SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Commercial Crew Program”

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

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

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

At least 307 records · Page 17

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

NASA NTRS2011

Limiting Future Collision Risk to Spacecraft: An Assessment of NASA's Meteoroid and Orbital Debris Programs

Over the past 50 years, various NASA communities have contributed significantly to maturing NASA s meteoroid and orbital debris (MMOD)1 programs to their current state. As a result of these community efforts, and to NASA s credit, NASA s MMOD programs and models are now widely used and respected by the providers and users of both government and commercial satellites, nationally as well as internationally. Satellites have been redesigned to protect critical components from MMOD damage by moving critical components from exterior surfaces to deep inside a satellite s structure. Orbits are monitored and altered to minimize the risk of collision with tracked orbital debris. MMOD shielding added to the International Space Station (ISS) protects critical components and astronauts from potentially catastrophic damage that might result from smaller, untracked debris and meteoroid impacts. The space shuttle, as it orbited Earth, and whether docked to the ISS or not, was optimally oriented to protect its fragile thermal protection and thermal radiation systems from MMOD damage. In addition, astronauts inspected its thermal protection system for MMOD damage before the shuttle reentered Earth s atmosphere; Orion, NASA s capsule to carry astronauts to low Earth orbit, includes designs to mitigate the threat of MMOD damage and provide increased safety to the crew. When a handful of reasonable assumptions are used in NASA s MMOD models, scenarios are uncovered that conclude that the current orbital debris environment has already reached a "tipping point." That is, the amount of debris - in terms of the population of large debris objects, as well as overall mass of debris in orbit - currently in orbit has reached a threshold where it will continually collide with itself, further increasing the population of orbital debris. This increase will lead to corresponding increases in spacecraft failures, which will only create more feedback into the system, increasing the debris population growth rate. The increase thus far has been most rapid in low Earth orbit (LEO), with geosynchronous Earth orbits (GEOs) potentially suffering the same fate, but over a much longer time period. The exact timing and pace of this exponential growth are uncertain, but the serious implications of such a scenario require careful attention because of the strategic importance of U.S. space operations. The Office of Science and Technology Policy and the Office of Management and Budget contracted with the National Research Council for a study to perform three tasks: review NASA s MMOD programs and efforts, recommend in which of those NASA should increase or decrease its effort or change focus, and determine whether NASA should pursue work in any new MMOD areas. The official letter requesting the study and the full statement of task for the Committee for the Assessment of NASA s Orbital Debris Programs are in Appendixes A and B, respectively.

Source record↗

NASA NTRS1980

Recommendations for the NASA Avionics program for the 1980's

NASA is examining the merits of a significant expansion of its avionics, controls, and human factors technology program for the 1980's. The rationale for an expanded program is related to two factors. One factor is related to a utilization of recent and anticipated significant advances in microelectronics. The second factor is the need to develop new concepts in avionics and control systems for more efficient aircraft operation and better utilization of extremely limited airport capacity. Substantial benefits could be realized in three major categories, including improved aircraft efficiency, improved flight operations, and improved/extended operational capability. The NASA Avionics, Controls, and Human Factors Technology Plan is the report of a task force of agency personnel working in close cooperation with industry, DOD, and FAA. Attention is given to the NASA role, aircraft controls, crew station technology, flight management, integration and interfacing, commercial transports, general aviation, rotorcraft, V/STOL, and high performance aircraft.

