Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Mobility ports”

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 55 records · Page 3
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2023

xPLSS Structural Backplate Design, Manufacture, and Test Overview

NASA Johnson Space Center (JSC) has been developing and building a new detailed design of the Exploration Extravehicular Mobility Unit (xEMU) space suit to support future International Space Station (ISS) and Lunar Artemis missions. The Exploration Portable Life Support System (xPLSS) of the xEMU contains some clever new technologies to meet the requirements to provide Extra Vehicular Activity (EVA) capability on the ISS and the Moon. The suit must interface with and fit through ports and airlocks of at least three vehicles: ISS, Human Landing System (HLS), and Gateway. The first partial xPLSS experimental flight unit called SWME EXPRESS Rack Flight Experiment (SERFE) that was a rack-deployed thermal control system payload on the ISS for two years (2020-2022). The first complete assembly of the xEMU was built as a Design Verification Test (DVT) unit (2022); similar to but more extensive than an Engineering Development Unit (EDU). The xPLSS Backplate serves not only as the structural backbone of the xPLSS and SERFE systems but also contains innovative design features to reduce the: mass, complexity, parts count, number ofseals (and therefore leak potential), and outer dimensions of the entire assembly. This paper provides an overview of these new design features, manufacturing processes, system interfaces, and SERFE/DVT test results of the Backplate as part of the xPLSS/xEMU.

xPLSS↗
NASA NTRS2009

Aerodynamics of a Gulfstream G550 Nose Landing Gear Model

In this paper we discuss detailed steady and unsteady aerodynamic measurements of a Gulfstream G550 nose landing gear model. The quarter-scale, high-fidelity model includes part of the lower fuselage and the gear cavity. The full model configuration allowed for removal of various gear components (e.g. light cluster, steering mechanism, hydraulic lines, etc.) in order to document their effects on the local flow field. The measurements were conducted at a Reynolds number of 7.3 x 10(exp 4) based on the shock strut (piston) diameter and a freestream Mach number of 0.166. Additional data were also collected at lower Mach numbers of 0.12 and 0.145 and correspondingly lower Reynolds numbers. The boundary layer on the piston was tripped to enable turbulent flow separation, so as to better mimic the conditions encountered during flight. Steady surface pressures were gathered from an extensive number of static ports on the wheels, door, fuselage, and within the gear cavity. To better understand the resultant flow interactions between gear components, surface pressure fluctuations were collected via sixteen dynamic pressure sensors strategically placed on various subcomponents of the gear. Fifteen of the transducers were flush mounted on the gear surface at fixed locations, while the remaining one was a mobile transducer that could be placed at numerous varying locations. The measured surface pressure spectra are mainly broadband in nature, lacking any local peaks associated with coherent vortex shedding. This finding is in agreement with off-surface flow measurements using PIV that revealed the flow field to be a collection of separated shear layers without any dominant vortex shedding processes.

Neuhart, Dan H.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Validation of Fitness for Duty Standards Using Pre- and Post-Flight Capsule Egress and Suited Functional Performance Tasks in Simulated Reduced Gravity (Pilot Egress Fitness)

As NASA prepares for exploration missions, it will be critical to understand and build upon known crew capabilities. Specifically, we need to know the functional capacities of crew at different stages of a mission and characterize these profiles so that the appropriate vehicle requirements and mission concepts of operations (ConOps) can be developed. One of the most complex phases of any missions is when there is a transition between gravity environments. For instance, both physiological adaptation to microgravity and subsequent re-entry into a gravity environment result in reduced functional capacity, even with rigorous adherence to inflight countermeasures. Quantification of the astronauts’ post-landing functional performance is necessary to design ConOps for exploration missions. Specifically, these two high-risk tasks may have to be performed soon after gravity transitions: •Unassisted capsule egress task after return to Earth •Planetary extravehicular activity (EVA) soon after landing on Mars or the Moon This study has been broken down into two phases. A pilot phase to assess the overall feasibility and demonstrate the capability to do these tasks shortly after landing and the full Egress Fitness study, which will be part of the CIPHER complement. This study uses a functional task approach to characterize performance of these high-risk tasks in long-duration ISS crewmembers before flight and shortly after return to Earth. Prior to any testing, each astronaut subject completes a suit fit check to ensure adequate sizing and mobility to be able to complete the EVA tasks. Pilot Egress Fitness pre-flight and post-flight testing includes an Earth based emergency egress out of a functional capsule mockup, and a short Mars gravity EVA simulation including suit donning, hatch egress, ladder descent, task board cable operations, baggage transfer over sand/rocky regolith, alignment with a rear entry port, and suit egress. Pre-flight testing can occur almost anytime pre-flight, but post-flight scheduling is much more critical with the capsule egress test occurring 1-4 hours after landing and the planetary EVA approximately 18-36 hours after landing. Data collected for both tasks includes task completion time, photo, and video. The EVA portion also includes collection of metabolic and heart rate. Pilot Egress Fitness study has completed baseline pre-flight testing on 3 astronaut subjects. Post-flight testing of the first two subjects will be completed in November 2021 and the final subject around March 2022. Results and lessons learned from this pilot study will inform the full Egress Fitness study, which will incorporate additional pre-flight sessions, longer EVA tasks, and post-flight testing on R+1, 4, and 7 to characterize the timeframe of recovery

