Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Spacewalk”

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

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

At least 289 records · Page 16
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2020

Design of a Microgravity Hybrid Inflatable Airlock

Spacewalks, or extra-vehicular activities (EVAs), are a critical component of human space exploration for science activities and habitat construction and maintenance. For NASA's proposed lunar Gateway system, an airlock module is required for vehicle maintenance, repair, and exploration. Traditional airlock structures are fully metallic, with two chambers, known as an equipment lock and a crew lock. The larger volume, called the equipment lock, serves as the storage, logistics and electronics area, while the smaller volume, called the crew lock, serves as the volume to transition from the vacuum of space to the pressurized cabin. A traditional metallic structure design offers mass efficiency for these elements, but cannot offer volume efficiency. The potential to use an inflatable fabric pressure shell supplemented by a metallic support structure allows for efficiency in both mass and volume. Inflatable structures are being used for human habitable space modules, starting with the Bigelow Expandable Activities Module on the International Space Station. They are high-strength fabric-based structures that are compactly stowed for launch and then, once in space, they are expanded and rigidized with internal pressure. They provide significant launch volume savings over metallic structures. For Gateway, a hybrid airlock design is proposed with both metallic and inflatable structural elements, taking advantage of each material's capabilities. A metallic equipment lock serves as both a docking node and provides pressurized volume for pre-EVA activities including pre-breathe and suit donning/doffing. A rigid equipment lock offers stowage space during launch for integrated hardware and suits. Adding an integrated inflatable crew lock provides the volume required for EVAs with minimal use of launch volume. Using dual inflatable crew locks provides redundancy and the capability to move large pieces of equipment into and out of the vehicle for repair and maintenance. The inflatable crew lock is deflated and packaged in the launch shroud and expanded after installation on the Gateway. This packing capability allows additional volume to be added to the equipment lock and fully utilize the capability of the launch vehicle. This report outlines the work completed to design, analyze, and test the systems of a microgravity airlock with inflatable crew locks. In detail, it includes launch vehicles, structural sizing of the metallic equipment lock, the fabric layers of the inflatable crew lock, the internal structure of the crew lock, the space suit interface elements, the crew restraint system, the hatches and pass-throughs, the material and thermal elements, and the crew operations for the usage of the system. This paper is meant to offer a reference design for a hybrid microgravity airlock design for deep space human exploration.

Litteken, Douglas↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Training Astronauts using Hardware-in-the-Loop Simulations and Virtual Reality

The commercial market has recently started giving significant attention to virtual and augmented reality, even though the technology has been around for many years. The Virtual Reality Training Lab (VRL) at the NASA Johnson Space Center has been using virtual reality to train astronauts for decades. This paper will focus on describing three major Hardware-in-the-Loop VR simulation systems, the Simplified Aid for EVA Rescue (SAFER) system known as the "jetpack", the Mass Handling System nicknamed Charlotte, and a simulated robotics environment for collaborative mission evaluation. Two of these systems are critical for astronaut training. Crew must certify on SAFER and go through the Charlotte Mass Handling training prior to flying to the International Space Station (ISS). Typically, they also complete at least one collaborative visualization session to review any planned Extra Vehicular Activities (EVAs), or spacewalks, before an assigned flight. Given the volatility of new technologies, the graphics and simulation environments used are maintained to be hardware agnostic to preserve a high level of fidelity. Utilizing VR for astronaut training has proved to be effective and essential for these specific systems.

Angelica D. Garcia↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Training Artemis Astronauts to Explore the Moon

