Established COTS parts.” An ILPM is a COTS manufacturer that produces high quality and reliable parts. Some parts produced by ILPMs, defined as Established COTS parts, do not need any additional MIL-SPEC or NASA screening and lot acceptance testing to be used in space applications. This report provides guidance for selecting, procuring, and applying COTS parts and for performing part-, board-, and system-level COTS parts verification. The recommendation to select Established COTS parts from ILPMs will assure those COTS parts will have comparable quality to corresponding MIL-SPEC parts. Selecting, applying, and verifying Established COTS parts from ILPMs requires a holistic team approach, engaging parts engineers, circuit designers, quality, reliability, and systems engineers, procurement specialists, radiation specialists, avionics leads, and program/project managers. A mission-specific approach tailored to a project’s Mission, Environment, Applications and Lifetime (MEAL) [ref. 2] requirements should be developed and approved by program/project managers. Any associated risks should be clearly identified, quantified, mitigated, and/or accepted. Different approaches are recommended according to program/project Risk Classes A, B, C, and D [ref. 3] and human-rated missions [ref. 4]: 1. Recommend Classes A and B and human-rated missions consider a “MIL-SPEC parts- based design” approach. ”MIL-SPEC parts-based design” approach is one in which most parts are MIL-SPEC parts and Established COTS parts from ILPMs are used only when an equivalent MIL-SPEC part does not meet functional or size, weight, and power (SWaP) or performance requirements, or is not available. 2. Recommend Classes D and Sub-D missions consider a “System of COTS” approach. “System of COTS” approach is one which most parts are Established COTS parts from ILPMs. 3. Recommend Class C missions determine which approach is the best for their projects; that is, use either a “MIL-SPEC parts-based design” approach, “System of COTS” approach, or a combined approach utilizing elements of both. This report intends to provide guidance in using COTS parts for NASA missions with risk classifications of A through D and human-rated missions; but it does not address the costs of using COTS parts. Costs of using COTS parts in different NASA mission classes can vary significantly even if the same parts are used in different risk postures, due to differing verification levels needed. The guidance does not distinguish between critical or non-critical systems, and a given project will need to apply the appropriate guidance based on their risk posture. The intended audience of this report are NASA personnel and commercial practitioners who support NASA’s spaceflight missions, including spaceflight program or project managers, parts engineers, parts manufacturers, radiation engineers, avionics engineers, system engineers, circuit design engineers, reliability engineers, safety and mission assurance (SMA) personnel, and parts procurement specialists. The NEPP Program will perform a pathfinder study to explore implementing the guidance in this NESC report. An ILPM verification process is not the same as conventional vendor qualification processes performed according to military standards and specifications. This NESC report intends to provide guidance in utilizing available parts data from ILPM manufacturers for parts assurance assessments needed for NASA missions. The report also captured the current practices from DoD and Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) in Section 10. Note each DoD and FAA report was provided by the corresponding agencies regarding their practices, which are independent from the NESC recommendations in the report.

Commercial-Off-The-Shelf↗

NASA NTRS2018

Evaluation of Crew-Centric Onboard Mission Operations Planning and Execution Tool: Year 2

