Results for “Human Landing System” — Page 5

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

New Perspective On Slosh Dynamics in High-Gravity Regimes for Lunar Missions

Slosh dynamics particularly in high gravity regime is of high interest to the NASA Human Landing Systems program, which aims to return humans to the Moon. This paper reexamines the commonly accepted equivalence between pendulum and mass-spring-damper mechanical analogies, demonstrating the differences through simulations and their impact on design and analysis. This study re-derives equations of motion for these mechanical models including mass-spring-damper (MSD) and pendulum by relaxing simplifying assumptions that had been typically applied to large launch vehicles and may be violated for lunar and planetary landing applications. The newly derived equations uncovers potential modeling gaps when applying the pendulum and MSD models, and the need for additional considerations in their application. Finally, the newly derived equations are validated using MathWorks® Simscape™ Multibody™ dynamics toolbox simulation.

Slosh↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

New Perspective on Slosh Dynamics in High-Gravity Regimes for Lunar Missions

Slosh dynamics particularly in high gravity regime is of high interest to the NASA Human Landing Systems program, which aims to return humans to the Moon. This paper reexamines the commonly accepted equivalence between pendulum and massspring-damper mechanical analogies, demonstrating the differences through simulations and their impact on design and analysis. This study re-derives equations of motion for these mechanical models including mass-spring-damper (MSD) and pendulum by relaxing simplifying assumptions that had been typically applied to large launch vehicles and may be violated for lunar and planetary landing applications. The newly-derived equations uncover potential modeling gaps when applying the pendulum and MSD models, and the need for additional considerations in their application. Finally, the newly-derived equations are validated using MathWorks® Simscape™ Multibody™ dynamics toolbox simulation.

Pendulum↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

ExMC Digital Engineering

Future missions beyond Artemis II will become increasingly complex as multiple vehicles (e.g., Gateway, Human Landing System (HLS), and Extravehicular Activity and Human Surface Mobility Program (EHP)), each having their own Program requirements and other associated documentation, which will need to be integrated into a single mission. Currently, the Human Health and Performance Directorate (HHPD)Program Support Teams mostly use documents to manage, perform, and archive their analyses. Identifying an opportunity for efficiency, ExMC demonstrated the ability to utilize MagicDraw, a Model-Based Systems Engineering (MBSE) tool, as a requirements database with traceability, dependencies, and relationships in one place. Rather than existing in documents, emails, and historical knowledge, ExMC pursued a Digital Engineering (DE) effort in coordination with HHPD by combining MBSE tools with other digital platforms to manage and develop user-defined databases and interfaces. This DE approach is aimed to simplify processes and reduce risk through the unification of requirements into a centralized digital network, improving collaboration, decision-making, and transparency compared to isolated documents and knowledge. However, manipulating data views and content in MagicDraw requires a steep learning curve not needed by all users and even the user-friendly web view comes with downsides due to the static views. To provide a more dynamic user interface, ExMC investigated the use of Microsoft Power Platform which does not require as steep of a learning curve to become proficient. This introduces analytics to the DE infrastructure, offering customizable and dynamic data dashboards. ExMC continues developing these dashboards and tailoring the DE infrastructure in alignment with HHPD workforce needs.

M Krihak↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Handling Qualities Assessment of Manual Lunar Landing with Display Augmentation

Research and development is being conducted to support data-driven design decisions for manual control and human involvement in the lunar landing task under the Human Landing System (HLS) program within the Artemis campaign. A human-in-the-loop simulator evaluation of the manual control of a lunar landing vehicle in the final approach and landing phase was conducted at NASA Langley Research Center in the Lunar Flight Deck simulator using the Altair Design and Analysis Cycle (DAC)-2 government reference vehicle. The objective was to perform a direct comparison of control law types with display aiding for various rotational control powers being considered under HLS. Ten subjects (four NASA test pilots and six current pilot astronauts) provided Cooper-Harper ratings, NASA Task Load Index workload ratings, and qualitative comments. The piloting task was to assume manual control of the vehicle (including vertical descent rate) at 150 m above the landing zone, fly to a redesignated landing target (which was up to 75 m radially from the center of the landing zone) and to touch down within a position accuracy of 5m. The data showed that the display augmentation in the form of a “hover cue” significantly improved the pilot’s ability to control translation and create satisfactory handling qualities for otherwise sluggish configurations; however, the investigation also showed that display augmentation is not a panacea. Handling qualities problems, including pilot-induced oscillations, and higher workload for the lowest control powers can still be evident.

