Results for “Natural Environments” — Page 16

NASA NTRS2005

Introduction to Flight Test Engineering [Introduction Aux Techniques Des Essais En Vol]

Flight test is at the core of what organizations must do in order to validate the operation and systems on an aircraft. While the AGARDograph series 300 and 160 series deal with aspects of this testing, this volume pulls it all together as an introduction to the process required to do effective flight test engineering. This volume was originally published in 1995. Its utility has been proven in that many flight test organizations and universities have requested copies for their engineers and students. It was felt that re-issuing it in a new format designed for electronic publication would be valuable to the community. This second printing changes none of the text, but rather reformats it. All the original references to AGARD (instead of RTO) are left in place so that none of the flavor of the original publication is lost. This is the Introductory Volume to the Flight Test Techniques Series. It is a general introduction to the various activities and aspects of Flight Test Engineering that must be considered when planning, conducting, and reporting a flight test program. Its main intent is to provide a broad overview to the novice engineer or to other people who have a need to interface with specialists within the flight test community. The first two Sections provide some insight into the question of why flight test and give a short history of flight test engineering. Sections 3 through 10 deal with the preparation for flight testing. They provide guidance on the preliminary factors that must be considered; the composition of the test team; the logistic support requirements; the instrumentation and data processing requirements; the flight test plan; the associated preliminary ground tests; and last, but by no means least, discuss safety aspects. Sections 11 through 27 describe the various types of flight tests that are usually conducted during the development and certification of a new or modified aircraft type. Each Section offers a brief introduction to the topic under consideration, and the nature and the objectives of the tests to be conducted. It lists the test instrumentation (and, where appropriate, other test equipment and facilities) required, describes the test maneuvers to be executed, and indicates the way in which the test data is selected, analyzed, and presented. The various activities that should take place between test flights are presented next. Items that are covered are: who to debrief; what type of reports to send where: types of data analysis required for next flight; review of test data to make a comparison to predicted data and some courses of action if there is not good agreement; and comments on selecting the next test flight. The activities that must take place upon completion of the test program are presented. The types of reports and briefings that should take place and a discussion of some of the uses of the flight test data are covered. A brief forecast is presented of where present trends may be leading.

Test facilities↗

NASA NTRS1996

Planetary and Deep Space Requirements for Photovoltaic Solar Arrays

In the past 25 years, the majority of interplanetary spacecraft have been powered by nuclear sources. However, as the emphasis on smaller, low cost missions gains momentum, more deep space missions now being planned have baselined photovoltaic solar arrays due to the low power requirements (usually significantly less than 100 W) needed for engineering and science payloads. This will present challenges to the solar array builders, inasmuch as planetary requirements usually differ from earth orbital requirements. In addition, these requirements often differ greatly, depending on the specific mission; for example, inner planets vs. outer planets, orbiters vs. flybys, spacecraft vs. landers, and so on. Also, the likelihood of electric propulsion missions will influence the requirements placed on solar array developers. This paper will discuss representative requirements for a range of planetary and deep space science missions now in the planning stages. We have divided the requirements into three categories: Inner planets and the sun; outer planets (greater than 3 AU); and Mars, cometary, and asteroid landers and probes. Requirements for Mercury and Ganymede landers will be covered in the Inner and Outer Planets sections with their respective orbiters. We will also discuss special requirements associated with solar electric propulsion (SEP). New technology developments will be needed to meet the demanding environments presented by these future applications as many of the technologies envisioned have not yet been demonstrated. In addition, new technologies that will be needed reside not only in the photovoltaic solar array, but also in other spacecraft systems that are key to operating the spacecraft reliably with the photovoltaics.

