Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Pressurized Rover”

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 NTRS2022

Power System Design Trades for a Pressurized Lunar/Mars Rover

To enable future human exploration missions, the lunar surface will serve as a crucial training ground and technology demonstration test site where NASA will prepare for future human missions to Mars and other destinations. Key enablers in this exploration are rover systems intended to operate in both the lunar and Mars surface environments. This study focused primarily on the Mars surface environment because, compared to the near-continuous illumination near the lunar poles, the day/night cycles and the reduced solar illumination on Mars make it much more difficult to use solar power. However, solar power is not the only power generation technology available. Top-level energy studies have shown that a radioisotope power system (RPS) has promise for supplying both power and thermal energy for crewed rovers on both the Moon and Mars. This design study investigates how an RPS could potentially meet the power and thermal needs of a pressurized rover with applications for both destinations. The design focus is on what service an RPS can provide and how it would be integrated into a rover (power and thermal interfaces, placement, radiation shielding, fairing installation on the pad, etc.).

RPS↗
NASA NTRS2010

Constellation Architecture Team-Lunar Scenario 12.0 Habitation Overview

This paper will describe an overview of the Constellation Architecture Team Lunar Scenario 12.0 (LS-12) surface habitation approach and concept performed during the study definition. The Lunar Scenario 12 architecture study focused on two primary habitation approaches: a horizontally-oriented habitation module (LS-12.0) and a vertically-oriented habitation module (LS-12.1). This paper will provide an overview of the 12.0 lunar surface campaign, the associated outpost architecture, habitation functionality, concept description, system integration strategy, mass and power resource estimates. The Scenario 12 architecture resulted from combining three previous scenario attributes from Scenario 4 "Optimized Exploration", Scenario 5 "Fission Surface Power System" and Scenario 8 "Initial Extensive Mobility" into Scenario 12 along with an added emphasis on defining the excursion ConOps while the crew is away from the outpost location. This paper will describe an overview of the CxAT-Lunar Scenario 12.0 habitation concepts and their functionality. The Crew Operations area includes basic crew accommodations such as sleeping, eating, hygiene and stowage. The EVA Operations area includes additional EVA capability beyond the suitlock function such as suit maintenance, spares stowage, and suit stowage. The Logistics Operations area includes the enhanced accommodations for 180 days such as enhanced life support systems hardware, consumable stowage, spares stowage, interconnection to the other habitation elements, a common interface mechanism for future growth, and mating to a pressurized rover or Pressurized Logistics Module (PLM). The Mission & Science Operations area includes enhanced outpost autonomy such as an IVA glove box, life support, medical operations, and exercise equipment.

Kennedy, Kriss J.↗
NASA NTRS1992

Pressurized Lunar Rover (PLR)

