Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “repair crew”

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

Assessment of Crew Time for Maintenance and Repairs Activities for Lunar Surface Missions

NASA is currently evaluating different methods to predict how much time crewmembers will spend conducting repair and maintenance activities on future space missions. As mission scope and spacecraft architectures change, it will be necessary to understand how crew repair and maintenance timelines are impacted by mission operations and technology changes. Past work has been done using historical ISS data to accurately predict crew habitation and operation timelines, resulting in the development of NASA’s Exploration Crew Time Model (ECTM). However, understanding crew maintenance and repair requirements has posed a unique challenge due to the complexity of available datasets, the probabilistic nature of sub-system failures, and the impacts of reliability growth on failure rates. This paper presents a methodology to collect and condition empirical repair and maintenance time data from available data sets, to extrapolate from that data to estimate projected maintenance and repair times for a lunar Surface Habitat, and to assess how uncertainty in repair time could impact utilization time on the lunar surface. NASA International Space Station (ISS) maintenance and crew time data are logged into two central databases, the Maintenance Data Collection (MDC) and the Operations Planning Timeline Integration System (OPTimIS) respectively. Separately, each of these two datasets capture only portions of the complete set of data required to generate an accurate assessment of crew time spent on maintenance activities at a sub-system level. MDC provides a detailed catalog of failure events and an overview of the failure’s required maintenance and OPTimIS provides a description of crew activities and crew time durations dedicated to maintenance. To create a more useful crew time estimate for maintenance timelines, the authors developed a methodology to capture relevant data from each set and combine and utilize that data by linking crew time requirements to specific components. The authors compare the failure logs in the MDC to crew activity logs pulled from OPTimIS and then process the data to estimate required repair times for each failure event. Data is also classified by the outcome of each repair event, whether the failed component was replaced or whether it was repaired in place. The entire maintenance activity dataset is then categorized based on the class of failed component to allow for a statistically significant sample size for each class and to provide accurate crew time estimates for any components lacking relevant data. This resultant component repair time data can be used in the future to generate Mean Time To Repair (MTTR) estimates and confidence intervals for each class of component based on a probabilistic distribution of documented maintenance events. These improved MTTR values can then be applied to candidate element sub-system architectures, along with component Mean Time Between Failure (MTBF) data to generate distributions for potential required system crew repair time estimates for a given mission. Repair time distributions can then be used to develop more accurate crew schedules and to assess potential available utilization time.

Crew Time↗
NASA NTRS2020

Risk and Performance Assessment of Generic Mission Architectures: Showcasing the Artemis Mission

A has initiated a strong push to return face. In this work, we astronaut assess performance and risk for proposed mission architectures using a new Mission Architecture Risk Assessment (MARA) tool. The MARA tool can produce statistics about the availability of components and overall performance of the mission considering potential failures of any of its components. In a Monte Carlo approach, the tool repeats the mission simulation multiple times while a random generator lets modules fail according to their failure rates. The results provide statistically meaningful insights into the overall performance of the chosen architecture. A given mission architecture can be freely replicated in the tool, with the mission timeline and basic characteristics of employed mission modules (habitats, rovers, power generation units, etc.) specified in a configuration file. Crucially, failure rates for each module need to be known or estimated. The tool performs an event-driven simulation of the mission and accounts for random failure events. Failed modules can be repaired, which takes crew time but restores operations. In addition to tracking individual modules, MARA can assess the availability of predefined functions throughout the mission. For instance, the function of resource collection would require a rover to collect the resources, a power generation unit to charge the rover, and a resource processing module. Together, the modules that are required for a given function are called a functional group. Similarly, we can assess how much crew time is available to achieve a mission benefit (e.g. research, building a base, etc) as opposed to spending crew time on repairs. Here we employ the method on the proposed NASA Artemis mission. Artemis aims to return United States astronauts to the lunar surface by 2024. Results provide insights into mission failure probabilities, up- and downtime for individual modules and crew-time resources spent on the repair of failed modules. The tool also allows us to tweak the mission architecture in order to find setups that produce more favorable mission performance. As such, the tool can be an aid in improving the mission architect abling cost-benefit analysis for mission improvement.

Rumpf, Clemens M.↗
NASA NTRS1994

SpaceHab 1 maintenance experiment

The SpaceHab 1 flight on STS-57 served as a test platform for evaluation of two space station payloads. The first payload evaluated a space station maintenance concept using a sweep signal generator and a 48-channel logic analyzer to perform fault detection and isolation. Crew procedures files, test setup diagram files, and software to configure the test equipment were created on the ground and uplinked on the astronauts' voice communication circuit to perform tests in flight. In order to use these files, the portable computer was operated in a multi-window configuration. The test data transmitted to the ground allowing the ground staff to identify the cause of the fault and provide the crew with the repair procedures and diagrams. The crew successfully repaired the system under test. The second payload investigated hand soldering and de-soldering of standard components on printed circuit (PC) boards in zero gravity. It also used a new type of intra-vehicular foot restraints which uses the neutral body posture in zero-g to provide retention of the crew without their conscious attention.