Currently, mission planning for the International Space Station (ISS) is largely affected by ground operators in mission control. The task of creating a week-long mission plan for ISS crew takes dozens of people multiple days to complete, and is often created far in advance of its execution. As such, re-planning or adapting to changing real-time constraints or emergent issues is similarly taxing. As we design for future mission operations concepts to other planets or areas with limited connectivity to Earth, more of these ground-based tasks will need to be handled autonomously by the crew onboard.There is a need for a highly usable (including low training time) tool that enables efficient self-scheduling and execution within a single package. The ISS Program has identified Playbook as a potential option. It already has high crew acceptance as a plan viewer from previous analogs and can now support a crew self-scheduling assessment on ISS or on another mission. The goals of this work, a collaboration between the Human Research Program and the ISS Program, are to inform the design of systems for more autonomous crew operations and provide a platform for research on crew autonomy for future deep space missions. Our second year of the research effort have included new insights on the crew self-scheduling sessions performed by the crew through use on the HERA (Human Exploration Research Analog) and NEEMO (NASA Extreme Environment Mission Operations) analogs. Use on the NEEMO analog involved two self-scheduling strategies where the crew planned and executed two days of EVAs (Extra-Vehicular Activities). On HERA year two represented the first HERA campaign where we were able to perform research tasks. This involved selected flexible activities that the crew could schedule, mock timelines where the crew completed more complex planning exercises, usability evaluation of the crew self-scheduling features, and more insights into the limit of plan complexity that the crew could effectively self-schedule. In parallel we have added in new features and functionality in the Playbook tool based off of our insights from crew self-scheduling in the NASA analogs. In particular this year we have added in the ability for the crew to add, edit, and remove their own activities in the Playbook tool, expanding the type of planning and re-planning possible in the tool and opening up the ability for more free form plan creation. The ability to group and manipulate groups of activities from the plan task list was also added, allowing crew members to add predefined sets of activities onto their mission timeline. In addition we also added a way for crew members to roll back changes in their plan, in order to allow an undo like capability. These features expand and complement the initial self-scheduling features added in year one with the goal of making crew autonomous planning more efficient. As part of this work we have also finished developing the first version of our Playbook Data Analysis Tool, a research tool built to interpret and analyze the unobtrusively collected data obtained during the NASA analog missions through Playbook. This data which includes user click interaction as well as plan change information, through the Playbook Data Analysis Tool, allows us to playback this information as if a video camera was mounted over the crewmember's tablet. While the primary purpose of this tool is to allow usability analysis of crew self-scheduling sessions used on the NASA analog, since the data collected is structured, the tool can automatically derive metrics that would be traditionally tedious to achieve without manual analysis of video playback. We will demonstrate and discuss the ability for future derived metrics to be added to the tool. In addition to the current data and results gathered in year two we will also discuss the preparation and goals of our International Space Station (ISS) onboard technology demonstration with Playbook. This technology demonstration will be preformed as part of the CAST payload starting in late 2016.

onboard planning↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Vacuum Sealable Container (VSC) and Astronaut Lunar Drill (ALD) for Artemis

Introduction: NASA’s Artemis Program is under development to send first woman and next man to the Moon. Artemis will utilize a suite of new technology for Lunar exploration, including new space vehicles, new space suits, and new Astronaut Tools. Honeybee Robotics has been working with NASA JSC to develop a new Vacuum Sealable Container (VSC) and new Astronaut Lunar Drill (ALD) for the upcoming Artemis missions. Vacuum Sealable Container: Sample return continues to be the “Holy Grail” of space exploration, allowing for the analysis of materials using Earth-based laboratories instead of needing to miniaturize and ruggedize instrumentation for space. The Apollo missions to the Moon had several kinds of Sealable Containers which brought back Lunar samples for analysis [1]. These samples are still being analyzed, fifty years later. The VSC requirements are different from that for Apollo containers and as such, new development was required. One major difference between Artemis samples and those from Apollo is the desire to bring back volatiles which may be part of lunar regolith. The VSC is designed to withstand a high-pressure differential caused by sublimating volatiles. Because of the new, stricter sealing requirements, additional features have been added to the VSC. For example, the seal on the container is required to be more robust, thus required more force to actuate, and the seal must be locked in place with a secondary mechanism. Astronaut Lunar Drill: The ALD is designed to be a multi-functional platform for Lunar sample acquisition. The drill builds on lessons learned from the Apollo Lunar Surface Drill (ALSD), as well as Honeybee’s long history of mechanized sample acquisition devices for space [2]. The main functionality of the ALD is Deep Core Regolith Drilling. Additional functionality includes Surface Rock Coring (SRC), and GeoTech Tools (GTT). The ALD is a rotary-percussive drill designed with deep drilling in mind. The ALD is currently designed to have decoupled rotary and percussion subsystems to allow for maximum battery life and reduced fatigue on the crewmember. Honeybee drill technology will automatically engage the percussion when needed to drill at maximum efficiency. The mechanized drill stand helps improve drilling efficiency; the system utilizes advanced drilling algorithms which only require the crewmember to hold a single switch. Additionally, the stand aids in extraction of deep cores, something which was a problem on Apollo. The SRC functionality of the ALD utilizes Honeybee’s Eccentric Tube Core Breakoff technology to collect and retain rock core samples. This technology has also been infused into the Perseverance rover mission. The ALD is removable from the stand to allow crewmembers to collect samples from large boulders. Bringing back rock cores samples instead of full rocks allows for a wider variety of samples to be returned to Earth for study and puts them in a uniform form-factor for effective sealing and analysis. SRC bits will utilize the power of the drill’s percussion system to drill hard Lunar rocks and expedite sample acquisition. The mechanized stand on the ALD allows for additional attachments for taking geotechnical measurements with a Static Cone Penetrometer (SCP) and a Shear Vane (SV). With the stand, the ALD can take SCP measurements with the touch of a button, storing data for return to Earth. SV measurements utilize the ALD’s Rotary motor to spin the vanes in a controlled manner, getting clean data untampered by human error. References: [1] Bar Cohen and Zacny (2009), Drilling in Extreme Environments - Penetration and Sampling on Earth and Other Planets, Wiley. [2] Bar-Cohen and Zacny, Advances in Terrestrial and Extraterrestrial Drilling, CRC Press. [3] Myrick (2003), Core Break-off Mechanism. US Patent No. 6,550,549 Acknowledgements: This work has been supported by NASA via SBIR Phase 3.