The objective of this project was to design a manned pressurized lunar rover (PLR) for long-range transportation and for exploration of the lunar surface. The vehicle must be capable of operating on a 14-day mission, traveling within a radius of 500 km during a lunar day or within a 50-km radius during a lunar night. The vehicle must accommodate a nominal crew of four, support two 28-hour EVA's, and in case of emergency, support a crew of six when near the lunar base. A nominal speed of ten km/hr and capability of towing a trailer with a mass of two mt are required. Two preliminary designs have been developed by two independent student teams. The PLR 1 design proposes a seven meter long cylindrical main vehicle and a trailer which houses the power and heat rejection systems. The main vehicle carries the astronauts, life support systems, navigation and communication systems, lighting, robotic arms, tools, and equipment for exploratory experiments. The rover uses a simple mobility system with six wheels on the main vehicle and two on the trailer. The nonpressurized trailer contains a modular radioisotope thermoelectric generator (RTG) supplying 6.5 kW continuous power. A secondary energy storage for short-term peak power needs is provided by a bank of lithium-sulfur dioxide batteries. The life support system is partly a regenerative system with air and hygiene water being recycled. A layer of water inside the composite shell surrounds the command center allowing the center to be used as a safe haven during solar flares. The PLR 1 has a total mass of 6197 kg. It has a top speed of 18 km/hr and is capable of towing three metric tons, in addition to the RTG trailer. The PLR 2 configuration consists of two four-meter diameter, cylindrical hulls which are passively connected by a flexible passageway, resulting in the overall vehicle length of 11 m. The vehicle is driven by eight independently suspended wheels. The dual-cylinder concept allows articulated as well as double Ackermann steering. The primary power of 8 kW is supplied by a dynamic isotope system using a closed Brayton cycle with a xenon-hydrogen mixture as the working fluid. A sodium-sulfur battery serves as the secondary power source. Excess heat produced by the primary power system and other rover systems is rejected by radiators located on the top of the rear cylinder. The total mass of the PLR 2 is 7015 kg. Simplicity and low total weight have been the driving principles behind the design of PLR 1. The overall configuration consists of a 7-m-long, 3-m-diameter cylindrical main vehicle and a two-wheeled trailer. The cylinder of the main body is capped by eight-section, faceted, semi-hemispherical ends. The trailer contains the RTG power source and is not pressurized. The shell of the main body is constructed of a layered carbon fiber/foam/Kevlar sandwich structure. Included in the shell is a layer of water for radiation protection. The layer of water extends from the front of the rover over the crew compartment and creates a safe haven for the crew during a solar flare-up. The carbon fiber provides the majority of the strength and stiffness and the Kevlar provides protection from micrometeoroids. The Kevlar is covered with a gold foil and multi-layer insulation (MLI) to reduce radiation degradation and heat transfer through the wall. A thin thermoplastic layer seals the fiber and provides additional strength.

Creel, Kenneth↗
NASA NTRS2008

Health and Safety Benefits of Small Pressurized Suitport Rovers as EVA Surface Support Vehicles

Pressurized safe-haven providing SPE protection and decompression sickness (DCS) treatment capabilities within 20 mins at all times. Up to 50% reduction in time spent in EVA suits (vs. Unpressurized Rovers) for equal or greater Boots-on-Surface EVA exploration time. Reduces suit-induced trauma and provides improved options for nutrition, hydration, and waste-management. Time spent inside SPR during long translations may be spent performing resistive and cardiovascular exercise. Multiple shorter EVAs versus single 8 hr EVAs increases DCS safety and decreases prebreathe requirements. SPRs also offer many potential operational, engineering and exploration benefits not addressed here.

Gernhardt, Michael L.↗
NASA NTRS2009

Lunar Outpost Life Support Architecture Study Based on a High Mobility Exploration Scenario

As scenarios for lunar surface exploration and habitation continue to evolve within NASA s Constellation program, so must studies of optimal life support system architectures and technologies. This paper presents results of a life support architecture study based on a 2009 NASA scenario known as Scenario 12. Scenario 12 represents a consolidation of ideas from earlier NASA scenarios and includes an outpost near the Lunar South Pole comprised of three larger fixed surface elements and four attached pressurized rovers. The scenario places a high emphasis on surface mobility, with planning assuming that all four crewmembers spend roughly 50% of the time away from the outpost on 3-14 day excursions in two of the pressurized rovers. Some of the larger elements can also be mobilized for longer duration excursions. This emphasis on mobility poses a significant challenge for a regenerative life support system in terms of cost-effective waste collection and resource recovery across multiple elements, including rovers with very constrained infrastructure resources. The current study considers pressurized rovers as part of a distributed outpost life support architecture in both stand-alone and integrated configurations. A range of architectures are examined reflecting different levels of closure and distributed functionality. Different lander propellant scavenging options are also considered involving either initial conversion of residual oxygen and hydrogen propellants to water or initial direct oxygen scavenging. Monte Carlo simulations are used to assess the sensitivity of results to volatile high-impact mission variables, including the quantity of residual lander propellants available for scavenging, the fraction of crew time away from the outpost on excursions, total extravehicular activity hours, and habitat leakage. Architectures are evaluated by estimating surpluses or deficits of water and oxygen per 180-day mission and differences in fixed and 10-year-total equivalent system mass (ESM) relative to a reference case. Results are presented based on current assumptions for Scenario 12 and based on Monte Carlo simulations with assumed probability distributions for the high-impact mission variables. The calculated probability of no water or oxygen resupply from Monte Carlo simulations provides a quantitative measure of system robustness that can be used for cost/benefit analyses to identify leading architecture candidates. Areas of technology improvement that are likely to have a significant impact are also suggested.

