SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Crew Module”

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 469 records · Page 26

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

NASA NTRS2001

STS-102 Expedition 2 Increment and Science Briefing

Merri Sanchez, Expedition 2 Increment Manager, John Uri, Increment Scientist, and Lybrease Woodard, Lead Payload Operations Director, give an overview of the upcoming activities and objectives of the Expedition 2's (E2's) mission in this prelaunch press conference. Ms. Sanchez describes the crew rotation of Expedition 1 to E2, the timeline E2 will follow during their stay on the International Space Station (ISS), and the various flights going to the ISS and what each will bring to ISS. Mr. Uri gives details on the on-board experiments that will take place on the ISS in the fields of microgravity research, commercial, earth, life, and space sciences (such as radiation characterization, H-reflex, colloids formation and interaction, protein crystal growth, plant growth, fermentation in microgravity, etc.). He also gives details on the scientific facilities to be used (laboratory racks and equipment such as the human torso facsimile or 'phantom torso'). Ms. Woodard gives an overview of Marshall Flight Center's role in the mission. Computerized simulations show the installation of the Space Station Remote Manipulator System (SSRMS) onto the ISS and the installation of the airlock using SSRMS. Live footage shows the interior of the ISS, including crew living quarters, the Progress Module, and the Destiny Laboratory. The three then answer questions from the press.

Source record↗

NASA NTRS2001

Astronaut-Induced Disturbances to the Microgravity Environment of the Mir Space Station

In preparation for the International Space Station, the Enhanced Dynamic Load Sensors Space Flight Experiment measured the forces and moments astronauts exerted on the Mir Space Station during their daily on-orbit activities to quantify the astronaut-induced disturbances to the microgravity environment during a long-duration space mission. An examination of video recordings of the astronauts moving in the modules and using the instrumented crew restraint and mobility load sensors led to the identification of several typical astronaut motions and the quantification or the associated forces and moments exerted on the spacecraft. For 2806 disturbances recorded by the foot restraints and hand-hold sensor, the highest force magnitude was 137 N. For about 96% of the time, the maximum force magnitude was below 60 N, and for about 99% of the time the maximum force magnitude was below 90 N. For 95% of the astronaut motions, the rms force level was below 9.0 N. It can be concluded that expected astronaut-induced loads from usual intravehicular activity are considerably less than previously thought and will not significantly disturb the microgravity environment.

Newman, Dava J.↗

NASA NTRS2004

"Bimodal" Nuclear Thermal Rocket (BNTR) Propulsion for Future Human Mars Exploration Missions

The Nuclear Thermal Rocket (NTR) Propulsion program is discussed. The Rover/NERVA program from 1959-1972 is compared with the current program. A key technology description, bimodal vehicle design for Mars Cargo and the crew transfer vehicle with inflatable module and artificial gravity capability, including diagrams are included. The LOX-Augmented NTR concept/operational features and characteristics are discussed.

Borowski, Stanley K.↗

NASA NTRS2007

NASA CEV Reference Entry GN&C System and Analysis

As part of its overall objectives, the Orion spacecraft will be required to perform entry and Earth landing functions for Low Earth Orbit (LEO) and Lunar missions. Both of these entry scenarios will begin with separation of the Service Module (SM), making them unique from other Orion mission phases in that only the Command Module (CM) portion of the Crew Exploration Vehicle (CEV) will be involved, requiring a CM specific Guidance, Navigation and Control (GN&C) system. Also common to these mission scenarios will be the need for GN&C to safely return crew (or cargo) to earth within the dynamic thermal and structural constraints of entry and within acceptable accelerations on the crew, utilizing the limited aerodynamic performance of the CM capsule. The lunar return mission could additionally require an initial atmospheric entry designed to support a precision skip and second entry, all to maximize downrange performance and ensure landing in the United States. This paper describes the Entry GN&C reference design, developed by the NASA-led team, that supports these entry scenarios and that was used to validate the Orion System requirements. Description of the reference design will include an overview of the GN&C functions, avionics, and effectors and will relate these to the specific design drivers of the entry scenarios, as well as the desire for commonality in vehicle systems to support the different missions. The discussion will also include the requirement for an Emergency Entry capability beyond that of the nominal performance of the multi-string GNC system, intended to return the crew to the earth in a survivable but unguided manner. Finally, various analyses will be discussed, including those completed to support validation efforts of the current CEV requirements, along with those on-going and planned with the intention to further refine the requirements and to support design development work in conjunction with the prime contractor. Some of these ongoing analyses will include work to size effectors (jets) and fuel budgets, to refine skip entry concepts, to characterize navigation performance and uncertainties, to provide for SM disposal offshore and to identify requirements to support target site selection.

