Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “habitat”

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

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↗

Definition and Development of Habitation Readiness Levels (HRLs) for Planetary Surface Habitats

One could argue that NASA has never developed a true habitat for a planetary surface, with only the Lunar Module from the 1960's-era Apollo Program providing for a sparse 2 person, 3 day capability. An integral part of NASA's current National Vision for Space Exploration is missions back to the moon and eventually to Mars. One of the largest leaps i11 lunar surface exploration beyond the Apollo lunar missions will be the conduct of these extended duration human missions. These missions could range from 30 to 90 days in length initially and may eventually range up to 500 days in length. To enable these extended duration human missions, probably the single-most important lunar surface element is the Surface Habitat. The requirements that must be met by the Surface Habitat will go far beyond the safety, performance and operational requirements of the Lunar Module, and NASA needs to develop a basis for making intelligent, technically correct habitat design decisions. This paper will discuss the possibilities of the definition and development of a Habitation Readiness Level (HRL) scale that might be mapped to current Technology Readiness Levels (TRLs) for technology development. HRLs could help measure how well a particular technology thrust is advanced by a proposed planetary habitat concept. The readiness level would have to be measured differently than TRLs, and may include such milestones as habitat design performance under simulated mission operations and constraints (including relevant field testing), functional allocation demonstrations, crew interface evaluation and post-occupancy evaluation. With many concepts for planetary habitats proposed over the past 20 years, there are many strategic technical challenges facing designers of planetary habitats that will support NASA's exploration of the moon and Mars. The systematic assessment of a variety of planetary habitat options will be an important approach and will influence the associated requirements for human design, volumetrics, functionality, systems hardware and operations.

Connolly, Janis H.↗

Carolina Coastal Plain Ecological Forecasting: Utilizing NASA Earth Observations to Map Suitable Venus Flytrap Habitat in an Effort to Inform Conservation, Seed Banking, and Reintroduction in the Carolina Coastal Plain and Sandhills Regions

Although the carnivorous plant Venus flytrap (Dionaea muscipula) is recognized globally, its native range is restricted to a small portion of the North and South Carolina Coastal Plain and Sandhills. Within this limited range, Venus flytrap populations are threatened by habitat loss, fire suppression, and poaching. NASA DEVELOP partnered with the North Carolina Botanical Garden (NCBG), the University of North Carolina Herbarium (NCU), and the North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP) to support Venus flytrap conservation. The team developed models based on species presence data and environmental variables using the Software for Assisted Habitat Modeling (SAHM) to create a 2021 habitat suitability map for Venus flytrap. These models incorporated Earth observations collected by Landsat 8 Thermal Infrared Sensor (TIRS), Terra Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer (MODIS), Advanced Land Observation Satellite (ALOS) Phased Array type L-band Synthetic Aperture Radar (PALSAR), and Sentinel-2 Multispectral Instrument (MSI). To predict areas at high risk of development, the team produced a 2050 land-use change map using TerrSet Land Change Modeler. The team found potential areas of conflict between predicted habitat and forecasted future development. Many areas of suitable habitat were concentrated along the coast where development was likely to occur, placing populations there at risk of extirpation. Overlaying suitable habitat with forecasted land change also identified suitable habitats with minimal risk of development, which may serve as lasting Venus flytrap habitat. These results can inform the NCBG and NCNHP’s conservation decision-making, including targeted seed banking, reintroduction, and prioritization of enduring habitats for protection and management.

