SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Standard Capsule”

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.

52 records · Page 3

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

NASA NTRS2013

Benefits, Consequences, and Uncertainties of Conventional (Exercise) Countermeasure Approaches

This presentation will review the pros, cons, and uncertainties of using exercise countermeasures in hypothetical long duration exploration missions. The use of artificial gravity and exercise will be briefly discussed. One benefit to continued use of exercise is related to our extensive experience with spaceflight exercise hardware and programming. Exercise has been a part of each space mission dating back to the 1960's when simple isometric and bungee exercises were performed in the Gemini capsule. Over the next 50 years, exercise hardware improved cumulating in today's ISS suite of exercise equipment: Cycle Ergometer with Vibration Isolation and Stabilization System (CEVIS), Treadmill (T2) and Advanced Resistive Exercise Device (ARED). Today's exercise equipment is the most robust ever to be flown in space and allows the variety and intensity of exercise that might reasonably be expected to maintain muscle mass and function, bone density and cardiovascular fitness. A second benefit is related to the large body of research literature on exercise training. There is a considerable body of supporting research literature including >40,000 peer reviewed research articles on exercise training in humans. A third benefit of exercise is its effectiveness. With the addition of T2 and ARED to our ISS exercise suite, crew member outcomes on standard medical tests have improved. Additionally exercise has other positive side effects such as stress relief, possible improvement of immune function, improved sleep, etc. Exercise is not without its consequences. The major cons to performance of in‐flight exercise are the time and equipment required. Currently crew are scheduled 2.5 hrs/day for exercise and there is considerable cost to develop, fly and maintain exercise hardware. While no major injuries have been reported on ISS, there is always some risk of injury with any form of exercise There are several uncertainties going forward; these relate mostly to the development of small compact robust effective exercise devices for the next generation of space vehicles. It is becoming increasingly apparent that high intensity exercise is required for maintenance of fitness and functional capability and so future hardware will need to be developed, tested and implemented that allow for a wide variety of exercise, at high intensity while likely involving low mass, volume and power. There are many unanswered issues related to the minimum number and type of exercise devices required for exploration, optimizing exercise prescriptions for these devices, whether a treadmill is absolutely required, and even whether any single countermeasure can adequately protect muscle, bone, cardiovascular and sensorimotor function.

Ploutz-Snyder, Lori↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

OSIRIS-REx Screening Experience & Lessons Learned

On September 24, 2023, the NASA OSIRIS-REx spacecraft returned a sample of asteroid Bennu, approaching on a hyperbolic impact trajectory relative to Earth. At approximately 108,000 km altitude and four hours prior to hitting the top of the atmosphere, the Sample Return Capsule (SRC) separated from the spacecraft bus, targeting the Utah Test and Training Range. Twenty minutes later, the bus performed a large divert maneuver to fly by at a perigee altitude of ~780 km. Given the immense scientific value of the sample, substantial efforts were undertaken by NASA CARA and the OSIRIS-REx mission to ensure safe passage of the objects from GEO through LEO. This presentation provides an overview of collision avoidance maneuver (CAM) options, results of screenings, coordination with DoD for contingency observations, and lessons learned for screening future Earth flyby and entry trajectories. Two particular challenges included screening two objects using a much larger than normal 250 km spherical monitor volume and decision planning for a single CAM while the SRC was still attached that would alter both trajectories. The larger, non-standard screening volume resulted in custom procedures that CARA personnel had to run manually for each screening, and the initial long propagation times while the objects were more than a week out required significant computing resources. With a single CAM opportunity at 13 hours out, the decision to execute a maneuver had to consider the risk to both objects, where one could imagine a situation where the maneuver would clear a high-risk conjunction for one object and introduce one for the other – begging the question of relative risk posture between the SRC and bus. These among other unique aspects of Earth flyby and entry missions led to novel planning and implementation procedures to support future missions of this type.

Dolan E. Highsmith↗

NASA NTRS2005

An Approximate Ablative Thermal Protection System Sizing Tool for Entry System Design

A computer tool to perform entry vehicle ablative thermal protection systems sizing has been developed. Two options for calculating the thermal response are incorporated into the tool. One, an industry-standard, high-fidelity ablation and thermal response program was integrated into the tool, making use of simulated trajectory data to calculate its boundary conditions at the ablating surface. Second, an approximate method that uses heat of ablation data to estimate heat shield recession during entry has been coupled to a one-dimensional finite-difference calculation that calculates the in-depth thermal response. The in-depth solution accounts for material decomposition, but does not account for pyrolysis gas energy absorption through the material. Engineering correlations are used to estimate stagnation point convective and radiative heating as a function of time. The sizing tool calculates recovery enthalpy, wall enthalpy, surface pressure, and heat transfer coefficient. Verification of this tool is performed by comparison to past thermal protection system sizings for the Mars Pathfinder and Stardust entry systems and calculations are performed for an Apollo capsule entering the atmosphere at lunar and Mars return speeds.

