Results for “architectures Mars surface exploration” — Page 16

NASA NTRS2009

NASA Lunar Mining and Construction Activities and Plans

The Space Exploration Policy enacted by the US Congress in 2005 calls for the US National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) to implement a sustained and affordable human and robotic program to explore the solar system and beyond; Extend human presence across the solar system, starting with a human return to the Moon by the year 2020, in preparation for human exploration of Mars and other destinations; Develop the innovative technologies, knowledge, and infrastructures both to explore and to support decisions about the destinations for human exploration; and Promote international and commercial participation in exploration to further U.S. scientific, security, and economic interests. In 2006, NASA released the Lunar Architecture Study, which proposed establishing a lunar Outpost on the Moon with international participation to extend human presence beyond Earth's orbit, pursue scientific activities, use the Moon to prepare for future human missions to Mars, and expand Earth s economic sphere. The establishment of sustained human presence on the Moon for science and exploration combines the design, integration, and operation challenges experienced from both the short Apollo lunar missions and the build-up and sustained crew operations of the International Space Station (ISS). Apollo experience reminds developers and mission planners that hardware must operate under extremely harsh environmental and abrasive conditions and every kilogram of mass and payload must be critical to achieve the mission s objectives due to the difficulty and cost of reaching the lunar surface. Experience from the ISS reminds developers and mission planners that integration of all hardware must be designed and planned from the start of the program, operations and evolution of capabilities on a continuous basis are important, and long-term life-cycle costs and logistical needs are equally or more important than minimizing early development and test costs. Overarching all of this is the need to implement efforts that are sustainable and affordable. One area NASA is developing that can significantly change how systems required for sustained human presence are designed and integrated, as well as potentially break our reliance on Earth supplied logistics, is In-Situ Resource Utilization (ISRU). ISRU, also known living off the land, involves the extraction and processing of local resources into useful products. In particular, the ability to make propellants, life support consumables, fuel cell reagents, and radiation shielding can significantly reduce the cost, mass, and risk of sustained human activities beyond Earth. Also, the ability to modify the lunar landscape for safer landing, transfer of payloads from the lander an outpost, dust generation mitigation, and infrastructure placement and buildup are also extremely important for long-term lunar operations. While extra-terrestrial excavation, material handling and processing, and site preparation and construction may be new to NASA and other space agencies, there is extensive terrestrial hardware and commercial experience that can be leveraged. This paper will provide an overview of current NASA activities in lunar ISRU mining and construction and how terrestrial experience in these areas are important to achieving the goal of affordable and sustainable human exploration.

Sanders, Gerald B.↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Human Mars Surface Mission Surface Power Impacts on Timeline and Traverse Capabilities

The National Aeronautics and Aerospace Administration’s (NASA) Mars Architecture Team (MAT) developed a concept for power management operations to support a thirty-day, minimal infrastructure Mars surface mission. The surface elements in this minimal surface mission concept include three landers as platforms for surface operations, a crewed Mars ascent vehicle (MAV), an unpressurized rover, and a pressurized rover where the crew will live for the duration of the thirty-day mission. In this analysis the power system is a ten kilowatt fission power system, which has been selected for its resiliency to dust storms, and will provide power for all aspects of the surface mission including thermal management of propellant and electronic systems, communications, and battery recharge of mobile surface assets. Developing a power management plan with the consideration of the various elements and mission phases helps define the traverse and exploration capabilities for the crew in the pressurized rover. Also, considerations need to be made for the different power requirements for each phase of the surface mission including arrival, offload, surface exploration, launch preparation, and departure. The described analysis aims to achieve a balance of maintaining power to critical systems while enabling desired traverse and exploration range in the pressurized rover. Additionally, a few enhancing technologies were explored that could expand the power capability if the additional capacity is necessary in the future. This study is used as a baseline to understand the constraints on all aspects of the surface mission for a minimal surface infrastructure human Mars campaign if a ten-kilowatt fission surface power system is available on the surface.