Bohannon, Jackie W.↗
NASA NTRS1999

STS-96 Crew Training, Mission Animation, Crew Interviews, STARSHINE, Discovery Rollout and Repair of Hail Damage

Live footage shows the crewmembers of STS-96, Commander Kent V. Rominger, Pilot Rick D. Husband, Mission Specialists Ellen Ochoa, Tamara E. Jernigan, Daniel T. Barry, Julie Payette and Valery Ivanovich Tokarev during various training activities. Scenes include astronaut suit-up, EVA training in the Virtual Reality Lab, Orbiter space vision training, bailout training, and crew photo session. Footage also shows individual crew interviews, repair activities to the external fuel tank, and Discovery's return to the launch pad. The engineers are seen sanding, bending, and painting the foam used in repairing the tank. An animation of the deployment of the STARSHINE satellite, International Space Station, and the STS-96 Mission is presented. Footage shows the students from Edgar Allen Poe Middle School sanding, polishing, and inspecting the mirrors for the STARSHINE satellite. Live footage also includes students from St. Michael the Archangel School wearing bunny suits and entering the clean room at Goddard Space Flight Center.

Source record↗
DOE OSTI2020

Repair and Resource Scheduling in Unbalanced Distribution Systems Using Neighborhood Search

—This paper proposes an optimization strategy to assist utility operators to recover power distribution systems after large outages. Specifically, a mixed-integer linear programming (MILP) model is developed for co-optimizing crews, resources, and network operations. The MILP model coordinates damage isolation, network reconfiguration, distributed generator re-dispatch, and crew/resource logistics. In addition, a framework for integrating different types of photovoltaic (PV) systems in the restoration process is developed. We consider two different types of crews, namely, line crews for damage repair and tree crews for obstacle removal. We also model the repair resource logistic constraints. Furthermore, a new algorithm is developed for solving the distribution system repair and restoration problem (DSRRP). The algorithm starts by solving DSRRP using an assignmentbased method, then a neighborhood search method is designed to iteratively improve the solution. The proposed method is validated on modified IEEE 123- and 8500-bus distribution test systems.

Outage management↗
DOE OSTI2026

A Systematic Review on Coordinated Restoration Strategies for Power Distribution Grids

Power distribution grids are increasingly exposed to High-Impact Low-Probability (HILP) events, which cause widespread disruptions with severe societal and economic impacts. The growing complexity of modern grids, driven by the integration of distributed energy resources and smart grid technologies, has introduced new challenges to effective service restoration. While significant research has explored individual restoration strategies, such as network reconfiguration and microgrid formation, limited attention has been given to methods in which they can be effectively coordinated. Furthermore, the absence of systematic review papers addressing this issue hampers the development of cohesive restoration frameworks capable of addressing the operational complexities of modern grids. This paper presents a systematic review synthesizing existing knowledge on power grid restoration, identifying key limitations, and highlighting opportunities for coordinated strategies. By addressing research gaps and emphasizing the integration of diverse approaches, this study provides critical insights for advancing grid resiliency and recovery, offering a foundation for future research and practical applications in the face of HILP events.

Systematic review↗
NASA NTRS1975

The Skylab program - An overview

A brief survey is made of significant aspects of the Skylab missions, with emphasis on atmospheric control, electrical power, stabilization and attitude control, prevention of instrument contamination, habitability of the spacecraft, in-flight maintenance and repair, and crew training. Skylab, unlike previous manned spacecraft, had a two-gas atmosphere of oxygen and nitrogen. The station's 25-kW capability was the largest electrical system ever flown in space. Skylab was the first flight application of large control-moment gyroscopes for attitude control. The missions provided significant scientific data in the fields of solar physics, biomedicine, earth resources, and materials processing. Particularly important was the finding of no physical limitation to men's ability to work in space for long periods.

