SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Crew Module”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 577 records · Page 32

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

NASA NTRS2011

Orion Entry Handling Qualities Assessments

The Orion Command Module (CM) is a capsule designed to bring crew back from the International Space Station (ISS), the moon and beyond. The atmospheric entry portion of the flight is deigned to be flown in autopilot mode for nominal situations. However, there exists the possibility for the crew to take over manual control in off-nominal situations. In these instances, the spacecraft must meet specific handling qualities criteria. To address these criteria two separate assessments of the Orion CM s entry Handling Qualities (HQ) were conducted at NASA s Johnson Space Center (JSC) using the Cooper-Harper scale (Cooper & Harper, 1969). These assessments were conducted in the summers of 2008 and 2010 using the Advanced NASA Technology Architecture for Exploration Studies (ANTARES) six degree of freedom, high fidelity Guidance, Navigation, and Control (GN&C) simulation. This paper will address the specifics of the handling qualities criteria, the vehicle configuration, the scenarios flown, the simulation background and setup, crew interfaces and displays, piloting techniques, ratings and crew comments, pre- and post-fight briefings, lessons learned and changes made to improve the overall system performance. The data collection tools, methods, data reduction and output reports will also be discussed. The objective of the 2008 entry HQ assessment was to evaluate the handling qualities of the CM during a lunar skip return. A lunar skip entry case was selected because it was considered the most demanding of all bank control scenarios. Even though skip entry is not planned to be flown manually, it was hypothesized that if a pilot could fly the harder skip entry case, then they could also fly a simpler loads managed or ballistic (constant bank rate command) entry scenario. In addition, with the evaluation set-up of multiple tasks within the entry case, handling qualities ratings collected in the evaluation could be used to assess other scenarios such as the constant bank angle maintenance case. The 2008 entry assessment was divided into two sections (see Figure 1). Entry I was the first, high speed portion of a lunar return and Entry II was the second, lower speed portion of a lunar return, which is similar (but not identical) to a typical ISS return.

Bihari, B.↗

NASA NTRS2015

Results of a Long-Term Demonstration of an Optical Multi-Gas Monitor on ISS

Previously at SAMAP we reported on the development of tunable diode laser spectroscopy (TDLS) based instruments for measuring small gas molecules in real time. TDLS technology has matured rapidly over the last 5 years as a result of advances in low power diode lasers as well as better detection schemes. In collaboration with two small businesses Vista Photonics, Inc. and Nanoracks LLC, NASA developed a 4 gas TDLS based monitor for an experimental demonstration of the technology on the International Space Station (ISS). Vista invented and constructed the core TDLS sensor. Nanoracks designed and built the enclosure, and certified the integrated monitor as a payload. The device, which measures oxygen, carbon dioxide, ammonia and water vapor, is called the Multi-Gas Monitor (MGM). MGM measures the 4 gases every few seconds and records a 30 second moving average of the concentrations. The relatively small unit draws only 2.5W. MGM was calibrated at NASA-Johnson Space Center in July 2013 and launched to ISS on a Soyuz vehicle in November 2013. Installation and activation of MGM occurred in February 2014, and the unit has been operating nearly continuously ever since in the Japanese Experiment Module. Data is downlinked from ISS about once per week. Oxygen and carbon dioxide data is compared with that from the central Major Constituents Analyzer. Water vapor data is compared with dew point measurements made by sensors in the Columbus module. The ammonia channel was tested by the crew using a commercial ammonia inhalant. MGM is remarkably stable to date. Results of 18 months of operation are presented and future applications including combustion product monitoring are discussed.