Michael B. Chappell↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Human Mars Mission Surface Power Impacts on Timeline and Traverse Capabilities

The National Aeronautics and Aerospace Administration’s (NASA) Mars Architecture Team (MAT) developed a concept for power management operations to support a thirty-day, minimal infrastructure Mars surface mission. The surface elements in this minimal surface mission concept include three landers as platforms for surface operations, a crewed Mars ascent vehicle (MAV), an unpressurized rover, and a pressurized rover where the crew will live for the duration of the thirty-day mission. In this analysis the power system is a ten kilowatt fission power system, which has been selected for its resiliency to dust storms, and will provide power for all aspects of the surface mission including thermal management of propellant and electronic systems, communications, and battery recharge of mobile surface assets. Developing a power management plan with the consideration of the various elements and mission phases helps define the traverse and exploration capabilities for the crew in the pressurized rover. Also, considerations need to be made for the different power requirements for each phase of the surface mission including arrival, offload, surface exploration, launch preparation, and departure. The described analysis aims to achieve a balance of maintaining power to critical systems while enabling desired traverse and exploration range in the pressurized rover. Additionally, a few enhancing technologies were explored that could expand the power capability if the additional capacity is necessary in the future. This study is used as a baseline to understand the constraints on all aspects of the surface mission for a minimal surface infrastructure human Mars campaign if a ten-kilowatt fission surface power system is available on the surface.

Michael B Chappell↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Using Open Standards and NASA Open Source Simulation Tools to Model Artemis Base Camp Mission Timelines

The United States’ National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) has announced that the Artemis Program will return humans to the Moon, establishing a persistent presence with the Artemis Base Camp (ABC), and extend human exploration to Mars. The NASA Exploration Systems Simulations (NExSyS) team at NASA’s Johnson Space Center is using internationally developed simulation interoperability standards and NASA open source simulation tools to support Artemis concept, analysis, designs, development, training, and ultimately operations. The NExSyS team has been tasked to support early ABC architecture and mission analysis using mission time lines developed by the crew operations mission planning team. The NExSyS team is developing a distributed simulation framework with initial Artemis element implementations to model the ABC mission timelines using the international simulation interoperability standard High Level Architecture (HLA), the Simulation Interoperability Standards Organization’s Space Reference Federation Object Model (SpaceFOM), the NASA open source Trick Simulation Environment, and another NASA open source interface package called TrickHLA. The ABC architecture is composed of a number of key surface elements and resources. Some examples of modeled elements (also known as entities) are landers, habitats, rovers, logistics carriers, and astronauts. Some examples of modeled transferable and consumable resources are power, water, oxygen, nitrogen, scientific samples, and food. These entities and resources are modeled in a collection of individual simulations called Federates. A coordinated collection of interoperable federates is called a Federation and when these federates are tied together in a coordinated simulation run, it is referred to as a Federation Execution. The federates communicate through HLA using data exchange formats defined by a collection of machine readable files called Federation Object Models (FOMs). These FOM files are based on extensions to the SpaceFOM. This enables the instantiation and sharing of objects and interactions between federates in the federation. These provide for entity and resource tracking, object transfer, and data collection. Federate interactions are used to trigger events and notify federates of entity or resource transfers. For the initial implementation, the constituent federates are Trick-based simulations that use TrickHLA to provide the required HLA-base interoperability. These Trick-based simulations provide the required modeling for the individual Artemis elements along with the associated element resources. These federates provide a means to explore traverses between surface elements and exploration sites as scheduled in a mission timeline and explore the affects traverse times have on the overall mission timeline. The mission time lines are modeled using a Trick input file event handling capabilities. Each timeline operation is handled as individual simulation events, and triggered based on previous event status, time of operation, and simulated task completions. In addition, the ABC Federation can be used to perform Monte Carlo analysis. The Monte Carlo tool can vary the inputs, timings, and malfunctions to show how various contingencies in the mission can affect the mission timeline.

Keaton Craig Dodd↗

NASA NTRS2017

Robust Exploration and Commercial Missions to the Moon Using NTR LANTR Propulsion and Lunar-Derived Propellants

