Results for “Capsule Design” — Page 22

DOE OSTI2026

High-Temperature SiC Cladding End Plug Irradiation Design and HFIR Readiness

This report documents the design of a High Flux Isotope Reactor (HFIR) irradiation experiment intended to evaluate irradiation effects on the hermeticity of silicon carbide (SiC) end plug specimens under a radial fast neutron flux gradient at representative light-water reactor (LWR) temperatures of approximately 300 °C. The overarching goal of this work is to statistically evaluate SiC end plug hermeticity and mechanical properties following irradiation using the high-throughput irradiation capability discussed here. Each specimen consists of a short section of SiC fiber–reinforced SiC (SiC/SiC) tube with a single monolithic SiC end plug joined to one end. The experiment allows up to 66 specimens to be irradiated in six different stacks within a dry, sealed irradiation capsule derived from the previously developed high-temperature SiC/SiC cladding bowing experiment. The neutronics basis, thermal analysis, and HFIR readiness of the experiment are discussed in this report for two possible design cases. The first design case is based on existing approval documentation and components that are on hand and approved for use, so the experiment insertion would require only specimen receipt, specimen pre-irradiation characterization, experiment assembly, and final fabrication package approval. The second design case provides improved thermal robustness and the preferred end plug geometry but requires fabrication of a modified holder and revisions to the HFIR approval documentation, in addition to the other activities required for the first design case, before insertion.

Hott, Daniel [Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL)↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Recent Developments of Thermal Protection Materials to Enable Lower Cost Space Missions

Introduction: Starting with the Commercial Crew Program, a new paradigm has emerged at NASA. Rather than designing rockets and spacecrafts for every mission optimized to achieve science, NASA has begun to use a service-based model and utilizing public-private partnership in developing the vehicles that can bring broader benefits as well as lower the cost for NASA missions. Commercial companies own and operate those vehicles. This allows NASA to not design missions from the bottom up, and has cost, risk, and schedule savings implications. On the other side, the constraints require meeting the requirements in terms of mass, volume, power, etc. By leveraging NASA developed technologies, commercial companies can quickly demonstrate the commercial mission concept, and, through technology transfer, adopt needed technology to address supply chain problems. A downside is that the technology has to be sufficiently mature to be transferred by NASA, which means that it requires significant investment, expertise, and time to develop. Space entities are focused on rapid development with an emphasis on manufacturing and integration innovation with reduced cost and schedule and quick entrance into the market. Thermal Protection Systems (TPS) are mission critical, but their development takes years, and involve access to arc jets or unique test facilities. Therefore, their development is both risky and investment heavy. NASA ARC developed several new TPS materials over the last decade (C-PICA, HEEET, 3MDCP, 3DMAT, ADEPT woven TPS) and brought them to high TPS maturity, making them enablers for commercials space missions from LEO, Lunar Sample Return, Mars, and Venus missions. LEO missions are relevant to future Mars missions due to the comparable entry conditions. External Partners' Missions: C-PICA is a recent improvement on NASA’s heritage PICA lightweight TPS ablator. C-PICA is now considered an enabling technology for New Frontiers and other NASA missions. C-PICA was infused into several missions from external partners. Varda Space Industries’ Winnebago-1 spacecraft successfully returned to Earth from LEO on Feb. 21st, 2024, using a C-PICA heatshield. Inversion Space’s Ray vehicle will test both ARC’s C-PICA and SIRCA TPS materials on a LEO return mission later in 2024. The Kentucky Re-Entry Probe Experiment (KREPE) is another example of a low-cost flight experiment to demonstrate the use of small entry capsules to gather data with three instrumented Kentucky Re-entry and Universal Payload System (KRUPS) capsules. NASA Arc provided C-PICA and Soft-PICA for two of the next KRUPS capsules scheduled to re-enter Earth from the ISS later in 2024. Finally, Rocket Lab’s low-cost mission to Venus, scheduled to launch in December 2024, will search for habitable conditions in Venus’ cloud layer, making use of NASA ARC provided HEEET insulation layer heat shield, and SIRCA backshell TPS materials. Future NASA Missions: NASA’s ability to help commercial missions can lead to future low-cost missions for several reasons: Competition encourages lower cost; technology maturation is now done at an integrated system level; and a common design architecture between commercial and scientific applications requires no specialized engineering design. From an engineering perspective, both of these commercial LEO capsules aforementioned are capable of a Mars entry; the commercial payload mut be replaced with as science payload. Finally, several NASA mission concepts, that could be candidates for future SIMPLEx program calls, such as VATMOS-SR and Nephele, both proposing to target the Venusian atmosphere, would make use of the HEEET insulation layer TPS for part of their heat shield.