Mudgett, Paul↗

NASA NTRS2015

Space Launch System Co-Manifested Payload Options for Habitation

The Space Launch System (SLS) has a co-manifested payload capability that will grow over time as the launch vehicle matures and planned upgrades are implemented. The final configuration is planned to be capable of inserting a payload greater than 10 metric tons (mt) into a trans-lunar injection trajectory along with the crew in the Orion capsule and its service module. The co-manifested payload is located below the Orion and its service module in a 10 m high fairing similar to the way the Saturn launch vehicle carried the lunar lander below the Apollo command and service modules. Various approaches that utilize this comanifested payload capability to build up infrastructure in deep space have been explored in support of future asteroid, lunar, and Mars mission scenarios. This paper reports on the findings of the Advanced Concepts Office study team at NASA Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) working with the Advanced Exploration Systems Program on the Exploration Augmentation Module Project. It includes some of the possible options for habitation in the co-manifested payload volume of the SLS. Findings include a set of module designs that can be developed in 10 mt increments to support these co-manifested payload missions along with a comparison of this approach to a large-module payload flight configuration for the SLS.

Smitherman, David↗

NASA NTRS2015

Space Launch System Co-Manifested Payload Options for Habitation

The Space Launch System (SLS) has a co-manifested payload capability that will grow over time as the rocket matures and planned upgrades are implemented. The final configuration is planned to be capable of inserting a payload greater than 10 metric tons (mt) into a trans-lunar injection trajectory along with the crew in the Orion capsule and the service module. The co-manifested payload is located below the Orion and its service module in a 10-meter high fairing similar to the way the Saturn launch vehicle carried the lunar lander below the Apollo command and service modules. A variety of approaches have been explored that utilizes this co-manifested payload capability to build up infrastructure in deep space in support of future asteroid, lunar, and Mars mission scenarios. This paper is a report on the findings from the Advanced Concepts Office study team at the NASA Marshall Space Flight Center, working with the Advanced Exploration Systems Program on the Exploration Augmentation Module Project. It includes some of the possible options for habitation in the co-manifested payload volume on SLS. Findings include module designs that can be developed in 10mt increments to support these missions, including overall conceptual layouts, mass properties, and approaches for integration into various scenarios for near-term support of deep space habitat research and technology development, support to asteroid exploration, and long range support for Mars transfer flights.

Smitherman, David↗

NASA NTRS2014

Rodent Research Development for Long Duration Studies on the International Space Station

Rodent research in space is needed to advance our understanding of the health risks,consequences and possible countermeasures to protect crew during future, long duration missions. TheAnimal Enclosure Module (AEM) was designed originally to support habitation of rats and mice onrelatively short duration, Shuttle missions (<19 days). The AEM was flown previously on 27 SpaceShuttle missions, and recently was modified extensively to support future long duration space biology andbiomedical research on the International Space Station (ISS). In consultation with a Science WorkingGroup comprised of veterinarians and investigators experienced in rodent spaceflight experimentation inspace, the Rodent Habitat project team at Ames Research Center modified existing hardware, developednew hardware, operations, and science activities, and performed a series of ground-based operational andscience habitat verification tests in preparation for the first validation flight.

long duration studies↗

NASA NTRS2021

Hypervelocity Impact Study for Migration from Kevlar® KM2® 705 to KM2® Plus 775: Material Property Measurement and Evaluation as a Ballistic Enhancement in Whipple Shields

Dupont™, the manufacturer of Kevlar®, has begun migrating from KM2® to KM2® Plus for ballistic textiles. Kevlar® KM2® has become an essential element of numerous meteoroid and orbital debris (MMOD) shield systems primarily as a multi-layer insulation (MLI) enhancement, and as such, the migration has implications for numerous system level risk assessments for future vehicles that will need to use the newer KM2® Plus fiber system. While the chemical makeup of the two fabrics are identical, differences in processing have yielded higher tenacities and toughness for the KM2® Plus system. To address this migration, the Hypervelocity Impact Technology (HVIT) group in NASA Exploration Sciences at Johnson Space Center (JSC) has worked with the NASA Engineering and Safety Center (NESC), the Multi-Purpose Crew Vehicle (MPCV) and the MPCV European Service Module (MPCV-ESM) group of the European Space Agency (ESA) with its contractors Airbus and Thales Alenia Space-Italy (TAS-I) to study how KM2® Plus in the woven form of 850 denier 775 compares with KM2® in the woven form of 850 denier 705. The two forms of Kevlar® fabrics have been compared by direct-impact with a known mass and as the rear wall in Whipple shields using the two-stage, light-gas-gun at the Remote Hypervelocity Test Laboratory (RHTL) of NASA JSC White Sands Test Facility (WSTF). From these examinations, it has been found that KM2® Plus does in fact improve the ballistic performance as a ballistic enhancement of MLI with an estimated improvement of 9.5±6.1% between the two fabrics, and on a mass basis, the estimated mass of KM2® Plus 775 is 3.6±0.7% lighter than KM2 705, which means the mass performance improvement is even higher.