Artemis↗

NASA NTRS1999

Growing crops for space explorers on the moon, Mars, or in space

An option in the long-duration exploration of space, whether on the Moon or Mars or in a spacecraft on its way to Mars or the asteroids, is to utilize a bioregenerative life-support system in addition to the physicochemical systems that will always be necessary. Green plants can use the energy of light to remove carbon dioxide from the atmosphere and add oxygen to it while at the same time synthesizing food for the space travelers. The water that crop plants transpire can be condensed in pure form, contributing to the water purification system. An added bonus is that green plants provide a familiar environment for humans far from their home planet. The down side is that such a bioregenerative life-support system--called a controlled environment life-support system (CELSS) in this paper--must be highly complex and relatively massive to maintain a proper composition of the atmosphere while also providing food. Thus, launch costs will be high. Except for resupply and removal of nonrecycleable substances, such a system is nearly closed with respect to matter but open with respect to energy. Although a CELSS facility is small compared to the Earth's biosphere, it must be large enough to feed humans and provide a suitable atmosphere for them. A functioning CELSS can only be created with the help of today's advanced technology, especially computerized controls. Needed are energy for light, possibly from a nuclear power plant, and equipment to provide a suitable environment for plant growth, including a way to supply plants with the necessary mineral nutrients. All this constitutes the biomass production unit. There must also be food preparation facilities and a means to recycle or dispose of waste materials and there must be control equipment to keep the facility running. Humans are part of the system as well as plants and possibly animals. Human brain power will often be needed to keep the system functional in spite of the best computer-driven controls. The particulars of a CELSS facility depend strongly on where it is to be located. The presence of gravity on the Moon and Mars simplifies the design for a facility on those bodies, but a spacecraft in microgravity is a much more challenging environment. One problem is that plants, which are very sensitive to gravity, might not grow and produce food in the virtual absence of gravity. However, the experience with growing super-dwarf wheat in the Russian space station Mir, while not entirely successful because of the sterile wheat heads, was highly encouraging. The plants grew well for 123 days, producing more biomass than had been produced in space before. This was due to the high photon flux available to the plants and the careful control of substrate moisture. The sterile heads were probably due to the failure to remove the gaseous plant hormone, ethylene, from the Mir atmosphere. Since ethylene can easily be removed, it should be possible to grow wheat and other crops in microgravity with the production of viable seeds. On the ground Biosphere-2 taught us several lessons about the design and construction of a CELSS facility, but Bios-3 came much closer to achieving the goals of such a facility. Although stability was never completely reached, Bios-3 was much more stable than Biosphere-2 apparently because every effort was made to keep the system simple and to use the best technology available to maintain control. Wastes were not recycled in Bios-3 except for urine, and inedible plant materials were incinerated to restore CO2 to the atmosphere. Since much meat (about 20% of calories) was imported, closure in the Bios-3 experiments was well below 100%. But then, a practical CELSS on the Moon might also depend on regular resupply from Earth. Several important lessons have been learned from the CELSS research described in this review.