TPS materials↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Recent Developments of Thermal Protection Materials to Enable Lower Cost Space Missions

Introduction: Starting with the Commercial Crew Program, a new paradigm has emerged at NASA. Rather than designing rockets and spacecrafts for every mission optimized to achieve science, NASA has begun to use a service-based model and utilizing public-private partnership in developing the vehicles that can bring broader benefits as well as lower the cost for NASA missions. Commercial companies own and operate those vehicles. This allows NASA to not design missions from the bottom up, and has cost, risk, and schedule savings implications. On the other side, the constraints require meeting the requirements in terms of mass, volume, power, etc. By leveraging NASA developed technologies, commercial companies can quickly demonstrate the commercial mission concept, and, through technology transfer, adopt needed technology to address supply chain problems. A downside is that the technology has to be sufficiently mature to be transferred by NASA, which means that it requires significant investment, expertise, and time to develop. Space entities are focused on rapid development with an emphasis on manufacturing and integration innovation with reduced cost and schedule and quick entrance into the market. Thermal Protection Systems (TPS) are mission critical, but their development takes years, and involve access to arc jets or unique test facilities. Therefore, their development is both risky and investment heavy. NASA ARC developed several new TPS materials over the last decade (C-PICA, HEEET, 3MDCP, 3DMAT, ADEPT woven TPS) and brought them to high TPS maturity, making them enablers for commercials space missions from LEO, Lunar Sample Return, Mars, and Venus missions. LEO missions are relevant to future Mars missions due to the comparable entry conditions. External Partners' Missions: C-PICA is a recent improvement on NASA’s heritage PICA lightweight TPS ablator. C-PICA is now considered an enabling technology for New Frontiers and other NASA missions. C-PICA was infused into several missions from external partners. Varda Space Industries’ Winnebago-1 spacecraft successfully returned to Earth from LEO on Feb. 21st, 2024, using a C-PICA heatshield. Inversion Space’s Ray vehicle will test both ARC’s C-PICA and SIRCA TPS materials on a LEO return mission later in 2024. The Kentucky Re-Entry Probe Experiment (KREPE) is another example of a low-cost flight experiment to demonstrate the use of small entry capsules to gather data with three instrumented Kentucky Re-entry and Universal Payload System (KRUPS) capsules. NASA Arc provided C-PICA and Soft-PICA for two of the next KRUPS capsules scheduled to re-enter Earth from the ISS later in 2024. Finally, Rocket Lab’s low-cost mission to Venus, scheduled to launch in December 2024, will search for habitable conditions in Venus’ cloud layer, making use of NASA ARC provided HEEET insulation layer heat shield, and SIRCA backshell TPS materials. Future NASA Missions: NASA’s ability to help commercial missions can lead to future low-cost missions for several reasons: Competition encourages lower cost; technology maturation is now done at an integrated system level; and a common design architecture between commercial and scientific applications requires no specialized engineering design. From an engineering perspective, both of these commercial LEO capsules aforementioned are capable of a Mars entry; the commercial payload mut be replaced with as science payload. Finally, several NASA mission concepts, that could be candidates for future SIMPLEx program calls, such as VATMOS-SR and Nephele, both proposing to target the Venusian atmosphere, would make use of the HEEET insulation layer TPS for part of their heat shield.