C P Bankston↗

NASA NTRS2026

Machine Learning for Predicting Team Functioning in HERA Missions

Team functioning is integral to success in future long term space exploration missions. Proactively detecting declines in team functioning can mitigate conflict and ensure mission success. This project developed a speech-based artificial intelligence (AI) system that unobtrusively predicts degradation in team functioning, including performance and cohesion, in the Human Exploration Research Analog (HERA) Campaigns 4 and 5. The AI system conducted automated analysis of the prosodic (tone of voice) and linguistic (language content) components of speech, modeling interpersonal dynamics at both the turn-taking and day-wide levels. We investigated team functioning via observing structured interactions (i.e., multi-mission space exploration vehicle-extra vehicular activity [MMSEV-EVA], team interaction battery [TIB]) and unstructured interactions before the MMSEV-EVA task. We developed machine learning models to predict team functioning (objective task accuracy, self reported team efficacy and self reported team cohesion) by analyzing OpenSmile acoustic features, linguistic descriptors extracted via the linguistic inquiry and word count (LIWC) dictionary, and semantic embeddings. In the TIB, static models using logistic regression and random forests were not able to predict task accuracy, but predicted team efficacy and cohesion during both the decision making and relational tasks to a moderate level (60-70%). Majority voting on the individual turns to predict day long team efficacy further increased accuracies (70-80%). Finally, long short-term memory (LSTM) models showed the best performance across all variables (80-91%), including task performance. In the MMSEV-EVA, static models achieved an accuracy of 60% with majority voting, which increased to 80% through the incorporation of mission day as a variable, accounting for the learning effect. A key finding across both tasks was the "team-dependent" nature of these interactions; models achieved much higher accuracy when trained on prior days of the same team's data rather than attempting to generalize across entirely different teams, with even 1-2 days of prior data per team achieving 5-15% improvement over team-independent models. In addition, the incorporation of pre-task data from the same team also improves model performance, e.g., incorporating data from the decision-making task of the TIB, which preceded the relational task, improved the prediction of team efficacy and cohesion during the latter. We compared model performance when trained on machine-generated data compared to data that had been further corrected by human annotators. Overall, models trained on human-corrected data exhibited a modest improvement in performance, particularly when acoustic features were used. We found no significant correlation between word error rate (WER) and model accuracy (r(55) = -0.08, p = 0.51), but model’s accuracy was significantly higher for medium/high quality transcription (0.74 (SD = 0.48)) compared to the low-quality group (0.64 (SD = 0.36)) (t(63)=2.82, p = 0.006). Based on these, several design recommendation emerge, that could inform Standards at NASA. Models predicting team functioning should incorporate at least one to two days of historical interaction data, include brief pre-task discussions, and explicitly model temporal learning effects, especially for longer operational tasks. Minimum quality standards for automated speech-processing pipelines are needed, given the performance gains observed with manually corrected acoustic data. Finally, systems should leverage both acoustic features and language embeddings in complementary ways, with modality choices and fusion strategies tailored to mission context, task demands, and data quality requirements.

Shrivatsa Mishra↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

A Simplified Model of VIPER Thermal Management System. Part II: Integrated Vehicle

NASA’s Volatiles Investigating Polar Exploration Rover (VIPER) thermal management system (TMS) relies on four loop heat pipes (LHPs) to transport electronic waste heat to the vehicle cooling radiative surface and avoid overheating. The TMS has also ten constant conductance heat pipes (CCHPs) dedicated to balance the thermal load within the internal environment where the avionics boxes are mounted, also called warm electronic box (WEB), and to transport the heat from two of the science payload instruments. The TMS also uses two thermal straps to thermally link the batteries to the WEB. These thermal components, in addition to heaters, thermostat, multi-layer insulation (MLIs), and isolators forms the core of the VIPER TMS. The complex heat transport balance managed by the TMS is challenging to characterize and model. The more fidelity and granularity of a model, the more costly the computational resources needed and the longer the simulation and modeling time. When the priority is to provide quick but reliable assessments of the thermal performance or real time thermal feedback for training of console operators, simplified modeling tools are needed. To satisfy that need, this paper describes the effort to develop and correlate a model of VIPER TMS based on control volume approach. The correlation effort in particular focuses on hibernation, cold thermal balance, and hot thermal balance data from the integrated vehicle thermal vacuum (TVAC) test. Thus, the correlated model captures the heat leaks during hibernations and the performance at two extremes, bounding, operating scenarios.