Spitzer, C. R.↗

NASA NTRS2019

Bumper: A Tool for Analyzing Spacecraft Micrometeoroid and Orbital Debris Risk

“Bumper” is NASA’s computer program for analyzing spacecraft micrometeoroid and orbital debris (MMOD) risk. Bumper was developed in the late-1980s and has been continuously used and maintained since. The user base has grown from a few government entities to now include numerous commercial entities as well. The NASA Johnson Space Center (JSC) Hypervelocity Impact Technology (HVIT) Team is responsible for all aspects of the Bumper software. Bumper has been used to characterize MMOD risk on hundreds of spacecraft. All of the International Space Station (ISS) modules, visiting vehicles and numerous external components and systems have been analyzed. Bumper was used to analyze each of the Space Shuttle missions since STS-50. The Orion Multi-Purpose Crew Vehicle (MPCV) MMOD shielding is being developed using Bumper as well. Bumper has also been used on numerous telescopes (Hubble, James Webb, and Fermi Gamma-ray Space Telescopes), scientific probes (Stardust, New Horizons, Parker Solar Probe), and Earth observation satellites (Landsat, Joint Polar Satellite System). Bumper is also being used to analyze the micrometeoroid risk and support design of the Deep Space Gateway (DSG) and Mars Sample Return (MSR) missions. The HVIT Bumper Configuration Control Board (CCB) ensures that all changes to the code are approved, reviewed, and documented. Most of the changes are made to add new MMOD damage “ballistic limit equations” (BLEs). BLEs are typically added in response to completion of a hypervelocity impact (HVI) test series and development of an associated BLE. Other less frequent changes include updates of the debris or meteoroid environment models, feature enhancements, and feature retirement. Some BLEs are commercially sensitive and/or proprietary, so the CCB also manages code user-version control and software distribution. The current version – “Bumper 3” – is a FORTRAN executable that utilizes a 64-bit architecture. Bumper 3 has numerous features that make it a powerful tool for analyzing spacecraft MMOD risk. Bumper uses the latest orbital debris and micrometeoroid environment models. Bumper also easily processes large spacecraft geometry models, recognizes hidden surfaces, permits BLE assignment by name or number, and conducts quality checks of the spacecraft geometry model. Bumper 3 can also be used to estimate the effects of particle penetration through thin, high-standoff distance hardware components such as solar arrays and radiators. This is done using a special HVIT-developed technique know as the “3-Part Analysis.” The paper introduces the Bumper 3 MMOD risk analysis code and provides an example MMOD risk assessment showing Bumper’s role in the overall MMOD protection design process.

Lear, Dana M.↗

NASA NTRS1998

Battery Systems for X-38 Crew Return Vehicle (CRV) and Deorbit Propulsion Stage (DPS)

A 28V 32 Ah cell Li/MnO2 and a 28V NiMH battery systems for the Deorbit Propulsion Stage (DPS) and the X-38 Crew Return Vehicle (CRV) are developed in Friwo-Silforkraft, Germany with the following objectives and approach: Provide safe battery designs for lowest volume and cost, and within schedule; Take advantage of less complex requests for V201 vs OPS CRV to simplify design and reduce cost; Use only existing commercial cell designs as building blocks for larger battery; Derive battery designs from the ASTRO-SPAS design which is the largest lithium battery design with Shuttle flight experience; Place maximum amount of battery energy on DPS; DPS battery is non rechargeable; and CRV batteries are rechargeable. This paper contains the following sections: a brief introduction on CRV requirements, CRV advantages over Soyuz, and X-38 programs; Battery objectives and approach; Battery requirements and groundrules (performance, on-orbit operation, etc); Design trades, solutions, redundancy plan, and margins; Envelope, size, and mass; Interfaces (structural, electrical & thermal); and Deviation from OPS CRV.

Darcy, Eric↗

NASA NTRS2012

Availability Estimation for Facilities in Extreme Geographical Locations

A value added analysis for the Reliability. Availability and Maintainability of McMurdo Ground Station was developed, which will be a useful tool for system managers in sparing, maintenance planning and determining vital performance metrics needed for readiness assessment of the upgrades to the McMurdo System. Output of this study can also be used as inputs and recommendations for the application of Reliability Centered Maintenance (RCM) for the system. ReliaSoft's BlockSim. a commercial Reliability Analysis software package, has been used to model the availability of the system upgrade to the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Near Earth Network (NEN) Ground Station at McMurdo Station in the Antarctica. The logistics challenges due to the closure of access to McMurdo Station during the Antarctic winter was modeled using a weighted composite of four Weibull distributions. one of the possible choices for statistical distributions throughout the software program and usually used to account for failure rates of components supplied by different manufacturers. The inaccessibility of the antenna site on a hill outside McMurdo Station throughout one year due to severe weather was modeled with a Weibull distribution for the repair crew availability. The Weibull distribution is based on an analysis of the available weather data for the antenna site for 2007 in combination with the rules for travel restrictions due to severe weather imposed by the administrating agency, the National Science Foundation (NSF). The simulations resulted in an upper bound for the system availability and allowed for identification of components that would improve availability based on a higher on-site spare count than initially planned.