Munday, S.↗

NASA NTRS2009

Launch Order, Launch Separation, and Loiter in the Constellation 1 1/2-Launch Solution

The NASA Constellation Program (CxP) is developing a two-element Earth-to-Orbit launch system to enable human exploration of the Moon. The first element, Ares I, is a human-rated system that consists of a first stage based on the Space Shuttle Program's solid rocket booster (SRB) and an upper stage that consists of a four-crew Orion capsule, a service module, and a Launch Escape System. The second element, Ares V, is a Saturn V-plus category launch system that consists of the core stage with a cluster of six RS-68B engines and augmented with two 5.5-segment SRBs, a Saturn-derived J-2X engine powering an Earth Departure Stage (EDS), and the lunar-lander vehicle payload, Altair. Initial plans called for the Ares V to be launched first, followed the next day by the Ares I. After the EDS performs the final portion of ascent and subsequent orbit circularization, the Orion spacecraft then performs a rendezvous and docks with the EDS and its Altair payload. Following checkout, the integrated stack loiters in low Earth orbit (LEO) until the appropriate Trans-Lunar Injection (TLI) window opportunity opens, at which time the EDS propels the integrated Orion Altair to the Moon. Successful completion of this 1 1/2-launch solution carries risks related to both the orbital lifetime of the assets and the probability of achieving the launch of the second vehicle within the orbital lifetime of the first. These risks, which are significant in terms of overall system design choices and probability of mission success, dictated a thorough reevaluation of the launch strategy, including the order of vehicle launch and the planned time period between launches. The goal of the effort described in this paper was to select a launch strategy that would result in the greatest possible expected system performance, while accounting for launch risks and the cost of increased orbital lifetime. Discrete Event Simulation (DES) model of the launch strategies was created to determine the probability of a second launch not occurring in a timely fashion (i.e., before the assets waiting in LEO expire). An overview of the launch strategy evaluation process is presented, along with results of specific cases that were analyzed. A high-level comparison of options is then presented, along with the conclusion derived from the analysis.

Stromgren, Chel↗

NASA NTRS2008

Ares First Stage "Systemology" - Combining Advanced Systems Engineering and Planning Tools to Assure Mission Success

Ares is an integral part of NASA s Constellation architecture that will provide crew and cargo access to the International Space Station as well as low earth orbit support for lunar missions. Ares replaces the Space Shuttle in the post 2010 time frame. Ares I is an in-line, two-stage rocket topped by the Orion Crew Exploration Vehicle, its service module, and a launch abort system. The Ares I first stage is a single, five-segment reusable solid rocket booster derived from the Space Shuttle Program's reusable solid rocket motor. The Ares second or upper stage is propelled by a J-2X main engine fueled with liquid oxygen and liquid hydrogen. This paper describes the advanced systems engineering and planning tools being utilized for the design, test, and qualification of the Ares I first stage element. Included are descriptions of the current first stage design, the milestone schedule requirements, and the marriage of systems engineering, detailed planning efforts, and roadmapping employed to achieve these goals.