Lange, Kevin E.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

A Safe Haven Concept for the Common Habitat in Moon, Mars, and Transit Environments

The safe haven for the Common Habitat architectures, both the Deep Space Exploration Vehicle and the Moon/Mars surface basecamps, consists of the airlock, logistics modules, and in-space or surface pressurized rovers. These elements are repositioned to dock together and form a secondary habitable environment. The multiple elements that compose the safe haven and its ability to share utilities across docking ports give it multiple subsystem options to sustain the crew. In the safe haven configuration, the two logistics modules dock to the side hatches of the airlock outer chamber, one pressurized rover docks to the outermost airlock hatch, and the second pressurized rover docks to the first. This configuration provides no less than thirty days of habitation for the eight-person crew. It also allows the airlock inner chamber to be used for EVAs to both the exterior surface and the Common Habitat interior, which may have lost pressure during the event that triggered the need for a safe haven. These EVAs enable the crew to work to repair the habitat and restore habitation capability.

Base camp↗
NASA NTRS2023

Desert Research and Technology Studies (D-RATS) 2022 Test Report

The primary purpose of the 2022 Desert Research and Technology Studies (D-RATS 22) analog mission field test was to provide data and recommendations regarding how pressurized rover (PR) design, cabin configuration, driving modes, timeline constraints, and mission operations can be acceptably implemented to support future Artemis missions that include a PR. The goal of these evaluations was to provide first order feedback and data on design concepts currently being traded as options for future pressurized rover flight prototypes. The Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA) may provide a PR for future Artemis missions. One of the primary objectives of D-RATS 2022 was to share with the JAXA PR team the processes and protocols by which NASA has learned to successfully evaluate rover concepts through integrated HITL evaluations over the past 20+ years, so that JAXA could apply any applicable lessons learned to their PR design, development, testing, and evaluation.

analog↗
NASA NTRS2011

Selecting Tasks for Evaluating Human Performance as a Function of Gravity

A challenge in understanding human performance as a function of gravity is determining which tasks to research. Initial studies began with treadmill walking, which was easy to quantify and control. However, with the development of pressurized rovers, it is less important to optimize human performance for ambulation as pressurized rovers will likely perform gross translation for them. Future crews are likely to spend much of their extravehicular activity (EVA) performing geology, construction,a nd maintenance type tasks. With these types of tasks, people have different performance strategies, and it is often difficult to quantify the task and measure steady-state metabolic rates or perform biomechanical analysis. For many of these types of tasks, subjective feedback may be the only data that can be collected. However, subjective data may not fully support a rigorous scientific comparison of human performance across different gravity levels and suit factors. NASA would benefit from having a wide variety of quantifiable tasks that allow human performance comparison across different conditions. In order to determine which tasks will effectively support scientific studies, many different tasks and data analysis techniques will need to be employed. Many of these tasks and techniques will not be effective, but some will produce quantifiable results that are sensitive enough to show performance differences. One of the primary concerns related to EVA performance is metabolic rate. The higher the metabolic rate, the faster the astronaut will exhaust consumables. The focus of this poster will be on how different tasks affect metabolic rate across different gravity levels.

Norcross, Jason R.↗
NASA NTRS2014

An Alternate Configuration of the Multi-Mission Space Exploration Vehicle

The NASA Multi-Mission Space Exploration Vehicle (MMSEV) Team has developed an alternate configuration of the vehicle that can be used as a lunar lander. The MMSEV was originally conceived of during the Constellation program as the successor to the Apollo lunar rover as a pressurized rover for two-person, multiday excursions on the lunar surface. Following the cancellation of the Constellation program, the MMSEV has been reconfigured to serve as a free-flying scout vehicle for exploration of a Near Earth Asteroid and is also being assessed for use as a Habitable Airlock in a Cislunar microgravity spacecraft. The Alternate MMSEV (AMMSEV) variant of the MMSEV would serve as the transport vehicle for a four-person lunar crew, providing descent from an orbiting spacecraft or space station and ascent back to the spaceborne asset. This paper will provide a high level overview of the MMSEV and preliminary results from human-in-the-loop testing.

