SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Crew member”

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 NTRS2008

Rescue Shuttle Flight Re-Entry: Controlling Astronaut Thermal Exposure

A rescue mission for the STS-125 Hubble Telescope Repair Mission requires reentry from space with 11 crew members aboard, exceeding past cabin thermal load experience and risking crew thermal stress potentially causing cognitive performance and physiological decrements. The space shuttle crew cabin air revitalization system (ARS) was designed to support a nominal crew complement of 4 to 7 crew and 10 persons in emergencies, all in a shirt-sleeve environment. Subsequent to the addition of full pressure suits with individual cooling units, the ARS cannot maintain a stable temperature in the crew cabin during reentry thermal loads. Bulk cabin thermal models, used for rescue mission planning and analysis of crew cabin air, were unable to accurately represent crew workstation values of air flow, carbon dioxide, and heat content for the middeck. Crew temperature models suggested significantly elevated core temperatures. Planning for an STS-400 potential rescue of seven stranded crew utilized computational fluid dynamics (CFD) models to demonstrate inhomogeneous cabin thermal properties and improve analysis compared to bulk models. In the absence of monitoring of crew temperature, heart rate, metabolic rate and incomplete engineering data on the performance of the integrated cooling garment/cooling unit (ICG/CU) at cabin temperatures above 75 degrees F, related systems & models were reevaluated and tests conducted with humans in the loop. Changes to the cabin ventilation, ICU placement, crew reentry suit-donning procedures, Orbiter Program wave-off policy and post-landing power down and crew extraction were adopted. A second CFD and core temperature model incorporated the proposed changes and confirmed satisfactory cabin temperature, improved air distribution, and estimated core temperatures within safe limits. CONCLUSIONS: These changes in equipment, in-flight and post-landing procedures, and policy were implemented for the STS-400 rescue shuttle & will be implemented in any future rescue flights from the International Space Station of stranded shuttle crews.

Gillis, David B.↗

NASA NTRS2010

GeoLab in NASA's Pressurized Excursion Module: First Results from the 2010 Field Trials

Before humans explore other planets, NASA must develop advanced techniques for collection, preservation and return of unique extraterrestrial samples. To help evaluate hardware requirements and operational concepts for future sample-return missions, we designed and built GeoLab our first generation lab for geological samples into NASA s Habitat Demonstration Unit in the Pressurized Excursion Module (HDU1-PEM). The center of GeoLab is a glovebox for the examination of samples in a shirt-sleeve environment. As part of a deployable habitat, GeoLab can participate in NASA s analog missions that simulate planetary exploration activities and support the testing of relevant technologies for collecting and handling geological samples. Over time, these tests will evaluate sample handling environments (field and lab), sampling tools and analytical instruments, and different scenarios involving both robotic and human procedures. The GeoLab design supports evolving tests and configurations. The glovebox is mounted on the habitat bulkhead, with three sample pass-though chambers that allow for direct sample transfer into the glovebox from the outside. The glovebox design and construction (low-particle shedding, minimally off-gassing materials) provides a clean environment to reduce sample contamination; in the future, we will integrate a positive pressure, enriched nitrogen atmosphere. The glovebox is equipped with configurable instrument ports. The 2010 test included a mass balance, a stereomicroscope with a HD camera for detailed imaging of samples, and a handheld XRF analyzer for preliminary geochemical characterization of samples. Network cameras provided context imagery and sample handling activities. We present early results from the initial field trial of GeoLab during the 2010 Desert Research and Technology Studies (D-RATS) planetary analog test near Flagstaff AZ. The 2010 D-RATS mission involved two rovers, the habitat with GeoLab, four crew members, and a team of scientists and flight controllers. The crewed rovers conducted geological traverses and collected samples on the planetary surface. Selected samples were transferred into GeoLab for detailed examination and initial analysis, providing critical data to the science team for evaluation and prioritization of samples.