Fischer, Gerd M.↗

NASA NTRS1976

Space processing in early Shuttle missions

The paper first reviews potential scientific and commercial benefits of space processing, and discusses roles of ground laboratory, sounding rocket, and Shuttle/Spacelab experimentation in carrying out space processing programs. Benefits which have been identified in such processes as containerless melting/solidification, electrophoresis, crystal growing, etc., and using such specific materials as tungsten, isoenzymes, single crystal silicon ribbon are utilized as specific examples in the above discussion. As a result, the paper identifies spectrum of specific objectives and implementation approaches for Shuttle/Spacelab experimentation. The paper then reviews currently planned Shuttle/Spacelab payload accommodations and traffic model. Finally, the paper matches experimentation approaches with Shuttle/Spacelab plans, and derives a possible schedule of missions in the 1979-1982 time frame using configurations with a high degree of automation where crew time for experiment involvement is limited.

Bloom, H. L.↗

NASA NTRS2023

Commercial Low-Earth Orbit Destination (CLD) Concept of Operations

This concept of operations describes: - High-level Government goals, objectives, and needs for the CLD program, vehicle(s), and missions, - Strategies, policies, and processes for developing, certifying, maintaining, using, and retiring CLDs in the context of Government use, and - Government and CLD partner roles, responsibilities, and interactions during various phases of Government CLD operations. The intent of this document is to describe the overall high-level concept of how the end-to-end CLD service will be used to convey the nature and scope of services the Government intends to procure from the CLD partner. It will provide insight into NASA’s concepts for CLD operations rather than to provide mature, explicit, or complete requirements. It addresses how the concept of operations will be used to meet NASA expectations from an operational perspective to facilitate an understanding of the end-to-end CLD service needs, goals, and objectives (NGOs). Formal CLD requirements and standards are detailed in the NASA Commercial LEO Development Program’s (CLDP) various requirements, interface, process, and standards documents, as well as the contractual Statements of Work (SOW) and Data Requirement Deliverables (DRD). As such, the Concept of Operations can use terms such as “should” or “may” or “expects to” since it is not a contractual requirements document. It exists solely to convey the initial nature and type of services the Government intends to procure and is not, per se, a requirements document.

Operations↗

NASA NTRS2006

Dawn of a New Space Age: Developing a Global Exploration Strategy.

Jeff Volosin is an aerospace engineer with over 20 years of experience in the design, development, and operations of both robotic and crewed spacecraft. Mr. Volosin is currently leading the NASA effort to develop and integrate a global exploration strategy which reflects the lunar exploration interests of international space agencies, academia and commercial stakeholders. Prior to joining NASA as a member of the Exploration Systems Mission Directorate in 2004, Jeff was an aerospace contractor, serving in a number of leadership positions including: Operations Manager for the NASA Communications Network and Flight Operations Manager for the Advanced Composition Explorer, Tropical Rainfall Measuring Mission, and the NOAA Polar and Geostationary satellite constellations. Earlier in his career, Jeff spent 4 years as a system engineer supporting the Space Exploration Initiative studies on human voyages to the Moon and Mars and also supported the Space Station program as an advanced life support engineer.

Volosin, Jeff↗

NASA NTRS2018

Space Technology Mission Directorate: Game Changing Development Program: Rapid Analysis and Manufacturing Propulsion Technology (RAMPT)

Technology Overview: The RAMPT (Rapid Analysis and Manufacturing Propulsion Technology) project will develop and advance large scale light-weight multi-metallic freeform manufacturing and composite overwrap techniques and analysis capabilities required to implement them to reduce design and fabrication cycles for regeneratively-cooled liquid rocket engine components; RAMPT will reduce design, fabrication, assembly schedules while allowing for reduced parts, increased reliability, significant weight reduction and a healthy American supply chain. Four technology areas developed: 1) Freeform Blown Powder Nozzle; 2) Composite overwrap structural jacket; 3) Bimetallic radial deposition for manifolds; 4) Modeling and analysis tools for Additive and Regen design. Exploration & Science Impact: Addresses longest lead, highest cost and heaviest component in engine; Applicable to Lunar Lander Engine, Booster Engines, Upper Stage Engines, and NTP (Nuclear Thermal Propulsion) Technology; Public-private partnerships with specialty industry vendors, government partners, Commercial Crew, and infusion into commercial space companies and manufacturers; SSTIP (NASA's Strategic Space Technology Investment Plan) Core Investment Area - Launch Propulsion Systems (TA01 (NASA Technology Area 01); Lightweight Space Structures and Materials (TA12); Manufacturing (TA12).