Dec, John A.↗

NASA NTRS2006

An Approximate Ablative Thermal Protection System Sizing Tool for Entry System Design

Dec, John A.↗

NASA NTRS2000

Stardust Navigation Covariance Analysis

The Stardust spacecraft was launched on February 7, 1999 aboard a Boeing Delta-II rocket. Mission participants include the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), the Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL), Lockheed Martin Astronautics (LMA) and the University of Washington. The primary objective of the mission is to collect in-situ samples of the coma of comet Wild-2 and return those samples to the Earth for analysis. Mission design and operational navigation for Stardust is performed by the Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL). This paper will describe the extensive JPL effort in support of the Stardust pre-launch analysis of the orbit determination component of the mission covariance study. A description of the mission and it's trajectory will be provided first, followed by a discussion of the covariance procedure and models. Predicted accuracy's will be examined as they relate to navigation delivery requirements for specific critical events during the mission. Stardust was launched into a heliocentric trajectory in early 1999. It will perform an Earth Gravity Assist (EGA) on January 15, 2001 to acquire an orbit for the eventual rendezvous with comet Wild-2. The spacecraft will fly through the coma (atmosphere) on the dayside of Wild-2 on January 2, 2004. At that time samples will be obtained using an aerogel collector. After the comet encounter Stardust will return to Earth when the Sample Return Capsule (SRC) will separate and land at the Utah Test Site (UTTR) on January 15, 2006. The spacecraft will however be deflected off into a heliocentric orbit. The mission is divided into three phases for the covariance analysis. They are 1) Launch to EGA, 2) EGA to Wild-2 encounter and 3) Wild-2 encounter to Earth reentry. Orbit determination assumptions for each phase are provided. These include estimated and consider parameters and their associated a-priori uncertainties. Major perturbations to the trajectory include 19 deterministic and statistical maneuvers planned for the mission. The spacecraft is three axis stabilized and has unbalanced thrusters for attitude control. Accelerations due to the attitude control system are treated stochastically. The tracking scenario for the study is patterned after the actual schedule employed during the different phases of the mission. Conventional X-band two-way Doppler and SRA range data was simulated and the standard accuracy for these data types was assumed throughout most of the mission. However, a deweighting scheme was used for the Doppler data during times of low Sun-Earth-Probe angles, especially in the case of the DSM. Optical data is assumed to be available starting at 50 days prior to the comet encounter. The optical data will be used to improve the ephemeris of Wild-2, which is considered crucial to properly target the comet flyby. Results of the covariance analysis are presented for all mission phases. Navigation capability will be discussed in terms of the uncertainty in the encounter B-Plane (B.R and B.T) and linearized time of flight. Delivery errors based on the final maneuver prior to the comet encounter will be presented. The most stringent navigation requirement is for the Earth reentry. The uncertainty in the flight path angle must be less than 0.02 degree (orbit determination and maneuver performance) to assure successful recovery of the SRC. Results presented show that this requirement can be met.

Menon, Premkumar R.↗

NASA NTRS2017

New Development in NASA's Rodent Research Hardware for Conducting Long Duration Biomedical and Basic Research in Space

Animal models, particularly rodents, are the foundation of pre-clinical research to understand human diseases and evaluate new therapeutics, and play a key role in advancing biomedical discoveries both on Earth and in space. The National Research Councils Decadal survey emphasized the importance of expanding NASAs life sciences research to perform long duration, rodent experiments on the International Space Station (ISS). To accomplish this objective, flight hardware, operations, and science capabilities were developed at NASA Ames Research Center (ARC) to enhance science return for both commercial (CASIS) and government-sponsored rodent research. The Rodent Research program at NASA ARC has pioneered a new research capability on the International Space Station and has progressed toward translating research to the ISS utilizing commercial rockets, collaborating with academia and science industry, while training crewmembers to assist in performing research on orbit. Throughout phases of these missions, our practices, hardware and operations have evolved from tested to developed standards, and we are able to modify and customize our procedure and operations for mission specific requirements. The Rodent Research Habitat is capable of providing a living environment for animals on ISS according to standard animal welfare requirements. Using the cameras in the Habitat, the Rodent Research team has the ability to perform daily health checks on animals, and further analyze the collected videos for behavioral studies. A recent development of the Rodent Research hardware is inclusion of enrichment, to provide the animals the ability to rest and huddle. The Enrichment Hut is designed carefully for adult mice (up to 35 week old) within animal welfare, engineering, and operations constraints. The Hut is made out of the same stainless steel mesh as the cage interior, it has an ingress and an egress to allow animals move freely, and a hinge door to allow crewmembers remove the animals easily. The Rodent Research team has also developed Live Animal Return (LAR) capability, which will be implemented during Rodent Research-5 mission for the first time. The animals will be transported from the Habitat to a Transporter, which will return on the Dragon capsule and splashes down in the Pacific Ocean. Once SpaceX retrieves the Dragon, all powered payloads will be transferred to a SeaVan and transferred to the Long Beach pier. The NASA team then receives the transporter and delivers to a PI-designated laboratory within 120 mile radius of Long Beach. This is a significant improvement allowing researchers to examine animals within 72 hrs. of reentry or to conduct recovery experiments. Together, the hardware improvements and experience that the Rodent Research team has gained working with principal investigators and ISS crew to conduct complex experiments on orbit are expanding capabilities for long duration rodent research on the ISS to achieve both basic science and biomedical objectives.

