Search NASA⌕ Search

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.

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

At least 739 records · Page 41
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS1993

A comparison of low-gravity measurements on-board Columbia during STS-40

The first NASA Spacelab Life Sciences mission (SLS-1) flew 5 June to 14 June 1991 on the orbiter Columbia (STS-40). The purpose of the mission was to investigate the human body's adaptation to the low-gravity conditions of space flight and the body's readjustment after the mission to the 1g environment of earth. In addition to the life sciences experiments manifested for the Spacelab module, a variety of experiments in other scientific disciplines flew in the Spacelab and in Get Away Special (GAS) Canisters on the GAS Bridge Assembly. Several principal investigators designed and flew specialized accelerometer systems to better assess the results of their experiments by means of a low-gravity environment characterization. This was also the first flight of the NASA Microgravity Science and Applications Division (MSAD) sponsored Space Acceleration Measurement System (SAMS) and the first flight of the NASA Orbiter Experiments Office (OEX) sponsored Orbital Acceleration Research Experiment accelerometer (OARE). We present a brief introduction to seven STS-40 accelerometer systems and discuss and compare the resulting data. During crew sleep periods, acceleration magnitudes in the 10(exp -6) to 10(exp -5)g range were recorded in the Spacelab module and on the GAS Bridge Assembly. Magnitudes increased to the 10(exp -4) level during periods of nominal crew activity. Vernier thruster firings caused acceleration shifts on the order of 10(exp -4)g and primary thruster firings caused accelerations as great as 10(exp -2) g. Frequency domain analysis revealed typical excitation of Orbiter and Spacelab structural modes at 3.5, 4.7, 5.2, 6.2, 7, and 17 Hz.

Rogers, M. J. B.↗
NASA NTRS2017

Plant Growth Research for Food Production: Development and Testing of Expandable Tuber Growth Module

Controlled and reliable growth of a variety of vegetable crops is an important capability for manned deep space exploration systems for providing nutritional supplementation and psychological benefits to crew members. Because current systems have been limited to leafy vegetables that require minimal root space, a major goal for these systems is to increase their ability to grow new types of crops, including tuber plants and root vegetables that require a large root space. An expandable root zone module and housing was developed to integrate this capability into the Vegetable Production System (Veggie). The expandable module uses a waterproof, gas-permeable bag with a structure that allows for root space to increase vertically throughout the growth cycle to accommodate for expanding tuber growth, while minimizing the required media mass. Daikon radishes were chosen as an ideal tuber crop for their subterraneous tuber size and rapid growth cycle, and investigations were done to study expanding superabsorbent hydrogels as a potential growth media. These studies showed improved water retention, but restricted oxygen availability to roots with pure gel media. It was determined that these hydrogels could be integrated in lower proportions into standard soil to achieve media expansion and water retention desired. Using the constructed module prototype and ideal gel and soil media mixture, daikon radishes are being grown in the system to test the capability and success of the system through a full growth cycle.

food production↗
NASA NTRS2017

Plant Growth Research for Food Production: Development and Testing of Expandable Tuber Growth Module

Controlled and reliable growth of a variety of vegetable crops is an important capability for manned deep space exploration systems for providing nutritional supplementation and psychological benefits to crew members. Because current systems have been limited to leafy vegetables that require minimal root space, a major goal for these systems is to increase their ability to grow new types of crops, including tuber plants and root vegetables that require a large root space. An expandable root zone module and housing was developed to integrate this capability into the Veggie growth system. The expandable module uses a waterproof, gas-permeable bag with a structure that allows for root space to increase vertically throughout the growth cycle to accommodate for expanding tuber growth, while minimizing the required media mass. Daikon radishes were chosen as an ideal tuber crop for their subterraneous tuber size and rapid growth cycle, and investigations were done to study expanding superabsorbent hydrogels as a potential growth media. These studies showed improved water retention, but restricted oxygen availability to roots with pure gel media. It was determined that these hydrogels could be integrated in lower proportions into standard soil to achieve media expansion and water retention desired. Using the constructed module prototype and ideal gel and soil media mixture, Daikon radishes were grown in the system to test the capability and success of the system through a full growth cycle.