Monika Rock↗

NASA Centennial Challenge: Three Dimensional (3D) Printed Habitat, Phase 2

The NASA Centennial Challenges: 3D-Printed Habitat Challenge seeks to develop the fundamental technologies necessary to manufacture an off-world habitat using mission recycled materials and/or local indigenous materials. The vision is that autonomous habitat manufacturing machines will someday be deployed to the Moon or Mars to construct shelters for human habitation. NASA and Bradley University, are holding a new US$ 2.5 million competition to design and build a 3-D printed habitat for deep space exploration, including the agency's journey to Mars. The multi-phase 3-D Printed Habitat Challenge, part of NASA's Centennial Challenges program, is designed to advance the additive construction technology needed to create sustainable housing solutions for Earth and beyond. The first phase of the competition ran through Sept. 27, 2015. This phase, a design competition, called on participants to develop state-of-the-art architectural concepts that take advantage of the unique capabilities 3-D printing offers. The top 3 prizes with a prize purse of $40,000 were awarded at the 2015 World Maker Faire in New York. The second phase of the competition is called the Structural Member Competition and it is divided into three levels happening in the spring and summer of 2017. The Compression Test Competition (Level 1) focuses on the fabrication technologies needed to manufacture structural components from a combination of indigenous materials and recyclables, or indigenous materials alone. For Level 1, teams will develop 3D printable materials, build a 3D printing machine, and print two specimens: a truncated cone and a cylinder. The Level 2 Beam Member Competition is the second of three sub-competitions within the overall Structural Member Competition. For Level 2, teams will print a beam that will be tested. The Level 3 Head to Head Competition is the third of three sub-competitions within the overall Structural Member Competition. For Level 3, teams will develop 3D printable materials, use a 3D printing machine, and print three compression specimens of the elected material, three flexural specimens of the elected material, and one dome structure. Tests conducted on the specimens and the dome structure will determine Level 3 scores and awards. On Earth these same habitat manufacturing capabilities could be used to produce housing wherever affordable housing is needed and access to conventional building materials and skills is limited. Terrestrially, it is envisioned that local indigenous materials (dirt, clay, sand, etc.) could be combined with readily available recyclable materials and used to construct semi-permanent shelters against environmental elements for human habitation. The goal of the 3D-Printed Habitat Challenge is to foster the development of new technologies necessary to additively manufacture a habitat using local indigenous materials with, or without, recyclable materials. This paper will summarize the Level 2 results of this NASA Centennial Challenge competition and it will discuss related technology advancement.

3D printing↗

Integration of Advanced Structures and Materials Technologies for a Robust Lunar Habitat

NASA’s Artemis program plans to have a sustainable lunar base deployed on the Moon by 2028. The base calls for a foundation surface habitat that can support a crew of four members for a minimum mission duration of 28-days. The lack of a magnetic field and significant lunar atmosphere extends the lifetime of secondary radiation emitted from metallic structures, which is a health hazard for exposed astronauts. Integration of non-metallic structural materials into surface habitat design may alleviate some of these concerns. Additionally, it is favorable for the structure to be collapsible for transportation to optimize payload volume, mass efficiency, and monetary constraints. As a result, inflatable structures are being investigated due to their improved packing efficiency at launch, optimal mass-to-volume ratio, and large surface area that can efficiently disperse structural loads and heat. Currently, only two inflatable airlocks have been deployed in space. Thus, there is a significant need to advance technologies associated with inflatable structures to provide greater options for future missions, i.e., Artemis and beyond. This study focused on the inflatable lunar habitat applications of emerging NASA Langley Research Center (LaRC) technologies and their required development steps to become space qualified. The Bowling Habitat architecture was generated from 13 of these NASA LaRC technologies, five of which were deemed critical, five determined as enhancing technologies, and three were classified as transformational technologies for the Artemis program. To address the payload constraints, the study also considered a tentative timeline that aligned with the current Artemis schedule for transporting the Bowling Habitat to the Moon. Ultimately, the Bowling Habitat mainly addressed the structural needs of an inflatable lunar habitat, meaning that major areas pertaining to the life-style aspects of the habitat must be improved. Areas include, but are not limited to, hard connection points, the monitoring of human health, and extra radiation protection for solar proton events.

Inflatable Habitat↗

Grand Teton Ecological Forecasting: Assessing Forage Change and Winter Habitat Availability for Bighorn Sheep that Employ a High-Elevation Overwintering Strategy to Identify Areas for Intervention

Grand Teton National Park provides habitat for a small native population of approximately 125 bighorn sheep (Ovis canadensis). The reduction in population of this species is attributed to loss of low elevation habitat, changing local environmental and climatic conditions, and increased disturbance from backcountry recreation. In response to these changes, this population of sheep employs a unique high-elevation wintering strategy in which they amass large fat stores in the summer and expend as little energy as possible in the winter while foraging on high elevation wind-swept and snow-free areas. For this project, DEVELOP partnered with Grand Teton National Park and used NASA Earth observations including Landsat 8 Operational Land Imager (OLI), Landsat 7 Enhanced Thematic Mapper Plus (ETM+), Landsat 5 Thematic Mapper (TM), and Terra Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer (MODIS) snow cover data to assess habitat suitability. Landcover change analyzed between 1987 and 2020 indicated shifting trends in grass and forb cover and tree cover. These trends persisted in the 2031 prediction, with grass cover decreasing and tree cover increasing, which translates to a loss of overall favorable habitat for bighorn sheep. Snow cover analyzed between 2001 and 2020 indicated similar unfavorable trends for the sheep with a decrease in barren areas, important for winter foraging. Finally, habitat suitability was modeled for 2020 and predicted to 2031 to determine habitat gains and losses for this species across the landscape. Overall, the results predicted decreases in suitable habitat and indicated that while these sheep are highly adaptable, strategies to manage suitable bighorn habitat may need to be employed rapidly to effectively conserve this species.