Loop Heat Pipe↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

A Simplified Model of VIPER Thermal Management System. Part II: Integrated Vehicle

NASA’s Volatiles Investigating Polar Exploration Rover (VIPER) thermal management system (TMS) relies on four loop heat pipes (LHPs) to transport electronic waste heat to the vehicle cooling radiative surface and avoid overheating. The TMS has also ten constant conductance heat pipes (CCHPs) dedicated to balance the thermal load within the internal environment where the avionics boxes are mounted, also called warm electronic box (WEB), and to transport the heat from two of the science payload instruments. The TMS also uses two thermal straps to thermally link the batteries to the WEB. These thermal components, in addition to heaters, thermostat, multi-layer insulation (MLIs), and isolators forms the core of the VIPER TMS. The complex heat transport balance managed by the TMS is challenging to characterize and model. The more fidelity and granularity of a model, the more costly the computational resources needed and the longer the simulation and modeling time. When the priority is to provide quick but reliable assessments of the thermal performance or real time thermal feedback for training of console operators, simplified modeling tools are needed. To satisfy that need, this paper describes the effort to develop and correlate a model of VIPER TMS based on control volume approach. The correlation effort in particular focuses on hibernation, cold thermal balance, and hot thermal balance data from the integrated vehicle thermal vacuum (TVAC) test. Thus, the correlated model captures the heat leaks during hibernations and the performance at two extremes, bounding, operating scenarios.

Thermal Modeling↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Design, Build, and Testing of the Roman Space Telescope’s Wide Field Instrument Optical Stimulus System (SORC)

The Stimulus Of Ray Cones (SORC) is an optical stimulus system developed to verify, characterize, and calibrate the Roman Space Telescope’s (RST) Wide Field Instrument (WFI) under simulated operational conditions. SORC provides several critical test modes, the primary being point-source mode, which projects an image anywhere on the Focal Plane Assembly (FPA) detectors. This mode provides precise position knowledge of the FPA within WFI. Additional modes enable capturing WFI pupil alignment, evaluation of WFI’s selectable optical elements, and verification of focal plane fiber operation for higher-level system testing. The light source system incorporates a suite of narrowband and broadband fiber fed sources spanning the visible to near-infrared range, with options for pulsed or continuous wave illumination. SORC was designed and built at NASA’s Goddard Spaceflight Center (GSFC). Initial system-level testing occurred under ambient conditions in GSFC’s Spacecraft Systems Development and Integration Facility (SSDIF), followed by vacuum testing at operational temperatures (SORC at 214-222 K) in the Space Environment Simulator (SES). The system was then shipped to BAE Systems in Boulder, CO for post-shipment ambient and cryogenic testing before integration with WFI for two thermal vacuum test campaigns at cryogenic temperatures. This presentation will focus on design, development, and performance of SORC. Details of WFI verification and calibration using SORC, along with test results, have been published previously and will be referenced only as needed to describe SORC. The SORC ground test capability is critical to ensuring WFI meets stringent optical performance requirements, directly supporting the mission’s science objectives.