Howard, Robert L., Jr.↗
NASA NTRS2011

Acquisition of Skill Proficiency Over Multiple Sessions of a Novel Rover Simulation

Following long-duration exploration transits, adaptive changes in sensorimotor function may impair the crew's ability to safely perform manual control tasks such as operating pressurized rovers. Postflight performance will also be influenced by the level of preflight skill proficiency they have attained. The purpose of this study was to characterize the acquisition of skills in a motion-based rover simulation over multiple sessions, and to investigate the effects of varying the simulation scenarios. METHODS: Twenty healthy subjects were tested in 5 sessions, with 1-3 days between sessions. Each session consisted of a serial presentation of 8 discrete tasks to be completed as quickly and accurately as possible. Each task consisted of 1) perspective-taking, using a map that defined a docking target, 2) navigation toward the target around a Martian outpost, and 3) docking a side hatch of the rover to a visually guided target. The simulator utilized a Stewart-type motion base (CKAS, Australia), single-seat cabin with triple scene projection covering 150 deg horizontal by 50 deg vertical, and joystick controller. Subjects were randomly assigned to a control group (tasks identical in the first 4 sessions) or a varied-practice group. The dependent variables for each task included accuracy toward the target and time to completion. RESULTS: The greatest improvements in time to completion occurred during the docking phase. The varied-practice group showed more improvement in perspective-taking accuracy. Perspective-taking accuracy was also affected by the relative orientation of the rover to the docking target. Skill acquisition was correlated with self-ratings of previous gaming experience. DISCUSSION: Varying task selection and difficulty will optimize the preflight acquisition of skills when performing novel operational tasks. Simulation of operational manual control will provide functionally relevant evidence regarding the impact of sensorimotor adaptation on early surface operations and what countermeasures are needed. Learning Objective: The use of a motion-based simulation to investigate decrements in the proficiency to operate pressurized rovers during early surface operations of space exploration missions, along with the acquisition of skill proficiency needed during the preflight phase of the mission.

Dean, S. L.↗
NASA NTRS2009

Providing Oxygen for the Crew of a Lunar Outpost

Oxygen (O2) is obviously essential for human space missions, but it is important to examine all the different ways it will be used and the potential sources that it may come from. This effort will lead to storage and delivery requirements and help to determine the optimum architecture from an overall systems engineering point of view. Accounting for all the oxygen in a Lunar Outpost mission includes meeting the metabolic needs of the crew while in the surface Habitat, leakage through the Habitat or Pressurized Rover walls, recharge of the space suit backpack and emergency situations. Current plans indicate that both primary and secondary O2 bottles for the space suit will be filled to a pressure of 20.7 MPa (3000 psia). Other uses of O2 require much lower pressure. Sources of O2 at a Lunar Outpost include compressed or liquefied O2 brought along specifically for life support, scavenged O2 from the Lander propulsion system, recovered O2 from waste water or exhaled carbon dioxide and O2 mined from the moon itself. Previously, eight technology options were investigated to provide the high pressure space suit O2. High pressure O2 storage was treated as the baseline technology and compared to the other seven. The other seven were cryogenic storage followed by high pressure vaporization, scavenging liquid oxygen (LOX) from Lander followed by vaporization, LOX delivery followed by sorption compression, low pressure water electrolysis followed by mechanical compression, high pressure water electrolysis, sharing a high pressure electrolyzer with a regenerative fuel cell power system, and making use of In- Situ Resource Utilization (ISRU). This system-level analysis was conducted by comparing equivalent system mass of the eight technologies in open and closed loop life support architectures. The most promising high pressure O2 generation technologies were recommended for development. Updates and an expansion of the earlier study have been made and the results are reported in this paper. Examples of recent analyses include feasibility of recovering space suit purge O2 in a Pressurized Rover and using sub-critical LOX for primary supply while using high-pressure gaseous O2 as the secondary supply for the space-suit. Preliminary analysis on scavenging LOX from the Lander and delivering it to the Habitat has also been incorporated into this integrated lunar fluids analysis

