SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “knowledge gaps”

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

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

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

At least 37 records · Page 2

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Addressing Critical Knowledge Gaps on Wildland Fires with UAS Technology

To better predict and respond to extreme fire behavior, wind shear, and superheated gases, there is a need for enhanced tactical microclimate wind forecasting. Collecting real-time or near-real-time three-dimensional atmospheric data during wildland fire suppression is vital for both ground firefighters and aviation safety. The use of balloons for soundings is not allowed due to aircraft operations, so new technology must be used. To address this need, the NASA FireSense Project has invested in co-developing and transitioning advanced technologies for atmospheric data collection to operational platforms to support decisions for wildland fire management. One of these technology investments has been with Uninhabited Aerial Systems (UAS) for atmospheric soundings. In collaboration with MITRE Corporation, a technology demonstration of Uninhabited Aerial Systems (UAS) for atmospheric soundings was held in Missoula, MT. This demonstration featured a NASA-designed payload on a Freefly Alta-X UAS, consistent with USFS UAS operations, balloon-borne soundings for data validation, and microscale modeling efforts. Results of this effort will be presented including comparison of forecasted conditions to data collection values as well as the impact on forecasts given real-time mixing heights and dispersion levels.

Jennifer Fowler↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

COSPAR Workshop Series on Refining Planetary Protection Requirements for Human Missions to Mars

COSPAR and its space agency partners are supporting a multi-year stepwise process devel-oping needed approaches to address planetary protection requirements for human missions beyond Earth orbit. The objective is to support incremental development from the current qualitative COSPAR planetary protection “Principles and Guidelines for Human Missions to Mars” to quantitative implementable planetary protection requirements for such future mis-sions. The workshops and meetings in this series have involved participants from NASA, ESA, JAXA and other national space agencies, as well as the scientific/technical community, and commercial/private enterprise stakeholders, based around three main topic areas: Microbial and Human Health Monitoring; Spacecraft Technology and Operations, and; Natural Trans-port of Contamination at Mars. This presentation provides a status update on the findings of the COSPAR Meetings on this topic to date. First, the identification and prioritization of knowledge gaps will be summarized. Next, where a knowledge gap is to be addressed by new measurements, example descriptions of measurements needed to close the knowledge gaps (and instruments necessary to make those measurements) will be discussed. Where the knowledge gaps closure is based on Agency policy decisions, the scope of the decision-making parameters and process will be described. Lastly, the presentation will consider how the findings of the study series can be integrated into current and future space agency and COSPAR activities.

J. Andy Spry↗

NASA NTRS2011

DCS: A Case Study of Identification of Knowledge and Disposition Gaps Using Principles of Continuous Risk Management

The Human Research Program (HRP) is formulated around the program architecture of Evidence-Risk-Gap-Task-Deliverable. Review of accumulated evidence forms the basis for identification of high priority risks to human health and performance in space exploration. Gaps in knowledge or disposition are identified for each risk, and a portfolio of research tasks is developed to fill them. Deliverables from the tasks inform the evidence base with the ultimate goal of defining the level of risk and reducing it to an acceptable level. A comprehensive framework for gap identification, focus, and metrics has been developed based on principles of continuous risk management and clinical care. Research towards knowledge gaps improves understanding of the likelihood, consequence or timeframe of the risk. Disposition gaps include development of standards or requirements for risk acceptance, development of countermeasures or technology to mitigate the risk, and yearly technology assessment related to watching developments related to the risk. Standard concepts from clinical care: prevention, diagnosis, treatment, monitoring, rehabilitation, and surveillance, can be used to focus gaps dealing with risk mitigation. The research plan for the new HRP Risk of Decompression Sickness (DCS) used the framework to identify one disposition gap related to establishment of a DCS standard for acceptable risk, two knowledge gaps related to DCS phenomenon and mission attributes, and three mitigation gaps focused on prediction, prevention, and new technology watch. These gaps were organized in this manner primarily based on target for closure and ease of organizing interim metrics so that gap status could be quantified. Additional considerations for the knowledge gaps were that one was highly design reference mission specific and the other gap was focused on DCS phenomenon.