ISS↗

NASA NTRS2014

Data Mining of Historical Human Data to Assess the Risk of Injury due to Dynamic Loads

The NASA Occupant Protection Group is charged with ensuring crewmembers are protected during all dynamic phases of spaceflight. Previous work with outside experts has led to the development of a definition of acceptable risk (DAR) for space capsule vehicles. The DAR defines allowable probability rates for various categories of injuries. An important question is how to validate these probabilities for a given vehicle. One approach is to impact test human volunteers under projected nominal landing loads. The main drawback is the large number of subject tests required to attain a reasonable level of confidence that the injury probability rates would meet those outlined in the DAR. An alternative is to mine existing databases containing human responses to impact. Testing an anthropomorphic test device (ATD) at the same human‐exposure levels could yield a range of ATD responses that would meet DAR. As one aspect of future vehicle validation, the ATD could be tested in the vehicle's seat and suit configuration at nominal landing loads and compared with the ATD responses supported by the human data set. This approach could reduce the number of human‐volunteer tests NASA would need to conduct to validate that a vehicle meets occupant protection standards. METHODS: The U.S. Air Force has recorded hundreds of human responses to frontal, lateral, and spinal impacts at many acceleration levels and pulse durations. All of this data are stored on the Collaborative Biomechanics Data Network (CBDN), which is maintained by the Wright Patterson Air Force Base (WPAFB). The test device for human occupant restraint (THOR) ATD was impact tested on WPAFB's horizontal impulse accelerator (HIA) matching human‐volunteer exposures on the HIA to 5 frontal and 3 spinal loading conditions. No human injuries occurred as a result of these impact conditions. Peak THOR response variables for neck axial tension and compression, and thoracic‐spine axial compression were collected. Maximal chest deflection was determined from motion capture video of the impact test. HIC‐ 15 and BRIC were calculated from head acceleration responses. Given the number of human subjects for each test condition a confidence interval of injury probability will be obtained. RESULTS: Results will be discussed in terms of injury‐risk probability estimates based on the human data set evaluated. Also, gaps in the data set will be identified. These gaps could be one of two types. One is areas where additional THOR testing would increase the comparable human data set, thereby improving confidence in the injury probability rate. The other is where additional human testing would assist in obtaining information on other acceleration levels or directions. DISCUSSION: The historical human data showed validity of the THOR ATD for supplemental testing. The historical human data are limited in scope, however. Further data are needed to characterize the effects of sex, age, anthropometry, and deconditioning due to spaceflight on risk of injury

Wells, Jesica↗

NASA NTRS2018

NASA's Space Launch System: Unprecedented Payload Capabilities

As NASA turns 60 and plans to transition the International Space Station (ISS) and other low-Earth orbit (LEO) activities to commercial enterprises, the Agency's human exploration program turns its focus to deep space. With missions planned to send astronauts back to the Moon and to construct a lunar orbiting Gateway for surface access as well as science experiments and technology demonstrations, NASA requires a vehicle with capabilities for launching more mass and volume than is currently commercially available. To that end, NASA and its private sector partners are building the Space Launch System (SLS) super heavy-lift launch vehicle, which will send the new Orion crew capsule, eventually with a complement of four astronauts, to cislunar space for the first time since the Apollo Program in the 1960s and 1970s. NASA Kennedy Space Center's (KSC's) Exploration Ground Systems (EGS) Program has upgraded and refurbished ground and launch facilities to process, assemble and launch NASA's new deep space exploration system, which is managed by the Exploration Systems Development (ESD) organization in the Human Exploration and Operations Mission Directorate (HEOMD). Offering an unmatched combination of power, payload capacity and departure energy, the evolvable SLS features the world's most proven propulsion system: solid rocket boosters and RS-25 main engines with a modified Delta Cryogenic Second Stage (DCSS) cryogenic upper stage. The initial SLS configuration, Block 1, will deliver at least 26 metric tons (t) to trans-lunar injection (TLI). The second variant, Block 1B, will deliver at least 34 t to TLI in its crew configuration and at least 40 t to TLI in its cargo configuration. The Block 1 cargo vehicle will fly with an industry-standard 5 m fairing while the Block 1B cargo configuration will accommodate 8 m-diameter fairings in varying lengths. The Block 2 vehicle will incorporate upgraded boosters and possibly larger fairings for launching Mars-class payloads to deep space. Although designed to enable human exploration of deep space, the vehicle also provides game-changing benefits for large science payloads and even harnesses excess capacity to provide small satellites with access to deep space. Three flights of the Block 1 vehicle are now planned; the first vehicle, being built for a test flight known as Exploration Mission-1 (EM-1), is nearing completion at NASA and contractor sites across the United States. In fact, hardware for the second mission has also been built. This paper will provide an overview of the SLS vehicle, with a focus on its payload accommodations and the missions enabled by the unprecedented payload volume and departure energy of SLS. This paper also describes the status of the manufacturing and integration for first flight and beyond.