Ewert, Michael K.↗
NASA NTRS2009

Science Operations for the 2008 NASA Lunar Analog Field Test at Black Point Lava Flow, Arizona

Surface science operations on the Moon will require merging lessons from Apollo with new operation concepts that exploit the Constellation Lunar Architecture. Prototypes of lunar vehicles and robots are already under development and will change the way we conduct science operations compared to Apollo. To prepare for future surface operations on the Moon, NASA, along with several supporting agencies and institutions, conducted a high-fidelity lunar mission simulation with prototypes of the small pressurized rover (SPR) and unpressurized rover (UPR) (Fig. 1) at Black Point lava flow (Fig. 2), 40 km north of Flagstaff, Arizona from Oct. 19-31, 2008. This field test was primarily intended to evaluate and compare the surface mobility afforded by unpressurized and pressurized rovers, the latter critically depending on the innovative suit-port concept for efficient egress and ingress. The UPR vehicle transports two astronauts who remain in their EVA suits at all times, whereas the SPR concept enables astronauts to remain in a pressurized shirt-sleeve environment during long translations and while making contextual observations and enables rapid (less than or equal to 10 minutes) transfer to and from the surface via suit-ports. A team of field geologists provided realistic science scenarios for the simulations and served as crew members, field observers, and operators of a science backroom. Here, we present a description of the science team s operations and lessons learned.

Garry W. D.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Regenerative ECLSS and Logistics Analysis for Sustained Lunar Surface Missions

Sustained Lunar Campaign: Annual crew missions to the lunar surface with 2 to 4 crewmembers living in a Surface Habitat (SH) and/or a Pressurized Rover (PR) for 30 days or longer. Missions will require annual resupply of logistics to the lunar surface: Logistics include consumables, EVA consumables and spares, carriers, surface system spares and maintenance, and science and utilization. Water and gas (may) dominate the total logistics resupply: Water and gas = a direct function of the level of closure provided by the ECLSS in the Surface Habitat (SH) and the Pressurized Rover (PR). Logistics requirements will drive the number of required resupply landers, launch vehicles, and resupply costs. Goal of Paper: Determine a recommended regenerative ECLSS architecture option to minimize the tradeoff between ECLSS Delivery Mass and Logistics Resupply Mass

ECLSS↗
NASA NTRS2008

Constellation Architecture Team-Lunar: Lunar Habitat Concepts

This paper will describe lunar habitat concepts that were defined as part of the Constellation Architecture Team-Lunar (CxAT-Lunar) in support of the Vision for Space Exploration. There are many challenges to designing lunar habitats such as mission objectives, launch packaging, lander capability, and risks. Surface habitats are required in support of sustaining human life to meet the mission objectives of lunar exploration, operations, and sustainability. Lunar surface operations consist of crew operations, mission operations, EVA operations, science operations, and logistics operations. Habitats are crewed pressurized vessels that include surface mission operations, science laboratories, living support capabilities, EVA support, logistics, and maintenance facilities. The challenge is to deliver, unload, and deploy self-contained habitats and laboratories to the lunar surface. The CxAT-Lunar surface campaign analysis focused on three primary trade sets of analysis. Trade set one (TS1) investigated sustaining a crew of four for six months with full outpost capability and the ability to perform long surface mission excursions using large mobility systems. Two basic habitat concepts of a hard metallic horizontal cylinder and a larger inflatable torus concept were investigated as options in response to the surface exploration architecture campaign analysis. Figure 1 and 2 depicts the notional outpost configurations for this trade set. Trade set two (TS2) investigated a mobile architecture approach with the campaign focused on early exploration using two small pressurized rovers and a mobile logistics support capability. This exploration concept will not be described in this paper. Trade set three (TS3) investigated delivery of a "core' habitation capability in support of an early outpost that would mature into the TS1 full outpost capability. Three core habitat concepts were defined for this campaign analysis. One with a four port core habitat, another with a 2 port core habitat, and the third investigated leveraging commonality of the lander ascent module and airlock pressure vessel hard shell. The paper will describe an overview of the various habitat concepts and their functionality. The Crew Operations area includes basic crew accommodations such as sleeping, eating, hygiene and stowage. The EVA Operations area includes additional EVA capability beyond the suit-port airlock function such as redundant airlock(s), suit maintenance, spares stowage, and suit stowage. The Logistics Operations area includes the enhanced accommodations for 180 days such as closed loop life support systems hardware, consumable stowage, spares stowage, interconnection to the other Hab units, and a common interface mechanism for future growth and mating to a pressurized rover. The Mission & Science Operations area includes enhanced outpost autonomy such as an IVA glove box, life support, and medical operations.

