Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Human spaceflight operations”

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 73 records · Page 4
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2014

Autonomous Mission Operations Roadmap

As light time delays increase, the number of such situations in which crew autonomy is the best way to conduct the mission is expected to increase. However, there are significant open questions regarding which functions to allocate to ground and crew as the time delays increase. In situations where the ideal solution is to allocate responsibility to the crew and the vehicle, a second question arises: should the activity be the responsibility of the crew or an automated vehicle function? More specifically, we must answer the following questions: What aspects of mission operation responsibilities (Plan, Train, Fly) should be allocated to ground based or vehicle based planning, monitoring, and control in the presence of significant light-time delay between the vehicle and the Earth?How should the allocated ground based planning, monitoring, and control be distributed across the flight control team and ground system automation? How should the allocated vehicle based planning, monitoring, and control be distributed between the flight crew and onboard system automation?When during the mission should responsibility shift from flight control team to crew or from crew to vehicle, and what should the process of shifting responsibility be as the mission progresses? NASA is developing a roadmap of capabilities for Autonomous Mission Operations for human spaceflight. This presentation will describe the current state of development of this roadmap, with specific attention to in-space inspection tasks that crews might perform with minimum assistance from the ground.

Mission Operations↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Coordinated NASA Development of Medical Capabilities and Technologies for Deep Space Exploration

Building upon the success of the last two decades of human spaceflight medical operations onboard the International Space Station (ISS), NASA now must start to evolve to a deep space medical operations paradigm. This new paradigm will include myriad challenges including communication delays and blackouts, infrequent or unavailable resupply, potentially significant vehicle resource constraints, and delayed or non-existent evacuation options. To overcome these challenges, two separate but highly coordinated NASA groups are working together to develop and test solutions to these problems: the Exploration Medical Capability (ExMC) Element of the NASA Human Research Program and the Exploration Medical Integrated Product Team (XMIPT) of the Environmental Control and Life Support System – Crew Health and Performance Systems Capability Leadership Team. Although the work of these two groups is very complementary, ExMC generally focuses more on research and early technology development work while the XMIPT works on maturing and integrating new medical capabilities for exploration. During this panel, these two groups together will present details on how medical capability gaps are defined and addressed, a new work plan in development to increase medical autonomy in spaceflight, a technology maturation effort to generate intravenous fluids from potable water onboard a spacecraft, multiple new technology demonstrations of in-situ laboratory analysis capabilities, and new onboard tools to advance medical care for deep space missions.

Kris Lehnhardt↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

NASA Extreme Environment Mission Operations (NEEMO)

Introduction: NASA is preparing to land the first woman and first person of color on the Moon within the next decade, and ensuring the success of these missions will depend on our preparation on the ground in multiple ground-based lunar environment analogs. To achieve this, NASA has used full mission class analogs, of which NASA Extreme Environment Mission Operations (NEEMO) is the longest continuously running example. Discussion: NEEMO is NASA’s long-standing undersea high-fidelity spaceflight mission analog. It focuses on exploration science, EVA techniques and tools, and maturing ISS IVA flight hardware and operations concepts. NEEMO crews are composed of groups of US and International Partner (IP) astronauts, engineers and scientists who live, work and explore in a challenging environment analogous to the environment experienced currently on ISS and what is expected for future deep space exploration destinations. NEEMO missions are conducted at Aquarius Reef Base (ARB), which includes a shore base in Tavernier, FL, and the world's only undersea research station, the Aquarius habitat, which is located 5.4 miles (9 kilometers) off Key Largo in the Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary. ARB is owned and operated by Florida International University (FIU). Aquarius was selected due to its remote and extreme location and its ability to provide the unique isolation and risk factors that spaceflight presents. NEEMO missions allow for evaluations of end-to-end EVA and Science exploration concepts of operations with a crew that is in situ in a true extreme environment. They also allow for evaluations of flight hardware and ops tools that are either pondered or destined for ISS or Gateway in the near future. NEEMO missions feature flight-like interactions between the crew and a Mission Control Center (MCC )and Science Team, which in turn allows evaluation of mission and science operations decision making and communications techniques. One reason NEEMO missions are of such high fidelity is that so many of the participants are experienced human space flight end operators. The majority of crewmembers are trained astronauts, and many of the MCC operators have credentials as current or former certified ISS MCC operators (e.g., CapCom, EVA Officer, etc.). Mission products are generated daily by the ground team and are modeled on ISS products (but modified as needed). A planning team manages the constantly evolving mission timelines in response to the ever-changing constraints and opportunities. During NEEMO missions, suited EVA crewmembers (using diving helmets) have clear voice communications with each other, the habitat, and the MCC and Science Team back on shore. Each EVA crewmember also sends helmet cam video to the habitat and MCC and Science Teams. Appropriate communications latencies are inserted for the destination being simulated as well. NEEMO missions are made possible by a broad collaboration of participants. Astronauts from all of the ISS partner agencies are eligible for crew assignment. Often the crew includes a NASA scientist, doctor or engineer with a particular skill to contribute. Sometimes crewmembers come from external entities–generally institutes or universities. Objectives come from a wide variety of sources as well, from within NASA, IPs, government agencies, academia, commercial companies and research institutes. A typical NEEMO mission is a collaboration between at least 5 NASA centers. To date, 23 NEEMO missions have been conducted since 2001, and NEEMO 24 is planned for 2022. Conclusion: NEEMO is a high-fidelity mission analog conducted in an extreme subsea environment. It features experienced end-operators in human spaceflight, from the astronaut crewmembers to key personnel staffing Mission Control. Acknowledgments: The authors wish to thank FIU and NASA’s HEO SEI/Strategic Analysis and Exploration Integration and Science Directorate organizations for the continued support that makes the NEEMO Project possible.