RAMPT↗

NASA NTRS1999

The Aviation System Analysis Capability Air Carrier Cost-Benefit Model

To meet its objective of assisting the U.S. aviation industry with the technological challenges of the future, NASA must identify research areas that have the greatest potential for improving the operation of the air transportation system. Therefore, NASA is developing the ability to evaluate the potential impact of various advanced technologies. By thoroughly understanding the economic impact of advanced aviation technologies and by evaluating how the new technologies will be used in the integrated aviation system, NASA aims to balance its aeronautical research program and help speed the introduction of high-leverage technologies. To meet these objectives, NASA is building the Aviation System Analysis Capability (ASAC). NASA envisions ASAC primarily as a process for understanding and evaluating the impact of advanced aviation technologies on the U.S. economy. ASAC consists of a diverse collection of models and databases used by analysts and other individuals from the public and private sectors brought together to work on issues of common interest to organizations in the aviation community. ASAC also will be a resource available to the aviation community to analyze; inform; and assist scientists, engineers, analysts, and program managers in their daily work. The ASAC differs from previous NASA modeling efforts in that the economic behavior of buyers and sellers in the air transportation and aviation industries is central to its conception. Commercial air carriers, in particular, are an important stakeholder in this community. Therefore, to fully evaluate the implications of advanced aviation technologies, ASAC requires a flexible financial analysis tool that credibly links the technology of flight with the financial performance of commercial air carriers. By linking technical and financial information, NASA ensures that its technology programs will continue to benefit the user community. In addition, the analysis tool must be capable of being incorporated into the wide-ranging suite of economic and technical models that comprise ASAC. This report describes an Air Carrier Cost-Benefit Model (CBM) that meets these requirements. The ASAC CBM is distinguished from many of the aviation cost-benefit models by its exclusive focus on commercial air carriers. The model considers such benefit categories as time and fuel savings, utilization opportunities, reliability and capacity enhancements, and safety and security improvements. The model distinguishes between benefits that are predictable and those that occur randomly. By making such a distinction, the model captures the ability of air carriers to reoptimize scheduling and crew assignments for predictable benefits. In addition, the model incorporates a life-cycle cost module for new technology, which applies the costs of nonrecurring acquisitions, recurring maintenance and operation, and training to each aircraft equipment type independently.

Gaier, Eric M.↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Establishing Trust in NASA’s Artemis Program Computer-Human Interface (CHI) Implementation

The NASA Artemis program will return humans to the moon. This time, with the help of commercial and international partners, the program’s objective is a permanent moon base. The moon base infrastructure, including an orbiting moon station and moon surface assets, will be developed for astronauts to stay for the long haul to learn to live and work on another planet in preparation for an eventual Humans-to-Mars mission. As the roundtrip communication delays increase in deep space exploration, more onboard systems autonomy and functionality will be needed to maintain and control the vehicle or habitat. These mission constraints will change the current Earth-based spacecraft ground control support approach that will demand more safe, efficient, and effective Computer-Human Interface (CHI) control. For Artemis, CHI is defined as the elements that the crew interfaces with-audio, video, lighting, and crew controls. Understanding how CHI will need to evolve to support deep space missions will be critical for the Artemis program-especially crew controls which is the focus of this paper. How does NASA ensure crew controls are reliable to control complex systems and prevent a catastrophic event due to human error-especially when the astronauts could be physiologically and/or psychologically impaired? NASA’s approach to mitigating catastrophic hazards in human spaceflight system development such as crew controls is through a holistic system engineering and Human System Integration methodology that embraces NASA’s Human-Rating Requirements-ensuring human performance characteristics to control/safely recover the crew from hazardous situations within the human interface design are considered. This paper discusses, at a high level, CHI for the Artemis program. Next, a discussion of what it means to human-rate a space system crew controls and how trust in the human-computer interface begins with the NASA human rating requirements. Finally, a discussion on how systems engineering, and the human system integration process ensures that crew control implementation incorporates the NASA human-rating requirements.