Toups, Larry↗
NASA NTRS2021

High School Aerospace Scholars Virtual Robotics Tour

Tour of the Johnson Space Center Robotic Technologies: ARGOS (Active Response Gravity Offload System), Rover (Featuring the Small Pressurized Rover), mSTAR/STAR, Six-Degree-of-Freedom Dynamic Test System (SDTS docking test system). Video has a 19:19 run time, color, audio and must be downloaded to view.

Reeve David Lambert↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Artemis: An Overview of NASA’s Activities to Return Humans to the Moon

NASA is well underway in its plans to return humans to the Moon and build long-term infrastructure both in orbit and on the surface. Following the Artemis I and Artemis II flight tests, NASA will begin crewed landings and regular missions to the Moon. Artemis will return value to the American public and the global community, enable groundbreaking scientific discovery, and prepare NASA and its partners for exploration of the solar system. Work on the initial Human Landing System (HLS), procurement activities for future HLS, and work on the initial modules of the lunar-orbiting Gateway are underway. International partnerships are playing a critical role in the planning, development, and execution of these missions. As of December 2021, three international partners have entered agreements to contribute to the Gateway and 14 nations have signed the Artemis accords. A new spacesuit acquisition strategy will stimulate economic growth and meet the growing needs of NASA and emerging customers. Requirements development is underway for an unpressurized lunar surface rover and plans for a pressurized rover, foundation surface habitat, and the Artemis Base Camp are in work. This paper will provide an update on the HLS demonstration missions and the procurement status for HLS services; a comprehensive look at the Gateway’s components and related statuses; a summary of planned surface systems; and an outline of the strategies NASA will use to successfully implement these plans, preparing for humanity's next giant leap: Mars.

Artemis↗
NASA NTRS2009

Suit Port Aft Bulkhead Mockup 2008 Test Results

The Lunar Electric Rover (LER), formerly called the Small Pressurized Rover (SPR), is currently being carried as an integral part of the current Lunar Surface Architectures under consideration in the Constellation program. One element of the LER is the suit port, the means by which the crew performs Extravehicular Activities (EVAs). Two suit port deliverables were produced in fiscal year 2008: an aft bulkhead mockup for functional integrated testing with the 1-G LER mockup and a functional and pressurizable Engineering Unit (EU). This paper focuses on the aft bulkhead mockup test results from Desert Research and Technology Studies (D-RATS) October 2008 testing at Black Point Lava Flow (BPLF), Arizona. Refer to 39th International Conference on Environmental Systems (ICES) for test results of the EU. The suit port aft bulkhead mockup was integrated with the mockup of the LER cabin and chassis. It is located on the aft bulkhead of the LER cabin structure and includes hatches, a locking mechanism, seals, interior and exterior suit don/doff aids, and exterior platforms to accommodate different crewmember heights. A lightweight mockup of the Mark III suit was tested with the suit port aft bulkhead mockup. There are several limitations to the suit port and mockup suits, and results of the suit port evaluation are presented and interpreted within the context of the limitations.

Romig, Barbara A.↗