Lynda J. Kramer↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Handling Qualities Assessment of Manual Lunar Landing with Display Augmentation

Research and development is being conducted to support data-driven design decisions for manual control and human involvement in the lunar landing task under the Human Landing System (HLS) program within the Artemis campaign. A human-in-the-loop simulator evaluation of the manual control of a lunar landing vehicle in the final approach and landing phase was conducted at NASA Langley Research Center in the Lunar Flight Deck simulator using the Altair Design and Analysis Cycle (DAC)-2 government reference vehicle. The objective was to perform a direct comparison of control law types with display aiding for various rotational control powers being considered under HLS. Ten subjects (four NASA test pilots and six current pilot astronauts) provided Cooper-Harper ratings, NASA Task Load Index workload ratings, and qualitative comments. The piloting task was to assume manual control of the vehicle (including vertical descent rate) at 150 m above the landing zone, fly to a redesignated landing target (which was up to 75 m radially from the center of the landing zone) and to touch down within a position accuracy of 5m. The data showed that the display augmentation in the form of a “hover cue” significantly improved the pilot’s ability to control translation and create satisfactory handling qualities for otherwise sluggish configurations; however, the investigation also showed that display augmentation is not a panacea. Handling qualities problems, including pilot-induced oscillations, and higher workload for the lowest control powers can still be evident.

Lynda Kramer↗

NASA NTRS2024

Design, Development, and Use of a Lunar Lander Simulation for NASA's Artemis Program

This paper describes the design, development, and initial use of a generalized and configurable lunar lander simulation to support NASA’s Artemis Program. This simulation is being developed for the Crew Compartment Office (CrewCo) in the Human Landing Systems (HLS) program and is called the HLS CrewCo Lander Simulation (HCLS). The HCLS provides insight into the challenges associated with returning humans to the Moon and the particular difficulties of operating at the Lunar South Pole. A generalized lunar landing spacecraft based on a government reference design has been modeled but the simulation can be modified and adapted to model vendor designs as well. The simulation architecture and toolsets provide a flexible framework that allows for quickly prototyping and evaluating various aspects of a piloted lunar landing system. This includes the modeling of all principal human controlled flight phases: rendezvous and docking with crew transfer systems; docked orbital outpost operations; undocking and lunar transfer; lunar orbital operations; lunar deorbit, descent, and landing (DDL); lunar surface operations; lunar ascent; and return to the orbital outpost. The flexibility of the simulation allows for the integrated evaluation of potential vehicle subsystems, crew displays, guidance and control modes, and trajectory designs. The purpose of the HCLS is not to design the ideal lunar lander, but rather to understand the strengths and weaknesses of vehicle design choices.

Edwin Z Crues↗

NASA NTRS2024

Design, Development, and Use of a Lunar Lander Simulation for NASA’s Artemis Program

This paper describes the design, development, and initial use of a generalized and configurable lunar lander simulation to support NASA’s Artemis Program. This simulation is being developed for the Crew Compartment Office (CrewCo) in the Human Landing Systems (HLS) program and is called the HLS CrewCo Lander Simulation (HCLS). The HCLS provides insight into the challenges associated with returning humans to the Moon and the particular difficulties of operating at the Lunar South Pole. A generalized lunar landing spacecraft based on a government reference design has been modeled but the simulation can be modified and adapted to model vendor designs as well. The simulation architecture and toolsets provide a flexible framework that allows for quickly prototyping and evaluating various aspects of a piloted lunar landing system. This includes the modeling of all principal human controlled flight phases: rendezvous and docking with crew transfer systems; docked orbital outpost operations; undocking and lunar transfer; lunar orbital operations; lunar deorbit, descent, and landing (DDL); lunar surface operations; lunar ascent; and return to the orbital outpost. The flexibility of the simulation allows for the integrated evaluation of potential vehicle subsystems, crew displays, guidance and control modes, and trajectory designs. The purpose of the HCLS is not to design the ideal lunar lander, but rather to understand the strengths and weaknesses of vehicle design choices.