Remote sensing↗

Vertical Translation System for the Common Habitat Architecture

The Common Habitat is a large, long-duration habitat that uses an SLS core stage Liquid Oxygen (LOX) tank as its primary structure. Measuring 8.4 meters in diameter and 15 meters in length, it is manufactured as a habitat and launched as such into space. It is intended for use on the Moon as part of a permanently occupied outpost, on Mars as part of an outpost that will be occupied for hundreds of days at a time, and in deep space as part of the Deep Space Exploration Vehicle where it will support crewed missions up to 1200 days in duration. A study of internal orientation and crew size resulted in a Common Habitat configuration sized for a crew of eight with a three-deck horizontal orientation. The Common Habitat Vertical Translation System provides a means for transporting crew and cargo between decks in a Common Habitat spacecraft in gravity levels varying from 0g to 1g. A crowdsourcing campaign was conducted through the GrabCAD platform to initially solicit ideas for restraints and mobility aids, including vertical translation. Four of the five top responses repeated ideas that would be incorporated into features of the Vertical Translation System. The first was a safety barrier (to prevent falls into the opening between decks) that could collapse to form a floor surface covering the opening when not in use. The second idea was a folding ladder that could be stowed in the ceiling when not in use. The third idea was an elevator platform that could traverse the ladder. Several key driving requirements were established for the Vertical Translation System: it may not penetrate into or through the lower deck; it must work on the Earth, Moon, Mars, and in microgravity; it must be easy to operate; it must enable translation of any item that can fit through the Common Habitat’s 40” x 60” hatches, inclusive of suited and unsuited crew with any degree of incapacitation and any equipment or cargo item; and it must include three component systems – deploying floor / safety barriers, a deployable ladder, and an elevator platform. Additional requirements were established for each of the component systems. The safety barriers must form a roughly 40-inch tall, complete wall enclosure on all four sides when deployed; it must include an easy to open gate that allows access to/from the ladder when deployed; and when retracted, the safety barrier must form a smooth, load-bearing floor that can be walked on, and wheeled objects can be rolled across in gravity, without being a trip hazard. The deployable ladder must be composed of multiple ladders that work together; it must stow in the ceiling when not in use; and it must not penetrate into the 40” x 60” vertical passage corridor. The elevator platform must work with the deployable ladder system; it must be able to bridge any gap in ladders between decks; it must stop at each deck flush with the deck surface; it must be capable of transporting an incapacitated crew member as a single rescuer operation; it must be capable of transporting a full-size subsystems pallet; it must function as an elevator for a crew member carrying large objects; it must have safety functions to prevent falls from the platform, or crew/cargo collisions with edges of hatch openings, or entanglement with ladder rungs/structure; it must stow when not in use; and it must autonomously both connect itself to the ladder and deploy itself to any deck where needed when called (e.g., a crew member on any deck can call for the platform and it must connect itself to the ladders without assistance and translate to the requestor’s deck). These requirements were developed into a system concept with the assistance of a NASA Pathways Intern who also added the requirement to size the design based on the use of commercial components, using existing motors and other mechanisms to ensure that the resulting system could be inexpensively produced. The Floor and Safety Barrier consists of four panels, two roughly 40 inches long and two roughly 60 inches long that can fold into the floor on top of each other when not in use. The uppermost panel is load bearing and acts as the floor surface. When deployed, they connect with each other to form a rigid barrier surrounding the vertical passageway. One of the panels contains a hinged gate that can be opened when deployed to allow for access to/from the passageway. The Deploying Ladder consists of two ladder segments, one mounted on the ceiling of the lower deck and the other mounted on the ceiling of the mid deck. A rotating mechanism is mounted on the ladder to allow it to rotate into a horizontal position against the ceiling for stowage, or down to a vertical position for use. A second rotating mechanism is built into the ladder, allowing the rungs to rotate. A toothed surface intended to work with the elevator platform covers the front of the ladder rails and the top and bottom of the rails are designed to be flush when aligned with another ladder segment. The elevator platform is essentially a motorized, self-propelled deck. It has a mechanism that holds it in contact with the ladder rails and drives itself against the toothed surface. This mechanism allows the elevator platform to ascend or descend the ladder. In order to stow the platform when not in use, a set of short ladder rails (without rungs) are mounted to the ceiling of the mid deck. When the mid deck ladder is stowed, it is flush with these rails and the platform can drive itself onto those short rails for stowage. An additional mechanism on the platform can pitch its deck surface 90 degrees, such that when the ladder is to be stowed, the platform can fold up against the ceiling. As a consequence of the ladder and elevator platform design, the opening between decks in the Common Habitat was enlarged to ensure that the elevator platform can accept a payload up to 40”x60” in dimension.

