Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Pressurized Rover”

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 NTRSDate not supplied

Thermal Impacts of Lunar Dust For Rovers

Experience and ground tests have shown that lunar dust coverage can severely degrade thermal system performance, and with the push to go back to the Moon for longer than a few days, lunar dust is being recognized as a significant technical challenge. The Lunar Terrain Vehicle (LTV) and Pressurized Rover (PR) will be operating on the lunar surface for long durations and roving at high speeds with interaction with astronauts and other robotics, which will cause dust to transfer to the vehicle, potentially to critical thermal surfaces. Dust coverage results in a change of overall optical properties, increased resistance to heat rejection due to the insulating effect of a dust layer, and even abrasion to thermal surfaces and soft goods. This paper provides an overview of what is currently known and unknown about what will happen to thermal surfaces exposed to dust on the Lunar South Pole, some dust mitigation options and testing guidance, and what resources can be used to help overcome this problem.

Lunar dust↗
NASA NTRS2010

Lunar Daylight Exploration

With 1 rover, 2 astronauts and 3 days, the Apollo 17 Mission covered over 30 km, setup 10 scientific experiments and returned 110 kg of samples. This is a lot of science in a short time and the inspiration for a barebones, return-to-the-Moon strategy called Daylight Exploration. The Daylight Exploration approach poses an answer to the question, What could the Apollo crew have done with more time and today s robotics? In contrast to more ambitious and expensive strategies that create outposts then rely on pressurized rovers to drive to the science sites, Daylight Exploration is a low-overhead approach conceived to land near the scientific site, conduct Apollo-like exploration then leave before the sun goes down. A key motivation behind Daylight Exploration is cost reduction, but it does not come at the expense of scientific exploration. As a goal, Daylight Exploration provides access to the top 10 science sites by using the best capabilities of human and robotic exploration. Most science sites are within an equatorial band of 26 degrees latitude and on the Moon, at the equator, the day is 14 Earth days long; even more important, the lunar night is 14 days long. Human missions are constrained to 12 days because the energy storage systems required to operate during the lunar night adds mass, complexity and cost. In addition, short missions are beneficial because they require fewer consumables, do not require an airlock, reduce radiation exposure, minimize the dwell-time for the ascent and orbiting propulsion systems and allow a low-mass, campout accommodations. Key to Daylight Exploration is the use of piloted rovers used as tele-operated science platforms. Rovers are launched before or with the crew, and continue to operate between crew visits analyzing and collecting samples during the lunar daylight

Griffin, Brand Norman↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Thermal Management Challenges and Technology Options for Lunar Regenerative Fuel Cells

Regenerative Fuel Cells (RFCs) enable lunar surface hardware, from pressurized rovers to surface habitats, to survive the lunar night by providing the required energy storage with a lower mass than state of the art battery systems. RFCs consist of fuel cell and electrolyzer electrochemical stack(s), a fluidic balance of plant, and electrical balance of plant. Fuel cells operate by converting the stored chemical energy of reactants into DC electrical power, heat, and water. When supplied DC power from an available external source, electrolyzers regenerate the reactants through electrolysis. The balance of plant is a critical part of the integrated system consisting of many individual components and provides fluid pressure management and conditioning, fluid storage, and thermal management. Component technology development is required to create an RFC system that will be capable of surviving the harsh lunar environment and maximize specific energy (W-hr/kg). One critical component requiring development includes a kW-scale high flux thermal switch. The primary requirement for the thermal switch is the ability to maintain low thermal resistance with the RFC heat rejection interface during the lunar day to maximize heat rejection while switching to a high thermal resistance during the lunar night such that the RFC can conserve as much thermal energy as possible. Different technology including freeze tolerant pumped loop, passive louvers, and variable conductance heat pipes were assessed as potential solutions. NASA is exploring development options through internal and external partnerships to develop this technology critical for a spaceflight RFC system.