Human-Rating↗

NASA NTRS2018

Space Resources and Mining: Current Objectives, Plans, and Missions

Why are Space Resources and Their Use Important? There are many reasons why people and nations want to explore space, and there are many different ways in which space can be explored. A critical interface linking both the ‘why’ and the ‘how’ of space exploration is the identification, extraction, and use of resources in space. In both NASA’s Journey to Mars: Pioneering Next Steps in Space Exploration released in October of 2015 and the Global Exploration Roadmap released in August 2013, the ability to find, quantify, extract, process, and use space resources was identified as a critical objective by NASA and over 14 other space agencies for achieving affordable and sustainable human exploration beyond Earth’s orbit, encouraging and creating new commercial entities and markets based on space activities, and increasing the terrestrial economy and quality-of-life benefits for all humankind. Robotic and especially human space exploration up to this point in time can be considered to be ‘Earth reliant’ in that everything needed to support and enable the mission is launched from Earth. The past Apollo missions to the Moon and the International Space Station currently in orbit above the Earth all rely on hardware, habitats, power, transportation, and life support consumables sent from Earth to keep the crew alive and working. As the distance from Earth increases, the cost of transportation and the risks due to failures and logistics disruptions also increases. By using resources found at the site of exploration to make mission critical consumables (such as propellants, fuel cell reactants and life support commodities), spare parts, and infrastructure needed to support surface activities (such as landing pads, roads, habitats/shelters, and power/thermal systems) commonly referred to as In Situ Resource Utilization, a significant amount of launch mass and cost can be saved and risk reduced. The ability to do these things also changes how exploration is performed from Earth Reliant to NASA’s goal of ‘Earth Independent’ exploration. After the US Apollo program was over, people began to recognize that it had been an inspiration for a generation of young students to go into Science, Technology, Engineering and Math (STEM) fields, and that the US industry and economy had significantly grown and lived off these students and the technological advances made to achieve these missions for decades. Space exploration should no longer be focused solely on scientific advancement or national pride, but for economic growth and population standard of living advancement. Considering the economic value of human exploration and how it could expand the economy of the US was brought to full light in a speech by John Marburger, the director of US Office of Science and Technology Policy under George W Bush at the Goddard Symposium in 2006. In his speech he highlighted that the ultimate goal was not to just Explore space but to Use space for the benefit of mankind. He further stated that the use of off-planet resources, in this case from the Moon, should be a critical architectural consideration for human space exploration to make it more affordable and sustainable. This could be achieved in two ways. The first is to start by encouraging and commercializing the extraction and production of transportation and life support related products from space resources, which could than lead to other resource uses once an affordable transportation architecture is established. The second is to encourage the spin-in of terrestrial technologies into space applications and spin-off of space technologies into terrestrial applications to increase the efficiency and profitability of terrestrial industries.

Sanders, Gerald B.↗

NASA NTRS2002

Systems Engineering Approach to Technology Integration for NASA's 2nd Generation Reusable Launch Vehicle

The overall goal of the 2nd Generation RLV Program is to substantially reduce technical and business risks associated with developing a new class of reusable launch vehicles. NASA's specific goals are to improve the safety of a 2nd generation system by 2 orders of magnitude - equivalent to a crew risk of 1-in-10,000 missions - and decrease the cost tenfold, to approximately $1,000 per pound of payload launched. Architecture definition is being conducted in parallel with the maturating of key technologies specifically identified to improve safety and reliability, while reducing operational costs. An architecture broadly includes an Earth-to-orbit reusable launch vehicle, on-orbit transfer vehicles and upper stages, mission planning, ground and flight operations, and support infrastructure, both on the ground and in orbit. The systems engineering approach ensures that the technologies developed - such as lightweight structures, long-life rocket engines, reliable crew escape, and robust thermal protection systems - will synergistically integrate into the optimum vehicle. To best direct technology development decisions, analytical models are employed to accurately predict the benefits of each technology toward potential space transportation architectures as well as the risks associated with each technology. Rigorous systems analysis provides the foundation for assessing progress toward safety and cost goals. The systems engineering review process factors in comprehensive budget estimates, detailed project schedules, and business and performance plans, against the goals of safety, reliability, and cost, in addition to overall technical feasibility. This approach forms the basis for investment decisions in the 2nd Generation RLV Program's risk-reduction activities. Through this process, NASA will continually refine its specialized needs and identify where Defense and commercial requirements overlap those of civil missions.

