Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Mars Surface Habitat”

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 NTRSDate not supplied

Future Homes in Space: Development of Concepts for Exploration Space Habitats

NASA’s Artemis campaign seeks to return humans to the moon and establish a sustained presence on the lunar surface. This session will emphasize how habitation capabilities on the moon and in cislunar space can potentially contribute to the sustainability objectives of Artemis. Habitable elements represent opportunities to enable longer duration stays, increase the number of crew members present, enhance science and utilization activities, drive technology development for future Mars exploration, perform analog missions, and fuel economic opportunities for US industry. Panelists include Paul Kessler (NASA Marshall Space Flight Center, deputy lead for lunar surface habitation); Andrew Choate (NASA Marshall Space Flight Center, Mars habitation lead); Krystofer Dudzinski (NASA Marshall Space Flight Center, a space architect within the MSFC Advanced Concepts Office); and Larry Toups (retired from NASA Johnson Space Center, currently an adjunct professor at University of Houston in space architecture). The panel is moderated by Tracie Prater (NASA Marshall Space Flight Center, Habitation Systems Development Office). The panel will begin with an overview of the history of habitation concepts and an academic perspective on general considerations in space habitat design (Larry Toups). Paul Kessler and Andrew Choate will introduce NASA’s principle of “architecting from the right” to help define objectives for Artemis missions, needs/characteristics, use cases, and functions (as published in the agency’s Architecture Definition Document) and provide perspective on how this principle informs habitation concept development work. NASA panelists will discuss key engineering challenges identified for developing, deploying, and operating habitable assets on the lunar surface and/or in deep space. These may include dust mitigation, outfitting of inflatable softgoods (for concepts which may use softgoods as a primary structural material), survival in lunar darkness, human health and performance considerations, maintenance/repair/sparing, and autonomy. These identified challenges represent risks for habitation systems development and relate closely to capability gaps identified by the agency. While the work of NASA Marshall Space Flight Center’s habitation development office is primarily focused on habitats which are launched from earth pre-integrated (referred to as Class I in the framework previously developed by NASA space architects Kennedy/Cohen) or launched from earth and deployed at the point of use (Class II), there is also extensive work in NASA, academia, and companies on constructed habitats, which would be built on a planetary surface using indigenous resources (Class III habitats). Panelist Krystopher Dudzinski will discuss potential evolutionary pathways from Class I and Class II habitats to Class III habitats, unique and common architectural challenges within each habitat class, and key gaps in implementing Class III habitats from an architectural perspective. NASA panelists and the moderator will also provide an overview of partnership opportunities and avenues for further engagement to advance habitation systems for the SpaceCom audience. NASA is currently developing notional concepts for a lunar surface habitat and Mars transit habitat, which will be discussed during this panel session and used as examples. These concepts represent options for habitation system design and are a point of departure. They do not represent a final plan or formal recommendation on the part of the agency. Based on the most recent analysis cycle, NASA’s lunar surface habitat (SH) concept nominally supports two crew members for 30 days, with the capacity to support four crew during a surge period where crew will swap between the SH and another surface asset, such as a pressurized rover. This example design has a metallic airlock for ingress/egress and the upper portion is an inflatable material system which serves as the habitation module. The notional interior of the habitat is a three-deck layout/configuration which supports all crew mission functions, including exercise, stowage, extravehicular activity (EVA), sleep, hygiene waste collection, maintenance and repair, and meal preparation. Under analysis assumptions for habitation, the Mars Transit Habitat (TH) concept would support four crew on an up to 1,200 day Mars mission. One option for the concept is to initially dock Transit Habitat at Gateway, where it can be used to increase the duration of crew stays in cislunar space and perform shakedown and analog missions prior to a Mars departure. One challenge in longer duration missions which involve both surface exploration and transit is understanding crew adaptation when transitioning between partial gravity and microgravity environments. TH at Gateway offers an opportunity to study this transition and in doing so reduce risks associated with future Mars exploration. Like lunar SH, the most recent analysis cycle concept of a Mars TH is a hybrid structure design, with a metallic section supporting EVAs, axial/radial docking, and Safe Haven capabilities, and an inflatable softgoods structure for the primary habitation function. Interior layouts to optimize crew usability and livability are currently under trade. The panel will include presentation material, but also seeks to engage the audience in a highly interactive conversation regarding the potential role for habitation in future exploration initiatives. Potential topics for discussion include the influence of the crew experience on habitation systems design and livability/usability considerations, the benefits of space habitation development in terrestrial applications, and challenges and opportunities in “feeding forward” lunar surface habitation systems development to Mars exploration.