Seiler, James↗

NASA NTRS2010

Waterhammer Testing and Modeling of the Ares I Upper Stage Reaction Control System

NASA's Ares I rocket is the agency's first step in completing the goals of the Constellation Program, which plans to deliver a new generation of space explorers into low earth orbit for future missions to the International Space Station, the moon, and other destinations within the solar system. Ares I is a two-stage rocket topped by the Orion crew capsule and its service module. The launch vehicle's First Stage is a single, five-segment reusable solid rocket booster (RSRB), derived from the Space Shuttle Program's four segment RSRB. The vehicle's Upper Stage, being designed at Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC), is propelled by a single J-2X Main Engine fueled with liquid oxygen and liquid hydrogen. During active Upper Stage flight of the Ares I launch vehicle, the Upper Stage Reaction Control System (US ReCS) will perform attitude control operations for the vehicle. The US ReCS will provide three-axis attitude control capability (roll, pitch, and yaw) for the Upper Stage while the J-2X is not firing and roll control capability while the engine is firing. Because of the requirements imposed upon the system, the design must accommodate rapid pulsing of multiple thrusters simultaneously to maintain attitude control. In support of these design activities and in preparation for Critical Design Review, analytical models of the US ReCS propellant feed system have been developed using the Thermal Hydraulic Library of MSC.EASY5 v.2008, herein referred to as EASY5. EASY5 is a commercially available fluid system modeling package with significant history of modeling space propulsion systems. In Fall 2009, a series of development tests were conducted at MSFC on a cold-flow test article for the US ReCS, herein referred to as System Development Test Article (SDTA). A subset of those tests performed were aimed at examining the effects of waterhammer on a flight-representative system and to ensure that those effects could be quantified with analytical models and incorporated into the design of the flight system. This paper presents an overview of the test article and the test approach, along with a discussion of the analytical modeling methodology. In addition, the results of that subset of development tests, along with analytical model pre-test predictions and post-test model correlations, will also be discussed in detail.

Williams, J. Hunter↗

NASA NTRS2012

Whole Module Offgas Test Report: Space-X Dragon Module

Between 7 April and 11 April 2012 a chemist from the JSC Toxicology Group acquired samples of air in 500 ml evacuated canisters from the sealed Dragon Module at the Space-X facility at KSC. Three samples were taken of facility air (two before the test and one after the test), and a total of 9 samples were taken from the sealed module in triplicate at the following times: 0 hours, 48 hours, and 96 hours. The module contained 470 kg, which was 100% of the mass to be launched. Analytical data contained in the Toxicology Group Report (attached) show that the ambient facility air was clean except for almost 9 milligrams per cubic meter of isopropanol (IPA) in the sample taken at the end of the test. Space-X must ensure that IPA is not introduced into the module before it is sealed for launch. Other minor contaminants in the ambient air included the following: perfluoro(2-methyl)pentane and hexamethylcyclotrisiloxane. The first-acquired samples of each triplicate from the module were not analyzed. Analyses of pairs of samples that were taken during the test show excellent agreement between the pairs and a linear increase in the T-values during the 4 days of the test (figure below). The rate of increase averaged 0.124 T units per day. If the time from last purge of the module on the ground to crew first entry on orbit is 10 days, then the T value at first entry should be less than 1.2 units, which is well below the criterion of 3.0 for consideration of additional protection of the crew from offgas products. The primary contributors were as follows: trimethylsilanol (0.057), fluorotrimethylsilane (0.047), acetaldehyde (0.004), hexamethylcyclopentasiloxane (0.003), and toluene (0.002).

James, John T.↗

NASA NTRS1977

Space station systems analysis study. Part 2, volume 3: Appendixes, Book 2: Supporting data (7 through 18)

Topics discussed include: (1) design considerations for a MARS sample return laboratory module for space station investigations; (2) crew productivity as a function of work shift arrangement; (3) preliminary analysis of the local logistics problem on the space construction base; (4) mission hardware construction operational flows and timelines; (5) orbit transfer vehicle concept definition; (6) summary of results and findings of space processing working review; (7) crew and habitability subsystem (option L); (8) habitability subsystem considerations for shuttle tended option L; (9) orbiter utilization in manned sortie missions; (10) considerations in definition of space construction base standard module configuration (option L); (11) guidance, control, and navigation subsystems; and (12) system and design tradeoffs.