James Gentile↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Design, Development, and Use of a Lunar Lander Simulation for NASA's Artemis Program

This paper describes the design, development, and initial use of a generalized and configurable lunar lander simulation to support NASA’s Artemis Program. This simulation is being developed for the Crew Compartment Office (CrewCo) in the Human Landing Systems (HLS) program and is called the HLS CrewCo Lander Simulation (HCLS). The HCLS provides insight into the challenges associated with returning humans to the Moon and the particular difficulties of operating at the Lunar South Pole. The simulation models a generalized integrated lunar landing spacecraft based on a government reference design but can and has been adapted to model vendor specific designs as well. The simulation architecture and tool sets provide a flexible framework that allows for quickly prototyping and evaluating various aspects of a piloted lunar landing system. This includes the modeling of all principal human controlled flight phases: rendezvous and docking with crew transfer systems; docked orbital outpost operations; undocking and lunar transfer; lunar orbital operations; lunar deorbit, descent, and landing (DDL); lunar surface operations; lunar ascent; and return to the orbital outpost. The flexibility of the simulation allows for the integrated evaluation of potential vehicle subsystems, crew displays, guidance and control modes, and trajectory designs. The purpose of the HCLS is not to design the ideal lunar lander, but rather to understand and the strengths and weaknesses of vehicle design choices. This paper describes the basic simulation architecture and discusses the tool sets used to develop the HCLS. This includes a number of open source tool sets and publicly available data sets. This paper also describes some of the early use cases and findings. The primary focus of early HCLS use has been on the manual piloting task to safely get the crew to the desired landing site in case of a failure in the automated guidance system. Several guidance modes and cues have been implemented which allow a pilot to manually fly the vehicle to the targeted landing site starting anywhere from powered descent initiation. It has been a valuable tool for understanding what is required to manually fly a lunar lander as well as giving a sense of the vehicle dynamics, which are much different than anything that is flown on Earth. A number of experienced test pilots have participated in manual piloting evaluations using the HCLS and provided valuable feedback on the piloting task which has been very beneficial to NASA and the HLS program.

James Michael Gentile↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Supervisory Control with Dual Tasking in Post G-Transition Vehicle Landings