Norcross, Jason↗

NASA NTRS2015

Risk of Crew Adverse Health Event Due to Altered Immune Response

Determining the effect of space travel on the human immune system has proven to be extremely challenging. Limited opportunities for in-flight studies, varying mission durations, technical and logistical obstacles, small subject numbers, and a broad range of potential assays have contributed to this problem. Additionally, the inherent complexity of the immune system, with its vast array of cell populations, sub-populations, diverse regulatory molecules, and broad interactions with other physiological systems, makes determining precise variables to measure very difficult. There is also the challenge of determining the clinical significance of any observed immune alterations. Will such a change lead to disease, or is it a transient subclinical observation related to short-term stress? The effect of this problem may be observed by scanning publications associated with immunity and spaceflight, which began to appear during the 1970s. Although individually they are each valid studies, the comprehensive literature to date suffers from widely varying sampling methods and assay techniques, low subject counts, and sometimes a disparate focus on narrow aspects of immunity. The most clinically relevant data are derived from in-flight human studies, which have demonstrated altered cell-mediated immunity and reactivation of latent herpes viruses. Much more data are available from post-flight testing of humans, with clear evidence of altered cytokine production patterns, altered leukocyte distribution, continued latent viral reactivation, and evidence of dramatically altered virus-specific immunity. It is unknown if post-flight assessments relate to the in-flight condition or are a response to landing stress and readaptation. In-flight culture of cells has clearly demonstrated that immune cells are gravity-sensitive and display altered functional characteristics. It is unknown if these data are related to in vivo immune cell function or are an artifact of microgravity culture. Ground analog testing of humans and animals, as well as microgravity-analog cell culture, has demonstrated utility. However, in all cases, it is not known with certainty if these data would reflect similar testing during space travel. Given their ready availability, ground analogs may be extremely useful for assay development and the evaluation of potential countermeasures. In general, the evidence base suffers from widely disparate studies on small numbers of subjects that do not directly correlate well with each other or spaceflight itself. Also lacking are investigations of the effect of gender on adaption to spaceflight. This results in significant knowledge 'gaps' that must be filled by future studies to completely determine any clinical risk related to immunity for human exploration-class space missions. These gaps include a significant lack of in-flight data, particularly during long-duration space missions. The International Space Station represents an excellent science platform with which to address this knowledge gap. Other knowledge gaps include lack of a single validated ground analog for the phenomenon and a lack of flight-compatible laboratory equipment capable of monitoring astronauts (for either clinical or research purposes). However, enough significant data exist, as described in this manuscript, to warrant addressing this phenomenon during the utilization phase of the ISS. A recent Space Shuttle investigation has confirmed the 31 in-flight nature of immune dysregulation, demonstrating that it is not merely a post-flight phenomenon. Several current studies are ongoing onboard the ISS that should thoroughly characterize the phenomenon. NASA recognizes that if spaceflight-associated immune dysregulation persists during exploration flights in conjunction with other dangers, such as high-energy radiation, the result may be a significant clinical risk. This emphasizes the need for a continued integrated comprehensive approach to determining the effect of prolonged spaceflight, separated from transient launch and landing stresses, on human immunity. After such studies, the phenomenon will be understood, and, hopefully, a monitoring strategy will have been developed that could be used to monitor the effectiveness of countermeasure

Crucian, Brian↗

NASA NTRS2017

EVA Systems Technology Gaps and Priorities 2017

Performance of Extra-Vehicular Activities (EVA) has been and will continue to be a critical capability for human space flight. Human exploration missions beyond LEO will require EVA capability for either contingency or nominal activities to support mission objectives and reduce mission risk. EVA systems encompass a wide array of products across pressure suits, life support systems, EVA tools and unique spacecraft interface hardware (i.e. EVA Translation Paths and EVA Worksites). In a fiscally limited environment with evolving transportation and habitation options, it is paramount that the EVA community's strategic planning and architecture integration products be reviewed and vetted for traceability between the mission needs far into the future to the known technology and knowledge gaps to the current investments across EVA systems. To ascertain EVA technology and knowledge gaps many things need to be brought together, assessed and analyzed. This includes an understanding of the destination environments, various mission concept of operations, current state of the art of EVA systems, EVA operational lessons learned, and reference advanced capabilities. A combined assessment of these inputs should result in well-defined list of gaps. This list can then be prioritized depending on the mission need dates and time scale of the technology or knowledge gap closure plan. This paper will summarize the current state of EVA related technology and knowledge gaps derived from NASA's Exploration EVA Reference Architecture and Operations Concept products. By linking these products and articulating NASA's approach to strategic development for EVA across all credible destinations an EVA could be done in, the identification of these gaps is then used to illustrate the tactical and strategic planning for the EVA technology development portfolio. Finally, this paper illustrates the various "touch points" with other human exploration risk identification areas including human health and performance.