Evans, Cynthia A.↗

NASA NTRS2015

Asteroid Redirect Crewed Mission Space Suit and EVA System Maturation

The Asteroid Redirect Crewed Mission (ARCM) requires a Launch/Entry/Abort (LEA) suit capability and short duration Extra Vehicular Activity (EVA) capability from the Orion spacecraft. For this mission, the pressure garment that was selected, for both functions, is the Modified Advanced Crew Escape Suit (MACES) with EVA enhancements and the life support option that was selected is the Exploration Portable Life Support System (PLSS). The proposed architecture was found to meet the mission constraints, but much more work is required to determine the details of the required suit upgrades, the integration with the PLSS, and the rest of the tools and equipment required to accomplish the mission. This work has continued over the last year to better define the operations and hardware maturation of these systems. EVA simulations have been completed in the NBL and interfacing options have been prototyped and analyzed with testing planned for late 2014. For NBL EVA simulations, in 2013, components were procured to allow in-house build up for four new suits with mobility enhancements built into the arms. Boots outfitted with clips that fit into foot restraints have also been added to the suit and analyzed for possible loads. Major suit objectives accomplished this year in testing include: evaluation of mobility enhancements, ingress/egress of foot restraint, use of foot restraint for worksite stability, ingress/egress of Orion hatch with PLSS mockup, and testing with two crew members in the water at one time to evaluate the crew's ability to help one another. Major tool objectives accomplished this year include using various other methods for worksite stability, testing new methods for asteroid geologic sampling and improving the fidelity of the mockups and crew equipment. These tests were completed on a medium fidelity capsule mockup, asteroid vehicle mockup, and asteroid mockups that were more accurate for an asteroid type EVA than previous tests. Another focus was the design and fabrication of the interface between the MACES and the PLSS. The MACES was not designed to interface with a PLSS, hence an interface kit must accommodate the unique design qualities of the MACES and provide the necessary life support function connections to the PLSS. A prototype interface kit for MACES to PLSS has been designed and fabricated. Unmanned and manned testing of the interface will show the usability of the kit while wearing a MACES. The testing shows viability of the kit approach as well as the operations concept. The design will be vetted through suit and PLSS experts and, with the findings from the testing, the best path forward will be determined. As the Asteroid Redirect Mission matures, the suit/life support portion of the mission will mature along with it and EVA Tools & Equipment can be iterated to accommodate the overall mission objectives and compromises inherent in EVA Suit optimization. The goal of the EVA architecture for ARCM is to continue to build on the previously developed technologies and lessons learned, and accomplish the ARCM EVAs while providing a stepping stone to future missions and destinations.

Bowie, Jonathan T.↗

NASA NTRS2014

Crewed Space Vehicle Battery Safety Requirements

This requirements document is applicable to all batteries on crewed spacecraft, including vehicle, payload, and crew equipment batteries. It defines the specific provisions required to design a battery that is safe for ground personnel and crew members to handle and/or operate during all applicable phases of crewed missions, safe for use in the enclosed environment of a crewed space vehicle, and safe for use in launch vehicles, as well as in unpressurized spaces adjacent to the habitable portion of a space vehicle. The required provisions encompass hazard controls, design evaluation, and verification. The extent of the hazard controls and verification required depends on the applicability and credibility of the hazard to the specific battery design and applicable missions under review. Evaluation of the design and verification program results shall be completed prior to certification for flight and ground operations. This requirements document is geared toward the designers of battery systems to be used in crewed vehicles, crew equipment, crew suits, or batteries to be used in crewed vehicle systems and payloads (or experiments). This requirements document also applies to ground handling and testing of flight batteries. Specific design and verification requirements for a battery are dependent upon the battery chemistry, capacity, complexity, charging, environment, and application. The variety of battery chemistries available, combined with the variety of battery-powered applications, results in each battery application having specific, unique requirements pertinent to the specific battery application. However, there are basic requirements for all battery designs and applications, which are listed in section 4. Section 5 includes a description of hazards and controls and also includes requirements.

