Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Human-Rating”

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

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

At least 37 records · Page 2
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2005

Game Plan

Industry proposals for the Crew Exploration Vehicle that NASA plans as a replacement for the space shuttle are due next week, but the agency's new chief says it might be necessary to slow the CEV procurement at first to speed it up later. After a quick trip to Kennedy Space Center for briefings on getting the space shuttle back in operation, Michael D. Griffin sat down with his growing staff last week to begin work on modifying the CEV procurement. "We are going to rethink our entire program in that area," he said during an inaugural press conference Apr. 18. The proposals due May 2 are being prepared in response to NASA's call for a "risk-reduction flight effort" in 2008 that would lead to delivery of a human-rated CEV in 2014. But Griffin was co-leader on an independent study in 2004 that recommended a way to get the CEV flying astronauts in 2010, the year President Bush has set as a deadline for retiring the space shuttle fleet. In that study, produced for The Planetary Society, Griffin and his team called for development of a 13-15-ton "Block 1" CEV limited to low Earth orbit (LEO) that would be launched atop a single space shuttle solid rocket motor (SRM), with a new cryogenic upper stage based on existing rocket engine technology, Under this approach, NASA would develop a "Block 2" CEV later for human exploration beyond LEO.

Morring, Frank, Jr.↗
NASA NTRS2000

Inflatable Habitats Technology Development

For many years inflatable structures have been theorized for use as satellite dishes, deployable arrays and human habitats. They fall into human-rated and non-human rated structures. As such the structural design requirements and safety redundancy are much different. This paper will discuss the Habitat and Surface Construction Technology that would support the development of Mars greenhouses as well as habitats. This paper will briefly describe the ISS TransHab architectural design and structural testing for the proposed as a habitation module for the International Space Station. It will also discuss inflatable greenhouse design considerations and examples.

Kennedy, Kriss J.↗
NASA NTRS2004

Teleoperation from Mars Orbit: A proposal for Human Exploration

For a human expedition to Mars, a case can be made that the best strategy for initial exploration is not to actually land the humans on Mars, but to put the humans into Mars orbit and operate on the surface by the technology of teleoperation. This will provide the results of human exploration, but at greatly reduced risk and cost. Teleoperation of Mars surface robots from a Mars-orbital habitat will operation near real time operation with minimum time delay, giving a virtual presence on the surface. By use of teleoperation, it is possible to vastly simplify the surface exploration mission. We now have no need to develop a human-rated Mars Lander and Mars Ascent Vehicle, and we can send geologists & biologists on the mission; not VTOL pilots. It is a cheaper, simpler, and safer way to explore, and hence it will be a faster way to explore. It has the excitement of being there, at a fraction of the price. Tele-exploration from Mars orbit also allows human (virtual) presence at a wide variety of locations. With an orbital base controlling surface telerobotics, human explorers are not stuck with one base location, but can explore all over Mars. They can explore the polar caps and also near-equatorial canyon regions, from the same orbiting base. This frees the mission from landing site constraints. With no need to select a "grab bag" site that contains a large number of geologically diverse features at or near a single location; it is now possible go to all the best sites-- paleolake sites, river beds, volcanic calderas, lava tube sites, layered terrain, canyons, possible shoreline features, the North and South poles. A near-polar inclination 24-hr 39-minute period Mars orbit, for example, will put the orbital station in line-of-sight of a given region for about 8 hours per day-- one teleoperation shift. Since present day life could exist on Mars, planetary protection is also needed to preserve the (possible) fragile Mars biosphere from competition from ferocious Earth life. Isolated biospheres on Earth have been devastated when they have been exposed to alien life forms introduced-accidentally or deliberately-- from another continent. If there is life on Mars, we will wish to protect it from having to compete with introduced Earth biota. Reverse planetary protection-protecting the Earth biosphere from exposure to Mars microorganisms-is also an important consideration. Exploring from orbit will reduce biological risk by keeping humans from exposure to possible Mars microbes. A telerobotic mission will need no quarantine on return to Earth, and avoids the difficult human question of how to isolate Mars mission astronauts infected by Martian microorganisms.