BACKGROUND Landing during exploration spaceflight may consist of both planned automated supervisory control and unplanned crew override. Supervisory control, particularly when performed under cognitive load with additional monitoring tasks, is essential for ensuring overall mission success during landing contingencies. Evaluating performance in a relevant Human Landing System (HLS) supervisory landing task after long-duration microgravity exposure can help identify potential risks from human error and sensorimotor alterations. Adaptive changes in the sensorimotor system can manifest during g-transitions as spatial disorientation. Although training and landing aids facilitate successful landings despite disorientation, these adaptive changes may heighten cognitive demand, which must be considered in the landing strategy. It is important to characterize these effects as soon as possible following the G-transition while the sensorimotor system remains in a state of adaptive flux to inform appropriate countermeasures. METHODS A Multi-attribute Lunar Table Battery (MALTB) task was developed for an iOS tablet device to provide flexible crew testing and training capabilities in-flight and on the ground. Elements of the tablet task were derived from the Multi-Attribute Task Battery (MATB, Cegarra et al. 2020). The task requires crew members to study a map of a planned landing site and memorizing the terrain and surface landmarks to inform potential divert maneuvers during landing. The user will oversee a series of approaches through touchdown simulations on the tablet with an external camera view of the Lunar surface. The primary responsibility of the crew member will be to execute a divert if the guidance recommended site is erroneous (e.g., the guidance projected landing target is not within 10m of the planned landing site center), or the projected landing site is no longer suitable due to surface obstacles. Considering vehicle maneuverability and fuel reserves, the divert capabilities will diminish as the task progresses. In cases where a divert is initiated, a new landing target will need to be designated by the user and will be evaluated for the proximity to the original pre-planned site. A secondary operational monitoring task will challenge the user's cognitive reserve by requiring the user to maintain several gauges within acceptable limits and respond to a visual indicator while completing the landing approach. Outcome measures include distance from the planned landing site to the user-initiate divert landing location, ground slope at the new landing site, time to divert, the ability to accomplish the secondary monitoring tasks, and perceived workload. The tablet task is being evaluated in a ground-based study to determine the learning effect of first-time users. The tablet task will be utilized in a flight study to test performance multiple times postflight. Future potential testing in-flight have been identified for capsules with iOS tablet devices. Multi-attribute Lunar Table Battery Task MALTB comprises video footage of thirty distinct landing conditions. The landing scenarios feature various landing sites (n = 3), hazardous object sizes (n = 6), sun azimuth degrees (n = 4), camera modes (i.e., fixed or gimbaled), and navigation bias (i.e., true or false). Each seventy second trial uses a sixty-degree constant glideslope trajectory. The application architecture and layout include user identification setup and data storing, a guided walkthrough of the task and interface components, practice mode for task familiarization, and a modified Bedford workload scale administered following task completion. The time-based dependent measures are saved locally to the iOS Files application and post-processing scripts have been developed to evaluate the remaining measures of performance. RELEVANCE This project will deliver an operational demonstration of crew monitoring capability following spaceflight and identify potential deficits that may require remediation. Comparison of individual vestibular and cognitive changes with crew performance will help better characterize the landing risks associated with sensorimotor alterations. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS: This project is funded by NASA’s Human Research Program Human Health Countermeasures Element. REFERENCES Cegarra J, Valery B, Avril E, Calmettes C, Navarro J (2020) OpenMATB: A Multi-Attribute Task Battery promoting task customization, software extensibility and experiment replicability. Behav Res Methods 52:1980-1990 doi: 10.3758/s13428-020-01364-w

Matthew McDonnell↗

NASA NTRS2023

Adaptive Independent Verification and Validation (IV&V) Reduces Risk of Software Impacting Safety in Artemis Missions

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) is asking more of its human spaceflight programs than ever before through the collective Artemis Missions. The NASA Independent Verification and Validation (IV&V) Program contributes to NASA’s human spaceflight goals by providing IV&V services for NASA’s critical spacecraft and ground software. The IV&V Program is tasked with providing assurance from both individual and integrated mission software perspectives. The Artemis IV&V organization is actively supporting six distinct development efforts: Orion, the Space Launch System (SLS), Exploration Ground Systems (EGS), Mission Control Center (MCC), the Lunar Gateway, and the Human Landing System (HLS), representing a wide diversity of developer organizations, management structures, and development approaches. With much of this extremely complex flight and ground software being essential to human safety both on the ground and in space, Artemis IV&V is likewise challenged to provide more value-added assurance to future Artemis missions within a constrained budget. To meet this challenge, Artemis IV&V employs a variety of novel and evolving “Adaptive IV&V” approaches for planning and executing IV&V analysis to increase both the efficiency and effectiveness of the IV&V Program’s assurance activities, and to address the difficulties imposed by assuring software for a large, highly integrated, multi-mission enterprise managed and executed by physically and organizationally distinct programs. Instilling agile principles like iterative planning cycles, self-organizing teams, and regular retrospectives, into IV&V planning and execution has led to a more rapid turnaround of a minimum viable assurance product and allowed for increased alignment of assurance activities with development progress. Adopting an assurance case methodology has led to greater consistency and clearer communication of assurance design and provided a foundation for long-term maintenance of assurance plans, products, and results across missions. The IV&V-developed Assurance / Safety Case Analytical Network (A-SCAN) framework and tool has enabled the quantification and tracking of system/software risk and confidence. These confidence measures provide a means to repeatedly express the impact of planned and completed assurance work and the remaining residual risk. Applied as part of a “Follow-the-Risk” organizational ethos, this allows consistent rightsizing of analysis rigor and intensity commensurate with the perceived risk of defects, as well as appropriate targeting of the highest risk areas of the software to find safety issues before they can manifest. Finally, the development of the IV&V Advanced Risk Reduction Integrated Software Test and Operations Tri-program Lightweight Environment (ARRISTOTLE), an integrated software-only simulation of Orion, SLS, and EGS systems, has made it possible to independently test integrated pad and flight scenarios and inject faults to observe how the Artemis multi-program, mission software behaves in degraded modes and in response to hazards. These adaptive IV&V investments have enabled Artemis IV&V to become more efficient and effective in IV&V planning and execution and respond more readily to changes in the risk landscape, increasing the breadth and depth of risk reduction possible within the available resources. Residual risk tracking allows IV&V to communicate more effectively with stakeholders, both internal and external at all levels, and inform key decision-making personnel. This evolving assurance design approach provides IV&V surety that work is performed in the highest risk, most value-added areas of the software, to keep our astronauts and ground crews safe and ensure mission success.