space habitats↗
NASA NTRS2005

In-situ Production of High Density Polyethylene and Other Useful Materials on Mars

This paper describes a revolutionary materials structure and power storage concept based on the in-situ production of abiotic carbon 4 compounds. One of the largest single mass penalties required to support the human exploration of Mars is the surface habitat. This proposal will use physical chemical technologies to produce high density polyethylene (HDPE) inflatable structures and construction materials from Mars atmospheric CO2. The formation of polyethylene from Mars CO2 is based on the use of the Sabatier and modified Fischer Tropsch reactions. The proposed system will fully integrate with existing in-situ propellant production concepts. The technology will also be capable of supplementing human caloric requirements, providing solid and liquid fuels for energy storage, and providing significant reduction in mission risk. The NASA Mars Reference Mission Definition Team estimated that a conventional Mars surface habitat structure would weigh 10 tonnes. It is estimated that this technology could reduce this mass by 80%. This reduction in mass will significantly contribute to the reduction in total mission cost need to make a Mars mission a reality. In addition the potential reduction of risk provided by the ability to produce C4 and potentially higher carbon based materials in-situ on Mars is significant. Food, fuel, and shelter are only three of many requirements that would be impacted by this research.

Flynn, Michael↗
NASA NTRS2015

Mars OASIS (Mars Operational Agricultural System for In-Situ Specialization) System Reference Manual

In order to enable long term habitation on planetary surfaces, a means of sustainable food production must be developed. Addressing this need for surface habitats on Mars, the MarsOASIS team has developed a concept for a Martian surface greenhouse for unmanned crop production research as a proof of concept for larger scale food production facilities for manned surface missions. Utilizing in-situ resources such as the Martian atmosphere, sunlight, and UV-C radiation, the greenhouse aims to provide a sustainable method of long-term food production requiring minimal consumable resources. The MarsOASIS system is capable of growing a full life cycle of Outredgeous lettuce with its autonomous control system designed for a unmanned environment, only requiring teleoperation in extreme circumstances. A reduced-scope prototype of MarsOASIS is being developed to test technologies such as a natural/artificial hybrid lighting system, a closed water recycling system, remote teleoperation, and fully autonomous monitoring and control of the greenhouse. The prototype is currently in the final stages of design, with a full demonstration of plant life cycle testing set to occur in summer 2015. Results from this prototype demonstration will help quantify the feasibility of the innovative approaches seen in the MarsOASIS design.

Asa Darnell↗
NASA NTRS2015

Evolvable Mars Campaign Long Duration Habitation Strategies: Architectural Approaches to Enable Human Exploration Missions

The Evolvable Mars Campaign (EMC) is the current NASA Mars mission planning effort which seeks to establish sustainable, realistic strategies to enable crewed Mars missions in the mid-2030s timeframe. The primary outcome of the Evolvable Mars Campaign is not to produce "The Plan" for sending humans to Mars, but instead its intent is to inform the Human Exploration and Operations Mission Directorate near-term key decisions and investment priorities to prepare for those types of missions. The FY'15 EMC effort focused upon analysis of integrated mission architectures to identify technically appealing transportation strategies, logistics build-up strategies, and vehicle designs for reaching and exploring Mars moons and Mars surface. As part of the development of this campaign, long duration habitats are required which are capable of supporting crew with limited resupply and crew abort during the Mars transit, Mars moons, and Mars surface segments of EMC missions. In particular, the EMC design team sought to design a single, affordable habitation system whose manufactured units could be outfitted uniquely for each of these missions and reused for multiple crewed missions. This habitat system must provide all of the functionality to safely support 4 crew for long durations while meeting mass and volume constraints for each of the mission segments set by the chosen transportation architecture and propulsion technologies. This paper describes several proposed long-duration habitation strategies to enable the Evolvable Mars Campaign through improvements in mass, cost, and reusability, and presents results of analysis to compare the options and identify promising solutions. The concepts investigated include several monolithic concepts: monolithic clean sheet designs, and concepts which leverage the co-manifested payload capability of NASA's Space Launch System (SLS) to deliver habitable elements within the Universal Payload Adaptor between the SLS upper stage and the Orion/Service module on the top of the vehicle. Multiple modular habitat options for Mars surface and in-space missions are also considered with various functionality and volume splits between modules to find the best balance of reducing the single largest mass which must be delivered to a destination and reducing the number of separate elements which must be launched. Analysis results presented for each of these concepts in this paper include mass/volume/power sizing using parametric sizing tools, identification of unique operational constraints, and limited comments on the additional impacts of reusability/dormancy on system design. Finally, recommendations will be made for promising solutions which will be carried forward for consideration in the Evolvable Mars Campaign work.