Landis, Geoffrey A.↗
NASA NTRS2005

Human Planetary Landing System (HPLS) Capability Roadmap: Wrap Up

When and how does the full scale system and subsystems need to be qualified & Human-rated for flight? Answer: No later than 29. Full scale AEDL Flight Tests can and should be done at Earth (need to get fast turn around between multiple tests). Do we need a Full Scale Validation Flight Test at Mars? Answer: Not, specifically, but the AEDL community is very uncomfortable with the notion of the very first full scale AEDL being piloted. The full scale unpiloted AEDL advance cargo mission that immediately precedes the human landing could do the trick. What kind of precursor AEDL Flight Tests are needed at Mars? Answer: We need to validate our performance & aerodynamic models by flying a scaled (1/10th?) version of the Full Scale Mission by 22. When and how do we decide on the AEDL system to fly? Answer: No later than 2015 (earlier is harder). We need to do multi-path full scale flight simulations and subscale / component development testing starting ASAP. If we find an AEDL for a landing mass of 40 MT, will this same architecture and technology paradigm extend to landing 80 MT? 120 MT? Is there another break point? Answer: We do not know yet.

Manning, Rob↗
NASA NTRS2005

Thermal Protection Materials Technology for NASA's Exploration Systems Mission Directorate

To fulfill the President s Vision for Space Exploration - successful human and robotic missions between the Earth and other solar system bodies in order to explore their atmospheres and surfaces - NASA must reduce trip time, cost, and vehicle weight so that payload and scientific experiment capabilities are maximized. As a collaboration among NASA Centers, this project will generate products that will enable greater fidelity in mission/vehicle design trade studies, support risk reduction for material selections, assist in optimization of vehicle weights, and provide the material and process templates for development of human-rated qualification and certification Thermal Protection System (TPS) plans. Missions performing aerocapture, aerobraking, or direct aeroentry rely on technologies that reduce vehicle weight by minimizing the need for propellant. These missions use the destination planet s atmosphere to slow the spacecraft. Such mission profiles induce heating environments on the spacecraft that demand thermal protection heatshields. This program offers NASA essential advanced thermal management technologies needed to develop new lightweight nonmetallic TPS materials for critical thermal protection heatshields for future spacecraft. Discussion of this new program (a December 2004 new start) will include both initial progress made and a presentation of the work to be preformed over the four-year life of the program. Additionally, the relevant missions and environments expected for Exploration Systems vehicles will be presented, along with discussion of the candidate materials to be considered and of the types of testing to be performed (material property tests, space environmental effects tests, and Earth and Mars gases arc jet tests).

Valentine, Peter G.↗
NASA NTRS2005

Meeting the Challenges of Exploration Systems: Health Management Technologies for Aerospace Systems With Emphasis on Propulsion

The constraints of future Exploration Missions will require unique Integrated System Health Management (ISHM) capabilities throughout the mission. An ambitious launch schedule, human-rating requirements, long quiescent periods, limited human access for repair or replacement, and long communication delays all require an ISHM system that can span distinct yet interdependent vehicle subsystems, anticipate failure states, provide autonomous remediation, and support the Exploration Mission from beginning to end. NASA Glenn Research Center has developed and applied health management system technologies to aerospace propulsion systems for almost two decades. Lessons learned from past activities help define the approach to proper ISHM development: sensor selection- identifies sensor sets required for accurate health assessment; data qualification and validation-ensures the integrity of measurement data from sensor to data system; fault detection and isolation-uses measurements in a component/subsystem context to detect faults and identify their point of origin; information fusion and diagnostic decision criteria-aligns data from similar and disparate sources in time and use that data to perform higher-level system diagnosis; and verification and validation-uses data, real or simulated, to provide variable exposure to the diagnostic system for faults that may only manifest themselves in actual implementation, as well as faults that are detectable via hardware testing. This presentation describes a framework for developing health management systems and highlights the health management research activities performed by the Controls and Dynamics Branch at the NASA Glenn Research Center. It illustrates how those activities contribute to the development of solutions for Integrated System Health Management.

Melcher, Kevin J.↗
NASA NTRS2004

Conducting Closed Habitation Experiments: Experience from the Lunar Mars Life Support Test Project