Review↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

NASA Earth Systems Digital Twins (ESDT)

"Similarly to artificial intelligence, which is now revolutionizing many aspects of our daily lives, Earth system digital twin technologies have the potential to revolutionize the way Earth Science research will be conducted in the future, and how results and knowledge from this research will provide information to support decision making and yield impactful societal benefits. An Earth System Digital Twin or ESDT is a dynamic and interactive information system that first provides a digital replica of the past and current states of the Earth or Earth system as accurately and timely as possible; second, allows for computing forecasts of future states under nominal assumptions and based on the current replica; and third, offers the capability to investigate many hypothetical scenarios under varying impact assumptions. In other words, an ESDT provides the integrated What-Now, What-Next, and What-If pictures of the Earth or Earth system, by continuously ingesting newly observed data and by leveraging multiple interconnected models, machine learning as well advanced computing and visualization capabilities. Digital twins have been developed in engineering since 2002, but the interest in digital twins for the Earth domain is more recent and stems from the convergence of several developments: - The huge amount of diverse data that has now been collected continuously for more than 50 years, and that is becoming more and more difficult to access, understand, and utilize. - At the same time, because of climate change and its impacts the information produced by all of this data is becoming of interest to many new non-traditional users for analyzing and predicting various phenomena. - Because of advances in computational and visualization capabilities and the parallel unprecedented development of machine learning (ML), extracting relevant information from these large amounts of data and running complex models faster has become possible. As a result, it is becoming necessary and possible to build intuitive and interactive frameworks that will enable users with various skill levels and/or organizational hierarchy levels to easily access large amounts of targeted information along with the relevant tools and models (Earth system and human activity models), to support them in analyzing and visualizing this information, to help them understand interactions among models, to visualize the potential outcomes of various impacts, and to support decision or policy making. The full power of digital twins is that, through an integrated representation and standardized tools and software technologies, the same digital replica can address the needs of multiple users at various resolutions (spatial and temporal) and for various applications (science, economic, policy, etc.) – “from farmer to scientist”. With all these interests at stake, the challenges of building optimal digital twins are many and complex. The first challenge is to determine if a Digital Twin should be global or local, and multi-domain or thematic. For example, some domains such as Climate or Weather will require a global Digital Twin or Digital Twin capabilities while science areas such as Biodiversity might be more local. We can also envision that multiple thematic ESDTs, e.g., Air Quality, Wildfires, Hydrology could be federated or provide input to other ESDTs, either on a regional level or to a more global ESDT. Overall, we can imagine a future “web” of Digital Twins co-existing in a hierarchy or in a network, and capable of being connected or federated depending on the needs. This last point brings up the very important challenge of interoperability, including standards and protocols that will need to be built into these systems from the beginning. Each individual digital twin would have full flexibility in internal construction but would need standards-based interfaces (input and output) or hooks to make it compatible with others. Another challenge when building digital twins will be to decide how to organize each digital replica. Based on the applications targeted by the DT under implementation, various amounts and types of raw data, Analysis Ready Data (ARD) and information will need to be incorporated. Depending on the required latencies and needs of the users, various solutions can be considered, including Data Cubes, Data Lakes, pointers, or computing information on demand. We envision that each ESDT will choose a solution adapted to its specific objectives. Another important challenge is the type(s) of visualization that will be used, as well as the level of interactivity and refresh rate that will be required. Again, this will depend on the objectives of the ESDT, but also on the various users’ needs. In most cases, several types of visualizations and human interfaces will need to be offered depending on the projected users of that system. In parallel to the challenges highlighted above, there are also many tools and technologies that will need to be developed or improved for all types of digital twins. Among those are improved machine learning technologies, for example providing explainability, but also ML techniques for causality and providing a better integration of physics models. Additionally, reliable uncertainty quantification methods will be needed for all ESDT components, from validating data fusion and assimilation to assessing the accuracy of ML models and weighing the values of decisions supported by those systems. This presentation introduces the ESDT concept, presents several ESDT use cases, and a proposed ESDT architecture framework, as well as various technologies being developed by the Advanced Information Systems Technology (AIST) Program."