Stimulus of Ray Cones↗

NASA NTRS2026

Model Correlation and Thermal Analysis of xEMU Boot at Lunar South Pole Temperatures

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Artemis program plans to send astronauts to the lunar south pole, a region of the moon that is colder than previous lunar missions and low earth orbit operations. The spacesuit boots that will be used on these missions will be directly impacted by these extremely cold temperatures (down to ~50 K). To assess the performance of the Exploration Extravehicular Mobility Unit (xEMU) lunar boot in these extreme temperatures, the boot was tested at the Jet Propulsion Lab (JPL) in the Cryogenic Ice Transfer, Acquisition Development, and Excavation Laboratory (CITADEL) thermal vacuum (TVAC) chamber. This data was used to correlate thermal models to predict operational performance of the boots on the lunar south pole. This paper documents the data analysis, thermal boot model correlation, and operational predictions conducted using data from the xEMU TVAC test. Data from the test series was used to determine expected thermal conductances within the boot and between the boot and environment. These conductances were used to correlate a Thermal Desktop model of the xEMU boot across 10 different test points which varied external temperature, internal boot ventilation flowrate, and contact pressure. The correlated model was then used to predict operational performance in the lunar south pole. While the predictions indicate promising evidence for performance of the boots at the 100K test point, there is still substantial uncertainty in performance, particularly at the 48K test point. The results of this test series and model correlation stress the importance of improved testing for characterizing the expected thermal resistance between the outside of the boot and the lunar surface.

xEMU↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Model Correlation and Thermal Analysis of xEMU Boot at Lunar South Pole Temperatures

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Artemis program plans to send astronauts to the lunar south pole, a region of the moon that is colder than previous lunar missions and low earth orbit operations. The spacesuit boots that will be used on these missions will be directly impacted by these extremely cold temperatures (down to ~50 K). To assess the performance of the Exploration Extravehicular Mobility Unit (xEMU) lunar boot in these extreme temperatures, the boot was tested at the Jet Propulsion Lab (JPL) in the Cryogenic Ice Transfer, Acquisition Development, and Excavation Laboratory (CITADEL) thermal vacuum (TVAC) chamber. This data was used to correlate thermal models to predict operational performance of the boots on the lunar south pole. This paper documents the data analysis, thermal boot model correlation, and operational predictions conducted using data from the xEMU TVAC test. Data from the test series was used to determine expected thermal conductances within the boot and between the boot and environment. These conductances were used to correlate a Thermal Desktop model of the xEMU boot across 10 different test points which varied external temperature, internal boot ventilation flowrate, and contact pressure. The correlated model was then used to predict operational performance in the lunar south pole. While the predictions indicate promising evidence for performance of the boots at the 100K test point, there is still substantial uncertainty in performance, particularly at the 48K test point. The results of this test series and model correlation stress the importance of improved testing for characterizing the expected thermal resistance between the outside of the boot and the lunar surface.

thermal analysis↗

NASA NTRS2026

Surprisingly Enriched CO and CH4 in Halley-type Comet 13P/Olbers: Clues to Its Interstellar Heritage

The native ice composition of Halley-type Comet 13P/Olbers (hereafter 13P) was measured post-perihelion, on UT 2024 August 16 using iSHELL, the 1–5 μm cross-dispersed, high-resolution facility spectrograph at the NASA InfraRed Telescope Facility. At that time, the heliocentric distance (Rh) of 13P was 1.37 au and the geocentric distance (Δ) was 1.99 au. Using a slit that delivered spectral resolving power RP λ/Δλ 4.5 × 104, two instrument settings targeted rovibrational emissions of seven parent molecules released into the coma through sublimation of ices in the nucleus. These settings provided broad and contiguous or nearly contiguous spectral coverage, one simultaneously measuring H2O, CO, and OCS, and the other simultaneously measuring CH4, C2H6, CH3OH, and H2CO. Meaningful abundances were obtained for all seven species. Our study revealed substantial enrichments of CO and CH4, the two most volatile species systematically targeted at IR wavelengths in comets. Relative to their respective mean abundance ratios among measured comets from the Oort cloud reservoir, CO in 13P was enriched by a factor of about six and CH4 was enriched by a factor of about three. Together with near-average abundances measured for CH3OH and C2H6, this suggests large endowments of CO and CH4 on interstellar grains, yet it could indicate inhibited surface chemistry on the pre-cometary grains subsequently contained in the nucleus or 13P. Assuming that this represents the primordial composition of 13P, it could reflect very low temperatures in its natal environment (∼10 K or lower).