M L Reagan↗
NASA NTRS2012

A Proposed Strategy for the U.S. to Develop and Maintain a Mainstream Capability Suite ("Warehouse") for Automated/Autonomous Rendezvous and Docking in Low Earth Orbit and Beyond

The ability of space assets to rendezvous and dock/capture/berth is a fundamental enabler for numerous classes of NASA fs missions, and is therefore an essential capability for the future of NASA. Mission classes include: ISS crew rotation, crewed exploration beyond low-Earth-orbit (LEO), on-orbit assembly, ISS cargo supply, crewed satellite servicing, robotic satellite servicing / debris mitigation, robotic sample return, and robotic small body (e.g. near-Earth object, NEO) proximity operations. For a variety of reasons to be described, NASA programs requiring Automated/Autonomous Rendezvous and Docking/Capture/Berthing (AR&D) capabilities are currently spending an order-of-magnitude more than necessary and taking twice as long as necessary to achieve their AR&D capability, "reinventing the wheel" for each program, and have fallen behind all of our foreign counterparts in AR&D technology (especially autonomy) in the process. To ensure future missions' reliability and crew safety (when applicable), to achieve the noted cost and schedule savings by eliminate costs of continually "reinventing the wheel ", the NASA AR&D Community of Practice (CoP) recommends NASA develop an AR&D Warehouse, detailed herein, which does not exist today. The term "warehouse" is used herein to refer to a toolbox or capability suite that has pre-integrated selectable supply-chain hardware and reusable software components that are considered ready-to-fly, low-risk, reliable, versatile, scalable, cost-effective, architecture and destination independent, that can be confidently utilized operationally on human spaceflight and robotic vehicles over a variety of mission classes and design reference missions, especially beyond LEO. The CoP also believes that it is imperative that NASA coordinate and integrate all current and proposed technology development activities into a cohesive cross-Agency strategy to produce and utilize this AR&D warehouse. An initial estimate indicates that if NASA strategically coordinates the development of a robust AR&D capability across the Agency, the cost of implementing AR&D on a spacecraft could be reduced from roughly $70M per mission to as low as $7M per mission, and the associated development time could be reduced from 4 years to 2 years, after the warehouse is completely developed. Table 1 shows the clear long-term benefits to the Agency in term of costs and schedules for various missions. (The methods used to arrive at the Table 1 numbers is presented in Appendices A and B.)

Krishnakumar, Kalmanje S.↗
NASA NTRS2013

Display Developer for Firing Room Applications

The firing room at Kennedy Space Center (KSC) is responsible for all NASA human spaceflight launch operations, therefore it is vital that all displays within the firing room be properly tested, up-to-date, and user-friendly during a launch. The Ground Main Propulsion System (GMPS) requires a number of remote displays for Vehicle Integration and Launch (VIL) Operations at KSC. My project is to develop remote displays for the GMPS using the Display Services and Framework (DSF) editor. These remote displays will be based on model images provided by GMPS through PowerPoint. Using the DSF editor, the PowerPoint images can be recreated with active buttons associated with the correct Compact Unique Identifiers (CUIs). These displays will be documented in the Software Requirements and Design Specifications (SRDS) at the 90% GMPS Design Review. In the future, these remote displays will be available for other developers to improve, edit, or add on to so that the display may be incorporated into the firing room to be used for launches.