Gerek A Whitman↗

NASA NTRS2023

Adaptive Independent Verification and Validation (IV&V) Reduces Risk of Software Impacting Safety in Artemis Missions

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) is asking more of its human spaceflight programs than ever before through the collective Artemis Missions. The NASA Independent Verification and Validation (IV&V) Program contributes to NASA’s human spaceflight goals by providing IV&V services for NASA’s critical spacecraft and ground software. The IV&V Program is tasked with providing assurance from both individual and integrated mission software perspectives. The Artemis IV&V organization is actively supporting six distinct development efforts: Orion, the Space Launch System (SLS), Exploration Ground Systems (EGS), Mission Control Center (MCC), the Lunar Gateway, and the Human Landing System (HLS), representing a wide diversity of developer organizations, management structures, and development approaches. With much of this extremely complex flight and ground software being essential to human safety both on the ground and in space, Artemis IV&V is likewise challenged to provide more value-added assurance to future Artemis missions within a constrained budget. To meet this challenge, Artemis IV&V employs a variety of novel and evolving “Adaptive IV&V” approaches for planning and executing IV&V analysis to increase both the efficiency and effectiveness of the IV&V Program’s assurance activities, and to address the difficulties imposed by assuring software for a large, highly integrated, multi-mission enterprise managed and executed by physically and organizationally distinct programs. Instilling agile principles like iterative planning cycles, self-organizing teams, and regular retrospectives, into IV&V planning and execution has led to a more rapid turnaround of a minimum viable assurance product and allowed for increased alignment of assurance activities with development progress. Adopting an assurance case methodology has led to greater consistency and clearer communication of assurance design and provided a foundation for long-term maintenance of assurance plans, products, and results across missions. The IV&V-developed Assurance / Safety Case Analytical Network (A-SCAN) framework and tool has enabled the quantification and tracking of system/software risk and confidence. These confidence measures provide a means to repeatedly express the impact of planned and completed assurance work and the remaining residual risk. Applied as part of a “Follow-the-Risk” organizational ethos, this allows consistent rightsizing of analysis rigor and intensity commensurate with the perceived risk of defects, as well as appropriate targeting of the highest risk areas of the software to find safety issues before they can manifest. Finally, the development of the IV&V Advanced Risk Reduction Integrated Software Test and Operations Tri-program Lightweight Environment (ARRISTOTLE), an integrated software-only simulation of Orion, SLS, and EGS systems, has made it possible to independently test integrated pad and flight scenarios and inject faults to observe how the Artemis multi-program, mission software behaves in degraded modes and in response to hazards. These adaptive IV&V investments have enabled Artemis IV&V to become more efficient and effective in IV&V planning and execution and respond more readily to changes in the risk landscape, increasing the breadth and depth of risk reduction possible within the available resources. Residual risk tracking allows IV&V to communicate more effectively with stakeholders, both internal and external at all levels, and inform key decision-making personnel. This evolving assurance design approach provides IV&V surety that work is performed in the highest risk, most value-added areas of the software, to keep our astronauts and ground crews safe and ensure mission success.