Earth Science Remote Sensing; Information Systems↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

EVA Swab Kit: Tools and Techniques for Collecting Aseptic Samples from Crewed Space Missions

Introduction: When we send humans to search for life on other planets, we'll need to know what we brought with us versus what may already be there. To ensure our crewed spacecraft meet planetary protection requirements—and to protect our science from human contamination—we'll need to assess and verify whether micro-organisms may be leaking/venting from our spacesuits. This requires collecting samples under Extravehicular Activity (EVA) conditions. Detailed, systematic research on forward contamination from robotic spacecraft has been steadily progressing since the Viking missions, but systematic studies of contamination from space suits has not been conducted in many years. The modern EMU (Extravehicular Mobility Unit) suit used by NASA is designed to leak at rates as high as 100 cc/min. Before humans land on Mars there is a critical need to understand the types and quantities of microbes that could be introduced via space suits. The Human Forward Contamination Assessment team at NASA’s Johnson Space Center (JSC) has developed a prototype EVA swab tool [1,2,3,4] designed for use in space to sample cleaned and uncleaned space suits to determine the present day microbial load and eventually the rate of leakage. The ability to assess microbial leakage early in advanced space suit and life support system design cycles will help avoid costly hardware redesign later. Test Objectives: The primary objective of EMU testing was to characterize the type of micro-organisms typically found on or near selected suit pressure joints under suit differential pressure conditions. Most human-borne microbes can fit through a 0.5 to 1.0 µm gap. Knowing which joints are more likely to leak will inform hardware design decisions. Knowing which types of micro-organisms may leak from EVA suits provides a basis for subsequent studies to characterize the viability of those organisms under destination conditions, as well as how far they might spread through natural or human-influenced processes. That data, in turn, will inform exploration mission operations and hardware design. The secondary objective of testing was to evaluate the interface between a fully suited test subject and the EVA swab tool at vacuum. Bulky EVA suits can restrict movement and limit visibility through the helmet visor. Fully suited testing is important for identifying tool design issues prior to flight. At exploration destinations, such as Mars, suited crew may be required to periodically sample their suits as part of an environmental monitoring protocol. Suit Microbial Sampling Results: This report details results of microbial swabs collected from current flight suit configurations worn by crew members assigned to upcoming ISS expedition missions as well as swabs collected from prototype suits intended for use on the Orion spacecraft. These tests were intended to characterize the types of contaminants found on flight suits under current, typical handling conditions. No attempt was made to change suit handling procedures, provide additional sterilization, or to limit typical potential contaminant sources. Using culture based techniques, we cultivated 235 CFU (colony forming units) comprised of 26 bacterial species and one fungal species on the outside of the suits. The fungal species and 14 of the bacterial species were unique to the suit surfaces and were not detected in any of the background samples collected within the chambers. We sequenced 755,434 ribosomal fragments on all of the suit surfaces from swab samples. 557,016 of these sequences represent DNA that survived at least 4 hours at vacuum. These sequences formed 2,464 OTU's (Operational Taxonomic Units, 97% similarity) showing low diversity in the samples. The most abundant sequences that survived vacuum belong to the genera Staphyloccocus, Ralstona, Bacillus and Rhodobacter all of which are common to the human microbiome. [5] See Danko et al., (2021) for more complete details of these first analyses. Further analysis of EVA suit materials with respect to the efficacy of various cleaning protocols and engineered containment solutions is planned to inform suit design for NASA’s Artemis Moon to Mars program crew testing. Swab Tool Function Results: The kit was demonstrated for fit and function in