SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Battery Safety”

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.

566 records · Page 32

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

NASA NTRS2026

The Operational NASA Anomaly Gas Analyzer and Exploration Follow-Ons

The NASA Anomaly Gas Analyzer (AGA) is the culmination of nearly ten years of advancement of core technology originally developed by Vista Photonics through the Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) program and expanded using NASA program funding. The AGA is a portable, battery operated, optical gas detection instrument for continuous monitoring of H 2 O, CO 2 , O 2 , CO, NH 3 , HCN, HF, HCl in the spacecraft environment. Real time, in-situ monitored, gas concentrations are communicated at 1 Hz through a built-in display on-orbit and additionally through a serial interface on the ground. The instruments function over the typical range of temperatures and pressures required for the spacecraft environment. A ten-year operational life is targeted. Seven AGA instruments are currently deployed on the International Space Station and two Orion-specific units are manifested for Artemis 2. A variation of the operational AGA is under development for lunar Human Landing Systems. A wider calibrated operating pressure envelope is required in this application. Otherwise, the instruments straightforwardly address lessons learned from the original AGA by improving aspects of thermal control, ruggedness, and ease-of-use. A subset of AGA-developed sensed gases (H 2 O, CO 2 , O 2 ) is the subject of the Primary Constituent Monitor (PCM) development for the Habitation and Logistics Outpost (HALO) destined for lunar orbit. Two PCMs will be installed in HALO as part of the environmental control loop where they will interface with vehicle power and communications. While the basic sensor techniques are unchanged from the AGA, these instruments have been radiation hardened to survive for many years in the harsh target environment. Current development status for these instruments will be presented along with recent developments of a naval submarine variant.

Air Monitoring↗

NASA NTRS1992

Effect of Microgravity on Several Visual Functions During STS Shuttle Missions

Many astronauts and cosmonauts have commented on apparent changes in their vision while on-orbit. Comments have included statements of supposed improved distance acuity to decreased near vision capability. The purpose of this study was to assess not only changes in visual acuity, but expand the assessment to several other visual functions for a comprehensive battery of tests. Vision was assessed using an innovative device, the Visual Function Tester - Model 1 (VFT-1), which presents the tests at optical infinity and includes critical flicker fusion, stereopsis to 10 seconds-of-arc, visual acuity in small steps to 20/7.7, cyclophoria, lateral and vertical phoria, and retinal rivalry. Vision was assessed 2 times prelaunch at L-14 days and L-7 days, 3-4 times while on-orbit, at landing, and 2 times postlanding at L+3 days and L+7 days. There were 26 STS astronauts that participated, with data on 20 astronauts used for analysis. There was a typical wide variability between subjects in baseline visual performance for each parameter at the prelaunch sessions. There was a slight but statistically significant decrease in visual acuity while on-orbit that was not clinically significant. For stereopsis (i.e. depth perception), there was a small improvement on-orbit that was not statistically significant. There were no changes during space flight for any of the other visual parameters tested. A few individuals showed apparent changes in acuity and stereopsis. The possibility exists that microgravity affects the visual system of some individuals differently, as with space adaptation syndrome. Repeat data on 2 astronauts showed good repeatability between the 2 flights. These results pertain to only short term space flight on the STS shuttle, and longer flights are necessary to determine if there is any relationship between mission duration and these visual functions.

Melvin R O'Neal↗

NASA NTRS2026

Performance Optimization for Lunar Extravehicular Activity Readiness (POLAR) Study: Methods Paper