TPS materials↗

NASA NTRS2011

Challenges of CPAS Flight Testing

The Crew Exploration Vehicle Parachute Assembly System (CPAS) is being designed to land the Orion Crew Module (CM) at a safe rate of descent at splashdown via a series of Drogue, Pilot, and Main parachutes. Because Orion is considerably larger and heavier than Apollo, many of the flight test techniques developed during the Apollo program must be modified. The Apollo program had a dedicated C-133 aircraft, which was modified to allow a simple airdrop of "boilerplate" flight test vehicles. However, the CPAS program must use either commercial or military assets with minimal modifications to airframes or procedures. Conceptual envelopes from 2-Degree Of Freedom trajectories are presented for several existing and novel architectures. Ideally, the technique would deliver a representative capsule shape to the desired altitude and dynamic pressure at test initiation. However, compromises must be made on the characteristics of trajectories or the fidelity of test articles to production hardware. Most of the tests to date have used traditional pallet and weight tub or missile-shaped test vehicles. New test vehicles are being designed to better incorporate Orion structural components and deploy parachutes in a more representative fashion. The first attempt to test a capsule-shaped vehicle failed due to unexpected events while setting up the test condition through a series of complex procedures. In order to avoid the loss of another expensive test article which will delay the program, simpler deployment methods are being examined and more positive control of the vehicle will be maintained. Existing challenges include interfacing with parent aircraft, separating test vehicles, achieving test conditions, and landing within limited test ranges. All these challenges must be met within cost and schedule limits.

Ray, Eric S.↗

NASA NTRS1987

Some aspects of space propulsion with extraterrestrial resources

Extraterrestrial resources for space processing of chemicals, in general, and propellants, in particular, are explored quantitatively. It is seen that, for several candidate space mission scenarios, space processing of both space resources and earth-carried resources can make decisive differences in the mission success for a given payload. To fix ideas and demonstrate trends, the specific case of water splitting to extract oxygen, discard (or use without storage) the resulting hydrogen, and burn earth-carried noncryogenic liquid fuel(s) in a simple rocket motor, designed for periodic thrusting, is treated in some detail. Experimental hardware is assembled and demonstrated to perform adequately, besides showing compactness of the space-packaged 'capsule' module that is self-contained. Building upon previous studies, the concept of in situ propellant production (ISPP) is reexamined in light of more recent energy and materials technologies. Missions to comets and Mars Sample Return are mentioned as candidate scenarios. The mission duration, reliability-repairability of hardware, resource availability in low earth orbit (LEO), and the thrust requirements are considered in turn. It is seen that space storage of hydrogen for extended durations (5-10 years) involves problems that require detailed studies, besides involving many presently unanswered issues. A study of the energy option in LEO and in deep space is developed in simple terms. The different solar, radioisotope, and nuclear power sources are mentioned. Storage and handling of raw and processed chemicals are considered.

Ramohalli, Kumar↗

NASA NTRS2017

Independent Assessment of the Backshell Pressure Field for Mars Entry, Descent, and Landing Instrumentation 2 (MEDLI2)

The Mars Entry, Descent, and Landing Instrumentation 2 (MEDLI2) project requested that the NASA Engineering and Safety Center (NESC) support a ballistic range test to measure backshell pressures on scale models of the Mars 2020 entry capsule. The MEDLI2 project needed the test to provide important dynamic pressure data to help select a backshell pressure port, quantify drag coefficient reconstruction uncertainties, and design the data acquisition hardware. This document contains the outcome of the NESC assessment.

Prince, Jill L.↗

DOE OSTI2025

AGC Experiment Status

AGC Experiment Status to include: History and status of the AGC-4, Review of the AGC experiment, AGC graphite grades and samples, The AGC-4 capsule and specimens, and HDG-1 and HDG-2. Description of the Experiment, AGC graphite grades and samples, AGC-1 Test Train, AGC-1 Test Train Design Features, New AGC Irradiation Schedule (2018) and update in schedule, Irradiation and disassembly history, present and future status, and shipment and initial PIE. Initial PIE strategy, recovered specimens, PIE results, and status of experiments.

11 - NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗

NASA NTRS1965

Tension shell structures for low density entry vehicles.

Tension shell configurations developed for low structural density entry capsules for exploration of Mars and other planets

SHELL THEORY↗

NASA NTRS2013

Mars Sample Return: Mars Ascent Vehicle Mission and Technology Requirements

A Mars Sample Return mission is the highest priority science mission for the next decade recommended by the recent Decadal Survey of Planetary Science, the key community input process that guides NASA's science missions. A feasibility study was conducted of a potentially simple and low cost approach to Mars Sample Return mission enabled by the use of new commercial capabilities. Previous studies of MSR have shown that landing an all up sample return mission with a high mass capacity lander is a cost effective approach. The approach proposed is the use of a SpaceX Dragon capsule to land the launch vehicle system that would return samples to Earth. This paper describes the mission and technology requirements impact on the launch vehicle system design, referred to as the Mars Ascent Vehicle (MAV).