Gerek Whitman↗

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 NTRSDate not supplied

Lunar Surface Cargo Offloading Concepts

A sustainable presence on the lunar surface will serve as a vital training ground and technology demonstration test site in preparation for future human missions to Mars. Robotic lunar surface campaigns will focus on the exploration of resources providing information on the availability and extraction of usable resources, such as oxygen and water, and prepare the surface for a sustained human presence. Landers, outfitted with sensor packages, will be used to conduct risk-reduction activities and aid in the development of technologies prior to the crewed lunar missions that drive the need to for a logistics supply chain that requires offloading. A series of landers will be required on other planetary surfaces to build up the capabilities, capitalizing on those resources, required for sustained human presence. In each of those landers will be cargo including ascent vehicles, habitats, supplies, science packages, spare parts, fluids commodities for fuel and life support, and others varying in volume and ranging from mass in hundreds of kilograms to an estimated 6-14 metric tons to support Human Landing Systems and surface logistics requirements. This paper will examine the challenge of offloading examples of these cargo elements from different categories of landers on the lunar surface using a variety of methodologies. Challenges on the lunar surface arise with the conditions present (thermal, lighting, communications, regolith consistency), the desire to minimize mass of all landed systems, the desire to perform much of the activities with limited to minimal human interaction, and the overall configuration of the landers that are responsible for landing the cargo.

Lunar↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Lunar Surface Cargo Offloading Concepts

A sustainable presence on the lunar surface will serve as a vital training ground and technology demonstration test site in preparation for future human missions to Mars. Robotic lunar surface campaigns will focus on the exploration of resources providing information on the availability and extraction of usable resources, such as oxygen and water, and prepare the surface for a sustained human presence. Landers, outfitted with sensor packages, will be used to conduct risk-reduction activities and aid in the development of technologies prior to the crewed lunar missions that drive the need to for a logistics supply chain that requires offloading. A series of landers will be required on other planetary surfaces to build up the capabilities, capitalizing on those resources, required for sustained human presence. In each of those landers will be cargo including ascent vehicles, habitats, supplies, science packages, spare parts, fluids commodities for fuel and life support, and others varying in volume and ranging from mass in hundreds of kilograms to an estimated 6-14 metric tons to support Human Landing Systems and surface logistics requirements. This paper will examine the challenge of offloading examples of these cargo elements from different categories of landers on the lunar surface using a variety of methodologies. Challenges on the lunar surface arise with the conditions present (thermal, lighting, communications, regolith consistency), the desire to minimize mass of all landed systems, the desire to perform much of the activities with limited to minimal human interaction, and the overall configuration of the landers that are responsible for landing the cargo.

Lunar↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Manual Crew Override of Vehicle Landings Following G-Transitions