To better understand which aspects of physical fitness may be most related to performance during Lunar surface operations and thereby help to inform the current NASA fitness standards, much can be learned from fields encompassing the “tactical athlete.” Other physically demanding professions such as law enforcement, military, or rescue professionals often require candidates to meet occupationally-relevant fitness standards. The determination of such standards is a multistep process, including both objective and subjective measures, to determine tasks essential to occupational performance and identify the minimal fitness profile needed to meet physical demands of the job. Notably, fitness is only one component which may contribute to the demands of astronaut selection, flight assignment, and occupational performance. Utilizing a framework to systematically determine which domains of fitness most contribute to relevant job tasks can aid in the refinement of current NASA-STD-3001 fitness standards. Therefore, NASA’s Exercise Physiology & Countermeasures Laboratory conducted the Performance Optimization for Lunar Extravehicular Activity Readiness (POLAR) study to identify and examine a comprehensive list of fitness tests (including NASA-STD-3001 assessments: 1-Repetition Maximum [1-RM] bench press and deadlift) and determine preliminary relationships between identified fitness parameters and novel Artemis-relevant tasks to help inform future investigations for the continued development of aerobic and muscular fitness standards for surface EVAs. This was accomplished through 1) a review of the literature relating fitness assessments to simulated or real EVA performance to identify fitness tests that are most correlated with simulated EVA task performance; 2) a task analysis following a modified framework for physical employment standards development to down select mission critical tasks; and 3) development and pilot testing of a novel, portable Artemis-relevant EVA task circuit to relate to a battery of fitness assessments. The current report describes the methodology used to complete the task analysis, EVA task circuit development, and the pilot study.

Nicole C Strock↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Performance of a Regenerative Fuel Cell System for the Lunar Surface

Regenerative fuel cells (RFCs) are an attractive energy storage solution for lunar missions as a technology capable of providing a higher specific energy (i.e., W∙h/kg) than state-of-the-art packaged Li-ion battery systems. An RFC consists of the (1 & 2) electrochemical stacks (chemical to electrical energy conversion to supply electricity to an external load, i.e. the fuel cell reaction, and electrical to chemical energy conversion of supplied electrical power to dissociate water into hydrogen and oxygen gases, i.e. water electrolysis), (3) fluidic conditioning, (4) reactant storage, (5) avionics, (6) power management and distribution (PMAD), and (7) thermal management. NASA’s Glenn Research Center has designed, assembled, and tested a breadboard RFC sys-tem capable of operating autonomously for multiple simulated lunar day/night cycles in a laboratory environment. The system is comprised of a non-flow through proton exchange membrane (PEM) fuel cell stack and a liquid-anode feed PEM electrolyzer (EZ) stack designed to electrochemically compress the reactants at balanced pressures up to 12.4 MPa (1800 psia). The fluidic conditioning, avionics, PMAD, and thermal management sub-systems are largely comprised of commercial-off-the-shelf components for this system-level development effort. The hardware is controlled by a CubeSat space processor running an operational program based on core flight architecture that can control the RFC hardware autonomously through a state machine with fault monitoring. The testing results highlighted here were completed with the system in an open-loop configuration such that reactants generated through water electrolysis were vented while gas cylinders supplied fuel cell operation. The breadboard operated autonomously, but there were five unplanned transitions to a safe state that required a manual restart after reviewing the data, determining a root cause, and implementing a solution. Four of the transitions were caused by the thermal management subsystem and the fifth was caused by a water management control issue in the EZ sub-system. The RFC system operated for over 550 hours with the final cycle being slightly abbreviated due to reasons unrelated to system performance.

Kerrigan Cain↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Performance of a Regenerative Fuel Cell System for the Lunar Surface