J R Norcross↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Validation of Fitness for Duty Standards Using Pre- and Post-Flight Capsule Egress and Suited Functional Performance Tasks in Simulated Reduced Gravity

The transition between gravity environments will involve one of the most complex, high-risk phases of any mission. For example, the reduced functional capacity caused by physiological deconditioning adaptations in microgravity coupled with the stressors of re-entry into partial gravity environments will increase risks to crew, even with rigorous adherence to inflight countermeasures. Quantification of the astronauts’ post-landing functional performance is necessary to design ConOps for exploration missions. Specifically, these two high-risk scenarios may be required to be performed soon after gravity transitions: • Nominal and/or emergency unassisted capsule egress task after return to Earth • Planetary extravehicular activity (EVA) soon after landing on Mars or the Moon This study is broken down into two phases. Phase 1: A feasibility study that will assess the overall feasibility and demonstrate the capability to do these tasks shortly after landing. Phase 2: the full Egress Fitness study, which is part of the CIPHER complement. This study uses a task-based approach to characterize functional performance of these high-risk scenarios in long-duration ISS crewmembers before flight and shortly after return to Earth. Prior to any testing, each astronaut subject completes a suit fit check to ensure adequate sizing and a mobility assessment to confirm completion of the EVA tasks. Pilot Egress Fitness pre-flight and post-flight testing includes an Earth-based emergency egress out of a functional capsule mockup and a short Mars gravity EVA simulation including suit donning, hatch egress, ladder descent, task board cable operations, baggage transfer over sand/rocky regolith, alignment with a rear entry port, and suit egress. Pre-flight testing will occur at any time point prior to flight. Post-flight assessment is much more critical with the capsule egress test that will occur 1–4 hours after landing and the planetary EVA approximately 18–36 hours after landing. The CIPHER study will incorporate additional pre-flight sessions, longer EVA tasks that include traverse and geology sampling, and post-flight sessions on R+1, 4, and 8 to characterize the timeframe of recovery. Data collected for both tasks include task completion time, photo, and video. The EVA portion also includes collection of metabolic and heart rate. Pilot Egress Fitness study has completed both baseline and post-flight testing on four astronaut subjects, with all four able to complete post-flight EVA testing and three able to complete postflight capsule egress testing. Preliminary results observe individual physiological variations, which were to be expected but also suggest the need to carefully track the timeline from undock to landing to testing. Furthermore, some task performance instructions and equipment may need to be adjusted to ensure results are primarily physiological. These and other lessons learned will be addressed with minor protocol changes in the full CIPHER Egress Fitness study.

J R Norcross↗
DOE OSTI2022

EVSE Cybersecurity and Resilience

Consequence-driven Cybersecurity Analysis for Extreme Fast Charging Electric Vehicle Infrastructure Electric vehicle (EV) development and associated charging infrastructure are expected to advance rapidly. Thirty percent of all global vehicle sales may be EVs and hybrid EVs by 2025, and they will rely on increasingly sophisticated strategies for grid integration. Next-generation EV charging infrastructure is expected to include interconnected renewable resources, such as photovoltaic (PV) arrays and battery storage systems, along with grid-edge devices. Although distributed energy resources (DERs) are useful in several ways, such as peak shaving at high demand times and backup supply for added resilience, the integration of vehicle charging and DERs could create more avenues for cyberattack. Physical and/or remote access to EV charging station components, including charge ports, power electronics, controllers, and local generation (e.g., PV and energy storage) could be paths to cause power fluctuations, leading to altered operations at the charging station, escalated privileges to administrative systems, exfiltration of financial information (including personally identifiable information), and reduced grid stability. One compromised EV supply equipment component can open the door to a variety of exploitable vulnerabilities. Cloud computing and mobile application control have the potential to expand the threat surface to non-repudiation and firmware integrity challenges. Vendor clouds have access to hundreds of chargers, and if compromised, can scale the attack surface exponentially. The high power and voltage levels of xFC infrastructure (e.g., 400 kW at 1000- V DC) increase the hazards and ability to impact the grid and vehicles more than lower-power charging systems. Legacy communications systems and protocols could also put EV infrastructure at risk of cyberattacks requiring a robust patch management process. Communications networks link EVs and chargers to several stakeholders - including charging station operators, grid operators, vendors/manufacturers, and aggregators - who have both physical and network access to share information for control, monitoring, and analytics. Information in these networks that is vulnerable to compromise includes the state of charge, charging duration, payment information, electricity price, and load control. Analyzing and prioritizing these interconnections risks could help address cybersecurity related to data leakage and manipulation.