Jeevarajan, Judith A.↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Early Assessments of Crew Timelines for the Lunar Surface Habitat

As NASA progresses towards sustained crewed space missions, crew timelines will become increasingly important to achieving mission goals. While it is desirable to spend as much time as possible during crewed space missions on science activities and experiments, there are a large number of activities that crew members must perform each day in order to maintain both crew and vehicle health and safety. The time available for science activities in space is highly dependent on mandatory tasks required for crew and vehicle health and safety. The different crewed activities need to be planned accordingly long before the start of a mission in order to optimize crew time for science. To begin assessing the potential crew time for available for science, an understanding of the requirements to maintain crew and vehicle health and safety is needed. These additional activities may include sleep, exercise, vehicle maintenance, logistics handling, crew personal time, as well as many other tasks. The remaining time outside of these required tasks, within a reasonable crew work schedule, can be dedicated to science operations. This paper will detail a collaborative effort to analyzing crew times for sustained spaceflight missions and how the results of that analysis are applied to the crew timeline for the proposed Lunar Surface Habitat (SH).To determine the crew time for all of these required activities, an analysis was conducted utilizing defined agency requirements and historical crewed mission data. Predicted crew activity times were integrated into a daily schedule in order to optimize the crew’s time during the mission. This methodology was utilized to produce expected crew timelines for NASA’s proposed Artemis Base Camp (ABC) missions. The current plans for the ABC contain two different sustained habitats, the Pressurized Rover (PR) and the Surface Habitat (SH). While the crew are separated between the two habitats, the timelines for each element are dependent on the other element’s operations, so the two element timelines are formed in conjunction with one another. The results described in this paper, however, will focus solely on the crew timeline in the SH. This paper will explain the methodology behind predicting the required crew time spent in the SH for each activity, and the process of incorporating these predicted crew times into a coherent schedule.

Crew Time↗

NASA NTRS1981

An analysis of aircrew procedural compliance

This research examines the relationships between aircrew compliance with procedures and operator errors. The data for this analysis were generated by reexamination of a 1976 experiment in full mission simulation conducted by Dr. H. P. Ruffell Smith (1979) for the NASA-Ames Research Center. The character of individual operators, the chemistry of crew composition, and complex aspects of the operational environment affected procedural compliance by crew members. Associations between enumerated operator errors and several objective indicators of crew coordination were investigated. The correspondence among high operator error counts and infrequent compliance with specific crew coordination requirements was most notable when copilots were accountable for control of flight parameters.

Schofield, J. E.↗

NASA NTRS1998

NASA/Mir Phase 1: A Lesson Learned in Long Duration Mission Planning and Operations

The NASA/Mir Phase I Program is a precursor to the assembly and operations of the International Space Station (ISS). The Phase I Program covers a four-year period and encompasses over ten shuttle flights to the Mir, culminating with the flight of STS-91 in June 1998. The Mir-Orbiting Station (Mir-OS) provides an excellent environment, both onboard and on the ground, for learning and studying the characteristics associated with crew-tended operations on long duration missions. By the end of the Phase I program, NASA astronauts will have accumulated over two years of continuous operations experience working and living onboard the Mir-OS. Ground controllers, working in Russia and at remote sites in the United States, will have gained valuable experience in the generation, maintenance, and coordination of the information and products required to support the long duration crew members onboard the Mir-OS. The experience gained by the crew and ground support personnel in the area of long duration mission operations has resulted in a number of factors that need to be considered in the definition and implementation of the processes and products for the ISS. While there are many areas in which experience has been gained, this paper focuses on the lessons learned regarding the level of detail and flexibility of crew timelines. Provided in this paper is an overview of the characteristics associated with long duration mission timeline development and execution, a summary of applicable lessons learned identified and documented through participation in the NASA/Mir Phase I Program, a detailed discussion of "Gross Timelines" as implementation which addresses the lessons learned. Also discussed are the challenges that must be overcome in getting the ISS program to recognize, evaluate, and learn from the crew and ground controller experience gained through participation in the NASA/Mir Phase I Program.

Hagopian, Jeff↗

NASA NTRS2004

SAE Mil-1394 For Military and Aerospace Vehicle Applications

Unique opportunity to utilize new technology while increasing vehicle and crew member safety. Demonstration of new technology that can be utilized for Crew Exploration Vehicle and other future manned vehicles. Future work for other cameras in the vehicle that can be IEEE1394 based without major vehicle modifications. Demonstrates that LM can share information and knowledge between internal groups and NASA to assist in providing a product in support of the NASA Return to Flight Activities. This upgrade will provide a flight active data bus that is 100 times faster than any similar bus on the vehicle.