space↗
NASA NTRS1993

A comparison of low-gravity measurements on-board Columbia during STS-40

The first NASA Spacelab Life Sciences mission (SLS-1) flew 5 Jun. to 14 Jun. 1991 on the orbiter Columbia (STS-40). The purpose of the mission was to investigate the human body's adaptation to the low-gravity conditions of space flight and the body's readjustment after the mission to the 1 g environment of earth. In addition to the life sciences experiments manifested for the Spacelab module, a variety of experiments in other scientific disciplines flew in the Spacelab and in Get Away Special (GAS) Canisters on the GAS Bridge Assembly. Several principal investigators designed and flew specialized accelerometer systems to better assess the results of their experiments by means of a low-gravity environment characterization. This was also the first flight of the NASA Microgravity Science and Applications Division (MSAD) sponsored Space Acceleration Measurement System (SAMS) and the first flight of the NASA Orbiter Experiments Office (OEX) sponsored Orbital Acceleration Research Experiment accelerometer (OARE). A brief introduction to seven STS-40 accelerometer systems are presented and the resulting data are discussed and compared. During crew sleep periods, acceleration magnitudes in the 10(exp -6) to 10(exp -5) g range were recorded in the Spacelab module and on the GAS Bridge Assembly. Magnitudes increased to the 10(exp -4) g level during periods of nominal crew activity. Vernier thruster firings caused acceleration shifts on the order of 10(exp -4) g and primary thruster firings caused accelerations as great as 10(exp -2) g. Frequency domain analysis revealed typical excitation of Orbiter and Spacelab structural modes at 3.5, 4.7, 5.2, 6.2, 7, and 17 Hz.

Rogers, Melissa J. B.↗
NASA NTRS1998

Expedition 1 Crew Resource Reel

This video shows footage of the Expedition 1 crew, William Shepherd, Yuri Gidzenko, and Sergei Krikalev, training for their stay on the International Space Station. Shepherd is seen training in the Soyuz spacecraft and inspecting the Service Module and Node 1. The three crewmembers are seen training for winter survival and extravehicular activity (in the Neutral Buoyancy Lab). They are taught how to use the fire extinguishers and extravehicular activity tools. Scenes show Gidzenko training in the crew compartment trainer and on the Mir Space Station and Krikalev on the STS-60 mission. A computer animation shows the Soyuz spacecraft docking with the Service Module.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS2017

The Potential for Health Monitoring in Expandable Space Modules: The Bigelow Expandable Activity Module on the ISS

Expandable modules for use in space and on the Moon or Mars offer a great opportunity for volume and mass savings in future space exploration missions. This type of module can be compressed into a relatively small shape on the ground, allowing them to fit into space vehicles with a smaller cargo/fairing size than a traditional solid, metallic structure based module would allow. In April 2016, the Bigelow Expandable Activity Module (BEAM) was berthed to the International Space Station (ISS). BEAM is the first human-rated expandable habitat/module to be deployed and crewed in space. BEAM is a NASA managed ISS payload project in partnership with Bigelow Aerospace. BEAM is intended to stay attached to ISS for an operational period of 2 years to help advance the technology readiness for future expandable modules. BEAM has been instrumented with a suite of space flight certified sensors systems which will help characterize the module's performance for thermal, radiation shielding and impact monitoring against potential Micro Meteoroid/Orbital Debris (MM/OD) providing fundamental information on the BEAM environment for potential health monitoring requirements and capabilities. This paper will provide an overview of how the sensors/instrumentation systems were developed, tested, installed and an overview of the current sensor system operations. It will also discuss how the MM/OD impact detection system referred to as the Distributed Impact Detection System (DIDS) data is being processed and reviewed on the ground by the principle investigators.