Joshua E Miller↗

NASA NTRS1997

SAMS Acceleration Measurements on MIR

During NASA Increment 3 (September 1996 to January 1997), about 5 gigabytes of acceleration data were collected by the Space Acceleration Measurement System (SAMS) onboard the Russian Space Station, Mir. The data were recorded on 11 optical disks and were returned to Earth on STS-81. During this time, SAMS data were collected in the Priroda module to support the following experiments: the Mir Structural Dynamics Experiment (MiSDE) and Binary Colloidal Alloy Tests (BCAT). This report points out some of the salient features of the microgravity environment to which these experiments were exposed. Also documented are mission events of interest such as the docked phase of STS-81 operations, a Progress engine burn, attitude control thruster operation, and crew exercise. Also included are a description of the Mir module orientations, and the panel notations within the modules. This report presents an overview of the SAMS acceleration measurements recorded by 10 Hz and 100 Hz sensor heads. Variations in the acceleration environment caused by unique activities such as crew exercise and life-support fans are presented. The analyses included herein complement those presented in previous mission summary reports published by the Principal Investigator Microgravity Services (PIMS) group.

Moskowitz, Milton E.↗

NASA NTRS1994

Alertness Management In Flight Operations: A NASA Education and Training Module

Since 1980, the NASA Ames Fatigue Countermeasures Program has been conducting research on sleep, circadian rhythms, and fatigue in a variety of flight operations 1. An original goal of the program was to return the scientific and operational knowledge to the aviation industry. To meet this goal, the NASA Ames Fatigue Countermeasures Program has created an Education and Training Module entitled, "Strategies for Alertness Management in Flight Operations." The Module was designed to meet three objectives: 1) explain the current state of knowledge about the physiological mechanisms underlying fatigue, 2) demonstrate how this knowledge can be applied to improve flight crew sleep, performance, and alertness, and 3) offer countermeasure recommendations. The Module is composed of two components: 1) a 60-minute live presentation provided by a knowledgeable individual and 2) a NASA/FAA Technical Memorandum (TM) that contains the presentation materials and appendices with complementary information. The TM is provided to all individuals attending the live presentation. The Module content is divided into three parts: 1) basic information on sleep, sleepiness, circadian rhythms, fatigue, and how flight operations affect these physiological factors, 2) common misconceptions about sleep, sleepiness, and fatigue, and 3) alertness management strategies. The Module is intended for pilots, management personnel, schedulers, flight attendants, and the many other individuals involved in the aviation system.