Simon, Matthew A.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Surface Transportation of the Common Habitat from Lander to Habitation Zone

The Common Habitat Architecture is a feasibility study surrounding the use of an SLS core stage liquid oxygen tank as the pressure vessel for a long-duration habitat intended for use in multiple gravity environments. The Common Habitat is used within this study as the primary habitation element in both Moon and Mars surface base camps. The Common Habitat Architecture offloads the Common Habitat from its lander and transports it to a Habitation Zone instead of leaving the habitat integrated with the lander. In this study, the Landing Zone is assumed to be approximately 3.5 kilometers from the Habitation Zone. Given the physical size and estimated 90-ton mass of the Common Habitat, a four-week trade study encompassing Moon and Mars lander identification, offloading, surface transport, and emplacement was conducted in February 2021 to assess whether there are any credible options for landing the Common Habitat on the Moon or Mars and deliver it to its intended point of use. Constrained to use only public data, the study applied subject matter expert opinion to each component of the study. The surface transportation component of the trade study assumes the habitat has been successfully offloaded from its lander and is at a point of handover to the surface transportation system. It is assumed that there are no crew present, and all human operations are performed remotely by Mission Control personnel. Three core cargo handling elements from prior NASA studies were used as the basis from which to derive surface transportation options – the Chariot, the All-Terrain Hex-Limbed Extra-Terrestrial Explorer, and the Lightweight Surface Manipulator System. Variations and hybrid combinations of these elements were used to develop transportation options for the Moon and Mars, given different habitat masses. Ultimately, several potentially feasible solutions were identified, and a solution was recommended that is common to both the Moon and Mars, with the potential to use a dissimilar system as a backup during lunar Common Habitat delivery. Next steps for sizing and additional development and analysis of the recommended surface transportation system are included as forward work.

Surface Mobility↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Common Habitat Design for Microgravity, Artificial Gravity and Partial Gravity in a Safe Haven Configuration

As space exploration efforts advance towards the returning to Lunar surface and later to Mars, new challenges emerge, and habitation becomes one of them. Having a custom manufacturing line for deep space transit and surface habitats (the Moon or Mars) implies a longer design and production line. Instead of spending great amounts of money and time on custom designs a common development has been explored where the interior architectural functions can be multifunctional, capable of being adapted into distinct gravity conditions. The concept developed for a common design is capable of being adapted to two (2) different layout configurations for a common habitat in a safe haven design: (#1) a habitat that could be used both as a deep space transport in micro gravity and on Mars surface partial gravity; and (#2) a habitat that could be used both as a deep space transport in artificial gravity and on Mars surface partial gravity. These designs have the potential to diminish manufacturing time and cost, but also reducing crew training time increasing crew adaptability to their habitation and gravity condition.