Source record↗

NASA NTRS2007

Launching to the Moon, Mars, and Beyond

America is returning to the Moon in preparation for the first human footprint on Mars, guided by the U.S. Vision for Space Exploration. This presentation will discuss NASA's mission today, the reasons for returning to the Moon and going to Mars, and how NASA will accomplish that mission. The primary goals of the Vision for Space Exploration are to finish the International Space Station, retire the Space Shuttle, and build the new spacecraft needed to return people to the Moon and go to Mars. Unlike the Apollo program of the 1960s, this phase of exploration will be a journey, not a race. In 1966, the NASA's budget was 4 percent of federal spending. Today, with 6/10 of 1 percent of the budget, NASA must incrementally develop the vehicles, infrastructure, technology, and organization to accomplish this goal. Fortunately, our knowledge and experience are greater than they were 40 years ago. NASA's goal is a return to the Moon by 2020. The Moon is the first step to America's exploration of Mars. Many questions about the Moon's history and how its history is linked to that of Earth remain even after the brief Apollo explorations of the 1960s and 1970s. This new venture will carry more explorers to more diverse landing sites with more capable tools and equipment. The Moon also will serve as a training ground in several respects before embarking on the longer, more perilous trip to Mars. The journeys to the Moon and Mars will require a variety of vehicles, including the Ares I Crew Launch Vehicle, the Ares V Cargo Launch Vehicle, the Orion Crew Exploration Vehicle, and the Lunar Surface Access Module. The architecture for the lunar missions will use one launch to ferry the crew into orbit on the Ares I and a second launch to orbit the lunar lander and the Earth Departure Stage to send the lander and crew vehicle to the Moon. In order to reach the Moon and Mars within a lifetime and within budget, NASA is building on proven hardware and decades of experience derived from the Apollo Saturn, Space Shuttle, and contemporary commercial launch vehicle programs. Less than one year after the Exploration Launch Projects Office was formed at NASA's Marshall Space Flight Center, engineers are testing engine components, firing test rocket motors, refining vehicle designs in wind tunnel tests, and building hardware for the first flight test of Ares I, scheduled for spring 2009. The Vision for Exploration will require this nation to develop tools, machines, materials, and processes never before invented, technologies and capabilities that can be turned over to the private sector to benefit nearly all aspects of life on Earth. This new pioneering venture, as did the Apollo Program before it, will contribute to America's economic leadership, national security, and technological global competitiveness and serve as an inspiration for all its citizens.

Sumrall, John P.↗

NASA NTRS1991

G189A modelling of Space Station Freedom's ECLSS

This paper contains a review of the requirements and design of the Environmental Control and Life Support System (ECLSS) for Space Station Freedom; a review of the G189A ECLSS computer program model developed at Boeing for the complete configuration of pressurized elements or volumes; and some significant computed results from this model showing transient performance for subsystems responsible for Temperature and Humidity Control,. Atmosphere Control and Supply, Air Revitalization, and Water Recovery and Management. The computed results presented here are important in assessing the capabilities of the ECLSS equipment in maintaining acceptable levels of temperature, humidity, 02, N2 and (2% in the occupied volumes during crew changeout events. These events involve up to four extra crew members from the Orbiter being located temporarily in the Space Station modules in addition to the normal contingent of four crew members. These additional crew members impose additional demands on the ECLSS equipment, in order to control the levels of the aforementioned quantities. Satisfactory control of all of these quantities was achieved. The maximum computed pp C02 was in the acceptable degraded performance regime. This level is higher than the 3.00 mm Hg upper limit for normal conditions

Environmental Control and Life Support Systems (EC↗

NASA NTRS1992

The reuse of logistics carriers for the first lunar outpost alternative habitat study

The Systems Definition Branch deals with preliminary concepts/designs of various projects currently in progress at NASA. One of these projects is called the First Lunar Outpost. The First Lunar Outpost (FLO) is a proposed permanent lunar base to be located on the moon. In order to better understand the Lunar Habitat, a detailed analysis of the lunar environment as well as conceptual studies of the physical living arrangements for the support crew is necessary. The habitat will be inhabited for a period of 45 days followed by a six month dormant period. Requirements for the habitat include radiation protection, a safe haven for occasional solar flare storms, an airlock module and consumables to support a crew of 4 with a schedule of 34 extra vehicular activities. Consumables in order to sustain a crew of four for 45 days ranges from 430 kg of food to only 15 kg for personal hygiene items. These consumables must be brought to the moon with every mission. They are transported on logistics carriers. The logistics carrier must be pressurized in order to successfully transport the consumables. Refrigeration along with other types of thermal control and variation in pressure are defined by the list of necessary consumables. The objective of the proposed work was to collaborate the Habitat Team with their study on Logistic Carriers as possible alternatives for additional habitable volume. Options for possible reuses was also determined. From this analysis, a recommended design is proposed.