Exploration Mission-1↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

The Containment Assurance Risk Framework of the Mars Sample Return Program

The Mars Sample Return campaign aims at bringing rock and atmospheric samples from Mars to Earth through a series of robotic missions. These missions would collect the samples being cached and deposited on Martian soil by the Perseverance rover, place them in a container, and launch them into Martian orbit for subsequent capture by an orbiter that would bring them back. Given there exists a non-zero probability that the samples contain biological material, precautions are being taken to design systems that would break the chain of contact between Mars and Earth. These include techniques such as sterilization of Martian particles, redundant containment vessels, and a robust reentry capsule capable of accurate landings without a parachute. Requirements exist that the probability of containment not assured of Martian-contaminated material into Earth’s biosphere be less than one in a million. To demonstrate compliance with this strict requirement, a statistical framework was developed to assess the likelihood of containment loss during each sample return phase and make a statement about the total combined mission probability of containment not assured. The work presented here describes this framework, which considers failure modes or fault conditions that can initiate failure sequences ultimately leading to containment not assured. Reliability estimates are generated from databases, design heritage, component specifications, or expert opinion in the form of probability density functions or point estimates and provided as inputs to the mathematical models that simulate the different failure sequences. The probabilistic outputs are then combined following the logic of several fault trees to compute the ultimate probability of containment not assured. Given the multidisciplinary nature of the problem and the different types of mathematical models used, the statistical tools needed for analysis are required to be computationally efficient. While standard Monte Carlo approaches are used for fast models, a multi-fidelity approach to rare event probabilities is proposed for expensive models. In this paradigm, inexpensive low-fidelity models are developed for computational acceleration purposes while the expensive high-fidelity model is kept in the loop to retain accuracy in the results. This work presents an example of end-to-end application of this framework highlighting the computational benefits of a multi-fidelity approach.

Giuseppe Cataldo↗

NASA NTRS2012

A Geometric Analysis to Protect Manned Assets from Newly Launched Objects - COLA Gap Analysis

A safety risk was identified for the International Space Station (ISS) by The Aerospace Corporation following the launch of GPS IIR-20 (March 24, 2009), when the spent upper stage of the launch vehicle unexpectedly crossed inside the ISS notification box shortly after launch. This event highlighted a 56-hour vulnerability period following the end of the launch Collision Avoidance (COLA) process where the ISS would be unable to react to a conjunction with a newly launched object. Current launch COLA processes screen each launched object across the launch window to determine if an object's nominal trajectory is predicted to pass within 200 km of the ISS (or any other manned/mannable object), resulting in a launch time closure. These launch COLA screens are performed from launch through separation plus I 00 minutes. Once the objects are in orbit, they are cataloged and evaluated as part of routine on-orbit conjunction assessment processes. However, as the GPS IIR-20 scenario illustrated, there is a vulnerability period in the time line between the end of launch COLA coverage and the beginning of standard on-orbit COLA assessment activities. The gap between existing launch and on-orbit COLA processes is driven by the time it takes to track and catalog a launched object, identify a conjunction, and plan and execute a collision avoidance maneuver. For the ISS, the total time required to accomplish an of these steps is 56 hours. To protect human lives, NASA/JSC has requested that an US launches take additional steps to protect the ISS during this "COLA gap" period. The uncertainty in the state of a spent upper stage can be quite large after all bums are complete and all remaining propellants are expelled to safe the stage. Simply extending the launch COLA process an additional 56 hours is not a viable option as the 3-sigma position uncertainty will far exceed the 200 km miss-distance criterion. Additionally, performing a probability of collision (Pc) analysis over this period is also not practical due to the limiting effects of these large orbit state uncertainties. An estimated upper bound for Pc for a typical spent upper stage if nominally aligned for a direct broadside collision with the ISS is only on the order of 10-6. For a smaller manned object such as a Soyuz capsule, the risk level decreases to an order of 10'8 . In comparison, the Air Force Range policy (AFI 91-217) for launch COLAs would only eliminate launch opportunities when conjunctions with objects exceed a Pc of 10'5 This paper demonstrates a conservative geometry-based methodology that may be used to determine if launch opportunities pose a threat to the ISS during the COLA gap period. The NASA Launch Services Program at Kennedy Space Center has developed this COLA gap analysis method and employed it fQr three NASA missions to identify potential ISS conjunctions and corresponding launch window closures during the 56-hour at-risk period. In the analysis, for each launch opportunity, the nominal trajectory of the spent upper stage and the orbit state of the ISS are propagated over the 56 hour period. Each time the upper stage crosses the orbit plane of the ISS, the relative radial and argument of latitude separations are calculated. A window cutout is identified if these separation differences fall within a mission-specific violation box, which is determined from the evaluation of a Monte Carlo dispersions analysis that quantifies the potential variation in the upper stage radial and argument of latitude differences. This paper details the results of these analyses and their impacts to each mission.