Paola M Gonzalez Marquez↗
NASA NTRS2022

Moon to Mars (M2M) Habitation Considerations: A Snap Shot As of January 2022

The following NASA Technical Memorandum (TM) is intended to provide a snapshot in time of NASA’s current considerations (ground rules and assumptions, functional allocations, logistics) for habitation systems for the lunar surface (non-roving) and Mars transits. As NASA continues to refine the reference designs to meet the needs of an evolving architecture, it is expected that this information will also be updated as a result. Where appropriate, relevant publicly released documents will be referenced to provide further detail. NASA’s human lunar exploration plan under the Artemis program calls for achieving the goal of sending the first woman and first person of color to the surface of the Moon in the mid- 2020s and working toward sustainable exploration by the end of the decade. Working with both commercial and international partners, NASA will establish a permanent human presence on the Moon to uncover new scientific discoveries and lay the foundation for private companies to build a lunar economy. Longer duration missions on the lunar surface and in lunar orbit will also serve as a test bed for technologies to support future Mars exploration campaigns. The agency will use what we learn on the Moon to prepare for humanity's next giant leap – sending astronauts to Mars. NASA intends to establish a sustained lunar presence with the development of the Artemis Base Camp to prove technologies and capabilities that will one day enable humans to live and work on Mars, beginning with core elements including the Lunar Terrain Vehicle (LTV), the Pressurized Rover (PR), the lunar Surface Habitat (SH), power systems, and in-situ resource utilization (ISRU) systems. For in space operations and eventual transport of humans to Mars, NASA will utilize a Mars Transit Habitat (TH). Following deployment, the TH will complete a series of longer duration missions and shakedown testing while docked at Gateway, leveraging Gateway’s habitation redundancy for safety measures. Proposed Gateway-TH missions will far exceed the longest duration cislunar human missions to date. They will be the first operational readiness tests of our long-duration deep space systems, and of the split crew (two crew on the surface, two crew in space) operations that are vital to the approach for the first human Mars mission. Both the SH and TH are major architectural elements of NASA’s Moon to Mars (M2M) approach, each with very different concepts of operation. The SH is intended for use on the lunar surface as a home for astronauts, surface operations base, science facility, hub for communications, extravehicular activity (EVA) equipment repair site, waste processing facility, and supply hub. It serves as an enabler for a sustained surface presence and preparation for partial gravity operations during Mars missions. The SH will be designed to be self-sufficient for operations on the lunar surface. The SH will independently provide several functions, including its own power generation, energy storage capability, sleep quarters, hygiene areas, work areas, and dining areas. It will be capable of communicating with surface assets, orbital assets, and directly with Earth ground stations. It is planned to operate with two crew in the habitat for ~28- day stays with crew swap-outs in which the PR crew of two trades places with the habitat crew. During the swap-out, the habitat will nominally support four crew for a short period of time. For contingency scenarios, the habitat must also be capable of supporting four crew for up to 7 days. The TH will be designed to be capable of up to ~1,200-day Mars missions with the ability to carry all food and supplies needed to support a crew of four for this duration. An assumed Mars mission profile for the TH is to carry crew and supplies for ~850-day roundtrips between Earth and Mars orbit that allows 30-day stays on the Martian surface. To test the systems for this long journey, the TH will be used to extend the duration of missions at Gateway, enabling the orbiting outpost to be used as a Mars analog. These analog missions will be accomplished by attaching the TH to Gateway and conducting lunar surface operations from the TH. The TH may also need to perform free-flying shakedown missions to test out all systems prior to leaving for Mars. The habitat provides many critical functions including: a contingency airlock, crew quarters, galley, hygiene areas, safe haven capability, and science equipment. It can receive docked items from either axial end or on a radial port.

Habitat↗
NASA NTRS2020

Stowage Assessment of the Common Habitat Baseline Variants

This paper performs a stowage assessment of the four baseline variants of the Common Habitat, a SLS-derived long duration, multi-mission habitat. The Common Habitat can be utilized as a lunar surface outpost, a Mars surface outpost, or an in-space habitat for Mars transit flights. The paper will discuss the stowage philosophy applied to all baseline variants of the Common Habitat and will discuss the approaches taken to domain-specific stowage, bulk stowage, and fluid and gas stowage. Water and air stowage for the closed loop ECLS subsystem is described across the four variants. Stowage of other supplies, consumables, and equipment is also described across the four variants and based on logistics sizing studies, a self-contained mission endurance is predicted for each variant – e.g. how long a mission each can support without a docked logistics module. Finally, follow-on assessments, including a habitability evaluation, are discussed along with specific stowage issues relevant to these assessments.