To prepare for human exploration of the Moon in the mid-2020s, NASA is developing a program to provide geoscience and planetary science classroom training and geologic eld training to astronauts and other mission personnel. The Artemis geoscience training plan builds on a long legacy: NASA has trained astronauts in geology, planetary science, and geological eld work for more than 50 years. From ~1965-1972, the geology focus for astronauts included orbital Earth observations during the early NASA missions, but the endgame was preparation for the Apollo missions to the Lunar surface [see Phinney (2015), NASA-SP-2015-626; Lofgren et al.(2011);Schmitt, et al. (2011); and El Baz (2011), all from GSA SP483]. From the mid 1970s through2017, the primary purpose for geoscience training was to prepare astronauts to observe theEarth and document a wide variety of Earth processes from orbital platforms (Skylab, SpaceShuttle and International Space Station). Astronaut observations of Earth from the InternationalSpace Station remain an important activity today, but the prospect of exploration of the lunar surface through the Artemis Program lends additional purpose to the geoscience content and eld experiences that we provide the astronauts. We recently completed the geology and eld training with Astronaut Class 22 and are now planning both focused eld exercises and simulations for future Artemis crews, as well as the accompanying classroom lessons on lunar and planetary sciences. The training we offer extends beyond the astronaut office – we partner across operational and engineering organizations at NASA and provide eld work exercises and opportunities to personnel in the Flight Operations Directorate (responsible for the overall training and certification), as well as the exploration Extravehicular Activity Oce (developing spacewalk suits and tools). These partnerships contribute to building a common language and sense of purpose, and also help to ensure that NASA’s geoscience training and science operations are fully integrated with the teams and systems responsible for getting the next generation of astronauts to the surface of the Moon.

Artemis↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Should Astronauts throw out their Trash? And if so, How?

We don’t think much about taking out the trash on Earth, but in space, it requires some thought. Should it even be thrown overboard? Besides the implications of littering in space, there are also practical considerations of whether waste materials can be reused for other purposes onboard or do they reduce mission efficiency. In a previous study, gasifying and venting trash along the way to Mars was found to noticeably reduce propellant needs and launch mass of the spacecraft, whereas keeping processed trash on board in the form of radiation shielding tiles would significantly lower the crew’s radiation dose during a solar particle event. The latest human exploration mission proposals will be considered with an eye toward answering the questions, “Should Astronauts throw out their Trash?” and “If so, what is the best way?” Besides reviewing the propulsion and radiation shielding aspects of the question, equivalent system mass factors of mass, power, volume, and crew time, as well as human factors, like smell, will be studied. Disposal options include jettison of an entire module containing waste, regular disposal of trash via an airlock, or gasifying waste products for easier disposal or reuse. Jettison via an airlock could take many forms, from “taking out the trash” on a spacewalk to launching trash tiles or pods with different mechanisms. Likewise, the “trash-to-gas” concept, which would allow for overboard venting via a pipe, has many thermochemical processes to choose from, each with their own pros and cons. Unraveling these various tradeoff studies is the goal of this paper.

trash↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Monitoring Human Performance on Future Deep Space Missions Abstract

NASA and the commercial spacecraft community are working diligently to put the first woman on the moon in the 2024 timeframe. At the same time, NASA researchers are thinking about how to solve the even larger challenges that future deep space missions will bring. Space travel itself is difficult, but astronauts on deep space missions will face obstacles and unknowns never before experienced. In addition to the altered gravity and hostile/closed environment of a spacecraft, deep space crews will face increased radiation, isolation, and distance from Earth. During Extravehicular Activity (EVA, or “spacewalk”) operations, crew will experience increased physical and cognitive workload due to extended types, frequencies and durations of tasks performed on exploration missions in partial gravity environments. All of these stressors will impact crew physical and mental health and performance in difficult-to-anticipate ways. Crew autonomy may be one of the biggest challenges faced. Communication delays and blackouts will occur, and in those situations, the crew may not have access to the Mission Control Center (MCC). They may be forced to be solely dependent on each other and the available information onboard to stay alive, healthy, and achieve the mission. The only conceivable way to meet the challenges of Earth independence is to enable the crew to monitor their own health and performance -- preferably unobtrusively as they perform their duties. Technologies and techniques must be developed to aid the crew in these assessments. A deep space mission is expected to have relatively short periods of high cognitive demand, stress, and fatigue, alongside potentially long periods of cognitive underload during the transit, where boredom, loneliness, and depression can set in. Both ends of this spectrum are dangerous. Crew must be made aware when their task performance drops significantly, when their cognitive workload is too high, when they have lost situation awareness, or when they are too stressed or too fatigued to perform well. They must be able to identify these risks, and then mitigate them with countermeasures available onboard. A number of self-monitoring technologies are presently being explored by NASA to advance crew state determination capabilities. These range from real-time, physiological workload and situation awareness assessments, to crew health measurements determining physical and mental fitness for duty, to task performance metrics such as suit resource expenditures. For EVA tasks during surface exploration missions, biomedical information such as metabolic rate may be provided to crewmembers for situational awareness related to task performance efficiency. In addition, translation distances, hydration, nutrition, inspired CO2 exposure and other consumables usage rates may be useful input metrics for modeling individualized performance during tasks to inform crew or provide estimates of work efficiency. Oculomotor metrics such as gaze dwell time, pupilometry, and eye tracking collected in advanced helmet mounted displays could potentially be used to characterize crew situation awareness. This paper highlights some of these projects, and provides broader discussion about the need for advanced monitoring and smart technologies, as NASA takes the leap into the next generation of space exploration.