The nuclear thermal rocket (NTR) has frequently been identified as a key space asset required for the human exploration of Mars. This proven technology can also provide the affordable access through cislunar space necessary for commercial development and sustained human presence on the Moon. In his post-Apollo Integrated Space Program Plan (1970-1990), Wernher von Braun, proposed a reusable nuclear thermal propulsion stage (NTPS) to deliver cargo and crew to the Moon to establish a lunar base before undertaking human missions to Mars. The NTR option was selected by von Braun because it was a demonstrated technology capable of generating both high thrust and high specific impulse (Isp 900 s) twice that of todays best chemical rockets. In NASAs Mars Design Reference Architecture (DRA) 5.0 study, the crewed Mars transfer vehicle used three 25 klbf Pewee engines the smallest and highest performing engine tested in the Rover program along with graphite composite fuel. Smaller, lunar transfer vehicles consisting of a NTPS using three approximately 16.5 klbf Small Nuclear Rocket Engines (SNREs), an in-line propellant tank, plus the payload can enable a variety of reusable lunar missions. These include cargo delivery and crewed lunar landing missions. Even weeklong tourism missions carrying passengers into lunar orbit for a day of sightseeing and picture taking are possible. The NTR can play an important role in the next phase of lunar exploration and development by providing an affordable in-space lunar transportation system (LTS) that can allow initial outposts to evolve into settlements supported by a variety of commercial activities such as in-situ propellant production used to supply strategically located propellant depots and transportation nodes. The utilization of iron-rich volcanic glass or lunar polar ice (LPI) deposits (each estimated at billions of metric tons) for propellant production can significantly reduce the launch mass requirements from Earth and can enable reusable, surface-based lunar landing vehicles (LLVs) using liquid oxygen/hydrogen (LOX/LH2) chemical rocket engines. Afterwards, LOX/LH2 propellant depots can be established in lunar equatorial and polar orbits to supply the LTS. At this point a modified version of the conventional NTR called the LOX-augmented NTR, or LANTR would be introduced into the LTS allowing bipropellant operation and leveraging the mission benefits of refueling with lunar-derived propellants for Earth return. The bipropellant LANTR engine utilizes the large divergent section of its nozzle as an afterburner into which oxygen is injected and supersonically combusted with nuclear preheated hydrogen emerging from the engines choked sonic throat essentially scramjet propulsion in reverse. By varying the oxygen-to-hydrogen mixture ratio, LANTR engines can operate over a range of thrust and Isp values while the reactor core power level remains relatively constant. Eventually, a LANTR-based LTS can enable a rapid commuter shuttle with one-way trip times to and from the Moon ranging from 36 to 24 hours. Even if only 1 of the extracted propellant from identified volcanic glass and polar ice deposits were available for use in lunar orbit, such a supply could support daily commuter flights to the Moon for many thousands of years! An evolutionary mission architecture is outlined and a variety of lunar missions and transfer vehicle designs are examined, along with the increasing demands on propellant production as mission complexity increases. A comparison of vehicle features and engine operating characteristics, for both NTR and LANTR engines, is also provided along with a brief discussion on the propellant production issues associated with using volcanic glass and LPI as source material.

Spacecraft design↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

The Adaptable, Deployable, Entry and Placement Technology (ADEPT) Enabling Advanced Entry, Descent, and Landing Capabilities for SmallSat Missions

The Adaptable, Deployable Entry and Placement Technology (ADEPT) is a mechanically deployable low-ballistic coefficient aeroshell entry system which performs entry, descent, and landing (EDL) functions for a broad range of planetary destinations including Mars, Venus, Titan and Earth. The deployable system allows mission planners to develop an aeroshell design that is stowed like a folded umbrella, and yet prior to the EDL mission segment, transforms into a deployed, near-rigid low ballistic coefficient configuration. The ADEPT architecture is scalable from a sub-1m class to 6m diameter entry vehicles for Venus and and it has been studied at up to 15m – 20m scale for human exploration class missions. There has been growing interest in performing interplanetary missions with small spacecraft as secondary payloads and ADEPT offers small satellite mission designers the ability to consider Aeroassist technologies to expand mission applications. The ADEPT architecture introduces a new approach for entry vehicle design. It deploys a flexible 3D woven carbon fabric as the primary drag surface. It is capable of surviving high aerothermal heating during entry, while maintaining a robust impermeable membrane that provides high drag for vehicle deceleration. The ADEPT project team has advanced this decelerator technology via systems-level testing at the one meter diameter (nano-ADEPT) scale. A subsonic aeroloads test (May 2015) and a pathfinder arc-jet aeroheating test (Sept 2015) and a successful sounding rocket flight (SR-1) launch of a 0.7 meter deployed diameter ADEPT (September 2018). The SR-1 flight experiment demonstrated most of the primary end-to-end mission stages including: launch in a stowed configuration, separation and deployment in zero-g, exo-atmospheric conditions, and passive ballistic re-entry of a 70 degree half-angle cone geometry. The ADEPT SR-1 sounding rocket flight experiment had to address challenges such as stowing within the constrained payload envelope, fabric folding, and packaging concerns.