Michael A Disanti↗

NASA NTRS1970

Adventures in Research: A History of Ames Research Center, 1940-1965

The present document, which I have called a history-though it certainly was not written for historians-was prepared for and at the request of the NASA Ames Research Center which, in sponsoring the project, acted with the encouragement of NASA Headquarters. It is an account of the establishment, evolutionary development, and activities of the Ames Research Center covering a period characterized by unprecedented scientific and technological revolution. The writing of this book about the Ames Research Center was undertaken with considerable pleasure by one who for many years was employed by the Center’s parent organization NASA and, before that, NACA; who had closely followed the Center’s growth from the beginning; and who was personally acquainted with, and who held in some affection, the members of its founding staff. These facts are given to alert readers to the presence of bias and the inaccuracies stemming therefrom. It should be emphasized that this work is a history only of the Ames Research Center. It is not a history of the U.S. Government, of NACA or NASA, of other research centers, of the military services, of industry, or of world events. Information on these peripheral subjects is introduced merely to provide the reader with a generalized feeling for the local and world environment in which the formation and subsequent activities of the Ames Research Center took place. The background material provided is notably incomplete and in some instances reveals the bias of the NACA/NASA community at the time the events took place. Frequently, also, it reflects the personalized viewpoint of the author who was a close observer of many of these events.

NASA Center History Series↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

3D Woven Mid-Density Carbon Phenolic (3MDCP) Full-Scale Heatshield Development for Mars Sample Return (MSR) Earth Entry System (EES)

The Mars Sample Return (MSR) mission will be returning samples of Martian soil to Earth. The samples will be returned in the Earth Entry System (EES). The EES capsule is protected by a new thermal protection system; the 3-Dimensionally Woven, Mid-Density, Carbon Phenolic (3MDCP) material which is derived from the Heatshield for Extreme Entry Environment Technology (HEEET). The baseline 3MDCP design is a single piece thermal protection system that avoids the manufacturing and certification challenges associated with a tiled configuration. A 3MDCP heatshield begins as a flat woven preform that is formed to the final heatshield shape and then infused with phenolic resin. A NASA Ames lead team, in collaboration with Spirit Textiles (formerly TEAM Inc.), Fiber Materials Inc. (FMI, a Spirit AeroSystems Company), and Kratos SRE, has been developing and demonstrating the processes to fabricate the 3MDCP heatshield and characterize the resulting properties. The process of forming the flat woven preform into the final heatshield shape, a sphere-cone geometry with a 52.5° cone angle, involves local but substantial movement of the yarns in the weave. This results in continuous fibers across the single piece heatshield, albeit with property variations between different regions of the heatshield. This presentation will provide a high-level status of 3MDCP development for the MSR EES heatshield. This will include an overview of the manufacturing processes with an emphasis on the impact of forming on fiber orientation, material properties, and performance. Results comparing preliminary formed and flat materials will be shown. Additionally, the presentation will layout the broader plan for property testing and tie-in to aerothermal performance.