Kritina Holden↗
NASA NTRS2021

Characterization of Spacesuit Associated Microbial Communities and their Implications for NASA Missions

Crewed National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) missions to other solar system bodies are currently being planned. One high-profile scientific focus during such expeditions would be life detection, specifically the discovery of past or present microbial life, if they exist. However, both humans and associated objects typically carry a high microbial burden. Thus, it is essential to distinguish between microbes brought with the expedition and those present on the exploring planets. Modern spacesuits are unique, customized spacecraft which provide protection, mobility and life support to crew during spacewalks, yet they vent continuously, and the mobility of microbes through spacesuits has not been studied. To evaluate the microbial colonization of spacesuits, NASA used an Extravehicular Activity swab kit to examine viable microbial populations of 48 samples from spacesuits using both traditional microbiological methods and molecular sequencing methods. The cultivable microbial population ranged from below the detection limit to 9 x 102 colony forming units per 25 cm2 of sample and also significantly varied by the location. The cultivable microbial diversity was dominated by members of Bacillus, Arthrobacter, and Ascomycota. However, 16S rRNA-based viable bacterial burden ranged from 105 to 106 copies per 25 cm2 of sample. Shotgun metagenome sequencing revealed the presence of a diverse microbial population on the spacesuit surfaces, including Curtobacterium and Methylobacterium from across all sets of spacesuits in high abundance. Among bacterial species identified, higher abundance of Cutibacterium acnes, Methylobacterium oryzae, and M. phyllosphaerae reads were documented. The results of this study provide evidence that identical microbial strains may live on the wrist joint, inner gauntlet, and outer gauntlet of spacesuits. This raises the possibility, but does not confirm, that viable microbes are able to migrate between the interior and exterior of spacesuits. Overall, these data provide the first estimate of microbial dispersion from internal to external spacesuit surfaces, which will help future mission planners develop effective planetary protection strategies.

spacesuit↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Machine Learning for Extravehicular Mobility Unit (EMU) Glove Inspections

The Extravehicular Mobility Unit (EMU) Glove Machine Learning Inspection project utilizes machine learning to expedite the inspection, analysis, and recommendation for continued use of space suit gloves post spacewalks. Today, ISS glove photos are individually reviewed by a team of experts to determine the conditions of space suit gloves. For this project the Microsoft Azure platform is used to perform Automated Machine Learning (AutoML) to detect issues with tagged images from previous Extravehicular Activities (EVA’s) to build a predictive model. The model analyzes a test image and deems the glove GO or NO-GO for additional EVA’s. The goal for this ML project is to decrease the time spent reviewing images by ground personnel and crewmembers in high frequency EVA locations such as the Moon and Mars. For destinations such as the Moon and Mars the goal is to give crew autonomy in determining glove conditions with limited support from Earth. This paper will outline the results to date and future work needed to expand the capability for in-situ recommendations.

EVA↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Coolant Leak from ISS External Active Thermal Control System (EATCS) – An Examination of Most Probable

The Port (P1) and Starboard (S1) External Active Thermal Control Systems (EATCS) are single phase, mechanically pumped ammonia loops that operate independently to cool the majority of the hardware and payloads onboard the International Space Station (ISS). A slow ammonia leak was detected using pressure and quantity telemetry five years after the P1 EATCS was activated. The leak gradually accelerated to a rate that locating and isolating the leak became imperative to maintain cooling capability. Partial pressure measurements from the Robotic External Leak Locator (RELL) scan surveys narrowed the search to the supply and return jumpers connecting one of three radiators to the system. Subsequently, the ISS crew performed high definition video surveys during an Extravehicular Activity (EVA), or spacewalk, and ammonia flakes were observed projecting from the jumpers. Thus, the ground teams were confident that the culprit for the ammonia leak was the jumpers. The ammonia leak stopped after ground teams remotely isolated and vented those jumpers and associated radiator. Both jumpers were removed and returned to the ground, and a root cause investigation was conducted. A calibrated leak test determined the bulk of the ammonia leaked through a pair of seals in a Quick Disconnect (QD), or connector, on one end of the return jumper. The return jumper QD was dissected, visually inspected, chemically tested and evaluated. The results indicated the most probable cause of the accelerating ammonia leak was due to defective seals, plating delamination underneath the seals, and on-orbit thermal cycles exacerbating the delamination. Both jumpers were refurbished, relaunched to the ISS, and scheduled to be reinstalled during an EVA in 2022. It appeared the issue was unique, but recently the S1 EATCS is showing signs of an accelerating ammonia leak, and RELL scans narrowed the source to a similar pair of radiator jumpers.