Paul Wercinski↗

NASA NTRS2024

Design of a Family of Mars Chemical Transportation Elements

NASA’s Mars Architecture Team (MAT) has recently developed a collection of concepts to assess the capabilities and constraints presented by architectures incorporating large-scale Mars In-Situ Resource Utilization (ISRU) propellant production. The focus of this manuscript is on the concept design of chemical propellant-based transportation systems including a dual role lander/ascent vehicle and an in-space transporter. Mission performance analyses performed during a recent design analysis cycle derived the 300,000 kg propellant production capacity utilized for preliminary concept designs of enabling surface ISRU systems, power systems, fluid handling systems, and their concept of operation, detailed in companion papers.

Mars↗

NASA NTRS2024

Design of a Family of Mars Chemical Transportation Elements

NASA’s Mars Architecture Team (MAT) has recently developed a collection of concepts to assess the capabilities and constraints presented by architectures incorporating large-scale Mars In-Situ Resource Utilization (ISRU) propellant production. The focus of this manuscript is on the concept design of chemical propellant-based transportation systems including a dual role lander/ascent vehicle and an in-space transporter. Mission performance analyses performed during a recent design analysis cycle derived the 300,000 kg propellant production capacity utilized for preliminary concept designs of enabling surface ISRU systems, power systems, fluid handling systems, and their concept of operation, detailed in companion papers.

Mars↗

NASA NTRS2016

Pharmaceuticals Exposed to the Space Environment: Problems and Prospects

The NASA Human Research Program (HRP) Health Countermeasures Element maintains ongoing efforts to inform detailed risks, gaps, and further questions associated with the use of pharmaceuticals in space. Most recently, the Pharmacology Risk Report, released in 2010, illustrates the problems associated with maintaining pharmaceutical efficacy. Since the report, one key publication includes evaluation of pharmaceutical products stored on the International Space Station (ISS). This study shows that selected pharmaceuticals on ISS have a shorter shelf-life in space than corresponding terrestrial controls. The HRP Human Research Roadmap for planetary exploration identifies the risk of ineffective or toxic medications due to long-term storage during missions to Mars. The roadmap also identifies the need to understand and predict how pharmaceuticals will behave when exposed to radiation for long durations. Terrestrial studies of returned samples offer a start for predictive modeling. This paper shows that pharmaceuticals returned to Earth for post-flight analyses are amenable to a Weibull distribution analysis in order to support probabilistic risk assessment modeling. The paper also considers the prospect of passive payloads of key pharmaceuticals on sample return missions outside of Earth's magnetic field to gather additional statistics. Ongoing work in radiation chemistry suggests possible mitigation strategies where future work could be done at cryogenic temperatures to explore methods for preserving the strength of pharmaceuticals in the space radiation environment, perhaps one day leading to an architecture where pharmaceuticals are cached on the Martian surface and preserved cryogenically.

pharmacology↗

NASA NTRS2008

Does NASA's Constellation Architecture Offer Opportunities to Achieve Multiple Additional Goals in Space?

Every major NASA human spaceflight program in the last four decades has been modified to achieve goals in space not incorporated within the original design goals: the Apollo Applications Program, Skylab, Space Shuttle, and International Space Station. Several groups in the US have been identifying major future science goals, the science facilities necessary to investigate them, as well as possible roles for augmented versions of elements of NASA's Constellation program. Specifically, teams in the astronomy community have been developing concepts for very capable missions to follow the James Webb Space Telescope that could take advantage of - or require - free-space operations by astronauts and/or robots. Taking as one example, the Single-Aperture Far-InfraRed (SAFIR) telescope with a approx. 10+ m aperture proposed for operation in the 2020 timeframe. According to current NASA plans, the Ares V launch vehicle (or a variant) will be available about the same time, as will the capability to transport astronauts to the vicinity of the Moon via the Orion Crew Exploration Vehicle and associated systems. [As the lunar surface offers no advantages - and major disadvantages - for most major optical systems, the expensive system for landing and operating on the lunar surface is not required.] Although as currently conceived, SAFIR and other astronomical missions will operate at the Sun-Earth L2 location, it appears trivial to travel for servicing to the more accessible Earth-Moon L1,2 locations. Moreover. as the recent Orbital Express and Automated Transfer Vehicle missions have demonstrated, future robotic capabilities should offer capabilities that would (remotely) extend human presence far beyond the vicinity of the Earth. In addition to multiplying the value of NASA's architecture for future human spaceflight to achieve the goals multiple major stakeholders. if humans one day travel beyond the Earth-Moon system - say, to Mars - technologies and capabilities for operating for long periods in free space must be developed. The engineering, management. and operational successes of the Space Station have demonstrated that international collaboratio~i is possible. However, there is a danger that the hard-won lessons of cLul+sent programs will be lost without continuing development of in-space operations. A program to achieve. for example. major astronomical goals in space using astronauts and robots will sustain international capabilities. produce highly visible achievements. and appeal to a11 additional broad community of stakeholders not currently involved with missions to the lunar surface.