Johnson, Brian J.↗

NASA NTRS2015

Robotic Reconnaissance Missions to Small Bodies and Their Potential Contributions to Human Exploration

Introduction: Robotic reconnaissance missions to small bodies will directly address aspects of NASA's Asteroid Initiative and will contribute to future human exploration. The NASA Asteroid Initiative is comprised of two major components: the Grand Challenge and the Asteroid Mission. The first component, the Grand Challenge, focuses on protecting Earth's population from asteroid impacts by detecting potentially hazardous objects with enough warning time to either prevent them from impacting the planet, or to implement civil defense procedures. The Asteroid Mission involves sending astronauts to study and sample a near- Earth asteroid (NEA) prior to conducting exploration missions of the Martian system, which includes Phobos and Deimos. The science and technical data obtained from robotic precursor missions that investigate the surface and interior physical characteristics of an object will help identify the pertinent physical properties that will maximize operational efficiency and reduce mission risk for both robotic assets and crew operating in close proximity to, or at the surface of, a small body. These data will help fill crucial strategic knowledge gaps (SKGs) concerning asteroid physical characteristics that are relevant for human exploration considerations at similar small body destinations. Small Body Strategic Knowledge Gaps: For the past several years NASA has been interested in identifying the key SKGs related to future human destinations. These SKGs highlight the various unknowns and/or data gaps of targets that the science and engineering communities would like to have filled in prior to committing crews to explore the Solar System. An action team from the Small Bodies Assessment Group (SBAG) was formed specifically to identify the small body SKGs under the direction of the Human Exploration and Operations Missions Directorate (HEOMD), given NASA's recent interest in NEAs and the Martian moons as potential human destinations [1]. The action team organized the SKGs into four broad themes: 1) Identify human mission targets; 2) Understand how to work on and interact with the small body surface; 3) Understand the small body environment and its potential risk/benefit to crew, systems, and operational assets; and 4) Understand the small body resource potential. Each of these themes were then further subdivided into categories to address specific SKG issues. Robotic Precursor Contributions to SKGs: Robotic reconnaissance missions should be able to address specific aspects related to SKG themes 1 through 4. Theme 1 deals with the identification of human mission targets within the NEA population. The current guideline indicates that human missions to fastspinning, tumbling, or binary asteroids may be too risky to conduct successfully from an operational perspective. However, no spacecraft mission has been to any of these types of NEAs before. Theme 2 addresses the concerns about interacting on the small body surface under microgravity conditions, and how the surface and/or sub-surface properties affect or restrict the interaction for human exploration. The combination of remote sensing instruments and in situ payloads will provide good insight into the asteroid's surface and subsurface properties. SKG theme 3 deals with the environment in and around the small body that may present a nuisance or hazard to any assets operating in close proximity. Impact and surface experiments will help address issues related to particle size, particle longevity, internal structure, and the near-surface mechanical stability of the asteroid. Understanding or constraining these physical characteristics are important for mission planning. Theme 4 addresses the resource potential of the small body. This is a particularly important aspect of human exploration since the identification and utilization of resources is a key aspect for deep space mission architectures to the Martian system (i.e., Phobos and Deimos). Conclusions: Robotic reconnaissance of small bodies can provide a wealth of information relevant to the science and planetary defense of NEAs. However, such missions to investigate NEAs can also provide key insights into small body strategic knowledge gaps and contribute to the overall success for human exploration missions to asteroids.