Thermal Control↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Coolant Leak from ISS External Active Thermal Control System (EATCS) – An Examination of Most Probable

The Port (P1) and Starboard (S1) External Active Thermal Control Systems (EATCS) are single phase, mechanically pumped ammonia loops that operate independently to cool majority of the hardware and payloads onboard the International Space Station (ISS). A slow ammonia leak was detected using pressure and quantity telemetry five years after the P1 EATCS was activated. The leak gradually accelerated to a rate that locating and isolating the leak became imperative to maintain cooling capability. Partial pressure measurements from the Robotic External Leak Locator (RELL) scan surveys narrowed the search to the supply and return jumpers connecting one of three radiators to the system. Subsequently, the ISS crew performed high definition video surveys during an Extravehicular Activity (EVA), or spacewalk, and ammonia flakes were observed projecting from the jumpers. Thus, the ground teams were confident that the culprit of the ammonia leak were the jumpers. The ammonia leak stopped after ground teams remotely isolated and vented those jumpers and associated radiator. Both jumpers were removed and returned to the ground, and a root cause investigation was conducted. A calibrated leak test determined the bulk of the ammonia leaked through a pair of seals in a Quick Disconnect (QD), or connector, on one end of the return jumper. The return jumper QD was dissected, visually inspected, chemically tested and evaluated. The results indicated the most probable cause of the accelerating ammonia leak was due to defective seals, plating delamination underneath the seals, and on-orbit thermal cycles exacerbating the delamination. Both jumpers were refurbished, relaunched to the ISS, and scheduled to be reinstalled during an EVA in 2022. It appeared the issue was unique, but recently the S1 EATCS is showing signs of an accelerating ammonia leak, and RELL scans narrowed the source to a similar pair of radiator jumpers.

Thermal Control↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

SIBatt-3D: In-Space/On-Surface 3D Printing of Sodium Ion Batteries from ISRU Materials

Constructed more than 20 years ago, the International Space Station’s primary power system originally used nickel-hydrogen batteries with a lifetime of 6.5 years, until NASA began the process of replacing them in 2016 with lithium-ion batteries with a lifetime of 10 years. The demanding and costly process was accomplished after four flights of the Japanese H-II Transfer Vehicle cargo spacecraft (with a cost of about $10,000 per pound of payload), and 13 different astronauts conducting 14 spacewalks. Besides utilization in the ISS, rechargeable batteries are present in many space applications: they are installed in exploration robots, life support systems and in portable communication devices, to mention some. In this context, this project is focused on the in-space manufacturing of shape-conformable batteries using in-situ resources, and aims to address the NASA’s gaps related to the development of next generation of energy storage devices (TX03), as well as in-space manufacturing and in-situ resource utilization (TX07). The proposed work also tackles the HEOMD’s objectives targeting the in-space additive manufacturing (AM) from Lunar/Martian materials (regolith as AM feedstock) to reinvigorate America’s Human Space Exploration Program (SPD-1). This project is in direct alignment with the STMD’s objectives to demonstrate in-space autonomous manufacturing and assembly of complete systems by 2030, and to enable humans to live and explore in space and on planetary surfaces by 2040 thanks to in-space habitation, infrastructure development and in-situ resource utilization (ST1 and ST5). Manufacturing of shape conformable batteries directly in-space and using in-situ resources would also contribute to reducing the payload weight and volume (TX12) for future missions, thus reducing risk for long term Mars missions where rapid resupply is logistically infeasible. Nowadays, commercial batteries consist of stacked two-dimensional (2D) sheets, which are only manufactured in restricted geometries (cylindrical and coin cell). Evolving from conventional 2D, complex 3D battery architectures have been proven to increase the electrochemical active surface area and ion diffusion path, leading to improved areal energy density and power performance. This tendency was illustrated in our recent in-depth modeling studies by simulating a classical Ragone plot exhibiting the energy-power relationship. Our team demonstrated through modeling that a complex gyroidal 3D printed battery architecture exhibits significantly improved power performances (>150% at the current density of 6C; full discharge in 10 minutes) in comparison to a traditional 3D printed planar geometry. Motivated by these results and as the fabrication of intricate 3D battery design is only possible experimentally thanks to the geometric freedom offered by additive manufacturing (AM), our team has already initiated leveraging thermoplastic material extrusion at the laboratory scale. While 3D printing of batteries is relatively recent (2013), it has witnessed a growing interest during the last recent years, as next-generation shape-conformable 3D batteries can be co-designed with the system. Consequently, dead-volume and mass brought from Earth are minimized, in addition to improved battery performance, in alignment with the aforementioned NASA’s objectives. Further, while this project is specifically dedicated to batteries, it lends itself towards the maturation of in-space manufacturing via 3D printing using in-situ resources, stated in HEOMD and STMD goals.