Thronson, Harley↗

NASA NTRS2008

Does NASA's Constellation Architecture Offer Opportunities to Achieve Multiple Additional Goals in Space?

Every major NASA human spaceflight program in the last four decades has been modified to achieve goals in space not incorporated within the original design goals: the Apollo Applications Program, Skylab, Space Shuttle, and International Space Station. Several groups in the US have been identifying major future science goals, the science facilities necessary to investigate them, as well as possible roles for augmented versions of elements of NASA's Constellation program. Specifically, teams in the astronomy community have been developing concepts for very capable missions to follow the James Webb Space Telescope that could take advantage of - or require - free-space operations by astronauts and/or robots. Taking as one example, the Single-Aperture Far-InfraRed (SAFIR) telescope with a approx.10+ m aperture proposed for operation in the 2020 timeframe. According to current NASA plans, the Ares V launch vehicle (or a variant) will be available about the same time, as will the capability to transport astronauts to the vicinity of the Moon via the Orion Crew Exploration Vehicle and associated systems. [As the lunar surface offers no advantages - and major disadvantages - for most major optical systems, the expensive system for landing and operating on the lunar surface is not required.] Although as currently conceived, SAFIR and other astronomical missions will operate at the Sun-Earth L2 location, it appears trivial to travel for servicing to the more accessible Earth-Moon L1,2 locations. Moreover, as the recent Orbital Express and Automated Transfer Vehicle missions have demonstrated, future robotic capabilities should offer capabilities that would (remotely) extend human presence far beyond the vicinity of the Earth. In addition to multiplying the value of NASA's architecture for future human spaceflight to achieve the goals multiple major stakeholders, if humans one day travel beyond the Earth-Moon system - say, to Mars - technologies and capabilities for operating for long periods in free space must be developed. The engineering. management, and operational successes of the Space Station have demonstrated that international collaboration is possible. However, there is a danger that the hard-won lessons of current programs will be lost without continuing development of in-space operations. A program to achieve. for example, major astronomical goals in space using astronauts and robots will sustain international capabilities, produce highly visible achievements, and appeal to an additional broad community of stakeholders not currently involved with missions to the lunar surface.

Thronson, Harley A.↗

NASA NTRS1999

Exploring Mars: the Ares Payload Service (APS)

In last year's Mars Society convention we introduced the results of five years of studies of space launch capability for the second millennium. We concluded that Single Stage to Orbit (SSTO) vehicles such as the Delta Clipper X33, and X34 cannot make it to orbit from the Earth's surface. Whether taking off vertically or horizontally or landing vertically or horizontally, the rocket equations, the performance of available fuels, and the realities of the weight and strength of materials leave no margin for payload. The promised savings from SSTO systems are illusory. However, a configuration that is able to deliver useful payload to orbit is the Single step to Orbit, SsTO, a rocket plane that is released fully fueled, from 35,000 to 40,000 feet altitude. Three approaches have been proposed. The Hot'l and Molnya Corporation designs carry the fueled rocket plane to altitude on the back of a carrier aircraft. In this design the carrier aircraft is Russia's Antonov 225 the world's largest cargo plane. The rocket plane is a modified version of the Buran, Russia's own space shuttle. Another configuration is Kelly Aviation's concept in which the fully fueled rocket plane is towed to altitude by the cargo plane and then released. A third approach is based on the early "X" planes, which were dropped from the belly of the carrier plane. While the rocket equations indicate that these three concepts can deliver useful payloads, the Stanford review found significant advantages to the approach of Pioneer Rocket, in which the rocket plane flies up to the carrier plane with conventional jet engines, docks, and then loads on the oxidizer for the flight to orbit. This architecture has more reasonable abort modes in case of system failure in either aircraft and can deliver a larger final payload to orbit for a given sized carrier. The Stanford recommendation is that the carrier aircraft be the Antonov 225. A design based on this was presented in a report last year. Refinements to the design notably an improved re-entry cooling system and fueling stability analysis were done this year. More technical detail and a proposed international consortium to develop the SSTO is presented in another session of this year's Mars convention. We believe that there will be no human exploration of Mars based on the Shuttle or Expendable launch vehicles, and no resources available except for a cooperative international program. However, just as the world is learning to cooperate in peacekeeping, we hold out the hope that similar cooperation will develop for Mars exploration. With that in mind, this year we asked the question- "How will the human mission get to Mars if it has to use the SsTO for transportation?"