Disher, J. H.↗
NASA NTRS2001

STS-97 Mission Highlights Resource Tape

A continuation of 'STS-97 Mission Highlights Resource Tape, Part 1 of 3' (document ID 20010020281) and 'STS-97 Mission Highlights Resource Tape, Part 2 of 3' (document ID 20010020282), the activities of flight days seven through eleven are seen. Footage includes the crew discussing repair procedures for the Solar Array Wing (SAW) with mission managers, shots of the shuttle's payload bay, the International Space Station (ISS) with Earth in the background, the Node Micrometeoroid/Orbital Debris Shield removal, the spacewalks performed by Mission Specialists Joseph Tanner and Carlos Noriega, the undocking of Endeavour and ISS, the Orbital Maneuvering System (OMS) firing, the payload bay doors closing, and the landing sequence of Endeavour. The Aurora Borealis and a night view of the French Rivera are seen from space.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS2002

STS-113/Endeavour/ISS 11A Pre-Launch - Launch On Orbit - Landing - Crew Egress

The crew of STS-113 and the Expedition 6 crew of the International Space Station (ISS) are introduced leaving the suitup room and while being assisted in their seats onboard Space Shuttle Endeavour. The shuttle's crew consisted of Commander Jim Wetherbee, Pilot Paul Lockhart and Mission Specialists Michael Lopez-Alegria and John Herrington. The Expedition 6 crew consisted of Commander Ken Bowersox, Flight Engineer Nikolai Budarin and NASA ISS Science Officer Don Pettit. Clips of the Endeavour's night launch are shown from these cameras: Beach Tracker, VAB, Pad A, OTV-60, OTV-70, Tower 1, UCS-15, Press Site Grandstand, Cocoa Beach DOAMS, Playalinda Beach DOAMS, UCS-23, and the In-Cabin Camera. While on-orbit, highlights include the docking of Endeavour with the ISS, the Change of Command Ceremony by the Expedition 5 and 6 crews of the ISS, the mating of the P1 and S0 Trusses, and three extravehicular activities (EVAs) by astronauts Lopez-Allegria and Herrington. The shuttle crew also repairs a leak in the onboard Carbon Dioxide Removal Assembly. Clips of the shuttle's landing are shown from these cameras: VAB, Tower 1, Midfield, Runway South End, Runway North End, Tower 2, Playalinda DOAMS, UCS-3 Infrared, UCS-23, Midfield Infrared, and Pilot Point of View (PPOV).

Source record↗
NASA NTRS2014

What to Expect When Your Workplace is in Deep Space

Working life on a vehicle going to Mars would have some things in common with going to work on Earth, but most would have that twist to remind you that you're not on Earth anymore. Regardless of where we are or what we're working on humans need to eat, sleep, stay healthy and stay active and alert to perform well on the job. Studies on Earth have shown how important each element is to an individual's wellbeing and job performance. To travel in space we create a vehicle that provides the basic needs required by humans, these include carrying supplies of air, water and food. However we also need the protective shell to carry the humans, all their supplies and the systems to ensure that people can breathe, stay warm, address all bodily functions and stay healthy in space. In addition to just surviving the new environments, work tasks such as equipment maintenance and repair, normal crew operations and special science experiments will be performed. Some of the factors that will affect the crew performance include: environmental adaptation to weightlessness, dealing with cramped living quarters, physical changes caused by space travel, and how the tools, equipment, training and support information are used throughout the voyage. Different conditions can affect how the crew performs their work; we need to know more about living and working under these conditions to have successful human exploration in space.

DeMott, Diana↗
NASA NTRS2014

What to Expect When Your Workplace is in Deep Space

Working life on a vehicle going to Mars would have some things in common with going to work on Earth, but most would have that twist to remind you that you're not on Earth anymore. Regardless of where we are or what we're working on humans need to eat, sleep, stay healthy and stay active and alert to perform well on the job. Studies on Earth have shown how important each element is to an individual's wellbeing and job performance. To travel in space we create a vehicle that provides the basic needs required by humans, these include carrying supplies of air, water and food. However we also need the protective shell to carry the humans, all their supplies and the systems to ensure that people can breathe, stay warm, address all bodily functions and stay healthy in space. In addition to just surviving the new environments, work tasks such as equipment maintenance and repair, normal crew operations and special science experiments will be performed. Some of the factors that will affect the crew performance include: environmental adaptation to weightlessness, dealing with cramped living quarters, physical changes caused by space travel, and how the tools, equipment, training and support information are used throughout the voyage. Different conditions can affect how the crew performs their work; we need to know more about living and working under these conditions to have successful human exploration in space.