Dunga, Larry↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Pressurized Rover Lunar Surface Windows Thermal Trade Study

The pressurized rover (PR) is a habitable lunar vehicle that supports up to two crew members and EVAs. The PR is expected to operate with a crew at the lunar south pole for up to 30 consecutive days. Lunar surface missions represent a significant thermal challenge due in part to the extreme changes in temperature environment. Minimizing heat leaks is essential to be able to survive cold phases of lunar surface missions. Windows in particular can be a significant source of heat leak when designed without thermal performance in mind. In addition, correctly modeling windows, and transparent materials in general, represents a significant thermal challenge. It can also be challenging to obtain accurate radiative properties for modern window materials. This study focuses on the modeling approach, results, and possible window heat leak mitigation techniques for pressurized rover. Mitigation techniques explored in this study include low emissivity coatings and removable internal or external covers. Window layup, geometry, and size are also assessed in this study for their impact to heat leak.

Sydney June Taylor↗

NASA NTRS1992

Medicine on Mars: Remote medical care and the space exploration initiative

Mars exploration missions as described in the Synthesis Group report will involve extended exposures of crew members to remote, hazardous environments for up to 100 days. Maintenance of crew health and performance will be critical to ensure mission success. Because of the great distances between the Earth and Mars, round trip telecommunication will take from seven to forty minutes and immediate return to Earth will not be feasible: an autonomous medical care system that integrates preventive, occupational, and environmental aspects of health care and provides diagnostic and treatment capabilities will be necessary. Providing medical care for Mars explorers will pose some unique technical and engineering challenges. Medical care equipment will need to be designed to be modular and portable to ensure that it is interchangeable between vehicle and planetary surface elements. Miniaturization will be necessary to reduce mass and volume. Computerized systems that automatically acquire and manage medical information and provide medical references (literature), decision support, and automated medical record keeping will be a crucial part of a Martian medical care system. Medical care will also rely on remote consultation with Earth-based specialists. This presentation will provide an overview of the health and medical concerns associated with Mars exploration missions and will describe some specific concepts for Mars medical care systems.

Simmons, S. C.↗

NASA NTRS1990

STS-38: Landing at Kennedy Space Center/Crew Exit

Live footage of the STS-38 touchdown at Kennedy Space Center is shown. The crew exits the spacecraft and is greeted by NASA personnel. The five member crew consists of Commander Richard Covey, Pilot Frank L. Culbertson. Mission Specialists: Robert C. Springer, Carl J. Meade, and Charles D. Gemar.

Source record↗

NASA NTRS2007

CEV Seat Attenuation System System Design Tasks

The Apollo crew / couch restraint system was designed to support and restrain three crew members during all phases of the mission from launch to landing. The crew couch used supported the crew for launch, landing and in-flight operations, and was foldable and removable for EVA ingress/egress through side hatch access and for in-flight access under the seat and in other areas of the crew compartment. The couch and the seat attenuation system was designed to control the impact loads imposed on the crew during landing and to remain non-functional during all other flight phases.

Goodman, Jerry R.↗

NASA NTRS2013

HERRO Mission to Mars Using Telerobotic Surface Exploration from Orbit

This paper presents a concept for a human mission to Mars orbit that features direct robotic exploration of the planet s surface via teleoperation from orbit. This mission is a good example of Human Exploration using Real-time Robotic Operations (HERRO), an exploration strategy that refrains from sending humans to the surfaces of planets with large gravity wells. HERRO avoids the need for complex and expensive man-rated lander/ascent vehicles and surface systems. Additionally, the humans are close enough to the surface to effectively eliminate the two-way communication latency that constrains typical robotic space missions, thus allowing real-time command and control of surface operations and experiments by the crew. Through use of state-of-the-art telecommunications and robotics, HERRO provides the cognitive and decision-making advantages of having humans at the site of study for only a fraction of the cost of conventional human surface missions. It is very similar to how oceanographers and oil companies use telerobotic submersibles to work in inaccessible areas of the ocean, and represents a more expedient, near-term step prior to landing humans on Mars and other large planetary bodies. Results suggest that a single HERRO mission with six crew members could achieve the same exploratory and scientific return as three conventional crewed missions to the Mars surface.