The Lunar-Mars Life Support Test Project (LMLSTP) was conducted from 1995 through 1997 at the National Aeronautics and Space Administration s (NASA) Johnson Space Center (JSC) to demonstrate increasingly longer duration operation of integrated, closed-loop life support systems that employed biological and physicochemical techniques for water recycling, waste processing, air revitalization, thermal control, and food production. An analog environment for long-duration human space travel, the conditions of isolation and confinement also enabled studies of human factors, medical sciences (both physiology and psychology) and crew training. Four tests were conducted, Phases I, II, IIa and III, with durations of 15, 30,60 and 91 days, respectively. The first phase focused on biological air regeneration, using wheat to generate enough oxygen for one experimental subject. The systems demonstrated in the later phases were increasingly complex and interdependent, and provided life support for four crew members. The tests were conducted using two human-rated, atmospherically-closed test chambers, the Variable Pressure Growth Chamber (VPGC) and the Integrated Life Support Systems Test Facility (ILSSTF). Systems included test articles (the life support hardware under evaluation), human accommodations (living quarters, kitchen, exercise equipment, etc.) and facility systems (emergency matrix system, power, cooling, etc.). The test team was managed by a lead engineer and a test director, and included test article engineers responsible for specific systems, subsystems or test articles, test conductors, facility engineers, chamber operators and engineering technicians, medical and safety officers, and science experimenters. A crew selection committee, comprised of psychologists, engineers and managers involved in the test, evaluated male and female volunteers who applied to be test subjects. Selection was based on the skills mix anticipated for each particular test, and utilized information from psychological and medical testing, data on the knowledge, experience and skills of the applicants, and team building exercises. The design, development, buildup and operation of test hardware and documentation followed the established NASA processes and requirements for test buildup and operation.

Barta, Daniel J.↗
NASA NTRS2006

A Practical Approach to Starting Fission Surface Power Development

The Prometheus Power and Propulsion Program has been reformulated to address NASA needs relative to lunar and Mars exploration. Emphasis has switched from the Jupiter Icy Moons Orbiter (JIMO) flight system development to more generalized technology development addressing Fission Surface Power (FSP) and Nuclear Thermal Propulsion (NTP). Current NASA budget priorities and the deferred mission need date for nuclear systems prohibit a fully funded reactor Flight Development Program. However, a modestly funded Advanced Technology Program can and should be conducted to reduce the risk and cost of future flight systems. A potential roadmap for FSP technology development leading to possible flight applications could include three elements: 1) Conceptual Design Studies, 2) Advanced Component Technology, and 3) Non-Nuclear System Testing. The Conceptual Design Studies would expand on recent NASA and DOE analyses while increasing the depth of study in areas of greatest uncertainty such as reactor integration and human-rated shielding. The Advanced Component Technology element would address the major technology risks through development and testing of reactor fuels, structural materials, primary loop components, shielding, power conversion, heat rejection, and power management and distribution (PMAD). The Non-Nuclear System Testing would provide a modular, technology testbed to investigate and resolve system integration issues.

Mason, Lee S.↗
NASA NTRS2006

NASA Crew Launch Vehicle Overview

The US. Vision for Space Exploration, announced January 2004, outlines the National Aeronautics and Space Administration s (NASA) strategic goals and objectives. These include: 1) Flying the Shuttle as safely as possible until its retirement, not later than 2010. 2) Bringing a new Crew Exploration Vehicle (CEV) into service as soon as possible after Shuttle retirement. 3) Developing a balanced overall program of science, exploration, and aeronautics at NASA, consistent with the redirection of the human spaceflight program to focus on exploration. 4) Completing the International Space Station (ISS) in a manner consistent with international partner commitments and the needs of human exploration. 5) Encouraging the pursuit of appropriate partnerships with the emerging commercial space sector. 6) Establishing a lunar return program having the maximum possible utility for later missions to Mars and other destinations. Following the confirmation of the new NASA Administrator in April 2005, the Agency commissioned a team of aerospace subject matter experts from government and industry to perform the Exploration Systems Architecture Study (ESAS), which provided in-depth information for selecting the follow-on launch vehicle designs to enable these goals, The ESAS team analyzed a number of potential launch systems, with a focus on: (1) a human-rated launch vehicle for crew transport and (2) a heavy lift launch vehicle (HLLV) to carry cargo. After several months of intense study utilizing technical performance, budget, and schedule objectives, the results showed that the optimum architecture to meet the challenge of safe, reliable crew transport is a two-stage variant of the Space Shuttle propulsion system - utilizing the reusable Solid Rocket Booster (SRB) as the first stage, along with a new upper stage that uses a derivative of the RS-25 Space Shuttle Main Engine to deliver 25 metric tons to low-Earth orbit. The CEV that this new Crew Launch Vehicle (CLV) lofts into space early next decade will initially ferry astronauts to the Space Station and be capable of carrying crews back to lunar orbit and of supporting missions to Mars orbit. The HLLV system will utilize the Shuttle External Tank combined with SRBs. The focus of this paper is on the CLV system, giving an overview of plans and progress to date.