Kerrigan Cain↗

NASA NTRS2010

Ares I-X Ground Diagnostic Prototype

Automating prelaunch diagnostics for launch vehicles offers three potential benefits. First, it potentially improves safety by detecting faults that might otherwise have been missed so that they can be corrected before launch. Second, it potentially reduces launch delays by more quickly diagnosing the cause of anomalies that occur during prelaunch processing. Reducing launch delays will be critical to the success of NASA's planned future missions that require in-orbit rendezvous. Third, it potentially reduces costs by reducing both launch delays and the number of people needed to monitor the prelaunch process. NASA is currently developing the Ares I launch vehicle to bring the Orion capsule and its crew of four astronauts to low-earth orbit on their way to the moon. Ares I-X will be the first unmanned test flight of Ares I. It is scheduled to launch on October 27, 2009. The Ares I-X Ground Diagnostic Prototype is a prototype ground diagnostic system that will provide anomaly detection, fault detection, fault isolation, and diagnostics for the Ares I-X first-stage thrust vector control (TVC) and for the associated ground hydraulics while it is in the Vehicle Assembly Building (VAB) at John F. Kennedy Space Center (KSC) and on the launch pad. It will serve as a prototype for a future operational ground diagnostic system for Ares I. The prototype combines three existing diagnostic tools. The first tool, TEAMS (Testability Engineering and Maintenance System), is a model-based tool that is commercially produced by Qualtech Systems, Inc. It uses a qualitative model of failure propagation to perform fault isolation and diagnostics. We adapted an existing TEAMS model of the TVC to use for diagnostics and developed a TEAMS model of the ground hydraulics. The second tool, Spacecraft Health Inference Engine (SHINE), is a rule-based expert system developed at the NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory. We developed SHINE rules for fault detection and mode identification. The prototype uses the outputs of SHINE as inputs to TEAMS. The third tool, the Inductive Monitoring System (IMS), is an anomaly detection tool developed at NASA Ames Research Center and is currently used to monitor the International Space Station Control Moment Gyroscopes. IMS automatically "learns" a model of historical nominal data in the form of a set of clusters and signals an alarm when new data fails to match this model. IMS offers the potential to detect faults that have not been modeled. The three tools have been integrated and deployed to Hangar AE at KSC where they interface with live data from the Ares I-X vehicle and from the ground hydraulics. The outputs of the tools are displayed on a console in Hangar AE, one of the locations from which the Ares I-X launch will be monitored. In a previous publication, we discussed how we selected the three tools based primarily on their ability to be certified for human spaceflight and described our plans for the prototype. This abstract is due October 23, 2009, and the Ares I-X launch is currently scheduled for October 27, 2009. If this abstract is accepted, then the full paper will describe how the prototype performed before the launch. It will include an analysis of the prototype's accuracy, including false-positive rates, false-negative rates, and receiver operating characteristics (ROC) curves. It will also include a description of the prototype's computational requirements, including CPU usage, main memory usage, and disk usage. If the prototype detects any faults during the prelaunch period then the paper will include a description of those faults. Similarly, if the prototype has any false alarms then the paper will describe them and will attempt to explain their causes. Also, the paper will describe the three tools and how they are used in the prototype. It will include a description of the TEAMS models of the Ares I-X first-stage TVC and associated ground hydraulics and how we adapted the TVC model for use in real-time diagnostics. It will describe the SHINE rules used for fault detection and mode identification and the software architecture that interfaces the various pieces of existing software that are part of the prototype to one another. It will describe how we selected the sensor values and commands that were used to train the IMS model and how we optimized the number of clusters in the IMS model. It will include screen shots of the graphical display that we developed in Java to display the outputs of the three tools. Because Ares I-X data was not yet available to us while we were developing the prototype, we used historical data from the Space Shuttle's Solid Rocket Booster (SRB) TVCs and the associated ground hydraulics to train IMS and to test the entire prototype. Because most of the failure modes that we modeled have never occurred in the Shuttle we inserted simulated failures into the Shuttle data. The Ares I-X first-stage TVC is very similar to the SRB TVC and we expect the data will be very similar. After the launch, we will determine how similar the data actually is and report how any differences in the data affected the diagnostic accuracy of the prototype. Finally, although we did not get the prototype certified, we designed it in a way that it could be certified and wrote a preliminary certification plan. The paper will include a brief summary of how we considered the need for certification in the design of the prototype, how we tested the prototype before deploying it to Hangar AE, and how we would propose to get it certified if it were deployed as an operational system. The paper will conclude with a description of some of the challenges we faced and some of the lessons learned in developing and deploying the prototype.