charging↗
DOE OSTI2020

MRDIS Case Study

The Mobile Radiation Detection and Identification System (MRDIS) is a large mobile scanner that inspects containers in transit from cargo ships for radiological materials. The MRDIS platform operates as a two-part system with one MRDIS using a plastic Polyvinyl Toleune (synthetic polymer) for primary detection and another MRDIS that uses spectroscopic detectors for secondary isotopic identification. MRDIS can operate either independently or as part of a team, depending on the needs of the port. MRDIS is controlled by a human operator, who searches the computer monitor for any traces of radiological materials when the containers pass through the center of the system. Each MRDIS can also feed data into a central system or collect data on its own for additional material analysis. The system integrates radiation detection, radioisotope identification, an optical character recognition system, occupancy/speed sensors, wireless communications, and data processing capabilities to discern what specific radiological materials are of particular interest. In addition, Sandia engineers created a detailed set of requirements for subsequent models, allowing for faster implementation of additional detection systems.

46 INSTRUMENTATION RELATED TO NUCLEAR SCIENCE AND ↗
NASA NTRS2015

Experimentally Determined Heat Transfer Coefficients for Spacesuit Liquid Cooled Garments

A Human-In-The-Loop (HITL) Portable Life Support System 2.0 (PLSS 2.0) test has been conducted at NASA Johnson Space Center in the PLSS Development Laboratory from October 27, 2014 to December 19, 2014. These closed-loop tests of the PLSS 2.0 system integrated with human subjects in the Mark III Suit at 3.7 psi to 4.3 psi above ambient pressure performing treadmill exercise at various metabolic rates from standing rest to 3000 BTU/hr (880 W). The bulk of the PLSS 2.0 was at ambient pressure but effluent water vapor from the Spacesuit Water Membrane Evaporator (SWME) and the Auxiliary Membrane Evaporator (Mini-ME), and effluent carbon dioxide from the Rapid Cycle Amine (RCA) were ported to vacuum to test performance of these components in flight-like conditions. One of the objectives of this test was to determine the heat transfer coefficient (UA) of the Liquid Cooling Garment (LCG). The UA, an important factor for modeling the heat rejection of an LCG, was determined in a variety of conditions by varying inlet water temperature, flowrate, and metabolic rate. Three LCG configurations were tested: the Extravehicular Mobility Unit (EMU) LCG, the Oceaneering Space Systems (OSS) LCG, and the OSS auxiliary LCG. Other factors influencing accurate UA determination, such as overall heat balance, LCG fit, and the skin temperature measurement, will also be discussed.

Bue, Grant↗
NASA NTRS2015

Experimentally Determined Overall Heat Transfer Coefficients for Spacesuit Liquid Cooled Garments

A Human-In-The-Loop (HITL) Portable Life Support System 2.0 (PLSS 2.0) test has been conducted at NASA Johnson Space Center in the PLSS Development Laboratory from October 27, 2014 to December 19, 2014. These closed-loop tests of the PLSS 2.0 system integrated with human subjects in the Mark III Suit at 3.7 psi to 4.3 psi above ambient pressure performing treadmill exercise at various metabolic rates from standing rest to 3000 BTU/hr (880 W). The bulk of the PLSS 2.0 was at ambient pressure but effluent water vapor from the Spacesuit Water Membrane Evaporator (SWME) and the Auxiliary Membrane Evaporator (Mini-ME), and effluent carbon dioxide from the Rapid Cycle Amine (RCA) were ported to vacuum to test performance of these components in flight-like conditions. One of the objectives of this test was to determine the overall heat transfer coefficient (UA) of the Liquid Cooling Garment (LCG). The UA, an important factor for modeling the heat rejection of an LCG, was determined in a variety of conditions by varying inlet water temperature, flow rate, and metabolic rate. Three LCG configurations were tested: the Extravehicular Mobility Unit (EMU) LCG, the Oceaneering Space Systems (OSS) LCG, and the OSS auxiliary LCG. Other factors influencing accurate UA determination, such as overall heat balance, LCG fit, and the skin temperature measurement, will also be discussed.