Deep space habitat↗
NASA NTRS2016

Human and Robotic Exploration Missions to Phobos Prior to Crewed Mars Surface Missions

Phobos is a scientifically significant destination that would facilitate the development and operation of the human Mars transportation infrastructure, unmanned cargo delivery systems and other Mars surface systems. In addition to developing systems relevant to Mars surface missions, Phobos offers engineering, operational, and public engagement opportunities that could enhance subsequent Mars surface operations. These opportunities include the use of low latency teleoperations to control Mars surface assets associated with exploration science, human landing‐site selection and infrastructure development which may include in situ resource utilization (ISRU) to provide liquid oxygen for the Mars Ascent Vehicle (MAV). A human mission to Mars' moons would be preceded by a cargo predeploy of a surface habitat and a pressurized excursion vehicle (PEV) to Mars orbit. Once in Mars orbit, the habitat and PEV would spiral to Phobos using solar electric propulsion based systems, with the habitat descending to the surface and the PEV remaining in orbit. When a crewed mission is launched to Phobos, it would include the remaining systems to support the crew during the Earth‐Mars transit and to reach Phobos after insertion in to Mars orbit. The crew would taxi from Mars orbit to Phobos to join with the predeployed systems in a spacecraft that is based on a MAV, dock with and transfer to the PEV in Phobos orbit, and descend in the PEV to the surface habitat. A static Phobos surface habitat was chosen as a baseline architecture, in combination with the PEV that was used to descend from orbit as the main exploration vehicle. The habitat would, however, have limited capability to relocate on the surface to shorten excursion distances required by the PEV during exploration and to provide rescue capability should the PEV become disabled. To supplement exploration capabilities of the PEV, the surface habitat would utilize deployable EVA support structures that allow astronauts to work from portable foot restraints or body restrain tethers in the vicinity of the habitat. Prototype structures were tested as part of NEEMO 20. PEVs would contain closed loop guidance and provide life support and consumables for two crew for 2 weeks plus reserves. The PEV has a cabin that uses the exploration atmosphere of 8.2 psi with 34% oxygen, enabling use of suit ports for rapid EVA with minimal oxygen prebreathe as well as dust control by keeping the suits outside the pressurized volume. When equipped with outriggers and control moment gyros, the PEV enables EVA tasks of up to 8 pounds of force application without the need to anchor. Tasks with higher force requirements can be performed with PEV propulsion providing the necessary thrust to react forces. Exploration of Phobos builds heavily from the developments of the cis‐lunar proving ground, and significantly reduces Mars surface risk by facilitating the development and testing of habitats, MAVs, and pressurized rover cabins that are all Mars surface forward. A robotic precursor mission to Phobos and Deimos is also under consideration and would need to launch in 2022 to support a 2031 human Phobos mission.

Gernhardt, Michael L.↗
DOE OSTI2022

Assessment of Wind Energy Resource Potential for Future Human Missions to Mars

Energy sustainability and redundancy for surface habitats, life support systems and scientific instrumentation represent one of the highest-priority issues for future crewed missions to Mars. However, power sources utilized for the current class of robotic missions to Mars may be potentially dangerous near human surface habitats (for example, nuclear) or lack stability on diurnal or seasonal timescales (for example, solar) that cannot be easily compensated for by power storage. Here, we evaluate the power potential for wind turbines as an alternative energy resource on the Mars surface. Using a state-of-the-art Mars global climate model, we analyse the total planetary Martian wind potential and calculate its spatial and temporal variability. We find that wind speeds at some proposed landing sites are sufficiently fast to provide a stand-alone or complementary energy source to solar or nuclear power. While several regions show promising wind energy resource potential, other regions of scientific interest can be discarded based on the natural solar and wind energy potential alone. We demonstrate that wind energy compensates for diurnal and seasonal reductions in solar power particularly in regions of scientific merit in the midlatitudes and during regional dust storms. Critically, proposed turbines stabilize power production when combined with solar arrays, increasing the percent time that power exceeds estimated mission requirements from ~40% for solar arrays alone to greater than 60-90% across a broad fraction of the Mars surface. We encourage additional study aimed at advancing wind turbine technology to operate efficiently under Mars conditions and to extract more power from Mars winds.

atmospheric dynamics↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

An Analysis of Exploration Capability Gaps for Future Habitation Systems to Inform Risk Assessment and Development Priorities