Thomas, Dale↗

NASA NTRS2002

Systems Engineering Approach to Technology Integration for NASA's 2nd Generation Reusable Launch Vehicle

The overall goal of the 2nd Generation RLV Program is to substantially reduce technical and business risks associated with developing a new class of reusable launch vehicles. NASA's specific goals are to improve the safety of a 2nd-generation system by 2 orders of magnitude - equivalent to a crew risk of 1-in-10,000 missions - and decrease the cost tenfold, to approximately $1,000 per pound of payload launched. Architecture definition is being conducted in parallel with the maturating of key technologies specifically identified to improve safety and reliability, while reducing operational costs. An architecture broadly includes an Earth-to-orbit reusable launch vehicle, on-orbit transfer vehicles and upper stages, mission planning, ground and flight operations, and support infrastructure, both on the ground and in orbit. The systems engineering approach ensures that the technologies developed - such as lightweight structures, long-life rocket engines, reliable crew escape, and robust thermal protection systems - will synergistically integrate into the optimum vehicle. To best direct technology development decisions, analytical models are employed to accurately predict the benefits of each technology toward potential space transportation architectures as well as the risks associated with each technology. Rigorous systems analysis provides the foundation for assessing progress toward safety and cost goals. The systems engineering review process factors in comprehensive budget estimates, detailed project schedules, and business and performance plans, against the goals of safety, reliability, and cost, in addition to overall technical feasibility. This approach forms the basis for investment decisions in the 2nd Generation RLV Program's risk-reduction activities. Through this process, NASA will continually refine its specialized needs and identify where Defense and commercial requirements overlap those of civil missions.

Thomas, Dale↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

NASA’s Human Landing System: Enabling the Next Generation of Lunar Science

The Human Landing System (HLS) is the mode of transportation that will take astronauts to the lunar surface as part of NASA's Artemis exploration program. HLS also serves as a research platform both on the surface and in lunar orbit, enabling critical scientific investigations on and of the Moon. With support at NASA centers around the country, the HLS program, based at Marshall Space Flight Center in Huntsville, Alabama, is working closely with its commercial partners throughout the development process to design and build innovative and technically advanced lunar landers – new vehicles designed for the modern era of space travel – leveraging decades of human spaceflight experience and the speed of the commercial sector. In 2019, NASA asked U.S. industry for proposals to design and develop a human lander for the first human mission to the lunar surface under Artemis. Initial contracts were awarded to Blue Origin Federation, Dynetics, and SpaceX to advance their designs. Following the execution of the ten-month Base Period, NASA announced in April 2021 that the agency selected SpaceX to move forward with its human landing system [1] and land the first two astronauts on the lunar surface during the Artemis III mission. Following two protest periods, NASA awarded the contract, known as Option A, to SpaceX in July 2021 and resumed work in November 2021 (Fig. 1). In parallel, the HLS program has been preparing for the acquisition that will procure regular crewed transportation to the lunar surface following Artemis III. NASA released a request for information (RFI) in July 2021 asking U.S. industry for feedback to help inform the future solicitation, known as Lunar Exploration Transportation Services (LETS) [2]. Also in July 2021, NASA released the NextSTEP-2 Appendix N broad agency announcement soliciting new work from U.S. industry to mature their HLS designs and perform risk reduction activities in advance of the LETS procurement [3]. NASA selected Blue Origin Federation, Dynetics, Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman, and SpaceX to participate [4]. This work will also help better inform the LETS procurement and prepare industry to propose. NASA hopes to release a draft request for proposals (RFP) in Spring 2022.