Bue, Grant↗
NASA NTRS2016

Z-2 Architecture Description and Requirements Verification Results

The Z-2 Prototype Planetary Extravehicular Space Suit Assembly is a continuation of NASA's Z series of spacesuits. The Z-2 is another step in NASA's technology development roadmap leading to human exploration of the Martian surface. The suit was designed for maximum mobility at 8.3 psid, reduced mass, and to have high fidelity life support interfaces. As Z-2 will be man-tested at full vacuum in NASA JSC's Chamber B, it was manufactured as Class II, making it the most flight-like planetary walking suit produced to date. The Z-2 suit architecture is an evolution of previous EVA suits, namely the ISS EMU, Mark III, Rear Entry I-Suit and Z-1 spacesuits. The suit is a hybrid hard and soft multi-bearing, rear entry spacesuit. The hard upper torso (HUT) is an all-composite structure and includes a 2-bearing rolling convolute shoulder with Vernier sizing mechanism, removable suit port interface plate (SIP), elliptical hemispherical helmet and self-don/doff shoulder harness. The hatch is a hybrid aluminum and composite construction with Apollo style gas connectors, custom water pass-thru, removable hatch cage and interfaces to primary and auxiliary life support feed water bags. The suit includes Z-1 style lower arms with cam brackets for Vernier sizing and government furnished equipment (GFE) Phase VI gloves. The lower torso includes a telescopic waist sizing system, waist bearing, rolling convolute waist joint, hard brief, 2 bearing soft hip thigh, Z-1 style legs with ISS EMU style cam brackets for sizing, and conformal walking boots with ankle bearings. The Z-2 Requirements Verification Plan includes the verification of more than 200 individual requirements. The verification methods include test, analysis, inspection, demonstration or a combination of methods. Examples of unmanned requirements include suit leakage, proof pressure testing, operational life, mass, isometric man-loads, sizing adjustment ranges, internal and external interfaces such as in-suit drink bag, partial pressure relief valve, purge valve, donning stand and ISS Body Restraint Tether (BRT). Examples of manned requirements include verification of anthropometric range, suit self-don/doff, secondary suit exit method, donning stand self-ingress/egress and manned mobility covering eight functional tasks. The eight functional tasks include kneeling with object pick-up, standing toe touch, cross-body reach, walking, reach to the SIP and helmet visor. This paper will provide an overview of the Z-2 design. Z-2 requirements verification testing was performed with NASA at the ILC Houston test facility. This paper will also discuss pre-delivery manned and unmanned test results as well as analysis performed in support of requirements verification.

Graziosi, Dave↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Science Capabilities of the Common Habitat

The Common Habitat is the primary habitable element in a conceptual architecture feasibility study for long-duration space exploration with an eight-person crew size. On lunar or planetary surfaces, the Common Habitat forms the core of a Surface Base Camp. In microgravity, the Common Habitat is the core of the Deep Space Exploration Vehicle (DSEV), an in-space transportation spacecraft. The Common Habitat employs a horizontal orientation that is divided internally into a lower deck, mid deck, and upper deck, roughly separating outfitting into individual, work, and group functions. On a planetary surface, the habitat is incorporated into a base camp, located near the south pole in the case of the Moon. The Mars base camp is currently location agnostic. Each base camp is divided into habitation, landing, resource production, and power zones. In microgravity, the habitat is incorporated into the Deep Space Exploration Vehicle, a vessel capable of transporting the crew within the inner solar system. In addition to crew and teleoperated control of external science assets, the Common Habitat employs a suite of life and physical science laboratory systems to enable it to support science investigations across a variety of destination environments, primarily featuring the Moon and Mars, along with the intervening interplanetary space. Other potential destinations include Near Earth Asteroids and Venus and Earth orbits. Located in the aft starboard section of the Common Habitat mid deck, the life science laboratory supports primarily biology and human research. In its baseline configuration, the laboratory includes horizontal work surfaces, freezers, multiple gloveboxes, sample transfer/exposure capability, large instruments, and reconfigurable ISPR-compatible payload bays. The Medical Care Facility and exercise facility can also support life science research. In the aft port section of the mid deck, the physical science laboratory supports physics, chemistry, materials science, geology, and remote sensing (including astrophysics, heliophysics, Earth science, planetary science, and meteorology). It provides a baseline of similar ISPR-compatible payload bays and adds additional freezers, including those for cryogenic sample storage, a remote sensing workstation, more gloveboxes, also with sample transfer/exposure, combustion chambers, fluid mechanics chambers, and a gas chromatograph. It leverages the Command & Control Center for teleoperations of mobile science assets. Both laboratories are highly modular, with the ability to swap out both payloads and instruments on an as-needed basis. The integrated science outfitting of the Common Habitat positions its crew to contribute to all of NASA’s Moon to Mars science objectives and extend human understanding into the inner solar system.