Rosekind, Mark R.↗

NASA NTRS2002

STS-111 Flight Day 8 Highlights

On Flight Day 8 of STS-111 (Space Shuttle Endeavour crew includes: Kenneth Cockrell, Commander; Paul Lockhart, Pilot; Franklin Chang-Diaz, Mission Specialist; Philippe Perrin, Mission Specialist; International Space Station (ISS) Expedition 5 crew includes Valery Korzun, Commander; Peggy Whitson, Flight Engineer; Sergei Treschev, Flight Engineer; ISS Expedition 4 crew includes: Yury Onufrienko, Commander; Daniel Bursch, Flight Engineer; Carl Walz, Flight Engineer), the Leonardo Multi Purpose Logistics Module (MPLM) is shown from the outside of the ISS. The MPLM, used to transport goods to the station for the Expedition 5 crew, and to return goods used by the Expedition 4 crew, is being loaded and unloaded by crewmembers. Live video from within the Destiny Laboratory Module shows Whitson and Chang-Diaz. They have just completed the second of three reboosts planned for this mission, in each of which the station will gain an additional statutory mile in altitude. Following this there is an interview conducted by ground-based reporters with some members from each of the three crews, answering various questions on their respective missions including sleeping in space and conducting experiments. Video of Earth and space tools precedes a second interview much like the first, but with the crews in their entirety. Topics discussed include the feelings of Bursch and Walz on their breaking the US record for continual days spent in space. The video ends with footage of the Southern California coastline.

Source record↗

NASA NTRS2014

Protecting Astronaut Health at First Entry into Vehicles Visiting the international Space Station: Insights from Whole-Module Offgas Testing

NASA has accumulated considerable experience in offgas testing of whole modules prior to their docking with the International Space Station (ISS). Since 1998, the Space Toxicology Office has performed offgas testing of the Lab module, both MPLM modules, US Airlock, Node 1, Node 2, Node 3, ATV1, HTV1, and three commercial vehicles. The goal of these tests is twofold: first, to protect the crew from adverse health effects of accumulated volatile pollutants when they first enter the module on orbit, and secondly, to determine the additional pollutant load that the ISS air revitalization systems must handle. In order to predict the amount of accumulated pollutants, the module is sealed for at least 1/5th the worst‐case time interval that could occur between the last clean air purge and final hatch closure on the ground and the crew's first entry on orbit. This time can range from a few days to a few months. Typically, triplicate samples are taken at pre‐planned times throughout the test. Samples are then analyzed by gas chromatography and mass spectrometry, and the rate of accumulation of pollutants is then extrapolated over time. The analytical values are indexed against 7‐day spacecraft maximum allowable concentrations (SMACs) to provide a prediction of the total toxicity value (T‐value) at the time of first entry. This T‐value and the toxicological effects of specific pollutants that contribute most to the overall toxicity are then used to guide first entry operations. Finally, results are compared to first entry samples collected on orbit to determine the predictive ability of the ground‐based offgas test.

Meyers, Valerie↗

NASA NTRS2017

One Giant Leap to Protect All Mankind: An Overview of the Lunar Receiving Laboratory

Motivation. In 1961, President John F. Kennedy charged the nation "to land a man on the moon and return him safely to Earth." Eight years later, the Apollo 11 astronauts splashed down in the Pacific Ocean after this first 8-day journey to the moon. As humans had never ventured to another extraterrestrial body, the U.S. government noted the great uncertainty associated with the unknown exposures related to this historic mission. Overview. With this uncertainty in mind, a newly formed Interagency Committee on Back Contamination (ICBC) was established to review the potential for lunar contaminants and establish the prevention of their escape into the biosphere during crew and sample recovery operations from the floating command module to the mobile quarantine facility on the recovery ship and return to the Johnson Space Center. Significance. As a result of the ICBC recommendations, in 1966 NASA planned and built the Lunar Receiving Laboratory (LRL) at the Johnson Space Center in Houston, Texas. The LRL served a great role in service of human space exploration to quarantine Apollo crewmembers, their space vehicles, and the lunar samples collected. Almost an afterthought in the space race to the Moon, the 83,000-square-foot LRL was designed and completed in 1967 for $7.8 million. The core purpose of the LRL was "to protect the public's health, agriculture, and other living resources; to provide lunar sample distribution to approved scientific investigators; and to preserve the scientific integrity of the lunar samples at all times." Its layout was comprised of three major zones: a quarantined Crew Area, a separate but also quarantined Sample Operations Area, and a Support and Administration Area outside the controlled biological barrier. This facility required trained personnel to live and perform within it for several weeks post-flight, to include astronaut crewmembers, flight surgeons, scientists, and vehicle recovery engineers. The LRL holds memories of these historic events but has since been repurposed for NASA's medical and environmental sciences activities, in what is now known as Building 37. As we approach its 50th anniversary, the LRL story will end in demolition as NASA advances its facilities for the next steps in human exploration of space. Learning Objectives: 1. To capture the historical relevance of the NASA Lunar Receiving Laboratory 2. To understand the requirements of receiving crew and samples from the moon for the first time 3. To describe the facility capabilities in protection of public health.