Firing Room Application↗
NASA NTRS2015

Using Empirical Models for Communication Prediction of Spacecraft

A viable communication path to a spacecraft is vital for its successful operation. For human spaceflight, a reliable and predictable communication link between the spacecraft and the ground is essential not only for the safety of the vehicle and the success of the mission, but for the safety of the humans on board as well. However, analytical models of these communication links are challenged by unique characteristics of space and the vehicle itself. For example, effects of radio frequency during high energy solar events while traveling through a solar array of a spacecraft can be difficult to model, and thus to predict. This presentation covers the use of empirical methods of communication link predictions, using the International Space Station (ISS) and its associated historical data as the verification platform and test bed. These empirical methods can then be incorporated into communication prediction and automation tools for the ISS in order to better understand the quality of the communication path given a myriad of variables, including solar array positions, line of site to satellites, position of the sun, and other dynamic structures on the outside of the ISS. The image on the left below show the current analytical model of one of the communication systems on the ISS. The image on the right shows a rudimentary empirical model of the same system based on historical archived data from the ISS.

Quasny, Todd↗
NASA NTRS2011

Making Human Spaceflight Practical and Affordable: Spacecraft Designs and their Degree of Operability

As we push toward new and diverse space transportation capabilities, reduction in operations cost becomes increasingly important. Achieving affordable and safe human spaceflight capabilities will be the mark of success for new programs and new providers. The ability to perceive the operational implications of design decisions is crucial in developing safe yet cost competitive space transportation systems. Any human spaceflight program - government or commercial - must make countless decisions either to implement spacecraft system capabilities or adopt operational constraints or workarounds to account for the lack of such spacecraft capabilities. These decisions can benefit from the collective experience that NASA has accumulated in building and operating crewed spacecraft over the last five decades. This paper reviews NASA s history in developing and operating human rated spacecraft, reviewing the key aspects of spacecraft design and their resultant impacts on operations phase complexity and cost. Specific examples from current and past programs - including the Space Shuttle and International Space Station - are provided to illustrate design traits that either increase or increase cost and complexity associated with spacecraft operations. These examples address factors such as overall design performance margins, levels of redundancy, degree of automated failure response, type and quantity of command and telemetry interfaces, and the definition of reference scenarios for analysis and test. Each example - from early program requirements, design implementation and resulting real-time operations experience - to tell the end-to-end "story" Based on these experiences, specific techniques are recommended to enable earlier and more effective assessment of operations concerns during the design process. A formal method for the assessment of spacecraft operability is defined and results of such operability assessments for recent spacecraft designs are provided. Recent experience in applying these techniques to Orion spacecraft development is reviewed to highlight the direct benefits of early operational assessment and collaborative development efforts.

Crocker, Alan R.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Research Operations and Integration Flight Session – Perspectives on Spaceflight Human Research

It takes many individuals and teams across several disciplines to implement human research before, during and after spaceflight. Each of these individuals/teams has a different view of the research which influences their specific inputs on how to successfully complete these critical research studies. In this session, we will hear from various teams involved in spaceflight research implementation, including researchers, crew members, flight surgeons, and experiment operations, to understand each of these unique viewpoints. The presentation will be followed by a question and answer session where Research Operations and Integration experts will answer your specific questions on the spaceflight research process.

Pasha Morshedi↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Research operations and Integration Flight Session - Perspectives on Spaceflight Human Research

It takes many individuals and teams across several disciplines to implement human research before, during and after spaceflight. Each of these individuals/teams has a different view of the research which influences their specific inputs on how to successfully complete these critical research studies. In this session, we will hear from various teams involved in spaceflight research implementation, including researchers, crew members, flight surgeons, and experiment operations, to understand each of these unique viewpoints. The presentation will be followed by a question and answer session where Research Operations and Integration experts will answer your specific questions on the spaceflight research process.

Pasha Morshedi↗
NASA NTRS2013

2013 Summer Internship

Objectives of Internship: a.) To learn about human spaceflight and how NASA operates. b.) To acquire sound lab techniques. c.) To study microorganisms, particularly in relation to humans and spaceflight.