R C Weber↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

A Strategy for Advancing Earth Independent Medical Operations

Exploration medical operations to the Moon and Mars present unprecedented challenges for providing in-mission medical care. The greater distance from Earth is the primary hazard that drives the need for a medical operations paradigm shift from low earth orbit mission. Increasingly complex long duration and long distance missions will have resource constraints (ex: mass, power, volume, data), a paucity of resupply or evacuation opportunities, and disruptions in real-time communications. In order to advance a more autonomous medical approach, a multi-faceted strategy will need to optimize all aspects of human health and performance in space. This strategy will include: increasing onboard medical autonomy through the development of novel crew health and performance systems; decision support capabilities to augment astronauts’ abilities in preventing, diagnosing, and treating medical conditions; creating new procedures and training tools for skill maintenance and just-in-time training; and enabling rapid crew access to data from all on-board systems, leading to better-informed, real-time, autonomous decisions. Collectively, this approach can be referred to as “Earth Independent Medical Operations” (EIMO). The Exploration Medical Capability Element of NASA’s Human Research Program has undertaken a longitudinal planning process to consensus around EIMO. Technical interchange meetings will occur with key constituents in late 2022 and again in early 2023 to define EIMO in practical terms and identify key elements of an EIMO system, with greater conceptual articulation and dissemination planned for the second half of 2023. We will share insights into the strategy for internal and external consensus building around EIMO, with a particular focus on the approach to partner stakeholders within NASA as well as commercial agencies.

Jay Lemery↗

NASA NTRS2011

Software Users Manual (SUM): Extended Testability Analysis (ETA) Tool

This software user manual describes the implementation and use the Extended Testability Analysis (ETA) Tool. The ETA Tool is a software program that augments the analysis and reporting capabilities of a commercial-off-the-shelf (COTS) testability analysis software package called the Testability Engineering And Maintenance System (TEAMS) Designer. An initial diagnostic assessment is performed by the TEAMS Designer software using a qualitative, directed-graph model of the system being analyzed. The ETA Tool utilizes system design information captured within the diagnostic model and testability analysis output from the TEAMS Designer software to create a series of six reports for various system engineering needs. The ETA Tool allows the user to perform additional studies on the testability analysis results by determining the detection sensitivity to the loss of certain sensors or tests. The ETA Tool was developed to support design and development of the NASA Ares I Crew Launch Vehicle. The diagnostic analysis provided by the ETA Tool was proven to be valuable system engineering output that provided consistency in the verification of system engineering requirements. This software user manual provides a description of each output report generated by the ETA Tool. The manual also describes the example diagnostic model and supporting documentation - also provided with the ETA Tool software release package - that were used to generate the reports presented in the manual

Maul, William A.↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

NASA Space Launch System Completes Green Run Testing, Begins Assembly

NASA’s Space Launch System (SLS) Program is poised in 2021 to shift its focus to the launch site with the completion of its last major integrated hardware and software test. SLS is NASA’s evolvable super heavy-lift launch vehicle for deep space exploration. Using proven propulsion technologies, SLS will be the most powerful launch vehicle in the world. That capability translates not only into more mass and volume to destinations but also simplified payload design and mission operations and greater opportunity for mission success. These capabilities will be important for the Artemis program, NASA’s plan to return humans to the Moon to stay in a sustainable way in order to develop and test technologies and operations needed for human missions to Mars and other destinations. SLS will anchor the transportation leg of an innovative, sustainable program of lunar exploration with commercial and international partners as the first step of human exploration of deep space. While all major hardware and software efforts made significant progress in 2020 and 2021, the most visible was the Green Run test series of the Artemis I core stage conducted at NASA’s Stennis Space Center (SSC) on the B-2 test stand. The series validated core stage design, performance, workmanship, and readiness for shipment to NASA Kennedy Space Center (KSC) for final processing, integration and launch. The core stage provides the backbone for SLS’ main propulsion system, consisting of two five-segment solid rocket boosters and four RS-25 liquid hydrogen (LH2)/liquid oxygen (LOX) engines. SLS also includes an Interim Cryogenic Propulsion Stage (ICPS) that will insert the Orion crew spacecraft into a lunar trajectory.

John Honeycutt↗