Peter Edward Marshall↗

NASA NTRS1960

Ranger Spacecraft

The thermal-control philosophy of the spacecraft currently under development by the Jet Propulsion Laboratory is design by passive means to maintain all components within the tolerances specified by cognizant engineers. Due to the complexity of the configurations, calculations are) of necessity, fairly generalized and final design is based upon tests in an environmental chamber. The Ranger series spacecraft is designed with a basic structure which is common to all models, with additional hardware to suit the individual mission. This basic structure of Rangers A-1 and A-2 is seen as the hexagonal instrument section, the erectable solar panels, the movable antenna, and the omniantenna. The Ranger A-1 and A-2 configuration is for engineering tests and space-exploration, with the scientific instrumentation isolation requirement dictating the spread-out design. The spacecraft stands 12 feet high, weighs 700 to 800 pounds, and has an internal power of 150 watts. Rangers A-3, A-4, and A-5 are designed to rough land a capsule on the moon. For these, a capsule and retrorocket replace the scientific instruments, occupying the space inside the tower structure. The spacecraft must survive many environments. Chronologically they are: 1) Folded configuration inside an aerodynamic shroud on the pad. 2) Thermal flux from shroud aerodynamically heated during boost phase. 3) Coasting up to 30 minutes attached to Agena stage after booster and shroud are separated. 4) Agena stage burning. 5) Coasting and tumbling after separation from Agena until it passes from earth's shadow. 6) Upon reaching sunlight, panels open and begin sun acquisition. 7) Antenna seeks earth after spacecraft locks onto sun. 8) Space phase- "steady state" with vehicle's vertical axis locked on sun, communicating with earth. The philosophy is to design for the sun-acquired mode, making allowances for the transient conditions.

T. O. Thostesen↗

NASA NTRS2005

Chapter 9 - Pre-Flight Tests

Pre-flight testing is critical to the success of any flight test program. Pre-flight tests are performed to measure and evaluate the characteristics of an aircraft in a non-flying environment and to verify that these characteristics are as desired. Since aircraft systems are becoming more and more complex, conducting proper pre-flight testing to help identify system characteristics and deficiencies prior to flight is more important now than ever before. Much flight test time has been lost fixing problems that should have been found and corrected prior to flight. Accidents have occurred because pre-flight tests and verification procedures were not conducted thoroughly enough to identify the aircraft's characteristics properly or to find system discrepancies. Proper pre-flight testing helps ensure that the aircraft is ready to fly and contributes toward an efficient, productive, and safe flight test program. The reader should be aware that this Section is dedicated to the testing that should take place prior to the first flight. There are other "pre-flight" tests that take place prior to each individual flight. These latter tests are not discussed in this Section. The following paragraphs of this Section describe significant tests that are usually accomplished prior to flying a new or highly modified aircraft. Test objectives, descriptions, products, and requirements are provided in the following subsections: 9.1 Wind tunnel tests 9.2 Simulation tests 9.3 Propulsion tests 9.4 Weight and balance tests 9.5 Ground vibration tests 9.6 Structural loads tests 9.7 Gain margin tests 9.8 Verification and calibration tests 9.9 Taxi tests The specific examples given and the test facilities mentioned in this Section will illustrate the approach taken and the techniques used by the US Air Force; however, they are typical of those used by other test organizations.

Paul W Kirsten↗

NASA NTRS2026

Designing a Propylene-Glycol Coolant Servicer System for Gateway’s Internal Active Thermal Control System

A human spacecraft ATCS—especially one using single-phase coolant loops exposed to cabin atmospheric conditions—requires periodic degassing and refilling to support long-duration missions of 15 to 30 years. During initial fill operations, system maintenance, gas permeation, and quick-disconnect mating or de-mating, small amounts of gas can gradually enter the coolant system over time. This can lead to degraded heat transfer performance, pump cavitation, and potentially pump vapor lock if a significant gas volume accumulates over time. Additionally, system leaks and routine fluid sampling can gradually reduce accumulator volumes to unacceptable levels, requiring periodic refills. In more severe cases, catastrophic changes in fluid composition may necessitate emergency draining, refilling, and degassing to ensure continued system functionality. These risks were identified and mitigated on the ISS ITCS through the development of a dual-membrane degasser ORU and a Fluid Servicer System ORU for coolant refilling. These systems were developed for the fully water-based ISS ITCS Coolant[1]. The Gateway space station, the first permanent human habitat in lunar orbit, uses a propylene-glycol/water coolant mixture, which has significantly different fluid properties compared to pure water. Because microgravity degassing technologies are sensitive to fluid surface tension and viscosity, existing ISS hardware is not suitable for servicing a propylene-glycol-based TCS. Unlike the ISS, the Gateway will operate in a higher-radiation environment and must meet stricter mass constraints due to its location outside of low earth orbit. This Government Furnished Equipment (GFE) flight hardware project aims to develop a lightweight, radiation-resistant Coolant Servicer System (CSS) capable of degassing and refilling Gateway’s propylene-glycol water-based IATCS.