Abell, P. A.↗

NASA NTRS2009

Microbial Risk Assessment

Historically, microbiological spaceflight requirements have been established in a subjective manner based upon expert opinion of both environmental and clinical monitoring results and the incidence of disease. The limited amount of data, especially from long-duration missions, has created very conservative requirements based primarily on the concentration of microorganisms. Periodic reevaluations of new data from later missions have allowed some relaxation of these stringent requirements. However, the requirements remain very conservative and subjective in nature, and the risk of crew illness due to infectious microorganisms is not well defined. The use of modeling techniques for microbial risk has been applied in the food and potable water industries and has exceptional potential for spaceflight applications. From a productivity standpoint, this type of modeling can (1) decrease unnecessary costs and resource usage and (2) prevent inadequate or inappropriate data for health assessment. In addition, a quantitative model has several advantages for risk management and communication. By identifying the variable components of the model and the knowledge associated with each component, this type of modeling can: (1) Systematically identify and close knowledge gaps, (2) Systematically identify acceptable and unacceptable risks, (3) Improve communication with stakeholders as to the reasons for resource use, and (4) Facilitate external scientific approval of the NASA requirements. The modeling of microbial risk involves the evaluation of several key factors including hazard identification, crew exposure assessment, dose-response assessment, and risk characterization. Many of these factors are similar to conditions found on Earth; however, the spaceflight environment is very specialized as the inhabitants live in a small, semi-closed environment that is often dependent on regenerative life support systems. To further complicate modeling efforts, microbial dose-response characteristics may be affected by a potentially dysfunctional crew immune system during a mission. In addition, microbial virulence has been shown to change under certain conditions during spaceflight, further complicating dose-response characterization. An initial study of the applicability of microbial risk assessment techniques was performed using Crew Health Care System (CHeCS) operational data from the International Space Station potable water systems. The risk of infection from potable water was selected as the flight systems and microbial ecology are well defined. This initial study confirmed the feasibility of using microbial risk assessment modeling for spaceflight systems. While no immediate threat was detected, the study identified several medically significant microorganisms that could pose a health risk if uncontrolled. The study also identified several specific knowledge gaps in making a risk assessment and noted that filling these knowledge gaps is essential as the risk estimates may change by orders of magnitude depending on the answers. The current phase of the microbial risk assessment studies focuses on the dose-response relationship of specific infectious agents, focusing on Salmonella enterica Typhimurium, Pseudomonas spp., and Escherichia coli, as their evaluation will provide a better baseline for determining the overall hazard characterization. The organisms were chosen as they either have been isolated on spacecraft or have an identified route of infection during a mission. The characterization will utilize dose-response models selected either from the peer-reviewed literature and/or by using statistical approaches. Development of these modeling and risk assessment techniques will help to optimize flight requirements and to protect the safety, health, and performance of the crew.

Ott, C. M.↗

NASA NTRS2015

Robotic Missions to Small Bodies and Their Potential Contributions to Human Exploration and Planetary Defense

Introduction: Robotic missions to small bodies will directly address aspects of NASA's Asteroid Initiative and will contribute to future human exploration and planetary defense. The NASA Asteroid Initiative is comprised of two major components: the Grand Challenge and the Asteroid Mission. The first component, the Grand Challenge, focuses on protecting Earth's population from asteroid impacts by detecting potentially hazardous objects with enough warning time to either prevent them from impacting the planet, or to implement civil defense procedures. The Asteroid Mission involves sending astronauts to study and sample a near-Earth asteroid (NEA) prior to conducting exploration missions of the Martian system, which includes Phobos and Deimos. The science and technical data obtained from robotic precursor missions that investigate the surface and interior physical characteristics of an object will help identify the pertinent physical properties that will maximize operational efficiency and reduce mission risk for both robotic assets and crew operating in close proximity to, or at the surface of, a small body. These data will help fill crucial strategic knowledge gaps (SKGs) concerning asteroid physical characteristics that are relevant for human exploration considerations at similar small body destinations. These data can also be applied for gaining an understanding of pertinent small body physical characteristics that would also be beneficial for formulating future impact mitigation procedures. Small Body Strategic Knowledge Gaps: For the past several years NASA has been interested in identifying the key SKGs related to future human destinations. These SKGs highlight the various unknowns and/or data gaps of targets that the science and engineering communities would like to have filled in prior to committing crews to explore the Solar System. An action team from the Small Bodies Assessment Group (SBAG) was formed specifically to identify the small body SKGs under the direction of the Human Exploration and Operations Missions Directorate (HEOMD), given NASA's recent interest in NEAs and the Martian moons as potential human destinations. The action team organized the SKGs into four broad themes: 1) Identify human mission targets; 2) Understand how to work on and interact with the small body surface; 3) Understand the small body environment and its potential risk/benefit to crew, systems, and operational assets; and 4) Understand the small body resource potential. Of these four SKG themes, the first three have significant overlap with planetary defense considerations. The data obtained from investigations of small body physical characteristics under these three themes can be directly applicable to planetary defense initiatives. Conclusions: Missions to investigate small bodies can address small body strategic knowledge gaps and contribute to the overall success for human exploration missions to asteroids and the Martian moons. In addition, such reconnaissance of small bodies can also provide a wealth of information relevant to the science and planetary defense of NEAs.