Energy Storage↗
NASA NTRS2013

Potential Applications for Radioisotope Power Systems in Support of Human Exploration Missions

Radioisotope power systems (RPS) for space applications have powered over 27 U.S. space systems, starting with Transit 4A and 4B in 1961, and more recently with the successful landing of the Mars Science Laboratory rover Curiosity in August 2012. RPS enable missions with destinations far from the Sun with faint solar flux, on planetary surfaces with dense or dusty atmospheres, and at places with long eclipse periods where solar array sizes and energy storage mass become impractical. RPS could also provide an enabling capability in support of human exploration activities. It is envisioned that with the higher power needs of most human mission concepts, a high efficiency thermal-to-electric technology would be required such as the Advanced Stirling Radioisotope generator (ASRG). The ASRG should be capable of a four-fold improvement in efficiency over traditional thermoelectric RPS. While it may be impractical to use RPS as a main power source, many other applications could be considered, such as crewed pressurized rovers, in-situ resource production of propellants, back-up habitat power, drilling, any mobile or remote activity from the main base habitat, etc. This paper will identify potential applications and provide concepts that could be a practical extension of the current ASRG design in providing for robust and flexible use of RPS on human exploration missions.

Cataldo, Robert L.↗
NASA NTRS2005

Exploration Rover Concepts and Development Challenges

This paper presents an overview of exploration rover concepts and the various development challenges associated with each as they are applied to exploration objectives and requirements for missions on the Moon and Mars. A variety of concepts for surface exploration vehicles have been proposed since the initial development of the Apollo-era lunar rover. This paper provides a brief description of the rover concepts, along with a comparison of their relative benefits and limitations. In addition, this paper outlines, and investigates a number of critical development challenges that surface exploration vehicles must address in order to successfully meet the exploration mission vision. These include: mission and environmental challenges, design challenges, and production and delivery challenges. Mission and environmental challenges include effects of terrain, extreme temperature differentials, dust issues, and radiation protection. Design methods are discussed that focus on optimum methods for developing highly reliable, long-life and efficient systems. In addition, challenges associated with delivering a surface exploration system is explored and discussed. Based on all the information presented, modularity will be the single most important factor in the development of a truly viable surface mobility vehicle. To meet mission, reliability, and affordability requirements, surface exploration vehicles, especially pressurized rovers, will need to be modularly designed and deployed across all projected Moon and Mars exploration missions.

Zakrajsek, James J.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

A Crew Seat for Human Exploration in Multiple Gravity Environments

This work attempts to develop a single crew seating solution that is applicable across a range of gravity environments encountered by spacecraft proposed in several conceptual spacecraft architectures. All of these spacecraft will need to provide some sort of stationary accommodation for the crew for performing various activities such as work in science laboratories, maintenance and repair facilities, medical care facilities, and spacecraft operations centers, as well as for basic habitation in crew quarters, entertainment / relaxation facilities, and crew dining facilities. Depending on the spacecraft or architecture, this stationary accommodation may be experienced continuously in microgravity, such as would be the case for the Deep Space Exploration Vehicle. Alternately, it could be in continuous lunar or Martian gravity, such as the Common Habitat base camps. It could experience fractional gravity, such as a Pressurized Rover for In-Space Missions at a Near Earth Asteroid or one of the Martian moons. It could alternate between artificial gravity and microgravity, such as the Nautilus-X. It could alternate between microgravity and lunar or Martian gravity, such as the SpaceX Starship Human Landing System or the Blue Origin Blue Moon Block 2 Human Landing System. Or it could be in continuous Earth gravity, such as ground trainer systems. Prior human spaceflight systems for stationary accommodation have been focused on microgravity applications. These systems have their own limitations and cannot be used in a gravity environment. A public crowdsourcing campaign generated dozens of ideas, which ultimately generated a Gecko Mobility Aids system for crew translation and the Multi-Gravity Crew Seat (MGCS) for stationary accommodation. The MGCS functions in gravity as a traditional terrestrial seat, performing functions of load for the overall body and forearms, as well as head and neck load relief while positioning the body within range of an intended task. In microgravity, the MGCS functions as a body restraint, securing the body against inadvertent drifting by applying a restraining pressure at the front and back of the thighs, shoulders, and back. The initial MGCS concept was developed in a NASA hackathon and was refined through a review of dozens of terrestrial seating styles. Additionally, a review of anthropometry and biomechanics data related to the neutral body posture was conducted to help inform the microgravity configuration of the MGCS. A series of CAD models were iteratively developed, with subject matter expert reviews leading to design improvements. A scale model was constructed and used with a humanoid model to demonstrate MGCS accommodation of a human-like body in both gravity and microgravity modes. Work to develop a full-scale protype of the MGCS is discussed, including design and fabrication of the headrest, arm rest, seat back, seat pan, seat base, and the conversion mechanisms. A 1-g human-in-the-loop evaluation of the prototype assessed the acceptability of performing seated activities in the MGCS, collecting data on the usability, comfort, and ease of ingress/egress. Based on the evaluation results, design modifications needed for reduced gravity testing are documented and initial work is indicated for a reduced gravity test plan.