Williams, Robert↗
NASA NTRS2016

Options for Staging Orbits in Cis-Lunar Space

NASA has been studying options to conduct missions beyond Low Earth Orbit, but within the Earth‐Moon system, in preparation for deep space exploration including human missions to Mars. Referred to as the Proving Ground, this arena of exploration activities will enable the development of human spaceflight systems and operations to satisfy future exploration objectives beyond the cis‐lunar environment. One option being considered includes the deployment of a habitable element or elements, which could be used as a central location for aggregation of supplies and resources for human missions in cis‐lunar space and beyond. Characterizing candidate orbit locations for this asset and the impacts on system design and mission operations is important in the overall assessment of the options being considered. The orbits described in this paper were initially selected by taking advantage of previous studies conducted by NASA and the work of other authors. In this paper orbits are assessed for their relative attractiveness based on various factors. A set of constraints related to the capability of the combined Orion and SLS system to deliver humans and cargo to and from the orbit are evaluated. Deployed assets intended to spend multiple years in the Proving Ground would ideally require minimal station keeping costs to reduce the mass budget allocated to this function. Additional mission design drivers include eclipse frequency, potential for uninterrupted communication with deployed assets, thermal, attitude control, communications, and other operational implications. Also the ability to support potential lunar surface activities and excursion missions beyond Earth‐Moon space is considered. The results of the characterization and evaluation of the selected orbits indicate a Near Rectilinear Orbit (NRO) is an attractive candidate as an aggregation point or staging location for operations. In this paper, the NRO is further described in terms which balance a number of key attributes that favor a variety of mission classes to meet multiple, sometimes competing, constraints.

Martinez, Roland↗
NASA NTRS2015

Options for Staging Orbits in Cis-Lunar Space

NASA has been studying options to conduct missions beyond Low Earth Orbit, but within the Earth-Moon system, in preparation for deep space exploration including human missions to Mars. Referred to as the Proving Ground, this arena of exploration activities will enable the development of human spaceflight systems and operations to satisfy future exploration objectives beyond the cis-lunar environment. One option being considered includes the deployment of a habitable element or elements, which could be used as a central location for aggregation of supplies and resources for human missions in cis-lunar space and beyond. Characterizing candidate orbit locations for this asset and the impacts on system design and mission operations is important in the overall assessment of the options being considered. The orbits described in this paper were initially selected by taking advantage of previous studies conducted by NASA and the work of other authors. In this paper orbits are assessed for their relative attractiveness based on various factors. First, a set of constraints related to the capability of the combined Orion and SLS system to deliver humans and cargo to and from the orbit are evaluated. Second, the ability to support potential lunar surface activities is considered. Finally, deployed assets intended to spend multiple years in the Proving Ground would ideally require minimal station keeping costs to reduce the mass budget allocated to this function. Additional mission design drivers include potential for uninterrupted communication with deployed assets, thermal, communications, and other operational implications. The results of the characterization and evaluation of the selected orbits indicate a Near Rectilinear Orbit (NRO) is an attractive candidate as an aggregation point or staging location for operations. In this paper, the NRO is further described in terms which balance a number of key attributes that favor a variety of mission classes to meet multiple, sometimes competing, constraints.

Whitley, Ryan↗
NASA NTRS2016

Evolution of Flexible Multibody Dynamics for Simulation Applications Supporting Human Spaceflight

During the course of transition from the Space Shuttle and International Space Station programs to the Orion and Journey to Mars exploration programs, a generic flexible multibody dynamics formulation and associated software implementation has evolved to meet an ever changing set of requirements at the NASA Johnson Space Center (JSC). Challenging problems related to large transitional topologies and robotic free-flyer vehicle capture/ release, contact dynamics, and exploration missions concept evaluation through simulation (e.g., asteroid surface operations) have driven this continued development. Coupled with this need is the requirement to oftentimes support human spaceflight operations in real-time. Moreover, it has been desirable to allow even more rapid prototyping of on-orbit manipulator and spacecraft systems, to support less complex infrastructure software for massively integrated simulations, to yield further computational efficiencies, and to take advantage of recent advances and availability of multi-core computing platforms. Since engineering analysis, procedures development, and crew familiarity/training for human spaceflight is fundamental to JSC's charter, there is also a strong desire to share and reuse models in both the non-realtime and real-time domains, with the goal of retaining as much multibody dynamics fidelity as possible. Three specific enhancements are reviewed here: (1) linked list organization to address large transitional topologies, (2) body level model order reduction, and (3) parallel formulation/implementation. This paper provides a detailed overview of these primary updates to JSC's flexible multibody dynamics algorithms as well as a comparison of numerical results to previous formulations and associated software.