Lunar Suface↗
NASA NTRS2016

Concept of Operations for a Prospective "Proving Ground" in the Lunar Vicinity

NASA is studying a "Proving Ground" near the Moon to conduct human space exploration missions in preparation for future flights to Mars. This paper describes a concept of operations ("conops") for activities in the Proving Ground, focusing on the construction and use of a mobile Cislunar Transit Habitat capable of months-long excursions within and beyond the Earth-Moon system. Key elements in the conops include the Orion spacecraft (with mission kits for docking and other specialized operations) and the Space Launch System heavy-lift rocket. Potential additions include commercial launch vehicles and logistics carriers, solar electric propulsion stages to move elements between different orbits and eventually take them on excursions to deep space, a node module with multiple docking ports, habitation and life support blocks, and international robotic and piloted lunar landers. The landers might include reusable ascent modules which could remain docked to in-space elements between lunar sorties. The architecture will include infrastructure for launch preparation, communication, mission control, and range safety. The conops describes "case studies" of notional missions chosen to guide the design of the architecture and its elements. One such mission is the delivery of a ~10-ton pressurized element, co-manifested with an Orion on a Block 1B Space Launch System rocket, to the Proving Ground. With a large solar electric propulsion stage, the architecture could enable a year-long mission to land humans on a near-Earth asteroid. In the last case, after returning to near-lunar space, two of the asteroid explorers could join two crewmembers freshly arrived from Earth for a Moon landing, helping to safely quantify the risk of landing deconditioned crews on Mars. The conops also discusses aborts and contingency operations. Early return to Earth may be difficult, especially during later Proving Ground missions. While adding risk, limited-abort conditions provide needed practice for Mars, from which early return is likely to be impossible.

Love, Stanley G.↗
NASA NTRS1991

Walking robot: A design project for undergraduate students

The objective of the University of Maryland walking robot project was to design, analyze, assemble, and test an intelligent, mobile, and terrain-adaptive system. The robot incorporates existing technologies in novel ways. The legs emulate the walking path of a human by an innovative modification of a crank-and-rocker mechanism. The body consists of two tripod frames connected by a turning mechanism. The two sets of three legs are mounted so as to allow the robot to walk with stability in its own footsteps. The computer uses a modular hardware design and distributed processing. Dual-port RAM is used to allow communication between a supervisory personal computer and seven microcontrollers. The microcontrollers provide low-level control for the motors and relieve the processing burden on the PC.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS2014

Carbon Dioxide Washout Testing Using Various Inlet Vent Configurations in the Mark-III Space Suit

Requirements for using a space suit during ground testing include providing adequate carbon dioxide (CO2) washout for the suited subject. Acute CO2 exposure can lead to symptoms including headache, dyspnea, lethargy, and eventually unconsciousness or even death. Symptoms depend on several factors including inspired partial pressure of CO2 (ppCO2), duration of exposure, metabolic rate of the subject, and physiological differences between subjects. Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) analysis has predicted that the configuration of the suit inlet vent has a significant effect on oronasal CO2 concentrations. The main objective of this test was to characterize inspired oronasal ppCO2 for a variety of inlet vent configurations in the Mark-III suit across a range of workload and flow rates. Data and trends observed during testing along with refined CFD models will be used to help design an inlet vent configuration for the Z-2 space suit. The testing methodology used in this test builds upon past CO2 washout testing performed on the Z-1 suit, Rear Entry I-Suit, and the Enhanced Mobility Advanced Crew Escape Suit. Three subjects performed two test sessions each in the Mark-III suit to allow for comparison between tests. Six different helmet inlet vent configurations were evaluated during each test session. Suit pressure was maintained at 4.3 psid. Suited test subjects walked on a treadmill to generate metabolic workloads of approximately 2000 and 3000 BTU/hr. Supply airflow rates of 6 and 4 actual cubic feet per minute were tested at each workload. Subjects wore an oronasal mask with an open port in front of the mouth and were allowed to breathe freely. Oronasal ppCO2 was monitored real-time via gas analyzers with sampling tubes connected to the oronasal mask. Metabolic rate was calculated from the CO2 production measured by an additional gas analyzer at the air outlet from the suit. Real-time metabolic rate measurements were used to adjust the treadmill workload to meet target metabolic rates. This paper provides detailed descriptions of the test hardware, methodology and results, as well as implications for future inlet vent designs and ground testing.