Within NASA, exploration capability gaps are defined as the difference between the current state-of-the-art in capabilities and the anticipated needs of future human spaceflight architectures. As NASA and its partners’ capabilities for human exploration of deep space continue to mature, it is necessary to understand the capability gaps that require closure to support future habitation systems, such as the Lunar Surface Habitat (SH) and Mars Transit Habitat (TH) currently in concept development. This paper will identify high-priority capability gaps for exploration habitation and show potential options for gap closure through investment in technology, development, and testing. High-priority capability gaps are divided into the following general taxonomy areas: human health/life support/habitation systems, flight computing and avionics, power and energy storage, communications and navigation, thermal management systems, human exploration destination systems, autonomous systems, sensors and instruments, GNC (guidance, navigation, and control), robotic systems, ground and uncrewed surface systems, and materials/structures/mechanical systems/manufacturing. In the gap identification process, teams of discipline experts from across NASA reviewed the latest habitation architecture needs against current capabilities to understand where gaps may exist. The results of the assessment established a basis for the current state-of-the-art within each gap and identified the capability needs of the proposed exploration missions the gap links to. An assessment of how each test platform (e.g., Ground, International Space Station (ISS), Commercial Low Earth Orbit (LEO) Destinations, Gateway) may be leveraged to mature capabilities and potentially provide a route to gap closure will be discussed. The notional timeline for gap closure to support reference missions and impacts to overall schedule are also assessed where appropriate. Based on the capability gap analysis described above, the paper summarizes important technology maturation considerations for human exploration architectures, with a focus on the Mars TH. The previously published NASA habitation ground rules and assumptions document is used as the basis to classify gaps as enabling, enhancing, or “push” opportunities for a particular architecture. Stepwise technology maturation plans/considerations are presented for some selected critical gaps. Overall, the analysis in this paper is intended to help influence development priorities for habitation systems, where high-priority, critical gaps are those currently assessed as having a low probability of closure by the anticipated need date. Capability gap analysis also informs the risk register for exploration habitation systems and mitigation strategies to ensure readiness of key technologies to support future mission timelines. Linkage between capability gaps for Moon and Mars is noted, as closure of a gap at a Lunar destination may subsequently enable or enhance Mars TH architectures.

technology development↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

An Analysis of Exploration Capability Gaps for Future Habitation Systems to Inform Risk Assessment and Development Priorities

Within NASA, exploration capability gaps are defined as the difference between the current state-of-the-art in capabilities and the anticipated needs of future human spaceflight architectures. As NASA and its partners’ capabilities for human exploration of deep space continue to mature, it is necessary to understand the capability gaps that require closure to support future habitation systems, such as the Lunar Surface Habitat (SH) and Mars Transit Habitat (TH) currently in concept development. This paper will identify high-priority capability gaps for exploration habitation and show potential options for gap closure through investment in technology, development, and testing. High-priority capability gaps are divided into the following general taxonomy areas: human health/life support/habitation systems, flight computing and avionics, power and energy storage, communications and navigation, thermal management systems, human exploration destination systems, autonomous systems, sensors and instruments, GNC (guidance, navigation, and control), robotic systems, ground and uncrewed surface systems, and materials/structures/mechanical systems/manufacturing. In the gap identification process, teams of discipline experts from across NASA reviewed the latest habitation architecture needs against current capabilities to understand where gaps may exist. The results of the assessment established a basis for the current state-of-the-art within each gap and identified the capability needs of the proposed exploration missions the gap links to. An assessment of how each test platform (e.g., Ground, International Space Station (ISS), Commercial Low Earth Orbit (LEO) Destinations, Gateway) may be leveraged to mature capabilities and potentially provide a route to gap closure will be discussed. The notional timeline for gap closure to support reference missions and impacts to overall schedule are also assessed where appropriate. Based on the capability gap analysis described above, the paper summarizes important technology maturation considerations for human exploration architectures, with a focus on the Mars TH. The previously published NASA habitation ground rules and assumptions document is used as the basis to classify gaps as enabling, enhancing, or “push” opportunities for a particular architecture. Stepwise technology maturation plans/considerations are presented for some selected critical gaps. Overall, the analysis in this paper is intended to help influence development priorities for habitation systems, where high-priority, critical gaps are those currently assessed as having a low probability of closure by the anticipated need date. Capability gap analysis also informs the risk register for exploration habitation systems and mitigation strategies to ensure readiness of key technologies to support future mission timelines. Linkage between capability gaps for Moon and Mars is noted, as closure of a gap at a Lunar destination may subsequently enable or enhance Mars TH architectures.