Multibody dynamics↗
NASA NTRS2014

Human Mars Surface Science Operations

Human missions to the surface of Mars will have challenging science operations. This paper will explore some of those challenges, based on science operations considerations as part of more general operational concepts being developed by NASA's Human Spaceflight Architecture (HAT) Mars Destination Operations Team (DOT). The HAT Mars DOT has been developing comprehensive surface operations concepts with an initial emphasis on a multi-phased mission that includes a 500-day surface stay. This paper will address crew science activities, operational details and potential architectural and system implications in the areas of (a) traverse planning and execution, (b) sample acquisition and sample handling, (c) in-situ science analysis, and (d) planetary protection. Three cross-cutting themes will also be explored in this paper: (a) contamination control, (b) low-latency telerobotic science, and (c) crew autonomy. The present traverses under consideration are based on the report, Planning for the Scientific Exploration of Mars by Humans1, by the Mars Exploration Planning and Analysis Group (MEPAG) Human Exploration of Mars-Science Analysis Group (HEM-SAG). The traverses are ambitious and the role of science in those traverses is a key component that will be discussed in this paper. The process of obtaining, handling, and analyzing samples will be an important part of ensuring acceptable science return. Meeting planetary protection protocols will be a key challenge and this paper will explore operational strategies and system designs to meet the challenges of planetary protection, particularly with respect to the exploration of "special regions." A significant challenge for Mars surface science operations with crew is preserving science sample integrity in what will likely be an uncertain environment. Crewed mission surface assets -- such as habitats, spacesuits, and pressurized rovers -- could be a significant source of contamination due to venting, out-gassing and cleanliness levels associated with crew presence. Low-latency telerobotic science operations has the potential to address a number of contamination control and planetary protection issues and will be explored in this paper. Crew autonomy is another key cross-cutting challenge regarding Mars surface science operations, because the communications delay between earth and Mars could as high as 20 minutes one way, likely requiring the crew to perform many science tasks without direct timely intervention from ground support on earth. Striking the operational balance between crew autonomy and earth support will be a key challenge that this paper will address.

Bobskill, Marianne R.↗
NASA NTRS2019

Haystack Ultra-Wideband Satellite Imaging Radar Measurements of the Orbital Debris Environment: 2014-2017

Since the founding of the NASA Orbital Debris Program Office (ODPO) in 1979, the knowledge that orbital debris poses a risk to operational satellites and human spaceflight has been publically available. Services that rely on satellite-based technology such as communications, internet, navigation, and weather forecasting, to name a few, are ubiquitous in modern society. The International Space Station (ISS) has been continuously inhabited by a crew of up to six astronauts since November 2000 and makes, on average, approximately one debris avoidance maneuver per year to avoid objects that are large enough to be tracked by ground-based radars. This places an increased need for understanding the current status of the debris environment (measurements), for the ability to predict the future environment (modeling), and for understanding risk factors for debris creating events (mitigation). For NASA, the measurements, modeling, and mitigation aspects of orbital debris are led by the NASA ODPO at the Johnson Space Center (JSC) in Houston, Texas.This report summarizes radar measurement data from the Haystack Ultra-wideband Satellite Imaging Radar (HUSIR) operated by the Massachusetts Institute of Technology Lincoln Laboratory (MIT/LL) and provided to the NASA ODPO. The time period covered by this report includes data collected during the U.S. government fiscal year (FY) 2014 through FY2017. The U.S. government FY begins on 1 October and lasts through 30 September of a given year (i.e., FY2014 lasts from 1 October 1 2013 through 30 September 30 2014). At this report’s release, processed data was unavailable from the Haystack Auxiliary Radar (HAX) due to errors in the calibration data for the radar and limited transmit power; a decision was made by NASA not to collect low-power HAX radar data. This is being resolved by NASA and MIT/LL and data collected during this time period will be released in a separate report.

DRADIS↗
NASA NTRS2018

Low-Latency Teleoperations: Operational Implications for Human Space Exploration

Low-latency teleoperations (LLT) is envisioned to be an element of human exploration missions in a number of different applications. LLT can be broadly considered to encompass any remote operation of an asset with a communication delay that is less than the human response time to allow for what is effectively "real-time" or "near real-time" operations. This paper will explore motivations and operational implications for why and how LLT might be used for human exploration space missions. LLT analyses have been performed under the auspices of the NASA Human Spaceflight Architecture Team (HAT) and Evolvable Mars Campaign (EMC). The EMC created a flexible, evolvable, capability-driven architectural strategy to enable a sustainable long-term human presence at Mars. LLT is envisioned to be part of that strategy for both in-space and on-surface applications, and this paper will expand on operational considerations within that broader strategic context, as well additional contexts. Some operational implications explored in this paper, derived largely from previous work, are: (1) crew mission support, for which we will address roles for Mission Control on earth, balanced with the capability for crew and robotic assets to operate independently, (2) science operations, with a focus on "backroom" support, highly dynamic science, and enhanced science return and efficiency, and (3) operational efficiency at a deep-space destination such as Mars, including implications for communications infrastructures and how to leverage and balance system autonomy with crew operations, both of which can inform the overall operational "choreography" between crew members, multiple shifts, and exploration assets.

human spaceflight↗