International Space Station↗

NASA NTRS1962

Manned Lunar Landing Via Rendezvous

In any mission description, the vehicles, the flight profiles, and the astrionics hardware to im- plement the mission are all tightly interwoven things. A final result evolves only after many iterations to the solution are made. This paper will describe one of these iterations in the Saturn C-5 Earth Orbit Rendezvous approach to the Manned Lunar Landing Program. Since the iter- ation to be described in an nthone, there exists some basis for the hope that the perturbation from the final solution is small. This paper is not concerned with the landing itself, but only with those operations leading to injection of the space craft into the lunar trans- fer trajectory. However, as is to be expected, it is the target conditions which set the pace for the overall operation. The entire operation must be sized to culminate at a time and place which places the lunar target in an attainable position. The procedure would call for a burst of activity lasting over a relatively short time as compared to the long and extensive preparations leading up to it. The activity must be aimed at the opening of the lunar "launch window". Figure 1 illustrates the variation in the velocity increment required to launch a vehicle into a lunar transfer trajectory from a 485 kilometer earth orbit. The minima are at irregularly spaced intervals and are a func- tion of the inclination of the lunar and the earth satellite planes and of the position of the moon in its orbit around the earth (i. e. , the day of the month). In an operations analysis these spacings will influence the number of vehicles on the launch pad (primary and back-up) , their state of readi- ness, the firing rate, and also the flight profile to be chosen. Whether it is decided to go by "con- necting" or by "tanking" mode, the objective must be to get the spacecraft in the launch ready state at the opening of one of these launch windows. It may be desired that the first vehicle be capable of remaining in a functionally capable state even after bridging one or more of the gaps between the windows. This consideration will influence the design of the vehicles as well as the operational modes to be designed into the flight control hard- ware. For example, a sleep switch may be de- sirable from the standpoint of savings in battery we ight.

LUNAR LANDING↗

NASA NTRS2026

Machine Learning for Predicting Team Functioning in HERA Missions

Team functioning is integral to success in future long term space exploration missions. Proactively detecting declines in team functioning can mitigate conflict and ensure mission success. This project developed a speech-based artificial intelligence (AI) system that unobtrusively predicts degradation in team functioning, including performance and cohesion, in the Human Exploration Research Analog (HERA) Campaigns 4 and 5. The AI system conducted automated analysis of the prosodic (tone of voice) and linguistic (language content) components of speech, modeling interpersonal dynamics at both the turn-taking and day-wide levels. We investigated team functioning via observing structured interactions (i.e., multi-mission space exploration vehicle-extra vehicular activity [MMSEV-EVA], team interaction battery [TIB]) and unstructured interactions before the MMSEV-EVA task. We developed machine learning models to predict team functioning (objective task accuracy, self reported team efficacy and self reported team cohesion) by analyzing OpenSmile acoustic features, linguistic descriptors extracted via the linguistic inquiry and word count (LIWC) dictionary, and semantic embeddings. In the TIB, static models using logistic regression and random forests were not able to predict task accuracy, but predicted team efficacy and cohesion during both the decision making and relational tasks to a moderate level (60-70%). Majority voting on the individual turns to predict day long team efficacy further increased accuracies (70-80%). Finally, long short-term memory (LSTM) models showed the best performance across all variables (80-91%), including task performance. In the MMSEV-EVA, static models achieved an accuracy of 60% with majority voting, which increased to 80% through the incorporation of mission day as a variable, accounting for the learning effect. A key finding across both tasks was the "team-dependent" nature of these interactions; models achieved much higher accuracy when trained on prior days of the same team's data rather than attempting to generalize across entirely different teams, with even 1-2 days of prior data per team achieving 5-15% improvement over team-independent models. In addition, the incorporation of pre-task data from the same team also improves model performance, e.g., incorporating data from the decision-making task of the TIB, which preceded the relational task, improved the prediction of team efficacy and cohesion during the latter. We compared model performance when trained on machine-generated data compared to data that had been further corrected by human annotators. Overall, models trained on human-corrected data exhibited a modest improvement in performance, particularly when acoustic features were used. We found no significant correlation between word error rate (WER) and model accuracy (r(55) = -0.08, p = 0.51), but model’s accuracy was significantly higher for medium/high quality transcription (0.74 (SD = 0.48)) compared to the low-quality group (0.64 (SD = 0.36)) (t(63)=2.82, p = 0.006). Based on these, several design recommendation emerge, that could inform Standards at NASA. Models predicting team functioning should incorporate at least one to two days of historical interaction data, include brief pre-task discussions, and explicitly model temporal learning effects, especially for longer operational tasks. Minimum quality standards for automated speech-processing pipelines are needed, given the performance gains observed with manually corrected acoustic data. Finally, systems should leverage both acoustic features and language embeddings in complementary ways, with modality choices and fusion strategies tailored to mission context, task demands, and data quality requirements.

Shrivatsa Mishra↗