Human Centered Design↗

Eastern Indigo Snake (Drymarchon couperi) Shelter Site Use in Peninsular Florida and Implications for Habitat Conservation

Shelters are critical for many species as protection from predators and extreme temperatures. Successful conservation of reptiles requires understanding both shelter site requirements and availability. The Eastern Indigo Snake (EIS) is endemic to the southeastern United States and is federally listed. Recovery has focused on maximizing unfragmented landscapes, with less attention on fine-scale features such as shelter sites. In the northern EIS range, Gopher Tortoise (Gopherus polyphemus) burrows are used extensively for shelter. Although EIS in peninsular Florida often shelter in tortoise burrows, they also use other shelters where tortoise burrows are scarce or absent. Solely focusing EIS survey and management efforts where Gopher Tortoises are present may overlook occupied habitats and misallocate resources. We investigated the importance of different shelter sites in central Florida using data from radio-tracked EIS. We modeled the use of shelter categories as a function of sex, season, and habitat using Bayesian multinomial generalized linear models. Results showed that EIS in peninsular Florida used Gopher Tortoise burrows across all seasons and habitats. Tortoise burrow use was highest in xeric habitats and lowest in mesic habitats where burrows are most and least abundant, respectively. There was less variability in shelter site use in disturbed habitats and flatwoods. Cool season tortoise burrow use across sexes and habitats in our study was much lower than in southern Georgia. Our results indicate that EIS are less dependent on Gopher Tortoise burrows in peninsular Florida and that suitable habitats with few or no tortoise burrows could still provide conservation value for EIS.

Bayesian hierarchical modeling↗

Habitat model for the Florida Scrub Jay on John F. Kennedy Space Center

The Florida Scrub Jay is endemic to Florida. The John F. Kennedy Space Center (KSC) provides habitat for one of the three largest populations of the Florida Scrub Jay. This threatened bird occupies scrub, slash pine flatwoods, disturbed scrub, and coastal strand on KSC. Densities of Florida Scrub Jays were shown to vary with habitat characteristics but not necessarily with vegetation type. Relationships between Florida Scrub Jay densities and habitat characteristics were used to develop a habitat model to provide a tool to compare alternative sites for new facilities and to quantify environmental impacts. This model is being tested using long term demographic studies of colorbanded Florida Scrub Jays. Optimal habitat predicted by the model has greater than or equal to 50 percent of the shrub canopy comprised of scrub oaks, 20-50 percent open space or scrub oak vegetation within 100 m of a ruderal edge, less than or equal to 15 percent pine canopy cover, a shrub height of 120-170 cm, and is greater than or equal to 100 m from a forest. This document reviews life history, social behavior, food, foraging habitat, cover requirements, characteristics of habitat on KSC, and habitat preferences of the Florida Scrub Jay. Construction of the model and its limitations are discussed.

Breininger, David R.↗

Habitat Utilization Assessment - Building in Behaviors

Habitability, and the associated architectural and design attributes of an environment, is a powerful performance shaping factor. By identifying how inhabitants use an area, we can draw conclusions about what design or architectural attributes cause what behaviors and systematically design in desired human performance. We are analyzing how a crew uses a long duration habitat and work environment during a four-day underwater mission and identifying certain architectural and design attributes that are related to, and potential enablers of, certain crew behaviors. By identifying how inhabitants use the habitat, we can draw conclusions about what habitability attributes cause what behaviors and systematically design in desired human performance (applicable to NASA's Bioastronautics Human Behavior and Performance Critical Path Roadmap question 6.12). This assessment replicates a methodology reported in a chapter titled "Sociokinetic Analysis as a Tool for Optimization of Environmental Design" by C. Adams.' That study collected video imagery of certain areas of a closed habitat during a 91 day test and from that data calculated time spent in different volumes during the mission, and characterized the behaviors occurring in certain habitat volumes thus concluding various rules for design of such habitats. This study assesses the utilization of the Aquarius Habitat, an underwater station, which will support six Aquanauts for a fourteen-day mission during which the crew will perform specific scientific and engineering studies. Video is recorded for long uninterrupted periods of time during the mission and from that data the time spent in each area is calculated. In addition, qualitative and descriptive analysis of the types of behaviors in each area is performed with the purpose of identifying any behaviors that are not typical of a certain area. If a participant uses an area in a way different from expected, a subsequent analysis of the features of that area may result in conclusions of performance shaping factors. With the addition of this study, we can make comparisons between the two different habitats and begin drawing correlation judgments about design features and behavior. Ideally, this methodology should be repeated in additional Aquarius missions and other analog environments because the real information will come from comparisons between habitats.