Wells, Nathan D.↗
NASA NTRS2002

STS-111 Mission Highlights Resource Tape: Flight Days 5 - 7 - Part 2 of 4

This video, Part 2 of 4, shows the activities of the STS-111 crew (Kenneth Cockrell, Commander; Paul Lockhart, Pilot; Franklin Chang-Diaz, Phillipe Perrin, Mission Specialists) during flight days 5 through 7. Also shown are the incoming Expedition 5 (Valeri Korzun, Commander; Peggy Whitson, NASA ISS Science Officer; Sergei Treschev, Flight Engineer) and outgoing Expedition 4 (Yuri Onufriyenko, Commander; Carl Walz, Daniel Bursch, Flight Engineers) crews of the ISS (International Space Station). The activities from other flight days can be seen on 'STS-111 Mission Highlights Resource Tape' Part 1 of 4 (internal ID 2002139357), 'STS-111 Mission Highlights Resource Tape' Part 3 of 4 (internal ID 2002139468), and 'STS-111 Mission Highlights Resource Tape' Part 4 of 4 (internal ID 2002139474). On flight day 5, the transfer and installation of a Power and Data Grapple Fixture onto the P6 Truss during an EVA (extravehicular activity) is shown. The relocation of micrometeorite debris shields is also shown. Canadarm 2 is used to move the Mobile Base System near the Mobile Transporter on the ISS Destiny Module. The capture of the Mobile Base System takes place on flight day 6, along with a crew transfer ceremony on board the ISS. The video includes a view of the South Pacific just before dawn, and the Endeavour crew answers questions from the public.

Source record↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

A Notional Artemis Lunar Surface Exploration Package (ArLSEP) based on the Gandalf Staff Platform

Introduction: The Artemis program is planning to deliver crew and cargo to the lunar surface, but there is no current package for supporting lunar in-struments and experiments similar to the Apollo Lunar Surface Exploration Package (ALSEP). This abstract provides a possible concept for such a package using the Gandalf Staff Platform as a common core. Gandalf Staff: The Gandalf Staff is an early prototype system developed over FY’21/FY’22 using NASA Science Technology Mission Directorate (STMD) Center Information Fund (CIF) grants to de-sign, build and test “proof-of-concept” components. These components include a 24v battery powered monopole that powers a suite of subsystems, including a Graphical User Interface (GUI) for crew, surface voice and data communications, Lunar Search and Rescue (LunaSAR) navigation and communications, LiDAR, field site external lighting, 360-degree camera, and a geothermal instrument for measuring sub-surface temperature gradient. The staff can be carried independently by an Extra-Vehicular Activity (EVA) astronaut, or can be mounted into a tripod for “hands free” support at a surface site being investigated. The staff can be attached to an external solar array and power storage system for long-duration operations. [1,2] ALSEP: An ASLEP flew on each mission Apollo 12 to Apollo 17. For Apollo 11, a simplified packaged called the Early Apollo Scientific Experiments Pack-age (EASEP) was flown. Each package included a “Central Station” that provided the power and communications connected to a variety of instruments and sensors. The power was provided by a Radioisotope Thermoelectric Generator (RTG) fueled by Plutoni-um-238 generating 70 watts of power (initially, decayed over time) [3]. The communications system provide for direct to Earth data transfer from the lunar surface. Each pack-age was stowed externally in the Lunar Module (LM) Scientific Equipment (SEQ) bay with a mass up to 163 kg (Apollo 17). The crew unloaded the ALSEP from the LM and deployed the instruments on the lunar surface. Although designed to operate for only 1 year, many sites operated for up to 8 years successfully [4]. The Active Seismic Experiment (ASE) included 3 geophones for detecting seismic waves created by mortars and thumpers deployed by the crew. Other active experiments measured the lunar atmosphere, the heat flow in the subsurface, the lunar gravity and potential gravity waves, the lunar magnetic field, the solar wind and plasma interactions in cislunar space. Passive experiments included collectors for dust and cosmic rays, and retroreflectors for precise measurements of distance using a laser from Earth. The ALSEP program continues to generate insights into lunar formation and evolution. ArLSEP Concepts: The lunar surface science package for the Artemis program will hopefully exceed the capability of the ALSEP. There are multiple issues for discussion leading to the design of a new ArLSEP, needing requirements definition from the science community, NASA mission architecture, and NASA budget planners. 