Propylene Glycol Water↗

NASA NTRS2026

Designing a Propylene-Glycol Coolant Servicer System for Gateway’s Internal Active Thermal Control System

A human spacecraft ATCS—especially one using single-phase coolant loops exposed to cabin atmospheric conditions—requires periodic degassing and refilling to support long-duration missions of 15 to 30 years. During initial fill operations, system maintenance, gas permeation, and quick-disconnect mating or de-mating, small amounts of gas can gradually enter the coolant system over time. This can lead to degraded heat transfer performance, pump cavitation, and potentially pump vapor lock if a significant gas volume accumulates over time. Additionally, system leaks and routine fluid sampling can gradually reduce accumulator volumes to unacceptable levels, requiring periodic refills. In more severe cases, catastrophic changes in fluid composition may necessitate emergency draining, refilling, and degassing to ensure continued system functionality. These risks were identified and mitigated on the ISS ITCS through the development of a dual-membrane degasser ORU and a Fluid Servicer System ORU for coolant refilling. These systems were developed for the fully water-based ISS ITCS Coolant[1]. The Gateway space station, the first permanent human habitat in lunar orbit, uses a propylene-glycol/water coolant mixture, which has significantly different fluid properties compared to pure water. Because microgravity degassing technologies are sensitive to fluid surface tension and viscosity, existing ISS hardware is not suitable for servicing a propylene-glycol-based TCS. Unlike the ISS, the Gateway will operate in a higher-radiation environment and must meet stricter mass constraints due to its location outside of low earth orbit. This Government Furnished Equipment (GFE) flight hardware project aims to develop a lightweight, radiation-resistant Coolant Servicer System (CSS) capable of degassing and refilling Gateway’s propylene-glycol water-based IATCS.

Propylene Glycol Water↗

NASA NTRS2026

SERFE Ground Unit EVA Series After Three Year Spacesuit Stowage Period

NASA’s spacesuit government reference design for returning to the Moon is called the Exploration Extravehicular Mobility Unit (xEMU). The xEMU subassembly that provides life support, such as oxygen and thermal control, is the Portable Life Support System (PLSS). Inside the PLSS is a new technology that NASA wanted to test to provide cooling to the crew during EVAs (ExtraVehicular Activity). This technology is called the Spacesuit Water Membrane Evaporator (SWME). In order to test SWME in an improved thermal control loop (TCL) both on Earth and in Space, the Spacesuit Evaporation Rejection Flight Experiment (SERFE) was created. The Ground unit, or testbed at Johnson Space Center (JSC), tested the cooling technology in Earth’s gravity, while the Flight unit, or payload on the International Space Station (ISS), tested the cooling technology in micro-gravity. Since fluids flow differently in micro-gravity, testing in both environments would provide important data for improving cooling performance during EVAs. Both units completed 25 simulated EVAs with the same settings so SWME performance on the ground could be compared to the ISS. The Flight unit was completed first and performed EVAs on the ISS between 2020 and 2022. The Ground unit performed EVAs between 2021 and 2022. When the Flight unit came back from the ISS, it was taken apart for analysis. This analysis looked at how well SWME was able to maintain its heat rejection capability after various dwell times, such as a 90 day Airlock Coolant Loop Recovery (ALCLR) cycle, when the Extravehicular Mobility Unit (EMU) currently on the ISS would normally need maintenance. After a three year simulated spacesuit dwell, the Ground unit performed another EVA series in 2025 to test SWME’s shelf life. The results from this test series will inform mission planning as NASA plans to go back to the Moon and beyond.