Whitmore, Mihriban↗

Integrated Systems Health Management for Sustainable Habitats (Using Sustainability Base as a Testbed)

Habitation systems provide a safe place for astronauts to live and work in space and on planetary surfaces. They enable crews to live and work safely in deep space, and include integrated life support systems, radiation protection, fire safety, and systems to reduce logistics and the need for resupply missions. Innovative health management technologies are needed in order to increase the safety and mission-effectiveness for future space habitats on other planets, asteroids, or lunar surfaces. For example, off-nominal or failure conditions occurring in safety-critical life support systems may need to be addressed quickly by the habitat crew without extensive technical support from Earth due to communication delays. If the crew in the habitat must manage, plan and operate much of the mission themselves, operations support must be migrated from Earth to the habitat. Enabling monitoring, tracking, and management capabilities on-board the habitat and related EVA platforms for a small crew to use will require significant automation and decision support software.Traditional caution and warning systems are typically triggered by out-of-bounds sensor values, but can be enhanced by including machine learning and data mining techniques. These methods aim to reveal latent, unknown conditions while still retaining and improving the ability to provide highly accurate alerts for known issues. A few of these techniques will briefly described, along with performance targets for known faults and failures. Specific system health management capabilities required for habitat system elements (environmental control and life support systems, etc.) may include relevant subsystems such as water recycling systems, photovoltaic systems, electrical power systems, and environmental monitoring systems. Sustainability Base, the agency's flagship LEED-platinum certified green building acts as a living laboratory for testing advanced information and sustainable technologies that provides an opportunity to test novel machine learning and controls capabilities. In this talk, key features of Sustainability Base that make it relevant to deep space habitat technology and its use of these kinds of subsystems previously listed will be presented. The fact that all such systems require less power to support human occupancy can be used as a focal point to serve as a testbed for deep space habitats that will need to operate within finite energy budgets.

Systems Health Management↗

Metallic Vs Inflatable Primary Structure: A Comprehensive Trade for a Mars Transit Habitat

Large diameter inflatable habitat solutions are hypothesized to have an advantage over traditional metallic habitats of equal volume and functional requirements in terms of minimizing mass. A fair and comprehensive trade of metallic primary structure versus inflatable softgoods primary structure for a Mars Transit Habitat was conducted by The Boeing Company under the NASA Next Space Technologies for Exploration Partnerships-2 (NextSTEP-2)Appendix A contract in order to determine the minimum mass option from a system level. A Mars Transit Habitat is a major system mass driver because small increases in the mass can create large mass changes in the propulsive stage, adding complexity and cost to the mission. Three different vehicle configurations were traded using a fixed volume constraint and the same Ground Rules and Assumptions(GR&A)provided by NASA. The configurations were 1) 5.5 m diameter metallic habitat, 2) 7.0 m diameter metallic habitat, and 3) 7.63 m diameter inflatable habitat. In order to complete the trade, each configuration was analyzed and sized, but a system level approach had to be taken to ensure other aspects and subsystems besides the structure were captured. The primary functions (i.e. restraint layer, bladder, multilayer insulation [MLI], micro-meteoroid orbital debris [MMOD]) and strength advantages of softgoods are well understood, but there were other system level impacts that were discovered or addressed that are unique to softgoods. For the metallic structure, a modern and mass optimal material and manufacturing process was adopted to ensure the lightest weight options were evaluated. Two different aluminium lithium structures were evaluated, a longer length 5.5 m diameter and a shorter length 7 m diameter structure. The trade demonstrates that each configuration is feasible and close to the target dry mass for the Mars Transit Habitat Trans-Martian Injection burn. System level mass was the primary consideration, but since the three concepts were close in total mass, a clear winner did not arise. Secondary factors were evaluated such as architecture habitability (human factors), development considerations, on-orbit activation and outfitting, extensibility to other applications, and configuration flexibility. The aggregation of the lowest mass, most benefits, and fewest challenges resulted in the 5.5m diameter metallic configuration being the most favorable.

Matthew Ziglar↗

Configuration and Projected Capabilities of the Common Habitat Medical Care Facility