Restraints and Mobility Aids↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Rapid Assessment of a Lunar Surface Laboratory Module

Johnson Space Center is piloting an innovation team known as the Forge to perform rapid turnaround, concurrent engineering studies. The Forge is intended to be able to pull together a team of strategically selected domain experts to innovatively solve a specified problem within a short period of time. The Forge’s inaugural project being the development of a Lunar Surface Laboratory Module concept. The lab module is intended as an option for the Artemis program’s Lunar Architecture Team. The lab module may allow for increased science productivity and return on investment than a surface architecture with only the habitat. This paper will discuss the configuration of the Lunar Laboratory module, including the pressure vessel, its placement relative to the Surface Habitat and Pressurized Rover, and internal architecture. In order to determine the suitability of such a design, a human factors evaluation is conducted. Historically, a human factors evaluation of a habitable volume could require a month or longer, including time needed to prepare a test plan, conduct the evaluation, compile the data, and produce a report. The entire Forge effort will only last for five weeks, forcing the creation of a rapid assessment process. This rapid assessment includes three evaluation studies, all conducted and processed in the space of a single day, to determine the acceptability of the resulting design. The first evaluation is a card sort evaluation of the laboratory instruments. A brief discussion of the card sort evaluation is provided. This card sort is focused on the relative positioning of the laboratory instruments, determining whether a given instrument should be adjacent to, or separated from, another. It will use human factors personnel and both life and physical scientists as subject matter experts. The second evaluation is a science productivity tabletop evaluation. This evaluation focuses on the selection of instruments and the number of instruments, attempting to assess the amount of work the crew will be able to use the facility to do. It uses life and physical science personnel as subject matter experts. The third evaluation is a CAD or Virtual Reality human factors walkthrough evaluation. This evaluation focuses on the layout of the lab module and its connectivity to the basecamp’s pressurized elements. If possible, astronauts will be used as subject matter experts. Each of these evaluations will focus primarily on objective data with limited subjective comments, reducing the time required for processing responses. The results of each evaluation and their implications will be discussed. Based on the evaluation data, an overall acceptability of the Lunar Surface Laboratory Module produced by the Forge study can be determined. Lessons learned and recommendations for future use of the human factors rapid assessment process in early design trades will also be provided.

Lunar Laboratory↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Replication of Segments of STS-94 as a Lunar Surface Mission

The Artemis program established the goal to land the first woman and first person of color on the Moon, but that is only the beginning of the program. Artemis plans to move towards a sustainable phase, with four crew living on the lunar surface for roughly 30-day annual missions, operating from a Pressurized Rover (PR) and a Surface Habitat (SH). The crew will split up – two living and operating from the PR and the others in the SH, perhaps swapping places halfway through the surface mission. There is a significant degree of maturity surrounding PR operations due to the NASA Desert Research and Technology Studies field tests from 2007-2011. However, there is a degree of uncertainty surrounding activity in the SH, with anecdotal speculation among some Artemis lunar surface engineers that the SH crew might not be fully utilized. Contrary to this belief, there is evidence in US human spaceflight history that the SH crew may instead be extremely busy. In particular, portions of the STS-94 Microgravity Science Lab mission demonstrate a science-based use case for crew activity in the SH. Fifteen Spacelab missions (not including STS-83, which was terminated early due to a fuel cell problem and reflown as STS-94) and eight Spacehab missions used the previously mentioned modules as science labs to expand the science capability of shuttle orbital missions, most flown prior to the assembly of the International Space Station. STS-94 is selected as an example of these flights. STS-94 was a 15.7-day mission with a 7-person crew. The crew operated in split 12-hour shifts, enabling 24-hour science operations. STS-94 used the space shuttle Columbia with the Spacelab module and Extended Duration Orbiter pallet in the cargo bay. The STS-94 physical science investigations were intended to explore various physical aspects of microgravity. These same investigations can be conducted on the Moon to explore 1/6 gravity. The Spacelab module was outfitted with several key facilities to enable this research: Large Isothermal Furnace, Combustion Module-1, Droplet Combustion Experiment, EXPRESS Rack, TEMPUS, Gravity Measurement Devices, and Middeck Glovebox. The current reference concept for the SH is a hybrid inflatable in a vertical orientation. Fairly typical of hybrid inflatables, the SH has an aluminum core pressurized section and a larger inflatable volume, in this case attaching to the top of the core. Two crew will live in the SH at a time, though four can briefly occupy the habitat, such as for contingency or handover activities. This paper will discuss use of the STS-94 physical science equipment in the SH and options for the architectural layout of a resulting physics laboratory. It will also discuss how this laboratory may accompany other science facilities such as biology, human research, and geology. The person hours used by the STS-94 crew to conduct physical science research will be estimated and then mapped to a two-person SH crew, making it possible to determine how many days are required in the SH to complete the lunar gravity physical science investigations at varying levels of crew availability.