technology development↗
NASA NTRS2012

Entry, Descent, and Landing for Human Mars Missions

One of the most challenging aspects of a human mission to Mars is landing safely on the Martian surface. Mars has such low atmospheric density that decelerating large masses (tens of metric tons) requires methods that have not yet been demonstrated, and are not yet planned in future Mars missions. To identify the most promising options for Mars entry, descent, and landing, and to plan development of the needed technologies, NASA's Human Architecture Team (HAT) has refined candidate methods for emplacing needed elements of the human Mars exploration architecture (such as ascent vehicles and habitats) on the Mars surface. This paper explains the detailed, optimized simulations that have been developed to define the mass needed at Mars arrival to accomplish the entry, descent, and landing functions. Based on previous work, technology options for hypersonic deceleration include rigid, mid-L/D (lift-to-drag ratio) aeroshells, and inflatable aerodynamic decelerators (IADs). The hypersonic IADs, or HIADs, are about 20% less massive than the rigid vehicles, but both have their technology development challenges. For the supersonic regime, supersonic retropropulsion (SRP) is an attractive option, since a propulsive stage must be carried for terminal descent and can be ignited at higher speeds. The use of SRP eliminates the need for an additional deceleration system, but SRP is at a low Technology Readiness Level (TRL) in that the interacting plumes are not well-characterized, and their effect on vehicle stability has not been studied, to date. These architecture-level assessments have been used to define the key performance parameters and a technology development strategy for achieving the challenging mission of landing large payloads on Mars.

Munk, Michelle M.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

NASA's Moon to Mars Autonomous Habitat Status

NASA is developing a strategy for sending humans to the Mars vicinity, known broadly as the Moon to Mars (M2M) Campaign. A critical part of this campaign is the development of in-space and surface habitation systems capable of substantially extending human presence beyond Low Earth Orbit (LEO). Mars missions feature an in-space transit habitat capable of supporting crews of four on ~850-1200-day missions, including transit to and from Mars and time in Mars orbit. Surface and transit habitats are complex elements which must keep crewmembers healthy and productive in deep-space environments with limited resources, long rescue times in contingency situations, and communication delays; all within constrained mass, volume, and power budgets. These habitats provide crew both living and workspace as well as most of the resources needed to support crew life. For deep space habitats, automation needs to be employed due to latency and for significant amounts of time when the habitats are uncrewed. Automation of systems is possible in space applications, but there are limitations. Outside of the Earth’s (or any) magnetosphere, radiation environments are harsh to both the physical hardware and the software components. Radiation (charged particles and ionizing electromagnetic waves) degrades and damages the hardware and causes single event upsets (SEUs) in software. If the hardware is damaged, data can be lost, or control actions not made. For software, SEUs cause algorithms to result in different solutions, or incorrect commands to be sent out. This means that algorithms and hardware used for deep space systems are different than what is used on Earth. Radiation-tolerant hardware is generations behind the current state-of-the-art hardware. Recent NASA missions, such as James Webb Space Telescope, continue to rely on older technologies such as the RAD750 processor, and the most advanced processors are still single core and less than 1.5 GHz. There have been attempts to use higher performance processors, but these often take multiple mitigation steps to handle the radiation environments, which limits the processing power and/or throughput. Current techniques for radiation mitigation have been redundancies, voting, physical separation of hardware, encasing materials, under-clocking hardware, and more. Some radiation mitigation techniques do provide benefits such as having a redundant system to improve the probability that a system will be available when needed. Autonomous software systems will have fewer interactions with humans on deep space missions and therefore need to be able to handle more off-nominal conditions. Microgravity also complicates the autonomous aspects of the mission because autonomous systems are usually built from known deterministic states, but microgravity causes physical objects to shift and move changing the location an autonomous system placed the object. Not only does the software need to be reliable and deterministic, losing resources due to a software error is not only costly but detrimental to reputation. The combination of having lower performance hardware and having to be able to verify and deterministically run software and an ever-changing environment makes deep space autonomous systems more complicated. Multiple gaps have been identified including verification of autonomous software algorithms (including artificial intelligence and machine learning), higher performance processors (graphics and general purpose), high speed networks (onboard and transmissions), memory, power distribution, data security, and variations from these. These gaps need to be closed for more advanced systems to be deployed and reduce the size, weight, and power impacts on the habitats.