Dumbacher, Daniel L.↗
NASA NTRS2006

NASA Exploration Launch Projects Overview: The Crew Launch Vehicle and the Cargo Launch Vehicle Systems

The U.S. Vision for Space Exploration (January 2004) serves as the foundation for the National Aeronautics and Space Administration's (NASA) strategic goals and objectives. As the NASA Administrator outlined during his confirmation hearing in April 2005, these include: 1) Flying the Space Shuttle as safely as possible until its retirement, not later than 2010. 2) Bringing a new Crew Exploration Vehicle (CEV) into service as soon as possible after Shuttle retirement. 3) Developing a balanced overall program of science, exploration, and aeronautics at NASA, consistent with the redirection of the human space flight program to focus on exploration. 4) Completing the International Space Station (ISS) in a manner consistent with international partner commitments and the needs of human exploration. 5) Encouraging the pursuit of appropriate partnerships with the emerging commercial space sector. 6) Establishing a lunar return program having the maximum possible utility for later missions to Mars and other destinations. In spring 2005, the Agency commissioned a team of aerospace subject matter experts to perform the Exploration Systems Architecture Study (ESAS). The ESAS team performed in-depth evaluations of a number of space transportation architectures and provided recommendations based on their findings? The ESAS analysis focused on a human-rated Crew Launch Vehicle (CLV) for astronaut transport and a heavy lift Cargo Launch Vehicle (CaLV) to carry equipment, materials, and supplies for lunar missions and, later, the first human journeys to Mars. After several months of intense study utilizing safety and reliability, technical performance, budget, and schedule figures of merit in relation to design reference missions, the ESAS design options were unveiled in summer 2005. As part of NASA's systems engineering approach, these point of departure architectures have been refined through trade studies during the ongoing design phase leading to the development phase that begins in 2008. Comprehensive reviews of engineering data and business assessments by both internal and independent reviewers serve as decision gates to ensure that systems can fully meet customer and stakeholder requirements. This paper provides the current CLV and CaLV configuration designs and gives examples of the progress being made during the first year of this significant effort. Safe, reliable, cost-effective space transportation systems are a foundational piece of America s future in space and the next step in realizing the plan for revitalizing lunar capabilities on the passageway to the human exploration of Mars. While building on legacy knowledge and heritage hardware for risk reduction, NASA will apply lessons learned from developing these new launch vehicles to the growth path for future missions. The elements for mission success and continued U.S. leadership in space have been assembled over the past year. As NASA designs and develops these two new systems over the next dozen years, visible progress, such as that reported in this paper, may sustain the national will to stay the course across political administrations and weather the inevitable trials that will be experienced during this challenging endeavor.

Snoddy, Jimmy R.↗
NASA NTRS2006

NASA's J-2X Engine Builds on the Apollo Program for Lunar Return Missions

In January 2006, NASA streamlined its U.S. Vision for Space Exploration hardware development approach for replacing the Space Shuttle after it is retired in 2010. The revised CLV upper stage will use the J-2X engine, a derivative of NASA s Apollo Program Saturn V s S-II and S-IVB main propulsion, which will also serve as the Earth Departure Stage (EDS) engine. This paper gives details of how the J- 2X engine effort mitigates risk by building on the Apollo Program and other lessons learned to deliver a human-rated engine that is on an aggressive development schedule, with first demonstration flight in 2010 and human test flights in 2012. It is well documented that propulsion is historically a high-risk area. NASA s risk reduction strategy for the J-2X engine design, development, test, and evaluation is to build upon heritage hardware and apply valuable experience gained from past development efforts. In addition, NASA and its industry partner, Rocketdyne, which originally built the J-2, have tapped into their extensive databases and are applying lessons conveyed firsthand by Apollo-era veterans of America s first round of Moon missions in the 1960s and 1970s. NASA s development approach for the J-2X engine includes early requirements definition and management; designing-in lessons learned from the 5-2 heritage programs; initiating long-lead procurement items before Preliminary Desi& Review; incorporating design features for anticipated EDS requirements; identifying facilities for sea-level and altitude testing; and starting ground support equipment and logistics planning at an early stage. Other risk reduction strategies include utilizing a proven gas generator cycle with recent development experience; utilizing existing turbomachinery ; applying current and recent main combustion chamber (Integrated Powerhead Demonstrator) and channel wall nozzle (COBRA) advances; and performing rigorous development, qualification, and certification testing of the engine system, with a philosophy of "test what you fly, and fly what you test". These and other active risk management strategies are in place to deliver the J-2X engine for LEO and lunar return missions as outlined in the U.S. Vision for Space Exploration.