Abell, Paul A.↗

NASA NTRS2017

EVA Suit Studies: Human Forward Contamination Project

Background: NASA Strategic Knowledge Gap B5: Forward Contamination for Mars. Issue: we have knowledge gaps!: Whether / how microbes are released from crewed pressure systems. Why do we care?: Informs Mars operational concepts - How to protect the science; Informs architecture decisions - How “open” Environmental Control and Life Support (ECLS) systems are; Informs landing site selection decisions - How close we can land / operate to where life may be present. Project goal: get some data to fill in these gaps: Data will help determine whether we’re ready to go to Mars, or if we need to change our systems or operational designs.

Rucker, Michelle↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

ISS External Microorganisms: A Planetary Protection Payload Ready-for-Flight

Before NASA or COSPAR is able to set planetary protection requirements for crewed missions to locations like Mars there are a number of critical knowledge gaps that must be addressed (1). One of the most important knowledge gaps is an understanding of microbial leakage from crewed habitats and space suits. Current ECLSS (Environmental Control and Life Support System) and PLSS (Portable Life Support System) requirements do not include any provisions to control microbes that may escape along with vented or leaked gasses. The current generation of NASA space suits can leak at rates as high as 100 cm3/min. during nominal operation (2). ISS (International Space Station) intentionally vents atmospheric gases like CO2to maintain habitable conditions for the crew. Furthermore, every time an airlock is used for EVA (extravehicular activity) there is an accompanying release of internal atmosphere. Since it is not possible to sterilize a crewed mission, it is important that we understand what if any microbes are entrained in these vented and leaked products. It is also important to understand if these microbes can survive on exterior surfaces. Recent sampling of the Russian segments of ISS suggest that bacteria and fungi from inside ISS may be capable of surviving on external surfaces (3). NASA has developed an aseptic sampling tool for use during EVA and plans to collect samples from vents on ISS to build on these results. The results of this work will be used to develop planetary protection requirements for vented and leaked gasses from crewed volumes.