Hayes, Judith↗

NASA NTRS2010

Operation of a Third Generation JPL Electronic Nose in the Regenerative ECLSS Module Simulator at MSFC

An electronic nose has been developed at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) to monitor spacecraft cabin air for anomalous events such as leaks and spills of solvents, coolants or other fluids with near-real-time analysis. It is designed to operate in the environment of the US Lab on ISS and was deployed on the International Space Station for a seven-month experiment in 2008-2009. In order improve understanding of ENose response to crew activities, an ENose was installed in the Regenerative ECLSS Module Simulator (REMS) at Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) for several months. The REMS chamber is operated with continuous analysis of the air for presence and concentration of CO, CO2, ethane, ethanol and methane. ENose responses were analyzed and correlated with logged activities and air analyses in the REMS.

Electronic Nose (ENose)↗

NASA NTRS1992

Assured crew return vehicle post landing configuration design and test

The 1991-1992 senior Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering Design class continued work on the post landing configurations for the Assured Crew Return Vehicle (ACRV) and the Emergency Egress Couch (EEC). The ACRV will be permanently docked to Space Station Freedom fulfilling NASA's commitment of Assured Crew Return Capability in the event of an accident or illness aboard Space Station Freedom. The EEC provides medical support and a transportation surface for an incapacitated crew member. The objective of the projects was to give the ACRV Project Office data to feed into their feasibility studies. Four design teams were given the task of developing models with dynamically and geometrically scaled characteristics. Groups one and two combined efforts to design a one-fifth scale model for the Apollo Command Module derivative, an on-board flotation system, and a lift attachment point system. This model was designed to test the feasibility of a rigid flotation and stabilization system and to determine the dynamics associated with lifting the vehicle during retrieval. However, due to priorities, it was not built. Group three designed a one-fifth scale model of the Johnson Space Center (JSC) benchmark configuration, the Station Crew Return Alternative Module (SCRAM) with a lift attachment point system. This model helped to determine the flotation and lifting characteristics of the SCRAM configuration. Group four designed a full scale EEC with changeable geometric and geometric and dynamic characteristics. This model provided data on the geometric characteristics of the EEC and on the placement of the CG and moment of inertia. It also gave the helicopter rescue personnel direct input to the feasibility study. Section 1 describes in detail the design of a one-fifth scale model of the Apollo Command Module Derivative (ACMD) ACRV. The objective of the ACMD Configuration Model Team was to use geometric and dynamic constraints to design a one-fifth scale working model of the Apollo Command Module Derivative (ACMD) configuration with a Lift Attachment Point (LAP) System. This model was required to incorporate a rigidly mounted flotation system and the egress system designed the previous academic year. The LAP system was to be used to determine the dynamic effects of locating the lifting points at different locations on the vehicle. The team was then to build and test the model; however, due to priorities, this did not occur. To better simulate the ACMD after a water landing, the nose cone section was removed and the deck area exposed. The areas researched during the design process were construction, center of gravity and moment of inertia, and lift attachment points.