Bowles, Jeffrey V.↗

NASA NTRS2013

Mars Sample Return: Mars Ascent Vehicle Mission and Technology Requirements

A Mars Sample Return mission is the highest priority science mission for the next decade recommended by the recent Decadal Survey of Planetary Science, the key community input process that guides NASAs science missions. A feasibility study was conducted of a potentially simple and low cost approach to Mars Sample Return mission enabled by the use of developing commercial capabilities. Previous studies of MSR have shown that landing an all up sample return mission with a high mass capacity lander is a cost effective approach. The approach proposed is the use of an emerging commercially available capsule to land the launch vehicle system that would return samples to Earth. This paper describes the mission and technology requirements impact on the launch vehicle system design, referred to as the Mars Ascent Vehicle (MAV).

ascent↗

NASA NTRS2019

Ablators for Human and Robotic Exploration of the Moon, Mars and Beyond

When Apollo was designed to carry astronauts safely back from the Moon, at return speeds exceeding 11 km/s, it required development of a new lightweight ablative material to protect the capsule and crew from the intense heat of entry. Soon after the Apollo program, successful Mars Viking Lander missions employed a different and much lighter ablator in more benign entry conditions. On the other hand, the Pioneer-Venus and Galileo Probe missions that followed required yet another ablative system, to manage the extreme heating at those destinations, which was like flying a ballistic missile nose tip into a thermonuclear explosion. NASA had to invent a new heat-shield concept based on the rocket nozzle and ballistic missile ablative materials. In the mid 1990's, as the Science focus returned to Mars, advances in manufacturing, testing and materials technology led to innovative lightweight ablators that enabled comet and asteroid sample return missions and facilitated large lander missions such as MSL and Mars 2020. NASA's current plans for robotic and human exploration of the Moon, Mars and beyond introduce different constraints and new expectations for ablators. Human missions to Moon and Mars, sample return missions from Mars, and exploration of Uranus and Neptune, the two planets we are yet to explore, will require ablators that can withstand extreme environments, with verifiable robustness, and with raw materials and manufacturing approaches that are sustainable in the longer term. This talk will review the history of ablators as well as current ablative TPS development that addresses the requirements for future missions to Moon, Mars and beyond.

Mars and Beyond↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Increasing the Dynamic Pressure Capability of the NASA Langley/ODU 6-inch MSBS

The 6-inch NASA/ODU Magnetic Suspension and Balance System (MSBS) has been configured for dynamic stability testing of blunt-body atmospheric entry capsules. Tests have been successfully accomplished in the low-speed, open-circuit wind tunnel, at speeds up to around 40 m/s. The wind tunnel is designed to reach around 150 m/s, resulting in dynamic pressures comparable to those projected to arise in a future supersonic MSBS facility. Extensive system upgrades are being undertaken to permit testing at higher speeds/dynamic pressures, including control system enhancements, revised position and attitude sensing, and activation of additional electromagnets in the existing array. This paper will review recent progress in all these areas.

Mark Schoenenberger↗

NASA NTRS2007

Reaction Control System Design Considerations for Mars Entry Vehicles

The next generation of Mars exploration landers must precisely deliver scientific payloads to sites of interest, unlike previous Mars missions. The past missions, such as Viking and Pathfinder, performed landings to within 100s of kilometers from their targets using an unguided atmospheric entry. Guided entry of a capsule with a relatively high lift-to-drag ratio will allow landing to within 10s of kilometers from the target with a significantly more massive payload. Successful guided entry requires the use of a reaction control system (RCS) for both attitude correction and entry guidance maneuvers. Various aspects of the entry, descent and landing (EDL) system performance may be impacted by the operation of the RCS during entry. This paper illustrates the risks that arise from the gasdynamic interaction of the entry vehicle (EV) and RCS, and which require attention in the areas of aerodynamics and control, and aerothermal environments. This paper will review the methods to address the design challenges associated with integration of RCS into the atmospheric entry system. Among these challenges is the analysis of the potential for the aerodynamic interference due to both the direct jet plume impingement and more complex plume interactions with the wake flow. These interactions can result in enhanced aeroheating, requiring that a different approach to the thermal protection system (TPS) selection and sizing be used. The recent findings for Mars Science Laboratory and Mars Phoenix will be presented to help illustrate some of the phenomena. Current design solutions will be discussed.