In-Space Manufacturing↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Results of a 3-day Pilot Study to Validate Planetary Prebreathe Protocols Using a 56.5 kPa 34% O2, 66% N2 Saturation Cabin Atmosphere

INTRODUCTION: Apollo missions used 100% O2 cabin atmospheres which effectively eliminated the risk of decompression sickness (DCS) during extravehicular activities (EVAs, ‘spacewalks’); however, this atmosphere presented a flammability risk that is no longer acceptable to NASA. Denitrogenation prebreathe protocols used to mitigate DCS risk for Space Shuttle and International Space Station EVAs are validated for the microgravity environment, but the significantly increased risk of DCS during equivalent ambulatory surface EVAs make these protocols inapplicable to planetary/Lunar missions. An “exploration atmosphere” of 56.5 kPa (8.2 psia), 34% O2, 66% N2 has been recommended by NASA for future Moon and Mars missions as a compromise that balances subsequent pre-EVA prebreathe duration, hypoxia, and flammability risk, assuming a 29.6 kPa (4.3 psi) spacesuit. Prebreathe validation studies was initiated utilizing a three-story 6m diameter hypobaric chamber at NASA’s Johnson Space Center. Here, we report the results of a 3-day human-in-the-loop system checkout. METHODS: Six volunteers acclimated to the 56.6kPa/34% O2 66% N2 environment for 48hrs prior to conducting a 20-minute prebreathe and a 6-hour simulated EVA at 34kPa/85% O2 / 15% N2. The EVA simulation was designed to include tasks that are physically and ergonomically representative of future planetary EVAs. Decompression stress was evaluated by serial doppler and echocardiographs, as well as by clinical features of DCS signs/symptoms. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION: Preliminary data analysis noted venous gas emboli (VGE) in 3 of 6 subjects, with peak Grade II VGE by Doppler and peak E-B score of 5 by cardiac ultrasonography. No volunteers were diagnosed with DCS during this initial test. No acute hypoxic symptoms were noted. Musculoskeletal and gastrointestinal complaints were noted, likely associated with the exercise load and the food system. Validation of exploration prebreathe protocols has since been initiated with an 11-day saturation test using the same facility and protocol.

Alejandro Garbino↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Human Thermal Assessment of Traverse and Geology Task Iterations During Simulated Lunar Extravehicular Activity