BACKGROUND Manual control during exploration spaceflight consists of both planned automated supervisory control and unplanned crew override. This crew override capability is critical to enable overall mission success during landing contingencies. However, the introduction of manual override capabilities must be implemented to enable crews to mitigate risks introduced by human error. Adaptive changes in the sensorimotor system can manifest during g-transitions as spatial disorientation. While training and landing aids enable successful landing through disorientation, these adaptive changes may increase cognitive demand that needs to be accounted for in the manual control strategy. It is important to characterize these effects as soon as possible following the G-transition to develop appropriate countermeasures. METHODS In this study, we will examine operational piloting tasks following International Space Station (ISS) missions in a simulated lunar landing using a six-degree-of-freedom (6DOF) motion base. The motion-based simulation will be implemented in our laboratory at the Johnson Space Center (JSC) and will be available within hours following the return from commercial crew landings. The primary goals of this study are (1) to understand the impact of spaceflight on crew ability to perform manual crew override tasks, (2) to examine how adaptive changes in vestibular and cognitive function relate to changes in manual crew override proficiency, and (3) compare performance during late “just-in-time” on-board training with early post-flight crew performance. The impact of spaceflight on piloting capability will be assessed from pre- versus post-flight changes in crewmembers assigned to either short duration (< 30 day) or long duration (~6- month) missions to the International Space Station (ISS). Individual differences in post-flight vestibular and cognitive changes include motion sickness reports, measures of tilt motion perception accuracy and precision, and dual-task tracking. During the 6DOF lunar simulation, the crew will manually takeover attitude and rate-of-descent to the nominal or re-designated landing aim point during the approach phase. The outcome measures for the lunar crew override tasks will be the percent time maintaining actual vehicle states, e.g., attitude and rate-of-descent, within recommended guidance during the landing approach, number and maximum deviation outside limits, and root mean square error (RMSE). Given that “just-in-time” (JIT) training is an operational expectation for the Human Landing System (HLS) program, all participants will perform late inflight JIT training for each manual crew override task in which they will participate. Crew proficiency will be captured inflight during JIT training that will be implemented on a laptop with hand controllers to allow the crewmember to practice the landing task procedures like the approach implemented for JIT training with Shuttle landing and ISS telerobotic tasks. COUNTERMEASURE UPDATES The lunar lander simulation has been implemented onto a two-laptop display system where subjects select from alternative landing points, based upon avoiding hazards that the on-board system identifies during the landing. The subject makes inputs using a rotational hand controller (i.e., joystick) and a translational hand controller, which are processed by simulated vehicle dynamics to update the vehicle attitude and rate of descent. Subjects will utilize a combination of flight, situation, and status displays to monitor the state of the simulated vehicle. The simulation exports tilt and translation movements to a 6DOF motion base synced to visual movements and provides representative vestibular cues to the subject while performing the task inside an enclosed cabin featuring a simulated lunar out-the-window view and a heads-down lander cockpit view. RELEVANCE This project will deliver an operational demonstration of crew override capability following spaceflight and identify potential deficits that may require remediation. Comparison of individual vestibular and cognitive changes with crew override performance will help better characterize the manual control risks associated with sensorimotor alterations. The inclusion of “just-in-time” on-board training will ensure we are characterizing changes in override proficiency with this expected countermeasure in place. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS: The authors acknowledge contributions from Draper, HLS Joint Test Panel, Crew HLS Interfaces for Piloting Working Group, and Dynamic Skills Trainer (DST) Lab toward the development of the lunar landing simulation. This project is funded by the Human Health Countermeasures Element.

Austin M Bollinger↗

NASA NTRS2024

Moon to Mars (M2M) Cross Program Utilization Payload Safety Process

It is the goal of Moon to Mars (M2M) to establish a single consolidated set of safety requirements and a safety review process for utilization payloads that will cross program vehicle hatches or operate externally on multiple program vehicles during transport or operation that satisfies Exploration Ground Systems (EGS), Orion, EVA, and Human Surface Mobility Program (EHP), Gateway (GW), and Human Landing System (HLS) programs. This document defines the Cross Program Utilization Payload (xPUP) safety review process for mission effectivity of Artemis III and beyond. This review process will help ensure protection of the overall Moon to Mars integrated system from potential hazards created by cross program payloads that either cross a program vehicle hatch or can interface with more than one M2M lunar exploration program vehicle. The process will identify payload hazards and controls that will protect ground personnel, flight crew, the integrated vehicle, ground equipment, or facilities. This process is also applicable to samples that cross hatches between vehicles including for return to Earth. The xPUP safety review process will be led by one of the M2M programs' integration safety panels, chosen on a per-payload basis. After the lead integration safety panel is determined, the common safety process is established, based on pre-determined criteria, which includes ad-hoc members from other stakeholder programs. Stakeholder programs are those that interface with the utilization payload in any way (e.g., operating on a lunar exploration vehicle or crossing program vehicle hatches). The xPUP will execute this safety review process for flight and ground utilization payload hardware design, its ground support equipment, and landing and recovery in accordance with the applicable safety requirements as specified in M2M-30043: Moon to Mars Cross Program Utilization Payload Safety Requirements. The xPUP safety process will follow the lead integration safety panel’s safety process requirements. Formal agreements will be communicated with the payload developer using the payload integration processes documented in M2M-30037, Artemis Payload Integration Implementation Plan.