M S Bell↗

NASA NTRS2008

Science Goals in Radiation Protection for Exploration

Space radiation presents major challenges to future missions to the Earth s moon or Mars. Health risks of concern include cancer, degenerative and performance risks to the central nervous system, heart and lens, and the acute radiation syndromes. The galactic cosmic rays (GCR) contain high energy and charge (HZE) nuclei, which have been shown to cause qualitatively distinct biological damage compared to terresterial radiation, such as X-rays or gamma-rays, causing risk estimates to be highly uncertain. The biological effects of solar particle events (SPE) are similar to terresterial radiation except for their biological dose-rate modifiers; however the onset and size of SPEs are difficult to predict. The high energies of GCR reduce the effectiveness of shielding, while SPE s can be shielded however the current gap in radiobiological knowledge hinders optimization. Methods used to project risks on Earth must be modified because of the large uncertainties in projecting health risks from space radiation, and thus impact mission requirements and costs. We describe NASA s unique approach to radiation safety that applies probabilistic risk assessments and uncertainty based criteria within the occupational health program for astronauts and to mission design. The two terrestrial criteria of a point estimate of maximum acceptable level of risk and application of the principle of As Low As Reasonably Achievable (ALARA) are supplemented by a third requirement that protects against risk projection uncertainties using the upper 95% confidence level (CL) in radiation risk projection models. Exploration science goals in radiation protection are centered on ground-based research to achieve the necessary biological knowledge, and in the development of new technologies to improve SPE monitoring and optimize shielding. Radiobiology research is centered on a ground based program investigating the radiobiology of high-energy protons and HZE nuclei at the NASA Space Radiation Laboratory (NSRL) located at DoE s Brookhaven National Laboratory in Upton, NY. We describe recent NSRL results that are closing the knowledge gap in HZE radiobiology and improving exploration risk estimates. Linking probabilistic risk assessment to research goals makes it possible to express risk management objectives in terms of quantitative metrics, which include the number of days in space without exceeding a given risk level within well defined confidence limits, and probabilistic assessments of the effectiveness of design trade spaces such as material type, mass, solar cycle, crew selection criteria, and biological countermeasures. New research in SPE alert and risk assessment, individual radiation sensitivity, and biological countermeasure development are described.

Cucinotta, Francs A.↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Considerations for Health and Performance During Surface Extravehicular Activities

BACKGROUND: NASA’s objectives for expanding human presence beyond low Earth orbit will require Extravehicular Activities (EVAs) on lunar and planetary surfaces. Given the physiological and functional demands of conducting surface EVAs in a pressurized spacesuit in reduced gravity environments, there is a possibility that crew injury and compromised physiological and/or functional performance may present. OVERVIEW: Many human health and performance knowledge gaps exist in regards to exploration EVA that require characterization to ensure safety, reliability, and mission success. To address knowledge gaps, EVA simulations in Earth-based analog environments and/or spacesuit simulators can be utilized to provide valuable insights into task-based physiologic and metabolic costs, cognitive loads, and associated operational limitations to inform future mission concepts. Physical workloads approaching 60% of maximum metabolic rates and 85% age-predicted heart rate maxima; core body temperatures approaching 100o F; and subjective responses indicating limited spare cognitive capacity via Bedford scale have been observed during ground-based exploration EVA simulations in the NASA Active Response Gravity Offload Simulator (ARGOS) and Neutral Buoyancy Lab (NBL) during simulated planetary EVAs in pressurized suits. Further, ground-based EVA analogs vary in their ability to simulate planetary EVA and resulting physical workloads. DISCUSSION: Metabolic costs, thermal burdens, functional strength, and cognitive impacts have been and must continue to be assessed in ground-based analogs to fully characterize operational demands and crew readiness levels for exploration EVA. Considerations should be given to enabling a new concept of high-tempo surface EVA operations and associated work-rest intervals, understanding human health and performance impacts of evolving commercial suit designs and capabilities, and predictive modeling and decision support capabilities to enable safe and successful EVA operations.

EVA↗

NASA NTRS2024

Considerations for Health and Performance during Surface Extravehicular Activities

BACKGROUND: NASA’s objectives for expanding human presence beyond low Earth orbit will require Extravehicular Activities (EVAs) on lunar and planetary surfaces. Given the physiological and functional demands of conducting surface EVAs in a pressurized spacesuit in reduced gravity environments, there is a possibility that crew injury and compromised physiological and/or functional performance may present. OVERVIEW: Many human health and performance knowledge gaps exist in regards to exploration EVA that require characterization to ensure safety, reliability, and mission success. To address knowledge gaps, EVA simulations in Earth-based analog environments and/or spacesuit simulators can be utilized to provide valuable insights into task-based physiologic and metabolic costs, cognitive loads, and associated operational limitations to inform future mission concepts. Physical workloads approaching 60% of maximum metabolic rates and 85% age-predicted heart rate maxima; core body temperatures approaching 100° F; and subjective responses indicating limited spare cognitive capacity via Bedford scale have been observed during ground-based exploration EVA simulations in the NASA Active Response Gravity Offload Simulator (ARGOS) and Neutral Buoyancy Lab (NBL) during simulated planetary EVAs in pressurized suits. Further, ground-based EVA analogs vary in their ability to simulate planetary EVA and resulting physical workloads. DISCUSSION: Metabolic costs, thermal burdens, functional strength, and cognitive impacts have been and must continue to be assessed in ground-based analogs to fully characterize operational demands and crew readiness levels for exploration EVA. Considerations should be given to enabling a new concept of high-tempo surface EVA operations and associated work-rest intervals, understanding human health and performance impacts of evolving commercial suit designs and capabilities, and predictive modeling and decision support capabilities to enable safe and successful EVA operations.