1. Delivery Mechanism Two possible projects currently provide capability to deliver scientific cargo to the lunar surface: 1) the Commercial Lunar Payload Services (CLPS) [5] and the Human Landing System (HLS) [6, 7]. Each project is controlled by a different organization within NASA and budgeted with different criteria although both support lunar exploration. The HLS system delivers crew (and potentially cargo) to human landing sites. If an ArLSEP is “predeployed” to such a site, the design must include power (either from the vehicle or independently) to keep the electronics functioning until deployed by the crew. If an ArLSEP is delivered on a vehicle after the crew is present on the lunar surface, safety protocols require adequate distance from the humans for impact from descent propelled sur-face regolith ejecta. This distance can not exceed the capability of the crew to walk (if no rover) to the vehicle for ArLSEP deployment. 2. Overall Guidelines The general design of ArLSEP will likely follow the ALSEP with a common system for communications and power; however, significant architecture differences between Apollo and Artemis exist. Power: The RTG will not be available for early Artemis missions nor likely follow-on Lunar Exploration Transportation Services (LETS) missions [8]. Thus, ArLSEP power must be supplied by solar arrays with sufficient battery capability to “keep alive” necessary electronics during any lunar surface eclipse period. Communication: The Artemis program is developing a series of communications satellites for lunar orbit to provide surface transmission of data and voice to Earth. Called “LunaNET”, this network is component useful for ArLSEP since south polar locations may not always have direct “line-of-sight” to Earth [9]. 3. Concept of Operations (ConOps) The general ConOps for ArLSEP is to deliver the package to lunar surface before the crew arrives, and then have the crew deploy the package after some period of time. This requires coordinated design (for power systems) and launch window (for schedule) on both the cargo and crew missions. Once the ArLSEP is deployed, it will operate autonomously for a number of years. It should be designed to be EVA compatible for crew maintenance and upgrade. 4. Notional Design (for discussion purpose only) The landing site near the South Pole is expected to have no eclipse cycle exceeding 5 days, so the “keep alive” power is 144 hours (6 days to include margin). A 12v ArLSEP will use rechargeable LiFePO4 cells, which are common in the Electric Vehicle (EV) industry. With a current of 5 amps and a 125 watt system, the mass is about 90kg. The comm. system and structure adds another 10kg, thus the “Central Station” is approximately 100kg. The solar power is collected on four arrays (each 2m above the surface), and the entire ArLSEP is designed to stow in a 2m x 1m x 1m volume. The experiment and instrument design will vary for each installation and add mass to the total (although they are expected to fit within the 2m3 volume). Seismic wave generation will likely not be provided with mortars, thus an electric “thumper” will be required. Active instruments such as imaging systems and sensing instruments will benefit from the additional power and communication capability provided by ArLSEP. Passive systems such as retroreflectors, witness plates, and cosmic dust collectors can be added to either the landing vehicle and/or the ArLSEP. With repeated HLS missions to the same human site, the ArLSEP can be expanded and easily maintained for long duration science collection on the lunar surface.