Hametz, Mark E.↗

NASA NTRS2014

Mars Sample Return Using Commercial Capabilities: Mission Architecture Overview

Mars Sample Return (MSR) is the highest priority science mission for the next decade as recommended by the recent Decadal Survey of Planetary Science. This paper presents an overview of a feasibility study for an MSR mission. The objective of the study was to determine whether emerging commercial capabilities can be used to reduce the number of mission systems and launches required to return the samples, with the goal of reducing mission cost. We report the feasibility of a complete and closed MSR mission design using the following scenario that covers three synodic launch opportunities, beginning with the 2022 opportunity: A Falcon Heavy injects a SpaceX Red Dragon capsule and trunk onto a Trans Mars Injection (TMI) trajectory. The capsule is modified to carry all the hardware needed to return samples collected on Mars including a Mars Ascent Vehicle (MAV), an Earth Return Vehicle (ERV), and hardware to transfer a sample collected in a previously landed rover mission to the ERV. The Red Dragon descends to land on the surface of Mars using Super Sonic Retro Propulsion (SSRP). After previously collected samples are transferred to the ERV, the single-stage MAV launches the ERV from the surface of Mars. The MAV uses a storable liquid bi-propellant propulsion system to deliver the ERV to a Mars phasing orbit. After a brief phasing period, the ERV, which also uses a storable bi-propellant system, performs a Trans Earth Injection (TEI) burn. Upon arrival at Earth, the ERV performs Earth and lunar swing-bys and is placed into a lunar trailing circular orbit - an Earth orbit, at lunar distance. A later mission, using Dragon and launched by a Falcon Heavy, performs a rendezvous with the ERV in the lunar trailing orbit, retrieves the sample container and breaks the chain of contact with Mars by transferring the sample into a sterile and secure container. With the sample contained, the retrieving spacecraft makes a controlled Earth re-entry preventing any unintended release of pristine martian materials into the Earth's biosphere. The analysis methods employed standard and specialized aerospace engineering tools. Mission system elements were analyzed with either direct techniques or by using parametric mass estimating relationships (MERs). The architecture was iterated until overall mission convergence was achieved on at least one path. Subsystems analyzed in this study include support structures, power system, nose fairing, thermal insulation, actuation devices, MAV exhaust venting, and GN&C. Best practice application of loads, mass growth contingencies, and resource margins were used. For Falcon Heavy capabilities and Dragon subsystems we utilized publically available data from SpaceX, published analyses from other sources, as well as our own engineering and aerodynamic estimates. Earth Launch mass is under 11 mt, which is within the estimated capability of a Falcon Heavy, with margin. Total entry masses between 7 and 10 mt were considered with closure occurring between 9 and 10 mt. Propellant mass fractions for each major phase of the EDL - Entry, Terminal Descent, and Hazard Avoidance - have been derived. An assessment of the effect of the entry conditions on the thermal protection system (TPS), currently in use for Dragon missions, shows no significant stressors. A useful payload mass of 2.0 mt is provided and includes mass growth allowances for the MAV, the ERV, and mission unique equipment. We also report options for the MAV and ERV, including propulsion systems, crewed versus robotic retrieval mission, as well as direct Earth entry. International planetary protection policies as well as verifiable means of compliance will have a large impact on any MSR mission design. We identify areas within our architecture where such impacts occur. We also describe preliminary compliance measures that will be the subject of future work. This work shows that emerging commercial capabilities as well as new methodologies can be used to efficiently support an important planetary science objective. The work also has applications for human exploration missions that use propulsive EDL techniques