Bowen, Justin↗

NASA NTRS2009

Human Exploration of Mars Design Reference Architecture 5.0

This document reviews the Design Reference Architecture (DRA) for human exploration of Mars. The DRA represents the current best strategy for human missions. The DRA is not a formal plan, but provides a vision and context to tie current systems and technology developments to potential missions to Mars, and it also serves as a benchmark against which alternative architectures can be measured. The document also reviews the objectives and products of the 2007 study that was to update NASA's human Mars mission reference architecture, assess strategic linkages between lunar and Mars strategies, develop an understanding of methods for reducing cost/risk of human missions through investment in research, technology development and synergy with other exploration plans. There is also a review of the process by which the DRA will continue to be refined. The unique capacities of human exploration is reviewed. The possible goals and objectives of the first three human missions are presented, along with the recommendation that the mission involve a long stay visiting multiple sites.The deployment strategy is outlined and diagrammed including the pre-deployment of the many of the material requirements, and a six crew travel to Mars on a six month trajectory. The predeployment and the Orion crew vehicle are shown. The ground operations requirements are also explained. Also the use of resources found on the surface of Mars is postulated. The Mars surface exploration strategy is reviewed, including the planetary protection processes that are planned. Finally a listing of the key decisions and tenets is posed.

Drake, Bret G.↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Effects of Communication Delay on Human Spaceflight Missions

Missions onboard the International Space Station rely on the real-time availability of a large ground team of system experts to command the vehicle, solve safety-critical problems, and guide the crew during complex operations. Also, in Low Earth Orbit (LEO), supplies can be sent and crews evacuated quite quickly if needed. Future missions Beyond Low Earth Orbit (BLEO) will not have this 24/7, real-time safety net as communication latency increases, resupply difficulty increases, and evacuation opportunities diminish. There are few, if any, terrestrial analogs for human spaceflight missions BLEO that reflect the conditions—including extreme environments, long mission durations, and small crew sizes – that make these missions so high risk. Studies on specific conditions, such as communication delays and asynchronous interactions, have been performed in NASA Earth-based analog missions and have found that communication delays can disrupt ground-crew interactions and adversely impact team performance. However, there are gaps and limitations in studies conducted to date, notably on human spacecraft system failure response and recovery, the impacts of shorter lunar-relevant communication delays on complex operations, and the effectiveness of countermeasures. The work presented here breaks down real anomalies that occurred on ISS and Apollo missions and creates example scenarios fort Lunar Surface and Mars missions to explore the impact of communication delays of varying length on onboard operations and mission outcomes. Our analyses indicate that short communication delays (e.g., seconds to a minute) adversely impact the ability for ground to provide real-time oversight and guidance and to catch quickly emerging problems in time. Longer communication delays (e.g., up to 40 minutes on Mars missions) call for a shift of responsibility for tactical operations from ground to crew; crew must make time-critical decisions independently and respond to time-critical vehicle anomalies to prevent consequences.

human-systems integration↗

NASA NTRS2010

Analysis of Shroud Options in Support of the Human Exploration of Mars

In support of the Mars Design Reference Architecture (DRA) 5.0, the NASA study team analyzed several shroud options for use on the Ares V launch vehicle.1,2 These shroud options included conventional "large encapsulation" shrouds with outer diameters ranging from 8.4 to 12.9 meters (m) and overall lengths of 22.0 to 54.3 meters, along with a "nosecone-only" shroud option used for Mars transfer vehicle component delivery. Also examined was a "multi-use" aerodynamic encapsulation shroud used for launch, Mars aerocapture, and entry, descent, and landing of the cargo and habitat landers. All conventional shroud options assessed for use on the Mars launch vehicles were the standard biconic design derived from the reference shroud utilized in the Constellation Program s lunar campaign. It is the purpose of this paper to discuss the technical details of each of these shroud options including material properties, structural mass, etc., while also discussing both the volume and mass of the various space transportation and surface system payload elements required to support a "minimum launch" Mars mission strategy, as well as the synergy, potential differences and upgrade paths that may be required between the Lunar and Mars mission shrouds.