P Estep↗

NASA NTRS2023

Robotic and Crewed Mars Missions Increasing the Demand for Planetary Protection Technology Needs

Planetary protection (PP) policy seeks to avoid harmful contamination by limiting biological and relevant organic contamination from spacecraft as well as preventing adverse changes to Earth’s biosphere when extraterrestial samples are brought back to Earth. The PP policy at NASA was updated in 2021 (NPR 8715.24) and 2022 (NASA-STD-8719.27) to enable missions by expanding the decades old prescriptive requirements to allow for an option of adopting performance-based requirements that are objectivesdriven, risk-informed and case-assured. In parallel, the final PP knowledge gap workshop was completed representing the international consensus on the key areas to be considered in developing crew PP policy. These knowledge gaps focused on key technology development areas in 1) microbial and human health monitoring, 2) technical and operations needed for contamination control and 3) natural transport of contamination on Mars. As robotic missions start to implement performance-based approaches and research and technology efforts commence to inform crew policy the demand for data quality driven verification and validation in relevant space environments. Examples of the types of testing that is envisioned includes test as you fly validation and verification of decontamination systems in a relevant on-orbit and Mars environment, developing lethality curves of terrestrial organisms to further our understanding of the biocidal impacts of Mars and the space environment, and particle transport model validation and verification. Thus, the PP discipline has identified the need for groundbased space environments to perform preliminary testing as validation and verification of flight systems and to advance the technology readiness level prior to further testing on-orbit or lunar environments to prepare for Mars.

J. Nick Benardini↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Robotic and Crewed Mars Missions Increasing the Demand for Planetary Protection Technology Needs

Planetary protection (PP) policy seeks to avoid harmful contamination by limiting biological and relevant organic contamination from spacecraft as well as preventing adverse changes to Earth’s biosphere when extraterrestrial samples are brought back to Earth. The PP policy at NASA was updated in 2021 (NPR 8715.24) and 2022 (NASA-STD-8719.27) to enable missions by expanding the decades old prescriptive requirements to allow for an option of adopting performance-based requirements that are objectives-driven, risk-informed and case-assured. In parallel, the final PP knowledge gap workshop was completed representing the international consensus on the key areas to be considered in developing crew PP policy. These knowledge gaps focused on key technology development areas in 1) microbial and human health monitoring, 2) technical and operations needed for contamination control and 3) natural transport of contamination on Mars. As robotic missions start to implement performance-based approaches and research and technology efforts commence to inform crew policy the demand for data quality driven verification and validation in relevant space environments. Examples of the types of testing that is envisioned includes test as you fly validation and verification of decontamination systems in a relevant on-orbit and Mars environment, developing lethality curves of terrestrial organisms to further our understanding of the biocidal impacts of Mars and the space environment, and particle transport model validation and verification. Thus, the PP discipline has identified the need for ground-based space environments to perform preliminary testing as validation and verification of flight systems and to advance the technology readiness level prior to further testing on-orbit or lunar environments to prepare for Mars.

J Nick Benardini↗

NASA NTRS2015

JSC Advanced Curation: Research and Development for Current Collections and Future Sample Return Mission Demands

Curation of NASA's astromaterials sample collections is a demanding and evolving activity that supports valuable science from NASA missions for generations, long after the samples are returned to Earth. For example, NASA continues to loan hundreds of Apollo program samples to investigators every year and those samples are often analyzed using instruments that did not exist at the time of the Apollo missions themselves. The samples are curated in a manner that minimizes overall contamination, enabling clean, new high-sensitivity measurements and new science results over 40 years after their return to Earth. As our exploration of the Solar System progresses, upcoming and future NASA sample return missions will return new samples with stringent contamination control, sample environmental control, and Planetary Protection requirements. Therefore, an essential element of a healthy astromaterials curation program is a research and development (R&D) effort that characterizes and employs new technologies to maintain current collections and enable new missions - an Advanced Curation effort. JSC's Astromaterials Acquisition & Curation Office is continually performing Advanced Curation research, identifying and defining knowledge gaps about research, development, and validation/verification topics that are critical to support current and future NASA astromaterials sample collections. The following are highlighted knowledge gaps and research opportunities.