Red Dragon↗

NASA NTRS2020

Lunar Transient Accelerations White Paper

Recently, the United States announced a plan to return astronauts to the moon by 2024 [8]. Lunar landing (and subsequent Mars landing) architecture was not considered when the current NASA standards and vehicle design requirements for crew injury risk were developed. Therefore a gap exists in protecting the crew in planetary landing scenarios. One of the interesting aspects of this design reference mission (DRM)is the consideration of having the crew stand during dynamic phases of flight. Although this approach was contemplated for the Apollo Lunar Module, current NASA standards do not address design solutions that allow the crew to stand. Currently, NASA uses several tools and associated limits to mitigate crew injury because of dynamic loads. Some of these tools are the Brinkley Dynamic Response Criterion (BDRC) model and Hybrid III Anthropomorphic Test Devices (ATDs) [10]; and these have several limitations for assessing spaceflight loading environments, as well as specific underlying assumptions that may not be applicable in planetary landing vehicles. The BDRC is a simple lumped mass parameter model developed by the U.S. military, and has been used primarily to evaluate injury risk associated with aircraft ejection systems. The model evaluates seat accelerations in each axis to determine injury risk. Because the model treats the human-seat-restraint system as a single system, it is contingent on a restraint system and seat with similar characteristics of the original test data underlying the model. In particular, the model requires a rigid seat with a minimum natural frequency of 15Hz, minimal seat pan padding, side supports, and multipoint harness. The BDRC model uses undamped natural frequency and damping coefficients based on these requirements and any deviations may render the model injury predictions void. In lunar landing, one expects that a minimal or even no seat with minimal restraints will be employed. In this case, the original model parameters are likely to not be applicable. For capsule-based spacecraft returning crew to Earth, the Hybrid III ATD in various sizes also is used to supplement the BDRC. This analytical tool was added to address limitations in the BDRC related to spacecraft landings while wearing a pressure garment and helmet. Although the Hybrid III ATD has additional measurement capability; head, neck,and lumbar spine responses were the only metrics included because of the limitations imposed by the model.Lunar landing acceleration limits must assume the crew is standing during landing, an orientation for which we have limited data.Although the Apollo missions did employ a standing orientation for the crew, much of the data is lost. Therefore data from othersources havebeen examined to inform lunar landing acceleration limits.

Jeffrey T Somers↗

NASA NTRS2018

Thermal Protection Systems Technology Transfer from Apollo and Space Shuttle to the Orion Program

This paper describes how the Orion program is utilizing the Thermal Protection System (TPS) experience from the Apollo and Space Shuttle programs to reduce program risk and improve affordability to meet NASA's future manned exploration missions. The Orion program successfully completed the Exploration Flight Test (EFT-1) mission in 2014 and is currently assembling, integrating, and testing the next spacecraft for the Exploration Mission (EM-1) to meet the flight test objectives of an unmanned orbital mission to the moon and return to earth in 2019. The Orion spacecraft production operations are located in the Neil Armstrong Operations and Checkout (O&C) facility at the Kennedy Space Center (KSC) providing an affordable and seamless delivery approach of vehicles directly to the launch site eliminating spacecraft transportation and additional checkout testing. Innovative vehicle design, manufacturing and test operations approaches are maturing and evolving with each Orion vehicle build to support the challenging NASA exploration mission requirements beyond Low Earth Orbit (LEO) while reducing program cost and schedule impacts. An example of Orion's evolution is the incorporation of an improved heat shield design, assembly and testing approach to meet the higher re-entry velocities for a lunar return for the EM-1 mission. The EFT- 1 heat shield was based on the Apollo heat shield manufacturing processes and was assembled at a supplier location and then transported to KSC for final integration. The EM-1 heat shield is now manufactured, assembled, tested, and installed into the spacecraft at the O&C facility reducing program cost and production schedules. The transition of the Space Shuttle TPS capabilities has enabled Orion to provide a human rated capsule design using proven materials and processes established over years of orbiter re-entry missions. The Orion Crew Module (CM) TPS configuration is derived from the Apollo CM approach utilizing improved materials and processes developed from the Space Shuttle program. The Orion EFT-1 heat shield utilized the Avcoat ablative material from Apollo which was injected into a honeycomb substrate and has been updated for EM-1 incorporating a block configuration bonded to a composite shell structure. This approach utilizes the proven Avcoat material for the heat shield ablator and is utilizing derived bonding and inspection methods and techniques from the Space Shuttle tile experience. The Orion back shell TPS configuration is based on Space Shuttle tile designs using proven tile materials and coatings. The Orion forward bay cover utilizes the high temperature tiles similar to the back shell tiles and low temperature blankets derived from the Space Shuttle program reducing weight impacts. Space Shuttle Multi-Layer Insulation (MLI) is installed in the Orion capsule to control the interior temperature environment providing a light weight design. These TPS design approaches have performed successfully on the Orion first flight test on EFT-1 and are incorporated in the configuration for the next flight test for EM-1. Completion of these two flight tests will certify the TPS for the Orion program for human rated exploration missions and has reduced the development cost to the Orion program. In addition to transitioning the Space Shuttle TPS design configurations to Orion, the supporting manufacturing infrastructure, manufacturing processes, and inspection methods are also incorporated into the Orion assembly operations at KSC. This has avoided significant startup schedule and costs impacts of new capabilities and development of support operations necessary to fabricate, install, inspect, and validate the TPS installations for the Orion spacecraft. The Thermal Protection System Facility (TPSF) which supported the Space Shuttle program provides the heat shield Avcoat blocks and the back shell AETB-8 tiles for Orion program. Extending the existing Space Shuttle TPS operations at KSC provides onsite support to the Orion spacecraft assembly operations. A significant benefit to the Orion program is the transition of the Space Shuttle technician work force at KSC. This highly skilled workforce was able to transition to the Orion program and immediately support the TPS installation operations. They brought with them the human rated manufacturing and assembly operations culture that was critical to the Space Shuttle success avoiding the retraining cost and schedule impacts of a new workforce to Orion. The technician skills certification program from the Space Shuttle was found to be compatible with the Lockheed Martin technician certification programs enabling a seamless training process utilizing process similarity avoiding the cost of retraining the work force to Orion standards. The existing workforce is certificated for multiple processes enabling reassignment of technicians to other tasks in the Orion AI&P operations reducing the overall touch labor manpower requirements. Additional benefits of using the Space Shuttle workforce is the incorporation of the lessons learned from Space Shuttle processes to improve the Orion TPS processes. This has resulted in a continuous evolution of TPS processes to improve the producibility and reduce the program cost for the TPS for the Orion program. Transitioning the Apollo and Space Shuttle TPS designs, processes, and technician workforce has been instrumental in enabling Orion to successfully meet the program challenges for NASA's exploration missions of the future.