Spacewalks or extravehicular activities (EVA) in microgravity are mentally and physically demanding. Current microgravity EVAs are predominantly focused on upper body tasks on engineered surfaces; however, the introduction of gravity means that crew members during future lunar EVAs will be required to perform tasks that generate full body workloads such as navigating natural lunar terrain while conducting geological sampling. To date, only 12 people have walked on the surface of the Moon resulting in limited knowledge of suited thermal regulation under lunar-relevant physical workloads. To address this gap, a study is underway to focus on spacesuit operations with simulated lunar EVA workloads. This study presents methodology for collecting standard thermal measures during suit testing. In this pilot study, two suited subjects underwent simulated lunar EVAs using the NASA Active Response Gravity Offload System (ARGOS) to simulate the effects of partial gravity. Each lunar EVA, lasting three to five hours, included various metabolically demanding EVA tasks. Subjects donned the NASA Mark III (MK III) space suit and were offloaded to 1/6th G (lunar gravity). A subset task circuit from one of these simulations replicated an EVA traverse to a lunar crater, taking a geological sample, and returning to base. The suited subject walked one 1500 m (0% grade) and three 500 m traverses at three different grades (10, 20, 30%). Between each traverse, subjects performed geology sampling tasks (0 and 10% grade). Thermal measurements included core and skin temperature, liquid cooling garment (LCG) inlet and outlet temperature, and spacesuit gas inlet and outlet temperature and humidity. Compared to baseline core temperature (S1 = 37.07±0.32 °C, S2 = 37.27±0.01 °C) and mean skin temperature (S1 = 32.38±0.34 °C, S2 = 33.62±0.03 °C), after a 1500 m traverse, each suited subject showed an increased core temperature (S1 = 37.23±0.12 °C, S2 = 37.41±0.11°C) and decreased mean skin temperature (S1 = 32.16±0.17 °C, S2 = 31.53±1.15 °C) at a delta LCG temperature (S1 = 1.86±0.24 °C, S2 = 2.20±0.76 °C) and delta suit humidity (S1 = 9.66±1.49 %, S2 = 11.50±1.58 %). Core temperature continued to increase from compounding traverse and geology tasks (S1 = 38.04±0.03 °C, S2 = 38.1±0.02 °C) accompanied by an increase in delta LCG temperature (S1 = 2.24±0.13 °C, S2 = 2.67±0.12 °C) and delta suit humidity (S1 = 28±2.42 %, S2 = 31±2.13 %). Conversely, as the circuit progressed, mean skin temperature continued to decrease due to sustained LCG heat rejection (S1 = 30.08±0.15 °C, S2 = 30.28±0.07 °C). During the simulated EVA circuit core temperature increased to elevated values and remained elevated as heat was retained while mean skin temperature decreased due to peripheral heat offloaded to the LCG. The thermal measures collected during this study provided critical heat loading dynamics during lunar EVA tasks. Including core and skin temperatures along with suited thermal measures provides a standard data collection scheme for human thermal metrics during EVA task management. Data collected in this configuration can be used to build future lunar EVA task circuits and human thermal predictions.

Bradley Hoffmann↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Coolant Leak from ISS External Active Thermal Control System (EATCS) – An Examination of Most Probable

The Port (P1) and Starboard (S1) External Active Thermal Control Systems (EATCS) are single phase, mechanically pumped ammonia loops that operate independently to cool majority of the hardware and payloads onboard the International Space Station (ISS). A slow ammonia leak was detected using pressure and quantity telemetry five years after the P1 EATCS was activated. The leak gradually accelerated to a rate that locating and isolating the leak became imperative to maintain cooling capability. Partial pressure measurements from the Robotic External Leak Locator (RELL) scan surveys narrowed the search to the supply and return jumpers connecting one of three radiators to the system. Subsequently, the ISS crew performed high-definition video surveys during an Extravehicular Activity (EVA), or spacewalk, and ammonia flakes were observed projecting from the jumpers. Thus, the ground teams were confident that the culprit of the ammonia leak were the jumpers. The ammonia leak stopped after ground teams remotely isolated and vented those jumpers and associated radiator. Both jumpers were removed and returned to the ground, and a root cause investigation was conducted. A calibrated leak test determined the bulk of the ammonia leaked through a pair of seals in a Quick Disconnect (QD), or connector, on one end of the return jumper. The return jumper QD was dissected, visually inspected, chemically tested and evaluated. The results indicated the most probable cause of the accelerating ammonia leak was due to defective seals, plating delamination underneath the seals, and on-orbit thermal cycles exacerbating the delamination. Both jumpers were refurbished, relaunched to the ISS, and scheduled to be reinstalled during an EVA in 2022. It appeared the issue was unique, but recently the S1 EATCS is showing signs of an accelerating ammonia leak, and RELL scans narrowed the source to a similar pair of radiator jumpers.