Korona, F. Adam↗
DOE OSTI2023

Ice nucleation measurements from DRUM impactors during TRACER campaign in the Houston TX region from July to September 2022

During TRACER, three Davis Rotating Uniform size-cut Monitors (DRUM; DRUMAir 4-DRUM) were used to collect aerosols for ice nucleation measurements in the Brooks laboratory at Texas A&M University. The three instruments were located at AMF1 in La Porte, Ancillary site in Guy (ANC), and onboard the Texas A&M Rapid Onsite Atmospheric Measurements Van (ROAM-V). ROAM-V was deployed to capture airmasses behind (maritime) and ahead (continental) of the passage of the sea-breeze front through Houston. On select sampling days, ROAM-V sampled in the morning/mid-day on the coast and then transited to a second inland site for the afternoon/evening. The suite of instruments deployed on ROAM-V included a Condensation Particle Counter (CPC; GRIMM Model 5.403 CPC), Scanning Mobility Particle Sizer (SMPS; TSI 3750 detector, TSI 3082 classifier, TSI 3088 neutralizer, TSI 3081A Differential Mobility Analyzer), Cloud Condensation Nuclei counter (Droplet Measurement Technologies CCN Counter), micro pulse lidar (Droplet Measurement Technologies Micro Pulse LiDAR (miniMPL)), and one of the Davis Rotating Uniform size-cut Monitors (DRUM; DRUMAir 4-DRUM). Before sampling at each location, the latitude and longitude were recorded using the GPS on the phone application “My Altitude”. Each DRUM sampler was operated at a flow rate of 23 LPM. Each DRUM has four stages where the aerodynamic diameter size cuts are as follows: stage 1 larger than 3 μm, stage 2 from 3 to 1.2 μm, stage 3 from 1.2 to 0.34 μm, and stage 4 from 0.34 to 0.15 μm. Pretreated aluminum foil was used as a substrate on all stages. At AMF1 and ANC sites, the DRUMs were operated on the shared aerosol inlet, with generous support of the DOE ARM site staff. These instruments rotated 24 mm per day and only contained aluminum foil substrates. Substrates were changed weekly and transported to Texas A&M for storage in -80C freezer until analysis. The DRUM onboard ROAM-V was operated at a faster rotation rate of 150 mm per day to clearly separate the multiple deployment locations for ROAM-V. For the ROAM-V DRUM, substrates were changed every deployment and transported to Texas A&M for storage in -80C freezer until analysis. At Texas A&M, ice nucleation experiments were conducted to measure the ice nucleation temperature of the ambient aerosol samples collected from the three DRUMs using our previously established procedures (Alsante et al., 2023; Fornea et al., 2009; Matthews et al., 2023). For ice nucleation, only samples collected on stage 3 were analyzed, given that these are the most relevant size (1.2 to 0.34 μm diameter) for potential ice nucleating particles. For the AMF1 and ANC sites, we cut and analyzed 2 mm (2-hour) samples. We analyzed the time periods of the AMF1 site instrument when the ROAM-V was deployed. A 72-hour period from July 11th at 23:49 through July 15th at 1:49 was analyzed from the ANC site instrument. For the ROAM-V instrument, we separated the daily samples by site location. Between 1- and 6-hour independent samples were analyzed at each location. We also cut the ROAM-V samples in half to allow for compositional analysis of the aerosol on the other half of the substrate. All viable samples from the ROAM-V were analyzed. Analysis was done using a custom-built ice nucleation apparatus, recently updated to include an array of 16 individual samples (Matthews et al., 2023). On our experimental setup, we used 100 μL of Ultra-High-Performance Liquid Chromatography (UHPLC) water (Sigma Aldrich, >99.9% purity) to wash off the aerosol from the DRUM substrate. Then, we micropipetted 2 μL droplet samples into each of the 16 wells of the array, using hydrophobically coated microscope slides. Experiments would cycle 28 times from 10 C to -40C over a 20-hour period. During analysis of the TRACER samples, nine experiments were conducted with UHPLC water process blanks that followed an identical preparation procedure. The average freezing temperature and standard deviation for these process blanks is -27.7±2.4 C. This data was collected for ARM Field Campaign AFC07023 and supported by DOE ASR grant DE-SC0021047. For any further questions, please feel free to contact the instrument PI, Sarah D. Brooks, sbrooks@tamu.edu. Alsante, A. N., Thornton, D. C., & Brooks, S. D. (2023). Ice nucleation catalyzed by the photosynthesis enzyme RuBisCO and other abundant biomolecules. Communications Earth & Environment, 4(1), 51. Fornea, A. P., Brooks, S. D., Dooley, J. B., & Saha, A. (2009). Heterogeneous freezing of ice on atmospheric aerosols containing ash, soot, and soil. Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres, 114(D13). DOI:10.1029/2009JD011958 Matthews, B. H., Alsante, A. N., & Brooks, S. D. (2023). Pollen Emissions of Subpollen Particles and Ice Nucleating Particles. ACS Earth and Space Chemistry.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
NASA NTRS2014