Michael Lewandowski↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Enabling Reliable, Fault-Tolerant Autonomous Lunar Habitats with High-Performance Spaceflight Computing

The lunar surface presents unfavorable constraints and harsh living conditions. To address these challenges, autonomous habitats will require complex integrated systems that combine advanced software, high-performance hardware, and cutting-edge sensors to ensure sustainability, safety, and operational efficiency. Consequently, maintaining a sustainable presence on the Moon requires reliable infrastructure and efficient development, precise monitoring, and utilization of resources within a lunar installation. These elements are essential not only to ensure that lunar settlement can be long-term, self-sustaining, and resource-efficient, but also to serve as a foundation for future missions and eventual human habitation on Mars. Humans are not native to the Moon; therefore, our survival and ability to thrive will depend on autonomous systems that can foster safety and resilience through high-availability architectures, graceful degradation, and highly fault-tolerant spaceflight hardware capable of continuing operation during failures. This requires advanced human-rated distributed systems architectures with specialized electronics, scalable capabilities, and an integrated design approach. Unlike current practices focused on short-term missions and regularly maintained components, permanent lunar compute systems must be designed for extended operations beyond mission durations. This paper explores the necessity of transitioning toward fault- tolerant, highly autonomous hardware systems designed for multi-year missions. It also identifies critical subsystems that require high levels of autonomy, supported by radiation-hardened processors and extreme thermal loads, which are essential to mitigate long-term degradation and ensure sustainable lunar habitation. Finally, the paper aligns with NASA’s identified Civil Space Shortfalls, particularly in high-performance onboard computing, advanced data acquisition, extreme-environment avionics, radiation monitoring and countermeasures, and autonomous health management. It proposes NASA’s new High-Performance Spaceflight Computing (HPSC) processor as a turnkey solution, delivering 100 times the performance-per-watt of legacy rad-hard CPUs and enabling onboard AI, edge computing, and fault-tolerant features essential for sustained lunar autonomy and beyond.

Sarkis S Mikaelian↗

NASA NTRS2026

SERFE Ground Unit EVA Series After Three Year Spacesuit Stowage Period

NASA’s spacesuit government reference design for returning to the Moon is called the Exploration Extravehicular Mobility Unit (xEMU). The xEMU subassembly that provides life support, such as oxygen and thermal control, is the Portable Life Support System (PLSS). Inside the PLSS is a new technology that NASA wanted to test to provide cooling to the crew during EVAs (ExtraVehicular Activity). This technology is called the Spacesuit Water Membrane Evaporator (SWME). In order to test SWME in an improved thermal control loop (TCL) both on Earth and in Space, the Spacesuit Evaporation Rejection Flight Experiment (SERFE) was created. The Ground unit, or testbed at Johnson Space Center (JSC), tested the cooling technology in Earth’s gravity, while the Flight unit, or payload on the International Space Station (ISS), tested the cooling technology in micro-gravity. Since fluids flow differently in micro-gravity, testing in both environments would provide important data for improving cooling performance during EVAs. Both units completed 25 simulated EVAs with the same settings so SWME performance on the ground could be compared to the ISS. The Flight unit was completed first and performed EVAs on the ISS between 2020 and 2022. The Ground unit performed EVAs between 2021 and 2022. When the Flight unit came back from the ISS, it was taken apart for analysis. This analysis looked at how well SWME was able to maintain its heat rejection capability after various dwell times, such as a 90 day Airlock Coolant Loop Recovery (ALCLR) cycle, when the Extravehicular Mobility Unit (EMU) currently on the ISS would normally need maintenance. After a three year simulated spacesuit dwell, the Ground unit performed another EVA series in 2025 to test SWME’s shelf life. The results from this test series will inform mission planning as NASA plans to go back to the Moon and beyond.

SWME↗