Darnell Cowan↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Preparing for Lunar Exploration: Geology and Field Training for Astronauts

NASA astronauts will soon return to the Moon, this time to the lunar south pole. Astronauts will perform traverses, make geologic observations, and collect samples to return to Earth. Lessons from Apollo show that science returns were optimized because crews were well-trained in both spacewalk operations and field geology. In that spirit, our team of geologists introduced a revised geologic training program for in-coming NASA astronauts that includes classroom activities and fieldwork and is split over 2 years. Year 1 focuses on an introduction to geologic concepts capped by a field exercise. Year two focuses on climate change, the Moon, other planets, and additional fieldwork. Our geology curriculum supports astronaut observations from the ISS and is the foundation for future Artemis geology training, which will include lunar science and increasingly complex field training in planetary-relevant locations. A final piece of our training program provides geology and field mapping experiences for NASA engineers, flight controllers, and managers, to help them understand the principles of fieldwork and relevance to lunar exploration. The Year 1 geology training must be an effective introduction for astronauts who have little or no background in geology. We focus the training around a narrowly defined field problem and use a week of classroom training to prepare the astronauts with the specific skills and background they need to carry out a field exercise on volcanic features, structures, and landforms of the Taos Plateau, New Mexico. Classroom modules are hands-on, using satellite imagery, maps, analog models, and samples, and provide the astronauts with specific and relevant experience in how to make observations and describe what they see, recognize, and interpret patterns, infer processes from products, and analyze relationships to build a story based on evidence from a variety of data sources. At the end of each classroom day, astronauts work in teams to build a preliminary geologic map of the field area, adding new observations and interpretations as they learn about topics in the classroom. Each team’s bucket list of target areas to visit helps shape their investigations during their week in the field. On the final day in the field, each astronaut team presents a geologic map, cross section, and geologic interpretation

Geology↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Exploration Helmet Permanent Anti-fog Study

For the current Extravehicular Mobility Unit (EMU) spacesuit, an astronaut applies an anti-fog solution to the interior of the helmet bubble before each EVA. However, the anti-fog solution has been reported to cause eye discomfort during at least seven EMU EVAs when the anti-fog solution contacted the crew member’s eyes. During STS-100, astronaut Chris Hadfield reported the eye irritation temporarily blinded him during his spacewalk. In addition, the wipe on anti-fog solution is a consumable that needs to be accounted for and a supply launched for missions. To solve this, the Exploration EMU (xEMU) pressure bubble investigated using a permanent anti-fog coating during Design Verification and Test (DVT) human in the loop (HITL) events. Chosen for previous use in Constellation Space Suit develop, HTAF-601, a water based permanent anti-fog solution, was tested. However, major issues have arisen with further HITL testing with the coating. Cleaning the helmet has been a challenge to avoid damaging the permanent anti-fog coating. NASA has completed a set of different methods for cleaning the anti-fog to try to document a preferred method. It was found isopropyl alcohol (IPA) cannot be used to clean the interior of the helmet because it will strip and delaminate the permanent anti-fog coating. Even with using a very gentle cleaning method of flushing with distilled or DI water and dabbing at facial oils, the permanent anti-fog starts to delaminate consistently after 50 hours manned pressurized time (MPT). Finally, the HTAF-601 coating is being discontinued by the vendor. Due to these issues, further investigation is being completed evaluating two solvent based anti-fog solutions: Exxene’s HCF-100 and FSI’s Visgard 106-94. Each coating will be evaluated on polycarbonate samples for application consistency, steam cycles (mimicking breath cycles), cleaning durability, haze, and light transmission. This study will determine if either coating is a viable option to pursue as a permanent anti-fog for spacesuit helmet applications.

spacesuit↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Evaluation of Planetary Extravehicular Activity Prebreathe Protocols using a 56.5 kPa, 34% O2, 66% N2 Saturation Cabin Atmosphere in an 11-day Hypobaric Hypoxia Study