ALSEP↗
NASA NTRS1997

STS-81 Post Flight Presentation

The flight crew of the STS-81 mission, Commander Michael A. Baker, Pilot Brent W. Jett Jr, and Mission Specialists John M. Grunsfeld, Marsha S. Ivins, Peter J.K. Wisoff, and Jerry M. Linenger present a video mission over-view of their space flight. Images include prelaunch activities such as eating the traditional breakfast, crew suit-up, and the ride out to the launch pad. Also included are various panoramic views of the shuttle on the pad. The crew can be seen being readied in the "white room" for their mission. After the closing of the hatch and arm retraction, launch activities are shown including countdown, engine ignition, launch, and the separation of the Solid Rocket Boosters. During the presentation the astronauts take turns discussing aspects of the mission including: the SPACEHAB a double module that provides additional middeck locker space for secondary experiments. During the five days of docked operations with Mir, the crews is seen transferring water and supplies from one spacecraft to the other.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS2001

SMOKE: Characterization of Smoke Particulate for Spacecraft Fire Detection

'Smoke' is a flight definition investigation whose purpose is to characterize the smoke particulate from microgravity smoke sources to enable improved design of future space-craft smoke detectors. In the earliest missions (Mercury, Gemini and Apollo), the crew quarters were so cramped that it was considered reasonable that the astronauts would rapidly detect any fire. The Skylab module, however, included approximately 30 UV-sensing fire detectors. The Space Shuttle Orbiter has nine particle-ionization smoke detectors in the mid-deck and flight deck. The detectors for the US segments of the International Space Station (ISS) are laser-diode, forward-scattering, smoke detectors. Current plans for the ISS call for two detectors in the open area of the module, and detectors in racks that have cooling air-flow. Due to the complete absence of microgravity data, all three of these detector systems were designed based upon 1-g test data and experience. As planned mission durations and complexity increase and the volume of spacecraft increases, the need for and importance of effective, crew-independent, fire detection will grow significantly, necessitating more research into microgravity fire phenomena. In 1997 the Comparative Soot Diagnostics Experiment (CSD) flew in the Orbiter Middeck as a Glovebox payload. The CSD experiment was designed to produce small quantities of smoke from several sources to obtain particulate samples and to determine the response of the ISS and Orbiter smoke detectors to these sources. Marked differences in the performance of the detectors compared to their behavior in 1-g were observed. In extreme cases, the detector used in the orbiter was completely blind to easily visible smoke from sources that were readily detected in 1-g. It is hypothesized but as yet unverified that this performance difference was due to enhanced growth of liquid smoke droplets in low-g. These CSD results clearly demonstrate that spacecraft smoke detector design cannot be based on 1-g experience.

Urban, D. L.↗
NASA NTRS2016

Sizing a Common Habitat for Multiple Environments and Mission Durations

A human mission to Mars and other deep space destinations will require a consistent habitation strategy that applies to disparate environments preferably using multiples of identical hardware. The crew will endure high-g forces during launch, microgravity during transit, and various partial gravities on the destination planet, moon, or asteroid. Habitable volume will likely need to be broken up into smaller modules that do not exceed the capacity of launch vehicles and entry-descent-landing technologies. Though it may be possible to design a different unique, optimized habitat for each environment that the crew may encounter, it is more likely that space agencies and other mission sponsors will only have the resources to develop and produce single multi-use hardware that can be used equally well in all environments, with minimal adaptation by the crew. When sizing habitable volume, mission duration and number of crew become important factors to consider. For example, a pressurized rover cabin may only need to support two crew members for a few days at a time, requiring less volume than a habitat that must support the same number of persons for an entire year. In this study the authors consider constraining factors such as launch vehicle capacity, mission duration, crew size, and Mars lander capacity and study how to divide total pressurized volume, subsystems, equipment, consumables, and supplies into multiple manifests. Preference has been given to solutions that use multiples of identical modules over unique optimized volumes. For example at one extreme, can all the habitat pressure vessels, logistic modules, Mars ascent stage cabins, rover cabins, and airlocks be constructed from multiples of the same small-diameter cylindrical modules? On the other extreme, can logistics, habitation volume, mobility, all be enclosed in a single monolithic volume habitat design? Though there may be advantages and disadvantages to either extreme, the conclusion of this study is that most functions can be distilled into two sizes for hardware: multiples of large diameter modules that generally stay in one place, and multiples of smaller volume cabins that can be moved around or function as cockpits for ascent stages, support vehicles, rovers, airlocks, and logistics delivery.

Howe, A Scott↗
NASA NTRS2006

International Space Station Acoustics

The International Space Station (ISS) presents a significant acoustics challenge considering all of the Modules and equipment that make it an on-orbit laboratory workshop and home with long-term crew occupation. This challenge is further complicated by the fact there are numerous and a wide variety suppliers of Station hardware, including International Partners. This paper addresses how ISS acoustics are managed to ensure a safe and habitable environment by establishing requirements, providing oversight and design support, sharing lessons learned and information, testing for hardware compliance, predicting future acoustic levels, and performing on-orbit measurement and monitoring of actual acoustic levels. ISS acoustic requirements are classified by the type of hardware involved, in three categories: Modules; payloads; and Government Furnished Equipment (GFE). Current status of overall ISS acoustics for each of these hardware categories will be discussed. In addition, the following items will be discussed: examples where NASA design support has been used to aid in obtaining compliance; difficulties encountered; and areas of concern.

Goodman, Jerry↗
NASA NTRS1973

Description of the docking module ECS for the Apollo-Soyuz Test Project.