Dyakonov, Artem A.↗

NASA NTRS2016

Heart Rate Responses to Unaided Orion Side Hatch Egress in the Neutral Buoyancy Laboratory

NASA is developing the Orion capsule as a vehicle for transporting crewmembers to and from the International Space Station (ISS) and for future human space exploration missions. Orion and other commercial vehicles are designed to splash down in the ocean where nominally support personnel will assist crewmembers in egressing the vehicle. However, off-nominal scenarios will require crewmembers to egress the vehicle unaided, deploy survival equipment, and ingress a life raft. PURPOSE: To determine the heart rate (HR) responses to unaided Orion side hatch egress and raft ingress as a part of the NASA Crew Survival Engineering Team's evaluation of the PORT Orion mockup in the Neutral Buoyancy Laboratory (NBL). METHODS: Nineteen test subjects, including four astronauts (N=19, 14 males/5 females, 38.6+/-8.4 y, 174.4+/-9.6 cm, 75.7+/-13.1 kg), completed a graded maximal test on a cycle ergometer to determine VO2peak and HRpeak and were divided into five crews of four members each; one subject served on two crews. Each crew was required to deploy a life raft, egress the Orion vehicle from the side hatch, and ingress the life raft with two 8 kg emergency packs per crew. Each crew performed this activity one to three times; a total of ten full egresses were completed. Subjects wore a suit that was similar in form, mass, and function to the Modified Advanced Crew Escape Suit (MACES) including helmet, gloves, boots, supplemental O2 bottles, and a CO2-inflated life preserver (approx.18 kg); subjects began each trial seated supine in the PORT Orion mockup with seat belts and mockup O2 and communication connections and ended each trial with all four crewmembers inside the life raft. RESULTS: VO2peak was 40.8+/-6.8 mL/kg/min (3.1+/-0.7 L/min); HRpeak was 181+/-10 bpm. Total egress time across trials was 5.0+/-1.6 min (range: 2.8-8.0 min); all subjects were able to successfully complete all trials. Average maximum HR at activity start, at the hatch opening, in the water, and in the raft, was 108, 137, 147, and 153 bpm, respectively; these values corresponded to 59+/-10%, 73+/-8%, 82+/-3%, and 84+/-6% of HRpeak, respectively. The highest HRs were seen after raft ingress and ranged from 72-99% HRpeak. Across all trials, cumulative averages of 5.4, 3.0, 1.1, and 0.2 min were spent at HRs >60%, >70%, >80%, and >90% HRpeak, respectively. CONCLUSION: Unaided Orion side hatch egress in the NBL is a relatively short-duration activity that elicits a high HR response for several min. Although all crewmembers successfully completed this activity, additional factors such as high seas, poor visibility, an incapacitated crewmember, neurovestibular perturbation, and neuromuscular deconditioning characteristic of a true operational environment may increase the physiologic demand (or decrease crewmembers' physiologic capacity) of unaided Orion side hatch egress. Additionally, landing conditions may require the crewmembers to egress from the top hatch, which is expected to be even more physiologically demanding; this condition will be evaluated in subsequent collaborative testing with the NASA Crew Survival Engineering Team.

English, Kirk L.↗

NASA NTRS2019

Ablators - From Apollo to Future Missions to Moon, Mars and Beyond

Apollo was designed to carry astronauts safely back from the Moon at return speeds exceeding 11 km/s and requireddevelopment of a new ablative thermal protection system (TPS) to protect the capsule from entry heating. Mercuryand Gemini, that preceded Apollo, were focused on Earth orbiting system demonstration and lessons learned fromthem were used in Apollo. The ablative material and associated system development for Lunar return conditionsrequired considerable ground and flight testing. Mars Viking Lander missions required a new lighter weight ablatoras entry heating was benign compared to Apollo. Pioneer-Venus and Galileo Probe missions required a new and morecapable ablator than Apollo. After two decades, Mars Pathfinder followed by Mars Exploration Rover missions,smaller than Viking but more demanding, were able to use Viking ablative TPS. At the same time, advances in manufacturing and materials technology led to development of innovative lightweight ablators. These new ablators enabled Stardust and Genesis Sample Return Missions. Around the turn of this century, NASA decided on a scaled-upversion of the Apollo capsule for human exploration of Moon and Mars and the ablative heat shield to protect the CrewExploration Vehicle ended up being the Apollo ablative TPS. The Artemis 1 mission is currently fitted with tiledsystem, different than Orion EFT-1 but with the Apollo ablative material as a result of lessons learned. NASA iscurrently planning on sample return missions from Mars, and this will require robust ablative TPS that can providehigher reliability than any other past mission. There are still unexplored high scientific value destinations in the solarsystem. In situ exploration of Uranus, Neptune, Saturn and sample return missions with return speed much higher thanStardust will require ablators capable of withstanding extreme entry that are also efficient. New ablative TPS havebeen developed in anticipation of these future missions. This paper is intended to tell the story of these ablators,illustrated through examples. We see the use of flight proven ablators was sometimes a risky proposition and newablators perceived to be higher risk have proved otherwise. The history of ablators illustrates the challenges eachmission had to address, either through the use of flight proven or new ablative TPS, to be successful.