Scott B. Tashakkor↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Science Capabilities of the Common Habitat

The Common Habitat is the primary habitable element in a conceptual architecture feasibility study for long-duration space exploration with an eight-person crew size. On lunar or planetary surfaces, the Common Habitat forms the core of a Surface Base Camp. In microgravity, the Common Habitat is the core of the Deep Space Exploration Vehicle (DSEV), an in-space transportation spacecraft. The Common Habitat employs a horizontal orientation that is divided internally into a lower deck, mid deck, and upper deck, roughly separating outfitting into individual, work, and group functions. On a planetary surface, the habitat is incorporated into a base camp, located near the south pole in the case of the Moon. The Mars base camp is currently location agnostic. Each base camp is divided into habitation, landing, resource production, and power zones. In microgravity, the habitat is incorporated into the Deep Space Exploration Vehicle, a vessel capable of transporting the crew within the inner solar system. In addition to crew and teleoperated control of external science assets, the Common Habitat employs a suite of life and physical science laboratory systems to enable it to support science investigations across a variety of destination environments, primarily featuring the Moon and Mars, along with the intervening interplanetary space. Other potential destinations include Near Earth Asteroids and Venus and Earth orbits. Located in the aft starboard section of the Common Habitat mid deck, the life science laboratory supports primarily biology and human research. In its baseline configuration, the laboratory includes horizontal work surfaces, freezers, multiple gloveboxes, sample transfer/exposure capability, large instruments, and reconfigurable ISPR-compatible payload bays. The Medical Care Facility and exercise facility can also support life science research. In the aft port section of the mid deck, the physical science laboratory supports physics, chemistry, materials science, geology, and remote sensing (including astrophysics, heliophysics, Earth science, planetary science, and meteorology). It provides a baseline of similar ISPR-compatible payload bays and adds additional freezers, including those for cryogenic sample storage, a remote sensing workstation, more gloveboxes, also with sample transfer/exposure, combustion chambers, fluid mechanics chambers, and a gas chromatograph. It leverages the Command & Control Center for teleoperations of mobile science assets. Both laboratories are highly modular, with the ability to swap out both payloads and instruments on an as-needed basis. The integrated science outfitting of the Common Habitat positions its crew to contribute to all of NASA’s Moon to Mars science objectives and extend human understanding into the inner solar system.

Lunar Suface↗
NASA NTRS2018

Preparing for Planetary Surface Exploration by Measuring Habitat Dust Intrusion with Filter Tests During an Analogue Mars Mission

As humans venture deeper into space more issues related to operations will become apparent. While the perils ofdust particles may not be widely recognized, it is one of the major issues astronauts will face on the surface of theMoon and Mars. Dust particles present a problem for both astronaut health and equipment as revealed during theApollo era lunar surface missions. Dust particles cling to spacesuits and field gear, which upon ingress would begincirculating throughout the spacecraft or habitat. An astronaut's health is compromised by the dust particle's potentialto embed in the lungs and cause respiratory illnesses. The extreme abrasiveness and granularity of the particles makeit near impossible to completely shield a spacecraft or habitat from dust related damage. NASA's Glenn ResearchCenter collaborated with Crew 188 at the Mars Desert Research Station (MDRS) in Utah to measure how much dustentered the habitat during a series of extravehicular activities (EVAs), or surface excursions. A NASA GRCdeveloped multistage filter system, coined the Scroll Filter System, was tested, for its effectiveness in removing dustthat entered the airlock and habitat after the EVAs. An optical particle counter measured the ambient airlockparticulates five times including: before the start of operations; after the crew left for EVA; in the middle of the EVAwith the settled air; before the crew entered the airlock after EVA; and finally, after the crew simulated repressurizationand suit brushing off in the airlock. Data was also collected in several of the working environmentlocations around MDRS and outside the habitat in the wind. Data collected from this research will help establishfilter equipment for life support systems and prescribed operations for astronaut transition from a planetary surfaceinto a desired clean habitat. Measurements may aid in updating a baseline expected dust load for a surface habitatand further facilitate the mitigation of astronaut's exposure to dust particles on the surface of celestial bodies.

Kobrick, Ryan L.↗