Feldman, Stuart↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Effects of Communication Delay on Human Spaceflight Missions

Missions onboard the International Space Station rely on the real-time availability of a large ground team of system experts to command the vehicle, solve safety-critical problems, and guide the crew during complex operations. Also, in Low Earth Orbit (LEO), supplies can be sent and crews evacuated quite quickly if needed. Future missions Beyond Low Earth Orbit (BLEO) will not have this 24/7, real-time safety net as communication latency increases, resupply difficulty increases, and evacuation opportunities diminish. There are few, if any, terrestrial analogs for human spaceflight missions BLEO that reflect the conditions—including extreme environments, long mission durations, and small crew sizes – that make these missions so high risk. Studies on specific conditions, such as communication delays and asynchronous interactions, have been performed in NASA Earth-based analog missions and have found that communication delays can disrupt ground-crew interactions and adversely impact team performance. However, there are gaps and limitations in studies conducted to date, notably on human spacecraft system failure response and recovery, the impacts of shorter lunar-relevant communication delays on complex operations, and the effectiveness of countermeasures. The work presented here breaks down real anomalies that occurred on ISS and Apollo missions and creates example scenarios fort Lunar Surface and Mars missions to explore the impact of communication delays of varying length on onboard operations and mission outcomes. Our analyses indicate that short communication delays (e.g., seconds to a minute) adversely impact the ability for ground to provide real-time oversight and guidance and to catch quickly emerging problems in time. Longer communication delays (e.g., up to 40 minutes on Mars missions) call for a shift of responsibility for tactical operations from ground to crew; crew must make time-critical decisions independently and respond to time-critical vehicle anomalies to prevent consequences.