STS-94↗
NASA NTRS1990

Long term life support for space exploration

A general strategy for the development of life-support systems is discussed in terms of present and future requirements for NASA exploration missions. A general life-support strategy is delineated for both intravehicular activity (IVA) and extravehicular activity (EVA) for lunar and Mars transfer vehicles, Mars habitats, and pressurized rovers. The baseline capability presented corresponds to the systems needs for the Space Station Freedom permanently manned capability and the Shuttle Extended Duration Orbiter. Design guidelines and system design goals are given for IVA life support with an emphasis on closed-loop systems, and the design prerogatives for EVA include a minimum time to transition between IVA and EVA, and minimum resitriction for human activity.

Rummel, John D.↗
NASA NTRS1998

Human Exploration of Mars: The Reference Mission of the NASA Mars Exploration Study Team

The Reference Mission was developed over a period of several years and was published in NASA Special Publication 6107 in July 1997. The purpose of the Reference Mission was to provide a workable model for the human exploration of Mars, which is described in enough detail that alternative strategies and implementations can be compared and evaluated. NASA is continuing to develop the Reference Mission and expects to update this report in the near future. It was the purpose of the Reference Mission to develop scenarios based on the needs of scientists and explorers who want to conduct research on Mars; however, more work on the surface-mission aspects of the Reference Mission is required and is getting under way. Some aspects of the Reference Mission that are important for the consideration of the surface mission definition include: (1) a split mission strategy, which arrives at the surface two years before the arrival of the first crew; (2) three missions to the outpost site over a 6-year period; (3) a plant capable of producing rocket propellant for lifting off Mars and caches of water, O, and inert gases for the life-support system; (4) a hybrid physico-chemical/bioregenerative life-support system, which emphasizes the bioregenerative system more in later parts of the scenario; (5) a nuclear reactor power supply, which provides enough power for all operations, including the operation of a bioregenerative life-support system as well as the propellant and consumable plant; (6) capability for at least two people to be outside the habitat each day of the surface stay; (7) telerobotic and human-operated transportation vehicles, including a pressurized rover capable of supporting trips of several days' duration from the habitat; (7) crew stay times of 500 days on the surface, with six-person crews; and (8) multiple functional redundancies to reduce risks to the crews on the surface. New concepts are being sought that would reduce the overall cost for this exploration program and reducing the risks that are indigenous to Mars exploration. Among those areas being explored are alternative space propulsion approaches, solar vs. nuclear power, and reductions in the size of crews.

Connolly, John↗
NASA NTRS2004

Constructing an Educational Mars Simulation

January 14th 2004, President George Bush announces his plans to catalyst the space program into a new era of space exploration and discovery. His vision encompasses a robotics program to explore our solar system, a return to the moon, the human exploration of Mars, and to promote international prosperity towards our endeavors. We at NASA now have the task of constructing this vision in a very real timeframe. I have been chosen to begin phase 1 of making this vision a reality. I will be working on creating an Educational Mars Simulation of human exploration of Mars to stimulate interest and involvement with the project from investors and the community. GRC s Computer Services Division (CSD) in collaboration with the Office of Education Programs will be designing models, constructing terrain, and programming this simulation to create a realistic portrayal of human exploration on mars. With recent and past technological breakthroughs in computing, my primary goal can be accomplished with only the aid of 3-4 software packages. Lightwave 3D is the modeling package we have selected to use for the creation of our digital objects. This includes a Mars pressurized rover, rover cockpit, landscape/terrain, and habitat. Once we have the models completed they need textured so Photoshop and Macromedia Fireworks are handy for bringing these objects to life. Before directly importing all of this data into a simulation environment, it is necessary to first render a stunning animation of the desired final product. This animation with represent what we hope to capture out of the simulation and it will include all of the accessories like ray-tracing, fog effects, shadows, anti-aliasing, particle effects, volumetric lighting, and lens flares. Adobe Premier will more than likely be used for video editing and adding ambient noises and music. Lastly, V-Tree is the real-time 3D graphics engine which will facilitate our realistic simulation. Additional information is included in the original extended abstract.