DeMott, Diana↗
NASA NTRS2020

Lower Level Repair Can Easily Fail Due to High Complexity

The International Space Station (ISS) uses Orbital Replacement Units (ORU’s) to repair failures on orbit. Using ORU’s reduces the crew time required to repair failures, but several copies of each ORU must be stored on ISS to ensure system availability. A typical ORU contains many components and has significant mass, but each ORU can repair only a single component failure. A full set of the ORU internal components could repair many different failures. Lower level assembly or component repair should reduce total spares mass. Successful electronics repair experiments were conducted on ISS. However, implementing component level repair would require a significant effort. The systems must be designed so they can be repaired during a mission, considering component layout and accessibility. The repair procedures must be developed and repair facilities, tools, and diagnostic and test instruments provided. Tracing a fault to a component is much more difficult than isolating it to an ORU. Replacing a component is much more difficult than replacing an ORU. Some problems with lower level repair are discussed. The mass savings of lower level repair will not save as much launch cost as before since launch cost has recently been reduced by an order of magnitude. Most system failures are not component failures that can be fixed by replacing a component but are due to system level problems. Repair and maintenance should be planned as part of an overall maintainability design. The risk that a lower level repair will fail is considerably greater than when using ORUs. With modern high reliability packaged systems, failure diagnosis and repair has become a lost art. However, diagnosis and repair data from the 1960’s show that increasing complexity often causes much longer diagnosis and repair times and may prevent successful repair. Increasing complexity by using lower level repair directly increases system cost, failure rate, crew time for repair, and the risk of an unrepairable system failure.

Harry W Jones↗
NASA NTRS2011

Component-Level Electronic-Assembly Repair (CLEAR) System Architecture

This document captures the system architecture for a Component-Level Electronic-Assembly Repair (CLEAR) capability needed for electronics maintenance and repair of the Constellation Program (CxP). CLEAR is intended to improve flight system supportability and reduce the mass of spares required to maintain the electronics of human rated spacecraft on long duration missions. By necessity it allows the crew to make repairs that would otherwise be performed by Earth based repair depots. Because of practical knowledge and skill limitations of small spaceflight crews they must be augmented by Earth based support crews and automated repair equipment. This system architecture covers the complete system from ground-user to flight hardware and flight crew and defines an Earth segment and a Space segment. The Earth Segment involves database management, operational planning, and remote equipment programming and validation processes. The Space Segment involves the automated diagnostic, test and repair equipment required for a complete repair process. This document defines three major subsystems including, tele-operations that links the flight hardware to ground support, highly reconfigurable diagnostics and test instruments, and a CLEAR Repair Apparatus that automates the physical repair process.

Oeftering, Richard C.↗
NASA NTRS1987

Crew factors in the design of the Space Station

The designing of Space Shuttle modules and equipment in order to provide a stimulating and efficient work atmosphere and a pleasant living environment is examined. The habitation module for the eight crew members is divided into four areas: ceiling, floor, port, and starboard. The module is to consist of crew quarters, a wardroom, a galley, a personal hygiene facility, a health maintenance facility, and stowage areas. There is a correlation between the function of the module and its location; for example the galley will be near the wardroom and the personal hygiene facility near the crew quarters. The designs of the equipment for crew accommodation and of the equipment to be maintained and repaired by the crew will be standarized. The design and functions of the crew and equipment restraints, crew mobility aids, racks to contain equipment, and functional units are described.

Robinson, Judith L.↗
NASA NTRS1990

Sensitivity study of Space Station Freedom operations cost and selected user resources

The results of sensitivity studies performed to estimate probable ranges for four key Space Station parameters using the Space Station Freedom's Model for Estimating Space Station Operations Cost (MESSOC) are discussed. The variables examined are grouped into five main categories: logistics, crew, design, space transportation system, and training. The modification of these variables implies programmatic decisions in areas such as orbital replacement unit (ORU) design, investment in repair capabilities, and crew operations policies. The model utilizes a wide range of algorithms and an extensive trial logistics data base to represent Space Station operations. The trial logistics data base consists largely of a collection of the ORUs that comprise the mature station, and their characteristics based on current engineering understanding of the Space Station. A nondimensional approach is used to examine the relative importance of variables on parameters.

Accola, Anne↗
NASA NTRS2005

Crew-Centered Operations: What HAL 9000 Should Have Been

To date, manned space flight has maintained the locus of control for the mission on the ground. Mission control performs tasks such as activity planning, system health management, resource allocation, and astronaut health monitoring. Future exploration missions require the locus of control to shift to on-board due light speed constraints and potential loss of communication. The lunar campaign must begin to utilize a shared control approach to validate and understand the limitations of the technology allowing astronauts to oversee and direct aspects of operation that require timely decision making. Crew-centered Operations require a system-level approach that integrates multiple technologies together to allow a crew-prime concept of operations. This paper will provide an overview of the driving mission requirements, highlighting the limitations of existing approaches to mission operations and identifying the critical technologies necessary to enable a crew-centered mode of operations. The paper will focus on the requirements, trade spaces, and concepts for fulfillment of this capability. The paper will provide a broad overview of relevant technologies including: Activity Planning and Scheduling; System Monitoring; Repair and Recovery; Crew Work Practices.

Korsmeyer, David J.↗