The Common Habitat is a large, long-duration habitat being explored as part of a conceptual study (not an active NASA program) that uses an SLS core stage Liquid Oxygen (LOX) tank as its primary structure. It is intended for use on the Moon as part of a permanently occupied outpost, on Mars as part of an outpost that will be occupied for hundreds of days at a time, and in deep space as part of the Deep Space Exploration Vehicle where it will support crewed missions up to 1200 days in duration. A study of internal orientation and crew size resulted in a Common Habitat configuration sized for a crew of eight with a three-deck horizontal orientation. Additional work outside the scope of this paper is developing a vertical translation system, a crew mobility aids system based on wearable gecko-derived grippers, and a crew seating/restraint system. These systems are all assumed for use in conjunction with the Medical Care Facility, which is needed to maintain crew well-being during these missions, where distance from Earth precludes the possibility of evacuation to Earth. This paper describes recent improvements in the Common Habitat Medical Care Facility and associated benefits for crew survivability in long duration missions beyond Earth orbit. These improvements were made with the assistance of a NASA Pathways intern whose experience includes a tour of duty in Afghanistan as an Army combat medic with the 691st GHOST-T, attached to the 1st and 7th US Special Forces Groups as part of Operation Freedom’s Sentinel, where he helped provide far-forward surgical capabilities in austere combat environments. The initial baseline Medical Care Facility was developed working in conjunction with University of Houston Space Architecture graduate students. The facility was placed on the upper deck of the Common Habitat in a location that provided privacy, operational volume, and was close to the vertical translation pathway. The notional outfitting repurposed component CAD models from unrelated studies and notionally indicated a level of care roughly equivalent to that aboard the International Space Station. The CAD modeling provided notional stowage volumes, a deployable surface, some fixed equipment, an ultrasound, and a potentially reconfigurable treatment table. While this facility is clearly a competent arrangement, it was desired to leverage available expertise and upgrade the station given the vast distances from Earth to be experienced by the Common Habitat. Key driving requirements applied to the upgrade included to provide Medical Level of Care V, offer enhanced telemedicine capabilities, provide patient physical accommodation, provide caregiver access to the patient from all sides, include sliding pocket doors for access to hygiene and to the Vertical Translation System, and to add any additional capability possible for the best achievable medical care. The first step in the facility upgrade was to quantify the current medical inventory on the International Space Station and ensure that sufficient stowage volume was present for this purpose. To that end, the ISS medical kits were reviewed, and eight full size mid deck lockers were placed in the facility. A number of additional devices were also added, based on the intern’s combat medic experience. Also, two fixed shelves and one horizontal work surface were added to the Medical Care Facility, with the shelves providing storage space for the additional devices and the work surface providing a location for the caregiver to work or stage equipment. Four display monitors were added to the wall above the horizontal work surface, supporting data display, telemedicine, conferencing, or other needs. The existing treatment table was replaced with a mobile surgical stretcher-chair. Two additional doors were added to the Medical Care Facility. One leads directly to the hygiene compartment, allowing it to support medical operations in addition to providing galley/wardroom support. The other door leads directly into the Vertical Translation System. The wall adjacent to the subsystems bay was moved, adding additional volume to the Medical Care Facility. This improved caregiver access to the patient and allowed for a larger number of caregivers to be present. It also provided options for relocation of support equipment relative to the patient as needed. In the upgraded Medical Care Facility, the Surgical Stretcher-Chair and the Vertical Translation System can work together to provide incapacitated crew member transport from a site of injury on any deck of the Common Habitat to the Medical Care Facility. It can also support patient treatment in a variety of positions including a variety of sitting postures and a supine posture at a variety of pitch angles. The facility can also support caregiver office work for review of examination results, private consultation, inventory and maintenance, and a variety of other purposes. A forward activity will be to conduct evaluations of the Medical Care Facility with different medical scenarios. Additionally, ambient and task lighting selections remain as forward work. The eight mid deck lockers can be augmented to use as portable equipment carts, similar to a manner in which maintenance facility stowage was used as portable carts during the NASA Desert Research and Technology Studies in the Constellation Program. Trash accommodation will also need forward work to assess, including provision for wet trash, dry trash, and biological waste. It will be important to assess a redesign of the surgical stretcher-chair. The commercial version used in the upgrade can only enable vertical translation in the seated configuration, requiring the patient to bend both hips and knees. A possible redesign of the chair will allow for vertical translation without requiring any bending at the hip or knees. Also, the commercial version is wheeled, making it mobile in gravity but unanchored in microgravity. Work will be needed to adapt the chair for gravity-independent performance. The hygiene compartment can be redesigned for dual-use medical scrub and galley handwash facility. Pending sufficient volume, it may also be possible to place sanitation equipment in this location to clean medical tools. Finally, most space architectures have never allowed for more than one incapacitated crew member, but several scenarios could potentially injure two or more crew in the same incident. This facility could be assessed to determine its present ability to address two or more injured crew in parallel and determine the potential upper limit for number of treatable crew in a multi-crew injury scenario, or to treat polytrauma of a single patient.