Vargas, Carolina↗

NASA NTRS2007

Innovative Multi-Environment, Multimode Thermal Control System

Innovative multi-environment multimode thermal management architecture has been described that is capable of meeting widely varying thermal control requirements of various exploration mission scenarios currently under consideration. The proposed system is capable of operating in a single-phase or two-phase mode rejecting heat to the colder environment, operating in a two-phase mode with heat pump for rejecting heat to a warm environment, as well as using evaporative phasechange cooling for the mission phases where the radiator is incapable of rejecting the required heat. A single fluid loop can be used internal and external to the spacecraft for the acquisition, transport and rejection of heat by the selection of a working fluid that meets NASA safety requirements. Such a system may not be optimal for each individual mode of operation but its ability to function in multiple modes may permit global optimization of the thermal control system. The architecture also allows flexibility in partitioning of components between the various Constellation modules to take advantage of operational requirements in various modes consistent with the mission needs. Preliminary design calculations using R-134 as working fluid show the concept to be feasible to meet the heat rejection requirements that are representative of the Crew Exploration Vehicle and Lunar Access Module for nominal cases. More detailed analyses to establish performance under various modes and environmental conditions are underway.

Singh, Bhim S.↗

NASA NTRS1998

STS-95: Discovery Flight Crew at SPACEHAB

This NASA Kennedy Space Center (KSC) sponsored video release presents members of the STS-95 flight crew: Curtis L. Brown, Commander, Steven W. Lindsey, Pilot, Pedro Duque (ESA), Chiaki Mukai (NASDA) Payload Specialist, John H. Glenn, Payload Specialist, and mission specialists, Scott E. Parazynski, and Stephen K. Robinson becoming familiar with the spacecraft module SPACEHAB stored at the KSC launch complex. The SPACEHAB module being flown on STS-95 provides additional pressurized workspace for experiments, cargo and crew activities. SPACEHAB modules have supported various Shuttle science missions along with several of the joint Shuttle-Mir missions. Members of the Japanese Space Agency (NASDA) are included in the video assisting the NASA flight crew in SPACEHAB training.

Source record↗

NASA NTRS1970

Experiment module concepts study. Volume 5 book 1, appendix A: Shuttle only task

Results of a preliminary investigation of the effect on the candidate experiment program implementation of experiment module operations in the absence of an orbiting space station and with the availability of the space shuttle orbiter vehicle only are presented. The fundamental hardware elements for shuttle-only operation of the program are: (1) integrated common experiment modules CM-1, CM-3, and CM-4, together with the propulsion slice; (2) support modules capable of supplying on-orbit crew life support, power, data management, and other services normally provided by a space station; (3) dormancy kits to enable normally attached modules to remain in orbit while shuttle returns to earth; and (4) shuttle orbiter. Preliminary cost estimates for 30 day on-orbit and 5 day on-orbit capabilities for a four year implementation period are $4.2 billion and $2.1 billion, respectively.