INTRODUCTION: Apollo missions used 100% O2 cabin atmospheres which effectively eliminated the risk of decompression sickness (DCS) during Lunar extravehicular activities (EVAs, ‘spacewalks’); however, this atmosphere presented a flammability risk that is no longer acceptable to NASA. Denitrogenation prebreathe protocols used to mitigate DCS risk for Space Shuttle and International Space Station EVAs are validated for the microgravity environment, but the significantly increased risk of DCS during equivalent ambulatory surface EVAs make these protocols inapplicable to planetary/Lunar missions. A cabin/vehicle “Exploration Atmosphere” of 56.5 kPa (8.2 psia), 34% O2, 66% N2 has been recommended by NASA for future Moon and Mars missions as a compromise that balances subsequent pre-EVA prebreathe duration, hypoxia, and flammability risk, assuming a 29.6 kPa (4.3 psi) spacesuit. Prebreathe validation studies were initiated utilizing a three-story 6m diameter hypobaric chamber at NASA’s Johnson Space Center. Here, we report the results of a 11-day human-in-the-loop system checkout. METHODS: Six volunteers lived in a hyboparic chamber for 11 days with an ‘exploration atmosphere’ of 56.6kPa/34% O2 66% N2. Subjects acclimated to the exploration atmosphere for 48hrs and thereafter participated in five 6-hour simulated EVAs at 34kPa/85% O2 / 15% N2 over the course of 11 days. Prior to each simulated EVA, subjects underwent a 20-minute prebreathe at 85% O2. The EVA simulation was designed to include tasks that are physically and ergonomically representative of future planetary EVAs, proportionate to the subject’s VO2max. Decompression stress was evaluated during the simulated EVA by serial doppler and echocardiographs alternating every 15min, as well as clinical monitoring for DCS signs/symptoms. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION: Venous gas emboli (VGE) were present in 3 of 6 subjects during EVAs, with peak Grade II VGE as evaluated by Doppler and a peak Eftedal-Brubakk score of 5 by cardiac ultrasonography. Two cases of DCS were diagnosed during the 11-day test chamber. No acute hypoxic symptoms were noted. Musculoskeletal and gastrointestinal complaints were noted, likely associated with the exercise load and the food system. Two cases of DCS (8%) does not cross either accept or reject pre-test criterion, so an additional study is planned for 2023 to meet our pre-test thresholds.

Alejandro Garbino↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Medical Lessons Learned from the Exploration Atmospheres Study

Background: The National Aeronautics and Space Administration’s (NASA) Exploration Atmospheres study (EA) was done to evaluate alternative cabin atmospheres for future spacecraft designs and planetary surface exploration of the Moon, Mars and beyond. Deep space exploration involves creating habitats and environments safe for human occupancy and means to explore the outside environment (extravehicular activities, EVA). In order to validate alternative atmospheres and pre-spacewalk procedures, the EA study was conducted to evaluate factors such as hypoxia risks, denitrogenation protocols, food limitations, medications, and the impact of other factors on human performance. Overview: Space travel is constrained by mass, volume, power and the cost of vehicle development, which creates tradeoffs in various capabilities, including breathing gasses. Higher atmospheric pressure in a vehicle means more gas, and a stronger containment vessel/habitat; while lower pressure requires higher oxygen partial pressure, which may increase fire risk. NASA’s EA study evaluated a proposed alternative cabin environment (8.2 psia, 34% Oxygen), for future spacecraft habitat, and planetary EVAs. EA included both a 3-day and a 11-day trial. These trials included a depressurization and saturation to 8.2psi at 34% O2 with additional depresses to 4.3 psia at 85% O2 for simulated EVAs, (1 EVA during the 3-day and 5 during the 11-day trials). Discussion: Planning for and executing the medical monitoring and response plan for a trial of this scope was a huge undertaking with no prior practice to fall back on. Food obstacles, sleeping issues, medications, joint injury, equipment limitations, medical privacy, multiple cases of decompression sickness, and even a COVID outbreak among the support team proved challenging. Conclusion: Testing of this nature is an essential part NASA’s preparation for the upcoming Lunar Artemis missions. As spaceflight transitions beyond low earth orbit, to planetary, even more trials of this nature will be required to learn what are the optimal atmospheric and associated operational constraints to maintain the optimal health of the crew and achieve mission objectives.

R Sanders↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

A Preliminary Assessment of Cognition and Fatigue During Simulated Lunar Surface Extravehicular Activities

Exploration Extravehicular Activity (xEVA), or spacewalks, during NASA’s future Lunar (Artemis) missions are expected to be more physically and cognitively demanding than any previous missions. Characterizing the effects of xEVA tasks and timelines on cognition and fatigue will be valuable, and perhaps essential, to the preservation of crew health and performance during xEVA.

Taylor E. Schlotman↗