The role of the Docking Module ECS (Environmental Control System) to be used on the Apollo-Soyuz Test mission is to provide a means for crewmen to transfer safely between the Apollo and Soyuz vehicles in a shirtsleeve environment. This paper describes the Docking Module ECS and includes the philosophy and rationale used in evaluating and selecting the capabilities that are required to satisfy the Docking Module's airlock function: (1) adjusting the pressure and composition of the atmosphere to effect crew transfer and (2) providing a shirtsleeve environment during transfer operations. An analytical evaluation is given of the environmental parameters (including CO2 level, humidity, and temperature) during a normal transfer timeline.

Guy, W. W.↗
NASA NTRS1999

The Aviation System Analysis Capability Air Carrier Cost-Benefit Model

To meet its objective of assisting the U.S. aviation industry with the technological challenges of the future, NASA must identify research areas that have the greatest potential for improving the operation of the air transportation system. Therefore, NASA is developing the ability to evaluate the potential impact of various advanced technologies. By thoroughly understanding the economic impact of advanced aviation technologies and by evaluating how the new technologies will be used in the integrated aviation system, NASA aims to balance its aeronautical research program and help speed the introduction of high-leverage technologies. To meet these objectives, NASA is building the Aviation System Analysis Capability (ASAC). NASA envisions ASAC primarily as a process for understanding and evaluating the impact of advanced aviation technologies on the U.S. economy. ASAC consists of a diverse collection of models and databases used by analysts and other individuals from the public and private sectors brought together to work on issues of common interest to organizations in the aviation community. ASAC also will be a resource available to the aviation community to analyze; inform; and assist scientists, engineers, analysts, and program managers in their daily work. The ASAC differs from previous NASA modeling efforts in that the economic behavior of buyers and sellers in the air transportation and aviation industries is central to its conception. Commercial air carriers, in particular, are an important stakeholder in this community. Therefore, to fully evaluate the implications of advanced aviation technologies, ASAC requires a flexible financial analysis tool that credibly links the technology of flight with the financial performance of commercial air carriers. By linking technical and financial information, NASA ensures that its technology programs will continue to benefit the user community. In addition, the analysis tool must be capable of being incorporated into the wide-ranging suite of economic and technical models that comprise ASAC. This report describes an Air Carrier Cost-Benefit Model (CBM) that meets these requirements. The ASAC CBM is distinguished from many of the aviation cost-benefit models by its exclusive focus on commercial air carriers. The model considers such benefit categories as time and fuel savings, utilization opportunities, reliability and capacity enhancements, and safety and security improvements. The model distinguishes between benefits that are predictable and those that occur randomly. By making such a distinction, the model captures the ability of air carriers to reoptimize scheduling and crew assignments for predictable benefits. In addition, the model incorporates a life-cycle cost module for new technology, which applies the costs of nonrecurring acquisitions, recurring maintenance and operation, and training to each aircraft equipment type independently.

Gaier, Eric M.↗
NASA NTRS2002

STS-105 Mission Highlights Resource Tape: Flight Days 4-6

A continuation of 'STS-105 Mission Highlights Resource Tape: Flight Days 1-3' (internal ID 2002046550), this video shows footage from flight days four through six of the STS-105 mission. Commander Scott Horowitz helps Mission Specialist Pat Forrester maneuver the Space Shuttle's robotic arm as it grapples the Multipurpose Logistics Module (MPLM) from Discovery's payload bay to the International Space Station (ISS). The three crews, STS-105 (Commander Horowitz, Pilot Fred Sturckow, and Mission Specialists Dan Barry and Forrester), Expedition 2 (Commander Yuriy Usachev and Flight Engineers James Voss and Susan Helms), and Expedition 3 (Commander Frank Culbertson, Jr. and Flight Engineers Mikhail Turin and Vladimir Dezhurov), are seen during unloading operations as they transfer equipment from the MPLM to the ISS. Forrester and Barry check their equipment and suits for the next day's spacewalks. The E2 crew shows the E3 crew around ISS. The crescent moon and the end of a sunset are seen from space. For activities from flight days 7-13, see 'STS-105 Mission Highlights Resource Tape: Flight Days 7-9' (internal ID 2002046552) and 'STS-105 Mission Highlights Resource Tape: Flight Days 10-13' (internal ID 2002046551).