Source record↗

NASA NTRS2019

Modeling and Simulation Techniques for the NASA SLS Service Module Panel Separation Event; from Loosely-Coupled Euler to Fully-Coupled 6-DOF, Time-Accurate, Navier-Stokes Methodologies

An aerodynamic database has been generated for use by the Orion Multi-Purpose Crew Vehicle (MPCV) Program to analyze Service Module (SM) panel jettison from the NASA SLS vehicle. The database is a combination of CFD data for the panel aerodynamic coefficients, and MATLAB code written to query the CFD data. The Cart3D inviscid CFD flow solver was used to generate the panel aerodynamic coefficients for static panel orientations and free stream conditions that can occur during the jettison event. The MATLAB code performs the multivariate interpolation to obtain aerodynamic coefficients. The MATLAB code uses input for SM panel parameters and returns the SM panel aerodynamic force and moment coefficients for use with a Six-Degree-of-Freedom (6-DOF) motion solver to model the jettison event. This paper examines the accuracy of the sequential-static database approach by modeling the panel jettison event with a fully-coupled, time-dependent, viscous, moving-body CFD simulation. The fully-coupled simulation is obtained using the Loci/Chem unstructured Navier-Stokes CFD solver. The results show that the fully-coupled approach agrees well with the loosely-coupled database/6-DOF approach, indicating that unsteady effects are minimal for the panel jettison event. These results suggest that the database/6-DOF approach is sufficient. In addition, this paper presents the development of an uncertainty model for use in Monte Carlo analysis of the panel jettison event. Here viscous CFD simulations are obtained with Loci/Chem and compared to the inviscid CFD forces and moments. An uncertainty model based on model-form error and numerical error is presented.

Hall, Leslie H.↗

NASA NTRS1980

US Coast Guard lightweight fire-fighting module

The U.S. Coast Guard Fire-fighting Module developed for the purpose of fighting fires in harbors and on ships is described. The module can be lifted by a dockside crane or helicopter and placed on the deck of a patrol boat or cutter for transportation to the scene of the fire. At the fire the module can be set up and put in operation by a crew of two in approximately fifteen minutes. Once in operation the module will deliver water to two fire nozzles at a pressure of 150 psi and a flow rate of 2000 gpm. Sufficient fuel is carried in the module for three hours of continuous operation. A record of the development of the fire fighting module is also presented.

Source record↗

NASA NTRS2000

Shuttle and ISS Food Systems Management

Russia and the U.S. provide the current International Space Station (ISS) food system. Each country contributes half of the food supply in their respective flight food packaging. All of the packaged flight food is stowed in Russian provided containers, which interface with the Service Module galley. Each country accepts the other's flight worthiness inspections and qualifications. Some of the food for the first ISS crew was launched to ISS inside the Service Module in July of 2000, and STS-106 in September 2000 delivered more food to the ISS. All subsequent food deliveries will be made by Progress, the Russian re-supply vehicle. The U.S. will ship their portion of food to Moscow for loading onto the Progress. Delivery schedules vary, but the goal is to maintain at least a 45-day supply onboard ISS at all times. The shelf life for ISS food must be at least one year, in order to accommodate the long delivery cycle and onboard storage. Preservation techniques utilized in the US food system include dehydration, thermo stabilization, intermediate moisture, and irradiation. Additional fresh fruits and vegetables will be sent with each Progress and Shuttle flights as permitted by volume allotments. There is limited refrigeration available on the Service Module to store fresh fruits and vegetables. Astronauts and cosmonauts eat half U.S. and half Russian food. Menu planning begins 1 year before a planned launch. The flight crews taste food in the U.S. and in Russia and rate the acceptability. A preliminary menu is planned, based on these ratings and the nutritional requirements. The preliminary menu is then evaluated by the crews while training in Russia. Inputs from this evaluation are used to finalize the menu and flight packaging is initiated. Flight food is delivered 6 weeks before launch. The current challenge for the food system is meeting the nutritional requirements, especially no more than 10 mg iron, and 3500 mg sodium. Experience from Shuttle[Mir also indicated insufficient caloric intake for many crewmembers. Additional thermostabilized and irradiated foods have been developed for ISS to improve the ease of preparation and overall acceptability. Dehydrated foods offer limited advantage, since water must be delivered to ISS. An effort is underway to introduce other International Partner's food into the ISS food system. At first this will be one or two selected foods with the potential for more as the program matures. An increase in the variety of available foods would improve the overall acceptability. Additional galley capability will be required when the crew size increases on ISS. Anticipated improvements include freezers, refrigerators and microwave ovens. All of the ISS food development efforts are devoted to improving the food acceptability and subsequent consumption and mission success

Kloeris, Vickie↗