Stewart, Michael↗

NASA NTRS2008

Visualization of Flowfield Modification by RCS Jets on a Capsule Entry Vehicle

Nitric oxide planar laser-induced fluorescence (NO PLIF) has been used to visualize the flow on the aft-body of an entry capsule having an activated RCS jet in NASA Langley Research Center's 31-Inch Mach 10 wind tunnel facility. A capsule shape representative of the Apollo command module was tested. These tests were performed to demonstrate the ability of the PLIF method to visualize RCS jet flow while providing some preliminary input to NASA's Orion Vehicle design team. Two different RCS nozzle designs - conical and contoured - were tested. The conical and contoured nozzles had area ratios of 13.4 and 22.5 respectively. The conical nozzle had a half-angle of 10 . Low- and high-Reynolds number cases were investigated by changing the tunnel stagnation pressure from 350 psi to 1300 psi, resulting in freestream Reynolds numbers of 0.56 and 1.8 million per foot respectively. For both of these cases, three different jet plenum pressures were tested (nominally 56, 250 and 500 psi). A single angle-of-attack was investigated (24 degrees). NO PLIF uses an ultraviolet laser sheet to interrogate a slice in the flow containing seeded NO; this UV light excites fluorescence from the NO molecules which is detected by a high-speed digital camera. The system has spatial resolution of about 200 microns (2 pixel blurring) and has flow-stopping time resolution (approximately 1 microsecond). NO was seeded into the flow two different ways. First, the RCS jet fluid was seeded with approximately 1-5% NO, with the balance N2. This allowed observation of the shape, structure and trajectory of the RCS jets. Visualizations of both laminar and turbulent flow jet features were obtained. Visualizations were obtained with the tunnel operating at Mach 10 and also with the test section held at a constant pressure similar to the aftbody static pressure (0.04 psi) obtained during tunnel runs. These two conditions are called "tunnel on" and "tunnel off" respectively. Second, the forebody flow was seeded with a very low flowrate (<100 standard cubic centimeters per minute) of pure NO. This trace gas was entrained into and allowed visualization of the shear layer forming between the expansion fan on the shoulder of the model and the recirculating separated flow in the wake of the model. This shear layer was observed to be laminar in the absence of the RCS jet operation and turbulent above a certain RCS jet flowrate. Furthermore, the operation of the RCS jet is seen to push the shear layer out away from the model, with a higher jet pressures resulting in larger deflections. Figures show some data from this test, partially processed. In the final paper, these images will be processed and rendered on a three dimensional visualization of the test hardware for clearer visualization and interpretation of the flowfields.