Snoddy, Jimmy R.↗
NASA NTRS2006

Lightweight Ablative and Ceramic Thermal Protection System Materials for NASA Exploration Systems Vehicles

As a collaborative effort among NASA Centers, the "Lightweight Nonmetallic Thermal Protection Materials Technology" Project was set up to assist mission/vehicle design trade studies, to support risk reduction in thermal protection system (TPS) material selections, to facilitate vehicle mass optimization, and to aid development of human-rated TPS qualification and certification plans. Missions performing aerocapture, aerobraking, or direct aeroentry rely on advanced heatshields that allow reductions in spacecraft mass by minimizing propellant requirements. Information will be presented on candidate materials for such reentry approaches and on screening tests conducted (material property and space environmental effects tests) to evaluate viable candidates. Seventeen materials, in three classes (ablatives, tiles, and ceramic matrix composites), were studied. In additional to physical, mechanical, and thermal property tests, high heat flux laser tests and simulated-reentry oxidation tests were performed. Space environmental effects testing, which included exposures to electrons, atomic oxygen, and hypervelocity impacts, was also conducted.

Valentine, Peter G.↗
NASA NTRS2006

Building Operations Efficiencies into NASA's Crew Launch Vehicle Design

The U.S. Vision for Space Exploration guides NASA's challenging missions of technological innovation and scientific investigation. With the Agency's commitment to complete the International Space Station (ISS) and to retire the Space Shuttle by 2010, the NASA Administrator commissioned the Exploration Systems Architecture Study (ESAS) in mid 2005 to analyze options for a safer, simpler, more cost efficient launch system that could deliver timely human-rated space transportation capabilities. NASA's finite resources yield discoveries with infinite possibilities. As the Agency begins the process of replacing the Shuttle with new launch vehicles destined for missions beyond low-Earth orbit to the Moon and Mars, NASA is designing the follow-on crew and cargo systems for maximum operational efficiencies. This mandate is imperative to reduce the $4.5 billion NASA spends on space transportation each year. This paper gives top-level details of how the follow-on Crew Launch Vehicle (CLV) is being designed for reduced lifecycle costs as a primary catalyst for the expansion of future frontiers.

Dumbacher, Daniel L.↗
NASA NTRS2006

Crew Launch Vehicle (CLV) Avionics and Software Integration Overview

On January 14, 2004, the President of the United States announced a new plan to explore space and extend a human presence across our solar system. The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) established the Exploration Systems Mission Directorate (ESMD) to develop and field a Constellation Architecture that will bring the Space Exploration vision to fruition. The Constellation Architecture includes a human-rated Crew Launch Vehicle (CLV) segment, managed by the Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC), comprised of the First Stage (FS), Upper Stage (US), and Upper Stage Engine (USE) elements. The CLV s purpose is to provide safe and reliable crew and cargo transportation into Low Earth Orbit (LEO), as well as insertion into trans-lunar trajectories. The architecture's Spacecraft segment includes, among other elements, the Crew Exploration Vehicle (CEV), managed by the Johnson Space Flight Center (JSC), which is launched atop the CLV. MSFC is also responsible for CLV and CEV stack integration. This paper provides an overview of the Avionics and Software integration approach (which includes the Integrated System Health Management (ISHM) functions), both within the CLV, and across the CEV interface; it addresses the requirements to be met, logistics of meeting those requirements, and the roles of the various groups. The Avionics Integration and Vehicle Systems Test (ANST) Office was established at the MSFC with system engineering responsibilities for defining and developing the integrated CLV Avionics and Software system. The AIVST Office has defined two Groups, the Avionics and Software Integration Group (AVSIG), and the Integrated System Simulation and Test Integration Group (ISSTIG), and four Panels which will direct trade studies and analyses to ensure the CLV avionics and software meet CLV system and CEV interface requirements. The four panels are: 1) Avionics Integration Panel (AIP), 2) Software Integration Panel, 3) EEE Panel, and 4) Systems Simulation and Test Panel. Membership on the groups and panels includes the MSFC representatives from the requisite engineering disciplines, the First Stage, the Upper Stage, the Upper Stage Engine projects, and key personnel from other NASA centers. The four panels will take the results of trade studies and analyses and develop documentation in support of Design Analysis Cycle Reviews and ultimately the System Requirements Review.