Habitat↗

Configuration and Projected Capabilities of the Common Habitat Medical Care Facility

The Common Habitat is a large, long-duration habitat being explored as part of a conceptual study (not an active NASA program) that uses an SLS core stage Liquid Oxygen (LOX) tank as its primary structure. It is intended for use on the Moon as part of a permanently occupied outpost, on Mars as part of an outpost that will be occupied for hundreds of days at a time, and in deep space as part of the Deep Space Exploration Vehicle where it will support crewed missions up to 1200 days in duration. A study of internal orientation and crew size resulted in a Common Habitat configuration sized for a crew of eight with a three-deck horizontal orientation. Additional work outside the scope of this paper is developing a vertical translation system, a crew mobility aids system based on wearable gecko-derived grippers, and a crew seating/restraint system. These systems are all assumed for use in conjunction with the Medical Care Facility, which is needed to maintain crew well-being during these missions, where distance from Earth precludes the possibility of evacuation to Earth. This paper describes recent improvements in the Common Habitat Medical Care Facility and associated benefits for crew survivability in long duration missions beyond Earth orbit. These improvements were made with the assistance of a NASA Pathways intern whose experience includes a tour of duty in Afghanistan as an Army combat medic with the 691st GHOST-T, attached to the 1st and 7th US Special Forces Groups as part of Operation Freedom’s Sentinel, where he helped provide far-forward surgical capabilities in austere combat environments. The initial baseline Medical Care Facility was developed working in conjunction with University of Houston Space Architecture graduate students. The facility was placed on the upper deck of the Common Habitat in a location that provided privacy, operational volume, and was close to the vertical translation pathway. The notional outfitting repurposed component CAD models from unrelated studies and notionally indicated a level of care roughly equivalent to that aboard the International Space Station. The CAD modeling provided notional stowage volumes, a deployable surface, some fixed equipment, an ultrasound, and a potentially reconfigurable treatment table. While this facility is clearly a competent arrangement, it was desired to leverage available expertise and upgrade the station given the vast distances from Earth to be experienced by the Common Habitat. Key driving requirements applied to the upgrade included to provide NASA’s Medical Level of Care V, offer enhanced telemedicine capabilities, provide patient physical accommodation, provide caregiver access to the patient from all sides, include sliding pocket doors for access to hygiene and to the Vertical Translation System, and to add any additional capability possible for the best achievable medical care. The first step in the facility upgrade was to quantify the current medical inventory on the International Space Station and ensure that sufficient stowage volume was present for this purpose. To that end, the ISS medical kits were reviewed, and eight full size mid deck lockers were placed in the facility. A number of additional devices were also added, based on the co-author’s combat medic experience. Also, two fixed shelves and one horizontal work surface were added to the Medical Care Facility, with the shelves providing storage space for the additional devices and the work surface providing a location for the caregiver to work or stage equipment. Four display monitors were added to the wall above the horizontal work surface, supporting data display, telemedicine, conferencing, or other needs. The existing treatment table was replaced with a mobile surgical stretcher-chair. Two additional doors were added to the Medical Care Facility. One leads directly to the hygiene compartment, allowing it to support medical operations in addition to providing galley/wardroom support. The other door leads directly into the Vertical Translation System. The wall adjacent to the subsystems bay was moved, adding additional volume to the Medical Care Facility. This improved caregiver access to the patient and allowed for a larger number of caregivers to be present. It also provided options for relocation of support equipment relative to the patient as needed. In the upgraded Medical Care Facility, the Surgical Stretcher-Chair and the Vertical Translation System can work together to provide incapacitated crew member transport from a site of injury on any deck of the Common Habitat to the Medical Care Facility. It can also support patient treatment in a variety of positions including a variety of sitting postures and a supine posture at a variety of pitch angles. The facility can also support caregiver office work for review of examination results, private consultation, inventory and maintenance, and a variety of other purposes. A forward activity will be to conduct evaluations of the Medical Care Facility with different medical scenarios. Additionally, ambient and task lighting selections remain as forward work. The eight middeck lockers can be augmented to use as portable equipment carts, similar to a manner in which maintenance facility stowage was used as portable carts during the NASA Desert Research and Technology Studies in the Constellation Program. Trash accommodation will also need forward work to assess, including provision for wet trash, dry trash, and biological waste. It will be important to assess a redesign of the surgical stretcher-chair. The commercial version used in the upgrade can only enable vertical translation in the seated configuration, requiring the patient to bend both hips and knees. A possible redesign of the chair will allow for vertical translation without requiring any bending at the hip or knees. Also, the commercial version is wheeled, making it mobile in gravity but unanchored in microgravity. Work will be needed to adapt the chair for gravity-independent performance. The hygiene compartment can be redesigned to serve both as a medical scrub facility and for galley hand washing. Pending sufficient volume, it may also be possible to place sanitation equipment in this location to clean medical tools. Finally, most space architectures have never allowed for more than one incapacitated crew member, but several scenarios could potentially injure two or more crew in the same incident. This facility could be assessed to determine its present ability to address two or more injured crew in parallel and determine the potential upper limit for number of treatable crew in a multi-crew injury scenario, or to treat polytrauma of a single patient.