Danehy, P. M.↗

NASA NTRS2015

Risky Business

During my internship I worked on two major projects, recommending improvements for the Center's Risk Management Workshop and helping with the strategic planning efforts for Safety and Mission Assurance (S&MA). The risk management improvements is the key project I worked on this semester through my internship, while the strategic planning is the secondary assignment. S&MA Business Office covers both aspects in its delegation, getting both spans some of the work done in the office. A risk is a future event with a negative consequence that has some probability of occurring. Safety and Mission Assurance identifies, analyzes, plans, and tracks risk. The directorate offers the Center a Risk Management Workshop, and part of the ongoing efforts of S&MA is to make continuous improvements to the RM Workshop. By using the Project Management Institute's (PMI) Standard for Risk Management, I performed a gap analysis to make improvements for our materials. I benchmarked the PMI's Risk Management Standard, compared our Risk Management Workshop materials to PMI's standard, and identified any gaps in our material. My major findings were presented to the Business Office of S&MA for a decision on whether or not to incorporate the improvements. These suggestions were made by attending JSC working group meetings, Health, Safety and Environment (HSE) panel reviews and various risk review meetings. The improvements provide better understanding of risk management processes and enhanced risk tracking knowledge and skills. Risk management is an integral part of any engineering discipline, getting exposed to this section of engineering will greatly help shape my career in the future. Johnson Space Center is a world leader in risk management processes; learning risk management here gives me a huge advantage over my peers, as well as understanding decision making in the context of risk management will help me to be a well-rounded engineer. Strategic planning is an area I had not previously studied. Helping with the strategic planning efforts in S&MA has taught me how organizations think and function as a whole. S&MA is adopting a balanced scorecard approach to strategic planning. As part of this planning method strategic themes, objectives, and initiatives are formed. I attended strategic theme team workshops that formed the strategy map for the directorate and gave shape to the plan. Also during these workshops the objectives were discussed and built. Learning the process for strategic planning has helped me better understand how organizations and businesses function, which also helps me to be a more effective employee. Other assignments I had during my internship included completing the Safety and Mission Assurance Technical Excellent Program (STEP) Level 1, as well as doing a two week rotation through the Space Exploration division in S&MA, specifically working with a thermal protection systems (TPS) engineer. While working there, I learned about the Orion capsule and the SpaceX Dragon cargo capsule. I attended meetings to prepare the engineers for the upcoming Critical Design Reviews for both capsules and reviewed test data. Learning risk management, strategic planning, and working in the Space Exploration division has taught me about many aspects of S&MA. My internship at NASA has given me new experiences and taught me numerous subjects that I would have otherwise not learned. This opportunity has expanded my educational horizons and is helping me to become a more useful engineer and employee.

Yarbrough, Katherine↗

NASA NTRS2007

Decontamination of Genesis Array Materials by UV Ozone Cleaning

Shortly after the NASA Genesis Mission sample return capsule returned to earth on September 8, 2004, the science team discovered that all nine ultra-pure semiconductor materials were contaminated with a thin molecular organic film approximately 0 to 100 angstroms thick. The organic contaminate layer, possibly a silicone, situated on the surface of the materials is speculated to have formed by condensation of organic matter from spacecraft off-gassing at the Lagrange 1 halo orbit during times of solar exposure. While the valuable solar wind atoms are safely secured directly below this organic contamination and/or native oxide layer in approximately the first 1000 angstroms of the ultra-pure material substrate, some analytical techniques that precisely measure solar wind elemental abundances require the removal of this organic contaminate. In 2005, Genesis science team laboratories began to develop various methods for removing the organic thin film without removing the precious material substrate that contained the solar wind atoms. Stephen Sestak and colleagues at Open University first experimented with ultraviolet radiation ozone (UV/O3) cleaning of several non-flight and flown Genesis silicon wafer fragments under a pure flowing oxygen environment. The UV/O3 technique was able to successfully remove organic contamination without etching into the bulk material substrate. At NASA Johnson Space Center Genesis Curation Laboratory, we have installed an UV/O3 cleaning devise in an ambient air environment to further experimentally test the removal of the organic contamination on Genesis wafer materials. Preliminary results from XPS analysis show that the UV/O3 cleaning instrument is a good non-destructive method for removing carbon contamination from flown Genesis array samples. However, spectroscopic ellipsometry results show little change in the thickness of the surface film. All experiments to date have shown UV/O3 cleaning method to be the best non-destructive method for removing organic contamination from the surface of the Genesis materials. The UV/O3 cleaning process can also clean carbon contamination to levels below non-flight standards. This can be seen by comparing sample 60260's carbon 10667 cps with non-flight Si carbon 21675 cps. Therefore, surface carbon contamination should not hinder the analysis of solar wind.

Calaway, Michael J.↗