Henke, Stephen A.↗
NASA NTRS2007

Crew/Robot Coordinated Planetary EVA Operations at a Lunar Base Analog Site

Under the direction of NASA's Exploration Technology Development Program, robots and space suited subjects from several NASA centers recently completed a very successful demonstration of coordinated activities indicative of base camp operations on the lunar surface. For these activities, NASA chose a site near Meteor Crater, Arizona close to where Apollo Astronauts previously trained. The main scenario demonstrated crew returning from a planetary EVA (extra-vehicular activity) to a temporary base camp and entering a pressurized rover compartment while robots performed tasks in preparation for the next EVA. Scenario tasks included: rover operations under direct human control and autonomous modes, crew ingress and egress activities, autonomous robotic payload removal and stowage operations under both local control and remote control from Houston, and autonomous robotic navigation and inspection. In addition to the main scenario, participants had an opportunity to explore additional robotic operations: hill climbing, maneuvering heaving loads, gathering geo-logical samples, drilling, and tether operations. In this analog environment, the suited subjects and robots experienced high levels of dust, rough terrain, and harsh lighting.

Diftler, M. A.↗
NASA NTRS2008

Lunar Communication Terminals for NASA Exploration Missions: Needs, Operations Concepts and Architectures

NASA is conducting architecture studies prior to deploying a series of short- and long-duration human and robotic missions for the exploration of the Moon and Mars under the Vision for Space Exploration Initiative. A key objective of these missions is to establish and expand, through a series of launches, a system of systems approach to exploration capabilities and science return. The systems identified were Crew Exploration Vehicles, crew and cargo launch vehicles, crew EVA suits, crew and cargo landers, habitats, mobility carriers, and small, pressurized rovers. Multiple space communication networks and systems, deployed over time, will support these space exploration systems of systems. Each deployment phase will support interoperability of components and provide 20 years of legacy systems. In this paper, we describe the modular lunar communications terminals needed for the emerging lunar mission operational scenarios. These lunar communication terminals require flexibility for use in stationary, integrated, and mobile environments. They will support links directly to Earth, to lunar relay satellites, to astronauts and to fixed and mobile lunar surface systems. The operating concepts and traffic models are presented for these terminals within variety of lunar scenarios. A preliminary architecture is outlined, providing for suitable long-duration operations in the harsh lunar environment.

Bhasin, Kul B.↗
NASA NTRS2009

Suit Port Aft Bulkhead Mockup Test Results and Lessons Learned

The Small Pressurized Rover (SPR) is currently being carried as an integral part of the current Lunar Surface Architectures under consideration in the Constellation program. One element of the SPR is the suit port, the means by which the crew performs Extravehicular Activities (EVAs). Two suit port deliverables were produced in fiscal year 2008: an aft bulkhead mockup for functional integrated testing with the 1-G SPR mockup and a functional and pressurizable engineering unit. This paper focuses on the test results and lessons learned on the aft bulkhead mockup. The suit port aft bulkhead mockup was integrated with the mockup of the SPR cabin and chassis. It is located on the aft bulkhead of the SPR cabin structure and includes hatches, a locking mechanism, seals, interior and exterior suit don/doff aids, and exterior platforms to accommodate different crewmember heights. A lightweight mockup of the Mark III suit was tested with the suit port aft bulkhead mockup. There are several limitations to the suit port and mockup suits, and results of the suit port evaluation are presented and interpreted within the context of the limitations.

Romig, Barbara A.↗
NASA NTRS2009

Development of Life Support System Technologies for Human Lunar Missions

With the Preliminary Design Review (PDR) for the Orion Crew Exploration Vehicle planned to be completed in 2009, Exploration Life Support (ELS), a technology development project under the National Aeronautics and Space Administration s (NASA) Exploration Technology Development Program, is focusing its efforts on needs for human lunar missions. The ELS Project s goal is to develop and mature a suite of Environmental Control and Life Support System (ECLSS) technologies for potential use on human spacecraft under development in support of U.S. Space Exploration Policy. ELS technology development is directed at three major vehicle projects within NASA s Constellation Program (CxP): the Orion Crew Exploration Vehicle (CEV), the Altair Lunar Lander and Lunar Surface Systems, including habitats and pressurized rovers. The ELS Project includes four technical elements: Atmosphere Revitalization Systems, Water Recovery Systems, Waste Management Systems and Habitation Engineering, and two cross cutting elements, Systems Integration, Modeling and Analysis, and Validation and Testing. This paper will provide an overview of the ELS Project, connectivity with its customers and an update to content within its technology development portfolio with focus on human lunar missions.