Monell, Donald W.↗
NASA NTRS2006

Building Operations Efficiencies into NASA's Ares I Crew Launch Vehicle Design

The U.S. Vision for Space Exploration guides the National Aeronautics and Space Administration s (NASA's) challenging missions that expand humanity s boundaries and open new routes to the space frontier. With the Agency's commitment to complete the International Space Station (ISS) and to retire the venerable Space Shuttle by 2010, the NASA Administrator commissioned the Exploration Systems Architecture Study (ESAS) in mid 2005 to analyze options for safe, simple, cost-efficient launch solutions that could deliver human-rated space transportation capabilities in a timely manner within fixed budget guidelines. The Exploration Launch Projects Office, chartered in October 2005, has been conducting systems engineering studies and business planning over the past few months to successively refine the design configurations and better align vehicle concepts with customer and stakeholder requirements, such as significantly reduced life-cycle costs. As the Agency begins the process of replacing the Shuttle with a new generation of spacecraft destined for missions beyond low-Earth orbit to the Moon and Mars, NASA is designing the follow-on crew and cargo launch systems for maximum operational efficiencies. To sustain the long-term exploration of space, it is imperative to reduce the $4.5 billion NASA typically spends on space transportation each year. This paper gives top-level information about how the follow-on Ares I Crew Launch Vehicle (CLV) is being designed for improved safety and reliability, coupled with reduced operations costs.

Dumbacher, Daniel↗
NASA NTRS2002

Historic and Current Launcher Success Rates

This presentation reviews historic and current space launcher success rates from all nations with a mature launcher industry. Data from the 1950's through present day is reviewed for possible trends such as when in the launch timeline a failure occurred, which stages had the highest failure rate, overall launcher reliability, a decade by decade look at launcher reliability, when in a launchers history did failures occur, and the reliability of United States human-rated launchers. This information is useful in determining where launcher reliability can be improved and where additional measures for crew survival (i.e., Crew Escape systems) will have the greatest emphasis

Rust, Randy↗
NASA NTRS2000

Analysis and Test of a Proton Exchange Membrane Fuel Cell Power System for Space Power Applications

An effort is underway to develop a prototype Proton Exchange Membrane (PEM) Fuel Cell breadboard system for fuhlre space applications. This prototype will be used to develop a comprehensive design basis for a space-rated PEM fuel cell powerplant. The prototype system includes reactant pressure regulators, ejector-based reactant pumps, a 4-kW fuel cell stack and cooling system, and a passive, membranebased oxygen / water separator. A computer model is being developed concurrently to analytically predict fluid flow in the oxidant reactant system. Fuel cells have historically played an important role in human-rated spacecraft. The Gemini and Apollo spacecraft used fuel cells for vehicle electrical power. The Space Shuttle currently uses three Alkaline Fuel Cell Powerplants (AFCP) to generate all of the vehicle's 15-20kW electrical power. Engineers at the Johnson Space Center have leveraged off the development effort ongoing in the commercial arena to develop PEM fuel cel ls for terrestrial uses. The prototype design originated from efforts to develop a PEM fuel cell replacement for the current Space Shuttle AFCP' s. In order to improve on the life and an already excellent hi storical record of reliability and safety, three subsystems were focused on. These were the fuel cell stack itself, the reactant circulation devices, and reactant / product water separator. PEM fuel cell stack performance is already demonstrating the potential for greater than four times the useful life of the current Shuttle's AFCP. Reactant pumping for product water removal has historically been accomplished with mechanical pumps. Ejectors offer an effective means of reactant pumping as well as the potential for weight reduction, control simplification, and long life. Centrifugal water separation is used on the current AFCP. A passive, membrane-based water separator offers compatibility with the micro-gravity environment of space, and the potential for control simplification, elimination of moving parts in an oxygen environment, and long life. The prototype system has been assembled from components that have previously been tested and evaluated at the component level. Preliminary data obtained from tests performed with the prototype system, as well as other published data, has been used to validate the analytical component models. These components have been incorporated into an integrated oxidant fluid system model. Results obtained from both the performance tests and the analytical model are presented.

Vasquez, Arturo↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

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

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

Sarkis S Mikaelian↗