suited subject vacuum tests to determine how well the tool worked as an aseptic microbial sampling device as well as to identify any design elements that could be upgraded for EVA task specific improvement. It was found that sample acquisition efficacy could be enhanced by redesign of the sample canister to end-effector interface. Several modifications of the sample caddy assemblies to optimize EVA safety and functionality were also identified. Consequently, fabrication of the redesigned sample canister to end-effector assembly interfaces and and the sample caddy assemblies are required. Fabrication of sixteen flight sample canister assemblies (8 per each of two EVA Swab Kits) and two sample caddy assemblies are in process to be followed by hardware testing and certification to produce two flight-certified EVA Swab Kits for transport to ISS no earlier than summer of 2022. Sampling Strategy: The International Space Station is an ideal testbed for systematic studies of contamination from crewed vehicles since it has been continuously occupied for 20 years and exposed to non-terrestrial conditions. We will sample the exterior of the ISS during EVA using a purpose-built swab tool capable of maintaining sterility while undergoing temperature changes from -151 to +121°C under hard vacuum. Prior to each EVA, the project team will work with ISS mission managers to identify precise sampling locations, which will vary by EVA based on the translation paths and worksites scheduled for that particular EVA. Ideally, translation path handrails and areas near ECLSS (Environmental Control and Life Support System) external vent openings on a spacecraft would be assessed. There are currently more than a dozen ECLSS external vents on the ISS. Some are connected to systems that vent waste products, while others are intended to equalize cabin pressure. As EVA opportunity allows, microbial samples from any of these external vents would provide a valuable data point, though some will be more useful than others. Four criteria have been identified to help prioritize sampling sites near vents: • EVA Accessibility: To minimize cost, it is desired to piggy-back onto a planned EVA. Therefore, the sampling location must be readily accessible by an EVA crew • Type of Vented Products: Vent products that have been in direct contact with crew, such as cabin air, are more likely to contain microorganisms than vent products associated with isolated systems, such as experiment module combustion products. • Mass of Vented Products: Higher-flow vents are more likely to contain detectible levels of microbial contaminants than lower-flow vents. • Local Environment: Sample locations with relatively benign local conditions, such as warm surfaces shielded from direct ultraviolet (UV) radiation exposure, may be more likely to support microbial growth than locations with harsher local environmental conditions. Because EVA accessibility is the most important criteria, the proposal team worked with an astronaut and flight controllers using the Dynamic Onboard Ubiquitous Graphics (DOUG) tool. The DOUG virtual environment allows an operator to “fly” around the current ISS vehicle configuration to assess EVA translation paths, attach points, and keep-out zones. While analysis on station or rapid return to Earth would be preferable, samples collected from the exterior of the ISS have already been exposed to temperature variations between -157 and +121 °C as well as hard vacuum. Therefore, they should be fairly stable and robust. We hypothesize that samples collected from the ISS exterior could be stored for up to 6 months at -80°C without degradation. Sample canisters will be returned to Earth while frozen at -80°C for analysis, and sterilized canisters can be re-flown back to ISS to support additional sampling opportunities Relevance to NASA Exploration Objectives: These data will allow us to identify new or improved methods, technologies, and procedures for spacecraft sterilization and leakage mitigation to minimize the amount of contamination introduced to the environment by human explorers. This work is funded by NASA research grant: NNH18ZDA001N-PPR References: [1] Bell, M.S. et al. (2015) LPS XLVI, Abst. #1832 [2] Rucker et al. (2018) 42nd COSPAR (PPP.3) [3] Bell, M.S. et al. (2019) Mars Extant Life Conference, Abst. #5096.[4] Bell, M.S. et al., (2020) 43rd COSPAR (BO.2).[5] Danko D, et.al.,(2021)Front.Microbiol.12:608478.

Mary Suzanne Bell↗