Fries, M. D.↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

NASA’s Planetary Protection Program to Assure Mission Safety and Success

NASA’s planetary protection program seeks to understand and control harmful contamination of solar systems targets of exploration by terrestrial contamination and prevent harmful biological contamination of the Earth-Moon system by extraterrestrial life, should it exist. To accomplish these objective’s NASA has developed a balanced safety and mission assurance strategy that leverages COSPAR Policy guidelines, workshops, scientiﬁc consensus, partnerships and international working groups to develop policy and implementation guidelines. Upcoming crewed missions to the Moon and Mars, as well as robotic missions to small solar system bodies, Europa, Titan and Mars are some of the driving activities of astrobiological interest that continue to emphasize the importance of planetary protection throughout the project life cycle. Development of a responsive and updated agency planetary protection policy has been a focus area in supporting upcoming mission opportunities for exploration to include Mars sample return and crewed mission concepts. An extensive update of this policy is underway which encompasses crewed and robotic procedural polices, a general technical requirements standard, and an implementation handbook. During this timeframe NASA has been working with the international community to develop scientiﬁc consensus, and to identify and ﬁll in knowledge gaps for developing balanced policy guidelines, incorporation of risk informed decision making and quantitative technical standards. NASA has developed a planetary protection roadmap as a technology management strategy to track and monitor the development of each knowledge gaps. The Committee of Space Research (COSPAR) Policy on Planetary Protection and the National Academies of Science, Engineering, and Medicine’s Committee of Planetary Protection are used to inform updates to the planetary protection polices and guidelines. This integrated strategy for planetary protection seeks to provide a transparent, structured approach for enabling missions, providing guidance for NASA and NASA partnered missions, and being responsive to the increased interest and activities in space exploration whilst maintaining an understanding and control of harmful contamination.

James Benardini↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

NASA's Planetary Protection Program to Assure Mission Safety and Success

NASA's planetary protection program seeks to understand and control harmful contamination of solar systems targets of exploration by terrestrial contamination and prevent harmful biological contamination of the Earth-Moon system by extraterrestrial life, should it exist. To accomplish these objective's NASA has developed a balanced safety and mission assurance strategy that leverages COSPAR Policy guidelines, workshops, scientific consensus, partnerships and international working groups to develop policy and implementation guidelines. Upcoming crewed missions to the Moon and Mars, as well as robotic missions to small solar system bodies, Europa, Titan and Mars are some of the driving activities of astrobiological interest that continue to emphasize the importance of planetary protection throughout the project life cycle.Development of a responsive and updated agency planetary protection policy has been a focus area in supporting upcoming mission opportunities for exploration to include Mars sample return and crewed mission concepts. An extensive update of this policy is underway which encompasses crewed and robotic procedural polices, a general technical requirements standard, and an implementation handbook. During this timeframe NASA has been working with the international community to develop scientific consensus, and to identify and fill in knowledge gaps for developing balanced policy guidelines, incorporation of risk informed decision making and quantitative technical standards. NASA has developed a planetary protection roadmap as a technology management strategy to track and monitor the development of each knowledge gaps. The Committee of Space Research (COSPAR) Policy on Planetary Protection and the National Academies of Science, Engineering, and Medicine's Committee of Planetary Protection are used to inform updates to the planetary protection polices and guidelines. This integrated strategy for planetary protection seeks to provide a transparent, structured approach for enabling missions, providing guidance for NASA and NASA partnered missions, and being responsive to the increased interest and activities in space exploration whilst maintaining an understanding and control of harmful contamination.

Planetary Protection↗