Barta, Daniel J.↗
NASA NTRS2009

Exploration Life Support Critical Questions for Future Human Space Missions

Exploration Life Support (ELS) is a project under NASA s Exploration Technology Development Program. The ELS Project plans, coordinates and implements the development of advanced life support technologies for human exploration missions in space. Recent work has focused on closed loop atmosphere and water systems for a lunar outpost, including habitats and pressurized rovers. But, what are the critical questions facing life support system developers for these and other future human missions? This paper explores those questions and discusses how progress in the development of ELS technologies can help answer them. The ELS Project includes Atmosphere Revitalization Systems (ARS), Water Recovery Systems (WRS), Waste Management Systems (WMS), Habitation Engineering, Systems Integration, Modeling and Analysis (SIMA), and Validation and Testing, which includes the sub-elements Flight Experiments and Integrated Testing. Systems engineering analysis by ELS seeks to optimize the overall mission architecture by considering all the internal and external interfaces of the life support system and the potential for reduction or reuse of commodities. In particular, various sources and sinks of water and oxygen are considered along with the implications on loop closure and the resulting launch mass requirements.

Ewert, Michael K.↗
NASA NTRS2009

Human Research Program Human Health Countermeasures Element Extravehicular Activity (EVA) Risk Standing Review Panel (SRP)

The Extravehicular Activity (EVA) Risk Standing Review Panel (SRP) was favorably impressed by the operational risk management approach taken by the Human Research Program (HRP) Integrated Research Plan (IRP) to address the stated life sciences issues. The life sciences community at the Johnson Space Center (JSC) seems to be focused on operational risk management. This approach is more likely to provide risk managers with the information they need at the time they need it. Concerning the information provided to the SRP by the EVA Physiology, Systems, and Performance Project (EPSP), it is obvious that a great deal of productive activity is under way. Evaluation of this information was hampered by the fact that it often was not organized in a fashion that reflects the "Gaps and Tasks" approach of the overall Human Health Countermeasures (HHC) effort, and that a substantial proportion of the briefing concerned subjects that, while interesting, are not part of the HHC Element (e.g., the pressurized rover presentation). Additionally, no information was provided on several of the tasks or how they related to work underway or already accomplished. This situation left the SRP having to guess at the efforts and relationship to other elements, and made it hard to easily map the EVA Project efforts currently underway, and the data collected thus far, to the gaps and tasks in the IRP. It seems that integration of the EPSP project into the HHC Element could be improved. Along these lines, we were concerned that our SRP was split off from the other participating SRPs at an early stage in the overall agenda for the meeting. In reality, the concerns of EPSP and other projects share much common ground. For example, the commonality of the concerns of the EVA and exercise physiology groups is obvious, both in terms of what reduced exercise capacity can do to EVA capability, and how the exercise performed during an EVA could contribute to an overall exercise countermeasure prescription.

Norfleet, William↗
NASA NTRS2010

Lunar Outpost Life Support Architecture Study Based on a High-Mobility Exploration Scenario

This paper presents results of a life support architecture study based on a 2009 NASA lunar surface exploration scenario known as Scenario 12. The study focuses on the assembly complete outpost configuration and includes pressurized rovers as part of a distributed outpost architecture in both stand-alone and integrated configurations. A range of life support architectures are examined reflecting different levels of closure and distributed functionality. Monte Carlo simulations are used to assess the sensitivity of results to volatile high-impact mission variables, including the quantity of residual Lander oxygen and hydrogen propellants available for scavenging, the fraction of crew time away from the outpost on excursions, total extravehicular activity hours, and habitat leakage. Surpluses or deficits of water and oxygen are reported for each architecture, along with fixed and 10-year total equivalent system mass estimates relative to a reference case. System robustness is discussed in terms of the probability of no water or oxygen resupply as determined from the Monte Carlo simulations.

Lange, Kevin E.↗