Source record↗

NASA NTRS1992

Assured crew return vehicle post landing configuration design and test

Anderson, Loren A.↗

NASA NTRS1997

STS-81 Flight Day 4

On this fourth day of the STS-81 mission, the flight crew, Cmdr. Michael A. Baker, Pilot Brent W. Jett, Mission Specialists, John M. Grunsfeld, Marsha S. Ivins, Peter J.K. Wisoff, and Jerry M. Linenger, prepare for the fifth linkup of the Space Shuttle and the Mir Space Station. The Atlantis docks with Mir at a point 210 nautical miles above the Earth southeast of Moscow, culminating a three-day rendezvous. Two hours after docking, the hatches between Atlantis and Mir are opened and Baker and Mir 22 Commander Valery Korzun share a hug to mark the start of five days of joint operations between the two crews. After an informal welcoming ceremony in the Mir's core module, the STS-81 crewmembers receive a station safety briefing. Linenger becomes the fourth American to occupy a position on the Russian Space Station following the docking of Atlantis to the outpost. During the docked phase of the mission, the two crews transfer nearly three tons of food, water and supplies to Mir.

Source record↗

NASA NTRS2011

Issues and Design Drivers for Deep Space Habitats

A cross-disciplinary team of scientists and engineers applied expertise gained in Lunar Lander development to the conceptual design of a long-duration, deep space habitat for Near Earth Asteroid (NEA) missions. The design reference mission involved two launches to assemble a 5-module vehicle for a 380-day round trip mission carrying 4 crew members. The conceptual design process yielded a number of interesting debates, some of which could be significant design drivers in a detailed Deep Space Habitat (DSH) design. These issues include: a) Launch loads: Potentially drives layout of equipment mounted to module floors or walls, and whether temporary internal structure is required to distribute launch loads to minimize shell mass; b) Unmanned loiter time: When added to an already lengthy mission, loiter time further drives risk and reliability, and poses issues for equipment shelf life such as material degradation or cryogenic fluids boil-off; c) Pointing and Visibility: A habitat embedded in a 5-module stack may drive Communications, Tracking, Guidance, and Navigation equipment out onto long booms to maintain line-of-sight visibility with targets. However, long booms will be more susceptible to disruption from exercise-induced vibration, potential damage during docking/undocking operations, and increased power distribution mass; d) Water: although it is assumed that a water processor will collect and recycle water, several interesting question were posed, such as: How much water to start with? Should potable water serve double-duty as radiation protection? And if so, should it be stowed in a single large tank, or smaller, portable containers? e) Design for repairability: one of the worst-case scenarios identified was a cabin depressurization that required suited repair from inside the module, potentially driving the need for long umbilical hoses or special equipment to allow smaller, mated modules to be used as safe havens for up to 180 days;

Anderson, Molly S.↗

NASA NTRS2001

STS-102 Crew Activity Report/Flight Day 7 Highlights

Footage shows STS-102 Mission Specialist Andy Thomas, Expedition 1 crewmember Sergei Krikalev, and Expedition 2 crewmember Susan Helms transferring supplies from the Leonardo Module to the International Space Station (ISS). Then STS-102 Commander Jim Wetherbee joins the crew of Expedition 2 (James Voss, Susan Helms, and Yuriy Usachev) for an on-orbit interview, where they answer questions about the spacewalks performed by Voss and Helms and about living on the ISS.

Source record↗

NASA NTRS2003

Cabin Air Quality Dynamics On Board the International Space Station

Spacecraft cabin air quality is influenced by a variety of factors. Beyond normal equipment offgassing and crew metabolic loads, the vehicle s operational configuration contributes significantly to overall air quality. Leaks from system equipment and payload facilities, operational status of the atmospheric scrubbing systems, and the introduction of new equipment and modules to the vehicle all influence air quality. The dynamics associated with changes in the International Space Station's (ISS) configuration since the launch of the U.S. Segment s laboratory module, Destiny, is summarized. Key classes of trace chemical contaminants that are important to crew health and equipment performance are emphasized. The temporary effects associated with attaching each multi-purpose logistics module (MPLM) to the ISS and influence of in-flight air quality on the post-flight ground processing of the MPLM are explored.

Perry, J. L.↗