human-systems integration↗

NASA NTRS2009

Proceedings of the 40th Lunar and Planetary Science Conference

The 40th Lunar and Planetary Science Conference included sessions on: Phoenix: Exploration of the Martian Arctic; Origin and Early Evolution of the Moon; Comet Wild 2: Mineralogy and More; Astrobiology: Meteorites, Microbes, Hydrous Habitats, and Irradiated Ices; Phoenix: Soil, Chemistry, and Habitability; Planetary Differentiation; Presolar Grains: Structures and Origins; SPECIAL SESSION: Venus Atmosphere: Venus Express and Future Missions; Mars Polar Caps: Past and Present; SPECIAL SESSION: Lunar Missions: Results from Kaguya, Chang'e-1, and Chandrayaan-1, Part I; 5 Early Nebula Processes and Models; SPECIAL SESSION: Icy Satellites of Jupiter and Saturn: Cosmic Gymnasts; Mars: Ground Ice and Climate Change; SPECIAL SESSION: Lunar Missions: Results from Kaguya, Chang'e-1, and Chandrayaan-1, Part II; Chondrite Parent-Body Processes; SPECIAL SESSION: Icy Satellites of Jupiter and Saturn: Salubrious Surfaces; SNC Meteorites; Ancient Martian Crust: Primary Mineralogy and Aqueous Alteration; SPECIAL SESSION: Messenger at Mercury: A Global Perspective on the Innermost Planet; CAIs and Chondrules: Records of Early Solar System Processes; Small Bodies: Shapes of Things to Come; Sulfur on Mars: Rocks, Soils, and Cycling Processes; Mercury: Evolution and Tectonics; Venus Geology, Volcanism, Tectonics, and Resurfacing; Asteroid-Meteorite Connections; Impacts I: Models and Experiments; Solar Wind and Genesis: Measurements and Interpretation; Mars: Aqueous Processes; Magmatic Volatiles and Eruptive Conditions of Lunar Basalts; Comparative Planetology; Interstellar Matter: Origins and Relationships; Impacts II: Craters and Ejecta Mars: Tectonics and Dynamics; Mars Analogs I: Geological; Exploring the Diversity of Lunar Lithologies with Sample Analyses and Remote Sensing; Chondrite Accretion and Early History; Science Instruments for the Mars Science Lander; . Martian Gullies: Morphology and Origins; Mars: Dunes, Dust, and Wind; Mars: Volcanism; Early Solar System Chronology; Seek Out and Explore: Upcoming and Future Missions; Mars: Early History and Impact Processes; Mars Analogs II: Chemical and Spectral; Achondrites and their Parent Bodies; and Planning for Future Exploration of the Moon The poster sessions were: Lunar Missions: Results from Kaguya, Chang'e-1, and Chandrayaan-1; LRO and LCROSS; Geophysical Analysis of the Lunar Surface and Interior; Remote Observation and Geologic Mapping of the Lunar Surface; Lunar Spectroscopy; Venus Geology, Geophysics, Mapping, and Sampling; Planetary Differentiation; Bunburra and Buzzard Coulee: Recent Meteorite Falls; Meteorites: Terrestrial History; CAIs and Chondrules: Records of Early Solar System Processes; Volatile and Organic Compounds in Chondrites; Crashing Chondrites: Impact, Shock, and Melting; Ureilite Studies; Petrology and Mineralogy of the SNC Meteorites; Martian Meteorites; Phoenix Landing Site: Perchlorate and Other Tasty Treats; Mars Polar Atmospheres and Climate Modeling; Mars Polar Investigations; Mars Near-Surface Ice; Mars: A Volatile-Rich Planet; Mars: Geochemistry and Alteration Processes; Martian Phyllosilicates: Identification, Formation, and Alteration; Astrobiology; Instrument Concepts, Systems, and Probes for Investigating Rocks and Regolith; Seeing is Believing: UV, VIS, IR, X- and Gamma-Ray Camera and Spectrometer Instruments; Up Close and Personal: In Situ Analysis with Laser-Induced Breakdown Spectroscopy and Mass Spectrometry; Jupiter and Inscrutable Io; Tantalizing Titan; Enigmatic Enceladus and Intriguing Iapetus; Icy Satellites: Cryptic Craters; Icy Satellites: Gelid Geology/Geophysics; Icy Satellites: Cool Chemistry and Spectacular Spectroscopy; Asteroids and Comets; Comet Wild 2: Mineralogy and More; Hypervelocity Impacts: Stardust Models, LDEF, and ISPE; Presolar Grains; Early Nebular Processes: Models and Isotopes; Solar Wind and Genesis: Measurements and Interpretation; Education and Public Outreach; Mercury; Pursuing Lunar Exploration; Sources and Eruptionf Lunar Basalts; Chemical and Physical Properties of the Lunar Regolith; Lunar Dust and Transient Surface Phenomena; Lunar Databases and Data Restoration; Meteoritic Samples of the Moon; Chondrites, Their Clasts, and Alteration; Achondrites: Primitive and Not So Primitive; Iron Meteorites; Meteorite Methodology; Antarctic Micrometeorites; HEDs and Vesta; Dust Formation and Transformation; Interstellar Organic Matter; Early Solar System Chronology; Comparative Planetology; Impacts I: Models and Experiments; Impacts II: Craters and Ejecta; Mars: Volcanism; Mars: Tectonics and Dynamics; Martian Stratigraphy: Understanding the Geologic History of Mars Through the Sedimentary Rock Record; Mars: Valleys and Valley Networks; Mars: Aqueous Processes in Valles Marineris and the Southern Highlands; Mars: Aqueous Geomorphology; Martian Gullies: Morphology and Origins; Mars: Dunes, Dust, and Wind; Mars: Remote Sensing; Mars: Geologic Mapping, Photogrammetry, and Cratering; Martian Mineralogy: Constraints from Missions and Laboratory Investigations; Mars Analogs: Chemical and Physical; Mars Analogs: Sulfates and Sulfides; Missions: Approaches, Architectures, Analogs, and Actualities; Not Just Skin Deep: Electron Microscopy, Heat Flow, Radar, and Seismology Instruments and Planetary Data Systems, Techniques, and Interpretation.

Source record↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Common Habitat Architecture

The Common Habitat is a human habitation element for inner solar system long duration (assessed up to 1200 days) space missions, inclusive of both orbital and surface missions. Exploration Science is supported by both internal laboratories and external science platforms (e.g., telescopes and other remote sensing systems). The Common Habitat is integrated with other elements needed (e.g., propulsion, heat rejection, airlock, etc.) to make the total system a spacecraft, space station, base, or other facility. The Common Habitat Architecture is an exploratory, primarily volunteer, NASA conceptual study and is NOT the current Artemis architecture. Common Habitat elements do show a similarity to some elements under development for Artemis but do not imply any relationship to, influence on, or influence by Artemis requirements, objectives, or acquisitions.

Common Habitat↗