CO2 Washout Testing Using Various Inlet Vent Configurations in the Mark-III Space Suit

Requirements for using a space suit during ground testing include providing adequate carbon dioxide (CO2) washout for the suited subject. Acute CO2 exposure can lead to symptoms including headache, dyspnea, lethargy and eventually unconsciousness or even death. Symptoms depend on several factors including inspired partial pressure of CO2 (ppCO2), duration of exposure, metabolic rate of the subject and physiological differences between subjects. Computational Fluid Dynamic (CFD) analysis has predicted that the configuration of the suit inlet vent has a significant effect on oronasal CO2 concentrations. The main objective of this test was to characterize inspired oronasal ppCO2 for a variety of inlet vent configurations in the Mark-III suit across a range of workload and flow rates. Data and trends observed during testing along with refined CFD models will be used to help design an inlet vent configuration for the Z-2 space suit. The testing methodology used in this test builds upon past CO2 washout testing performed on the Z-1 suit, Rear Entry I-Suit (REI) and the Enhanced Mobility Advanced Crew Escape Suit (EM-ACES). Three subjects performed two test sessions each in the Mark-III suit to allow for comparison between tests. Six different helmet inlet vent configurations were evaluated during each test session. Suit pressure was maintained at 4.3 psid. Suited test subjects walked on a treadmill to generate metabolic workloads of approximately 2000 and 3000 BTU/hr. Supply airflow rates of 6 and 4 actual cubic feet per minute (ACFM) were tested at each workload. Subjects wore an oronasal mask with an open port in front of the mouth and were allowed to breathe freely. Oronasal ppCO2 was monitored real-time via gas analyzers with sampling tubes connected to the oronasal mask. Metabolic rate was calculated from the total oxygen consumption and CO2 production measured by additional gas analyzers at the air outlet from the suit. Realtime metabolic rate measurements were used to adjust the treadmill workload to meet target metabolic rates. This paper provides detailed descriptions of the test hardware, methodology and results, as well as implications for future inlet vent designs and ground testing.

Korona, F. Adam↗
NASA NTRS2014

CO2 Washout Testing Using Various Inlet Vent Configurations in the Mark-III Space Suit

Requirements for using a space suit during ground testing include providing adequate carbon dioxide (CO2) washout for the suited subject. Acute CO2 exposure can lead to symptoms including headache, dyspnea, lethargy and eventually unconsciousness or even death. Symptoms depend on several factors including inspired partial pressure of CO2 (ppCO2), duration of exposure, metabolic rate of the subject and physiological differences between subjects. Computational Fluid Dynamic (CFD) analysis has predicted that the configuration of the suit inlet vent has a significant effect on oronasal CO2 concentrations. The main objective of this test was to characterize inspired oronasal ppCO2 for a variety of inlet vent configurations in the Mark-III suit across a range of workload and flow rates. Data and trends observed during testing along with refined CFD models will be used to help design an inlet vent configuration for the Z-2 space suit. The testing methodology used in this test builds upon past CO2 washout testing performed on the Z-1 suit, Rear Entry I-Suit (REI) and the Enhanced Mobility Advanced Crew Escape Suit (EM-ACES). Three subjects performed two test sessions each in the Mark-III suit to allow for comparison between tests. Six different helmet inlet vent configurations were evaluated during each test session. Suit pressure was maintained at 4.3 psid. Suited test subjects walked on a treadmill to generate metabolic workloads of approximately 2000 and 3000 BTU/hr. Supply airflow rates of 6 and 4 actual cubic feet per minute (ACFM) were tested at each workload. Subjects wore an oronasal mask with an open port in front of the mouth and were allowed to breathe freely. Oronasal ppCO2 was monitored real-time via gas analyzers with sampling tubes connected to the oronasal mask. Metabolic rate was calculated from the total oxygen consumption and CO2 production measured by additional gas analyzers at the air outlet from the suit. Real-time metabolic rate measurements were used to adjust the treadmill workload to meet target metabolic rates. This paper provides detailed descriptions of the test hardware, methodology and results, as well as implications for future inlet vent designs and ground testing.