Source record↗
NASA NTRS2008

Lunar Ascent and Rendezvous Trajectory Design

The Lunar Lander Ascent Module (LLAM) will leave the lunar surface and actively rendezvous in lunar orbit with the Crew Exploration Vehicle (CEV). For initial LLAM vehicle sizing efforts, a nominal trajectory, along with required delta-V and a few key sensitivities, is very useful. A nominal lunar ascent and rendezvous trajectory is shown, along with rationale and discussion of the trajectory shaping. Also included are ascent delta-V sensitivities to changes in target orbit and design thrust-to-weight of the vehicle. A sample launch window for a particular launch site has been completed and is included. The launch window shows that budgeting enough delta-V for two missed launch opportunities may be reasonable. A comparison between yaw steering and on-orbit plane change maneuvers is included. The comparison shows that for large plane changes, which are potentially necessary for an anytime return from mid-latitude locations, an on-orbit maneuver is much more efficient than ascent yaw steering. For a planned return, small amounts of yaw steering may be necessary during ascent and must be accounted for in the ascent delta-V budget. The delta-V cost of ascent yaw steering is shown, along with sensitivity to launch site latitude. Some discussion of off-nominal scenarios is also included. In particular, in the case of a failed Powered Descent Initiation burn, the requirements for subsequent rendezvous with the Orion vehicle are outlined.

Sostaric, Ronald R.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Capability Gaps Assessment and Identification of Critical Technology Elements for Mars Transit Habitat

The Habitation Systems Development Office (HP40) at NASA Marshall Space Flight Center supports systems engineering, integration, and project management for next generation space habitats. For in space operations and eventual transport of humans to Mars, NASA will rely on a Mars Transit Habitat (TH). The TH will be designed for an up to 1,200-day Mars mission and will carry all food and supplies needed to support four crew for this duration. In the current concept of operations, Mars TH transfers to near rectilinear halo orbit (NRHO) following launch and docks at Gateway as a visiting vehicle. While there, the TH will complete system shakedown testing and a series of analog missions which will grow from 3 to 6+ months in duration TH also augments Gateway’s habitation capabilities beyond 60-days. Proposed Gateway-TH missions will far exceed the longest duration cislunar human missions to date. These shakedown missions will also be the first operational readiness tests of Mars TH’s long-duration deep space systems, and of the split crew (two crew on the surface, two crew in space) operations that are vital to the approach for the first human Mars mission. Once shakedown missions are complete, Mars TH departs Gateway to aggregate with the Mars propulsion system in NRHO before onboarding the crew and final supplies in Earth orbit via a co-manifested Orion-logistics module. Orion and the LM return to Earth prior to the now aggregated Deep Space Transport vehicle’s journey to Mars. Development of the Mars TH requires significant technology development and maturation. Each year the agency performs a capability gaps assessment, where gaps developed by subject matter experts (SMEs) in various engineering/science disciplines are linked to architectural elements in formulation and prioritized. A gap captures the difference between the current state-of-the-art and the maturity of the capability that is needed to enable or enhance a mission as it is currently envisioned in the government reference architecture. HP40 conducted a gap analysis for Mars TH which will be summarized in this poster. Gaps classified as enabling (which means the mission cannot achieve success without gap closure) were subsequently used to identify critical technology elements (CTEs) for Mars TH. This identification of CTEs was also informed by an examination of the product breakdown structure for Mars TH and focused conversations with SMEs in specific technology areas. CTEs identified for Mars TH to date include the following (note this is not a comprehensive list – CTEs listed represent those in MSFC’s capability areas): inflatable softgoods for habitation; enhanced CO2 recovery; life support systems with greater levels of reliability and maintainability; autonomous guidance, navigation, command and control; and radiators for the Mars TH application. The habitation systems development team is currently delving deeper into each CTE to assess technology approaches being pursued, their maturity, and the degree of difficulty in maturation to meet projected Mars TH timelines. This poster will summarize work to date on the identification of enabling capability gaps linked to Mars TH and provide insight into the associated CTEs and technology maturation efforts.

technology development↗
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↗