Oleson, Steven R.↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Human Factors Considerations for Pressurized Crew Transfer Between Ascent or Lander Spacecraft and Surface Assets

An option for pressurized crew transfer between surface assets and lander or ascent spacecraft offers multiple advantages. The most important are the loss of life risks due to crew member injuries or surface spacesuit failures. However, even in nominal scenarios pressurized crew transfer is advantageous, protecting lander and ascent spacecraft as well as launch and entry spacesuits from dust exposure and aiding in adaptation to gravity following prolonged periods of microgravity. Several examples of lunar and Mars lander or ascent spacecraft have been released publicly and can serve as examples of the range of potential vehicles that may benefit from pressurized crew transfer. There are also examples of surface assets that can be used to provide crew transfer, including both current surface mobility or crew transfer concepts and terrestrial examples that could be adapted to use on the Moon or Mars. In all cases, the resulting passageway must be acceptable for use and protected from itself experiencing dust contamination. Key design considerations will be discussed.

Artemis↗

NASA NTRS1986

The effects of expressivity and flight task on cockpit communication and resource management

The results of an investigation to develop a methodology for evaluating crew communication behavior on the flight deck and a flight simulator experiment to test the effects of crew member expressivity, as measured by the Personal Attributes Questionnarie, and flight task on crew communication and flight performance are discussed. A methodology for coding and assessing flight crew communication behavior as well as a model for predicting that behavior is advanced. Although not enough crews were found to provide valid statistical tests, the results of the study tend to indicate that crews in which the captain has high expressivity perform better than those whose captain is low in expressivity. There appears to be a strong interaction between captains and first officers along the level of command dimension of communication. The PAQ appears to identify those pilots who offer disagreements and inititate new subjects for discussion.

Jensen, R. S.↗

NASA NTRS1993

Ground operation of robotics on Space Station Freedom

This paper reflects work carried out on Ground Operated Telerobotics (GOT) in 1992 to refine further the ideas, procedures, and technologies needed to test the procedures in a high latency environment, and to integrate GOT into Space Station Freedom operations. Space Station Freedom (SSF) will be in operation for 30 years, and will depend on robots to carry out a significant part of the assembly, maintenance, and utilization workload. Current plans call for on-orbit robotics to be operated by on-board crew members. This approach implies that on-orbit robotics operations use up considerable crew time, and that these operations cannot be carried out when SSF is unmanned. GOT will allow robotic operations to be operated from the ground, with on-orbit crew interventions only when absolutely required. The paper reviews how GOT would be implemented, how GOT operations would be planned and supported, and reviews GOT issues, critical success factors, and benefits.

Wojcik, Z. Alex↗

NASA NTRS2002

STS-107 Crew Interviews: Michael Anderson, Mission Specialist

STS-107 Mission Specialist 3 and Payload Commander Michael Anderson is seen during this preflight interview, where he gives a quick overview of the mission before answering questions about his inspiration to become an astronaut and his career path. He outlines his role in the mission in general, and specifically in conducting onboard science experiments. He discusses the following instruments and sets of experiments in detail: CM2 (Combustion Module 2), FREESTAR (Fast Reaction Enabling Science Technology and Research, MEIDEX (Mediterranean Israeli Dust Experiment) and MGM (Mechanics of Granular Materials). Anderson also mentions on-board activities and responsibilities during launch and reentry, mission training, and microgravity research. In addition, he touches on the dual work-shift nature of the mission, the use of crew members as research subjects including pre and postflight monitoring activities, the emphasis on crew safety during training and the value of international cooperation.

Source record↗

NASA NTRS2002

STS-107 Crew Interviews: Laurel Clark, Mission Specialist

STS-107 Mission Specialist 4 Laurel Clark is seen during this preflight interview, where she gives a quick overview of the mission before answering questions about her inspiration to become an astronaut and her career path. Clark outlines her role in the mission in general, and specifically in conducting onboard science experiments. She discusses the following suite of experiments and instruments in detail: ARMS (Advanced Respiratory Monitoring System) and the European Space Agency's Biopack. Clark also mentions on-board activities and responsibilities during launch and reentry, mission training, and microgravity research. In addition, she touches on the use of crew members as research subjects including pre and postflight monitoring activities, the emphasis on crew safety and the value of international cooperation.

Source record↗