Korona, F. Adam↗
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 NTRSDate not supplied

Designing for Advanced Aerial Mobility: Human-Autonomy Teaming and In-Time System-Wide Safety Assurance

The continued growth of aviation shall require new innovative technologies and operational concepts to meet the ever-increasing demands on air transportation. The NASA Advanced Air Mobility (AAM) project focuses on emerging aviation markets, such as Urban Air Mobility (UAM). UAM is defined as “...a safe and efficient system for air passenger and cargo transportation within an urban area. It is inclusive of small package delivery and other urban unmanned aerial system services and supports a mix of onboard/ground-piloted and increasingly autonomous operations” ([1]). The AAM project emphasizes technology development and validating system-level concepts and solutions in coordination with other NASA Aeronautics Research Mission Directorate (ARMD) projects to enable UAM metro- and micro-plex vertiport and airspace concepts of operations. The NASA AAM research portfolio includes the concepts of Remote Supervisor-in-Command (RSC) and Fleet and Airspace Manager (FAM) as possible human roles for consumer fleet providers. NASA research in RSC is focused on development of guidelines and standards for remote pilots/operators passively and actively controlling a large fleet of autonomous aircraft. For FAM, flight and ground system concepts and technologies to enable high density homogeneous operations at increased scale from vertiport(s), and coordination with other humans in the systems (e.g., UAM urban airspace manager, Air Traffic Control) are key research areas. The envisioned UAM operations are posited to require autonomous systems to enable functions ranging from fleet and resource management to vehicle control. Although automation has become increasingly sophisticated and ubiquitous in civil aviation, autonomy represents a significant evolution in automation, which has generally been limited in functional scope and capability. As autonomy takes on increasing responsibilities, humans and machines will be required to work together in new and different ways [2], rather than traditional design approaches focused on how machines (i.e., autonomy) can do the work of people. The emerging field of human-autonomy teaming (HAT) represents a comprehensive and prioritized research-driven approach to enable the success of future emerging aviation market applications through capabilities and principles that facilitate humans and machine working and thinking better together. The NASA Transformational Tools and Technologies (TTT) Autonomous System (AS) Sub-project was created to assist with the transition into higher levels of autonomy to enable new modes of air transportation, such as UAM. TTT-AS has identified HAT as a key research need to enable UAM while maintaining today’s ultra-safe aviation system safety levels. The latter challenge has been taken up by the NASA System-Wide Safety (SWS) Project, which recognizes that aviation safety, as it evolves, shall require new ways of thinking about safety to include integration of a wide-range of existing and new safety systems and practices, enhanced tools and technologies, increased access to data and data fusion, improved data analysis capabilities, enhanced in-time risk monitoring and detection, hazard prioritization and mitigation, safety assurance decision-support, and in-time integrated system analytics [3].The operational concept of UAM represents a variety of work that has been termed, “work-as-imagined” to characterize the idea that how people think that work is done and how work is actually done are often not the same [4]. To ensure design success and system safety, looking at “work-as-done” provides a comparative approach toward UAM concept and technology design through examination of corresponding analogs found today in aviation (e.g., on-demand operations) and other transportation domains (e.g., port operations). The paper shall discuss various alternative applications with specific focus on airline operation center (AOC) operations, and unmanned aerial system (UAS) command-and-control to inform scaled-versions of FAM and RSC, respectively, and with consideration of the national airspace system contextual environment. The tenets and principles of the HAT field and current NASA research efforts under the TTT-AS sub-project shall also be described. Finally, the SWS sub-project efforts to develop In-Time System-Wide Safety Assurance (ISSA) and In-Time Safety Management Systems (IASMS) are discussed in terms of how “in-time” safety assurance may be conceptualized for the on-demand mobility air taxi “work-as-imagined” operational concept [5]. As part of this effort, concepts from the emerging field of resilience engineering, are being studied. Traditional approaches to aviation safety have focused on what can go wrong and how to prevent it. Another approach to thinking about system safety should reflect not only “avoiding things that go wrong” (protective safety) but also “ensuring that things go right” (productive safety), that enables a system to exhibit the resilient performance [6] necessary for the success of the future aviation system emerging concepts of operations. The paper shall describe efforts focused on how productive safety and resilience may enable a more complete approach to system safety thinking and design of ISSA and IASMS for UAM. Future directions and research needs shall also be discussed.

resilience↗