Common Habitat↗

NASA's Habitat Outfitting Portfolio: Technology Development to Support Future Habitation Systems

Habitat outfitting generally refers to the supplies and equipment (and installation thereof) which provide crew with a livable, safe environment during a mission and enable the performance of mission tasks. Outfitting will be needed on future missions for habitation to provide the crew with a livable and safe environment. Both softgoods inflatable habitats, which are packaged and deployed/inflated at the point of use, and constructed habitats, which may be manufactured using in situ resource-derived materials on a planetary surface, will require more outfitting than traditional habitation approaches using rigid metallic structures (such as the International Space Station), where many elements can launch pre-integrated. For softgoods inflatable habitats, it is anticipated that much of the outfitting would be performed by crew, while in constructed habitation scenarios outfitting may be done by robotic systems as part of precursor missions. This paper provides an overview of future planned habitats and outfitting needs, technology gaps related to outfitting, and current work under NASA’s habitat systems development, in-space manufacturing, and habitat construction portfolios related to this topic.

space habitats↗

Design Variants of a Common Habitat for Moon and Mars Exploration

The Common Habitat is a long-duration habitat concept based on the Skylab II architecture that leverages a single, multi-destination design applicable to microgravity Mars transit, 1/6 g lunar surface, 3/8 g Mars surface, and 1 g Earth. A trade study for the Common Habitat will address vertical versus horizontal internal orientation and a crew size of four or eight crew. This has resulted in the creation of four variants of the Common Habitat: Four Crew Horizontal Configuration, Four Crew Vertical Configuration, Eight Crew Horizontal Configuration, and Eight Crew Vertical Configuration. Design guidelines that shaped the four configurations are discussed, including: mission duration, destinations/missions, pressure vessel, hatches and docking, subsystems and utilities, lander integration and offloading, and eight-crew extensibility. Functional capabilities for crew-related systems are also discussed, including: private habitation, meal preparation, meal consumption, medical operations, exercise, group socialization and recreation, human waste collection, hygiene, logistics, spacecraft monitoring and commanding, mission planning, robotics and teleoperation, scientific research, maintenance and fabrication, and EVA. Each of the four Common Habitat designs will be presented, with a deck-by-deck description of each workstation, crew station, or subsystem along with an assessment of its degree of compliance with the guidelines and functional capabilities. Finally, forward work will be identified that will down-select a single Common Habitat. This includes multiple analyses that will be performed on the four variants, a down-selection process, and design refinement goals for the selected variant.

Habitability↗

Functional Volume Assessment of an Early Version of the Mars Transit Habitat

During the summer of 2020, NASA assessed the transit habitat concept that was being used in Mars human exploration architecture studies. This assessment had six primary objectives: (1) provide a sanity check to the transit habitat concept layout; (2) understand if we can fit the hardware and functional tasks in the volume; (3) provide a high-level assessment of how aggressive the layout is; (4) generate a list of challenges or assumptions necessary to make it work; (5) generate a list of future work to refine understanding; and (6) identify proposed requirements. The results of this evaluation are discussed, including methodological challenges and rating challenges. Acceptability results are discussed for functions that the participants were able to rate and participant comments for functions that could not be evaluated are also described. Final conclusions are described, including challenges or assumptions needed to make the transit habitat concept design acceptable, future work needed to refine understanding of the transit habitat concept, and proposed habitat requirements based on test data. While NASA has since moved away from this architecture, the assessment is still useful to inform the design of future transit habitats or other deep space crewed vehicles.

Transit Habitat↗

Effect of environmental parameters on habitat structural weight and cost

Space-settlement conceptual designs have previously been accomplished using "Earth-normal" physiological conditions. The purpose of this paper is to quantify the habitat weight and cost penalties associated with this conservative design approach. These penalties are identified by comparison of conservative Earth-normal designs with habitats designed to less than Earth-normal conditions. Physiological research areas are also recommended as a necessary prerequisite to realizing these potential weight and cost savings. Major habitat structural elements, that is, pressure shell and radiation shielding, for populations of 10 2 , 10 4 , and 10 6 , are evaluated for effects of atmospheric pressure, pseudo-gravity level, radiation shielding thickness, and habitat configuration. Results show that broader habitable g-ranges, reduced atmospheric pressure, and detached radiation shielding all have a significant effect in reducing habitat costs. Also, a minimum cost per person is discovered for a habitat with a population of about 10 5 , and this cost is independent of habitat configuration.

Edward Bock↗