payloads↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Artemis Deep Space Habitation: Enabling a Sustained Human Presence on the Moon and Beyond

As NASA and its partners’ capabilities for human exploration of deep space continue to mature, so too does its roadmap toward a sustained crewed presence on the surface of the Moon and eventual human missions to Mars. The first launch of the Space Launch System and Orion crew vehicle, the contract award for the first demonstrations of a Human Landing System, and the beginning of construction on the initial elements of the lunar Gateway have marked major milestones toward NASA’s near-term exploration goals: a long-duration outpost in orbit around the Moon and the next footsteps on the lunar surface. At the same time, NASA is in the early phases of planning the capabilities that will be needed for long-term exploration. Among the common elements that will be required by long-duration stays on the lunar surface, transit to Mars, and Martian surface expeditions will be new habitats unlike any flown to date. NASA is currently working on development of both architectures for those habitats and on the technological advancements that will enable them, with an eye toward systems that will not only extend mission operations but also provide for living quarters that will keep the crew happy and healthy throughout their expeditions. Beyond the Gateway habitation needs, these capabilities will need to be defined and advanced to support the initial lunar surface missions and to prepare for human missions to the Mars system. The Surface Habitat is the current concept in consideration to serve as this initial surface habitat that will extend the crew mission durations. It will provide 30-to-60-day habitability for a crew of up to four allowing for the astronauts to explore farther and longer on each visit to the lunar surface. NASA is also currently reviewing opportunities to use current or near-term in-space habitation systems as proving grounds or precursors for keeping astronauts safe and healthy during future transits to Mars. Already, the International Space Station (ISS) is being used for implementation of next-generation life-support systems that will inform those used in exploration habitats, and the operations approach for ISS is providing lessons-learned for future science operations around or on the Moon.1U.S. Government work not protected by U.S. copyright While a suite of habitation concepts is currently under study within NASA, the agency is also working closely with U.S. industry through the Next Space Technologies for Exploration Partnerships (NextSTEP) activity to understand their concepts for commercially provided habitation capabilities as well as close coordination with international partners to understand their desires for in-space and surface habitation. This paper will provide a status of these concepts and partnership activities as well as potential future technology and architecture development paths.

Habitat↗

NASA NTRS2022

Regenerative Life Support Systems for Exploration Habitats: Unique Capabilities and Challenges to Enable Long-Duration-Mission Habitats Beyond Low Earth Orbit

The Artemis I launch of NASA’s Space Launch System and Orion crew vehicle will mark a major milestone in the agency’s efforts to return humans to the Moon. Work is underway on the Human Landing System that will carry the next astronauts to the lunar surface, and the lunar orbiting Gateway that will host science and serve as a platform to support sustained human presence on the Moon and ultimately crewed missions to Mars. Two decades of continuous human presence on the International Space Station has provided a wealth of experience operating, upgrading, and demonstrating advanced Regenerative Environmental Control and Life Support Systems (Regen ECLSS). However, habitats that enable sustained lunar surface presence and transit to Mars will encounter many unique conditions and challenges. System characteristics including reliability, maintainability, mass, and power become significantly more critical. Operating environments associated with lower total pressure, low gravity, contingency protocols, and extensive un-crewed and dormant periods impose additional functionality requirements and alter the performance of certain critical systems. Integration and combined operations with other elements such as orbiting outposts, logistics suppliers, and mobility platforms impact capability and interface requirements. Limits on allocated water and oxygen consumable mass influence the need for higher levels of water and oxygen recovery from waste products. Impacts and challenges these unique exploration circumstances impose on the suite of Regen ECLSS systems are explored and discussed herein.

David F Howard↗