Venkatapathy, Ethiraj↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Comparisons of Performance Metrics and Machine Learning Methods on an Entry Descent and Landing Database

This work focuses on evaluating machine learning methods and their applicability to the generation of an aerodynamic database, particularly for trajectory analysis of a capsule during entry, descent, and landing with a focus on uncertainty quantification. The source data to be used is the wind tunnel and computational data for the Integrated Design Assessment Team (IDAT) configuration of the Orion project, which has been publicly released. The methods used to generate the proposed databases are designed to naturally include a prediction interval, which will be evaluated both for their mean response as well as how well the prediction interval performs. These machine learning methods are compared to a traditionally generated database used by the Orion team as a baseline. It is found that while these machine learning methods perform well, the Orion database tends to still outperform them showing that engineering experience is still needed to make the best database possible. However, these methods still provide comparable results with significantly less effort.

Orion↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Comparisons of Performance Metrics and Machine Learning Methods on an Entry, Descent, and Landing Database

This work focuses on evaluating machine learning methods and their applicability to the generation of an aerodynamic database, particularly for trajectory analysis of a capsule during entry, descent, and landing with a focus on uncertainty quantification. The source data to be used is the wind tunnel and computational data for the Integrated Design Assessment Team (IDAT) configuration of the Orion project, which has been publicly released. The methods used to generate the proposed databases are designed to naturally include a prediction interval, which will be evaluated both for their mean response as well as how well the prediction interval performs. These machine learning methods are compared to a traditionally generated database used by the Orion team as a baseline. It is found that while these machine learning methods perform well, the Orion database tends to still outperform them showing that engineering experience is still needed to make the best database possible. However, these methods still provide comparable results with significantly less effort.

Orion↗

NASA NTRS2010

Assessment of Prone Positioning of Restrained, Seated Crewmembers in a Post Landing Stable 2 Orion Configuration

During the Orion landing and recovery subsystem design review, June 2009, it was noted that the human system and various vehicle systems, the environmental control and life support (ECLSS) and guidance, navigation and control (GN&C) systems for example, are negatively affected by Orion assuming a stable 2 (upside down; Figure A) configuration post landing. The stable 2 configuration is predicted to occur about 50% of the time based on Apollo landing data and modeling of the current capsule. The stable 2 configuration will be countered by an active up-righting system (crew module up-righting system; CMUS). Post landing balloons will deploy and inflate causing the vehicle to assume or maintain the stable 1 (up-right; Figure B) configuration. During the design review it was proposed that the up-righting system could be capable of righting the vehicle within 60 seconds. However, this time limit posed a series of constraints on the design which made it less robust than desired. The landing and recovery subsystem team requested an analysis of Orion vehicle systems as well as the human system with regard to the effect of stable 2 in order to determine if an up-righting response time greater than 60 seconds could be tolerated. The following report focuses on the assessment of the human system in the posture assumed when Orion is in the stable 2 configuration. Stable 2 will place suited, seated, and restrained crewmembers in a prone (facedown), head-up position for a period of time dependent on the functionality of the up-righting systems, ability of the crew to release themselves from the seat and restraints, and/or time to arrival of rescue forces. Given that the Orion seat and restraint system design is not complete and therefore, not available for evaluation, Space Medicine assessed how long a healthy but deconditioned crewmember could stay in this prone, restrained position and the physiological consequences of this posture by researching terrestrial analogs and considered the known physiological alterations and deconditioning experienced by long duration crewmembers.

Barr, Yael↗