Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Human spaceflight operations”

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

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

At least 91 records · Page 5

Evaluation of Self-Scheduling Exercises Completed by Analog Crewmembers in NASA's Human Exploration Research Analog (HERA)

NASA human spaceflight missions are inherently dynamic and require frequent scheduling changes in order to adapt to changing mission priorities and objectives. Tactical level changes to the mission plan are traditionally made by a team of expert planners and operations specialists on the ground. However, astronauts are expected to execute missions more autonomously during future long duration missions. Astronauts will need to take on some of the responsibility of managing their own schedule while still abiding by the numerous constraints required by human spaceflight operations. This paper summarizes salient elements of crew performance in NASA’s Human Exploration Research Analog Campaign 3. Analog crewmembers completed a series of self-scheduling exercises to evaluate Playbook’s usability towards enabling self-scheduling without support from ground control. Playbook is a self-scheduling software tool designed and developed by our team. We also investigated how to best communicate self-scheduling tasks and constraints to the crew in order to facilitate efficient self-scheduling during isolation in a realistic environment. Our analysis identified that 30 minutes was sufficient to complete complex self-scheduling tasks. Our evaluation also identified differences between individual and collaborative performance; analog crewmembers completed self-scheduling exercises more quickly as a team as opposed to individually and reported lower subjective difficulty ratings overall.

HERA↗

End-to-End Mission Design & Trajectory Optimization

The ability to compute end-to-end mission optimized trajectories is a critical component needed for the next generation of complex human spaceflight design and operations (Orion, HLS, Gateway, Mars). This project created a new interface for two of NASA’s trajectory tools: Copernicus and Genesis, enabling them to be used together for end-to-end mission design and optimization of all flight phases, including Earth ascent, lunar ascent, rendezvous, and lunar descent. This capability can also serve as a pathfinder for developing a future autonomous, onboard trajectory optimizer.

Software↗

Executive Summary for CIF22 Project: End-to-End Mission Design & Trajectory Optimization

The goal of this project was the integration of NASA's Copernicus and Genesis trajectory design tools to create a new capability for end-to-end mission design and optimization of all flight phases, including Earth ascent, lunar ascent, rendezvous, and lunar descent. This capability is a critical component needed for the next generation of complex human spaceflight design and operations (Orion, HLS, Gateway, Mars) and can serve as a pathfinder for developing a future autonomous, onboard trajectory optimizer. The result was the creation of a new Copernicus/Genesis plugin, which allows a Genesis trajectory (e.g., ascent or descent) to be incorporated into a Copernicus mission, enabling an end-to-end optimization. Inputs from Copernicus are sent to Genesis, which runs and produces output sent back to Copernicus. Thus, the full power of the Genesis tool is available in Copernicus and can be used for a wide variety of applications.

Jacob Williams↗

End-to-End Mission Design & Trajectory Optimization

The ability to compute end-to-end mission optimized trajectories is a critical component needed for the next generation of complex human spaceflight design and operations (Orion, HLS, Gateway, Mars). This project created a new interface for two of NASA’s trajectory tools: Copernicus and Genesis, enabling them to be used together for end-to-end mission design and optimization of all flight phases, including Earth ascent, lunar ascent, rendezvous, and lunar descent. This capability can also serve as a pathfinder for developing a future autonomous, onboard trajectory optimizer.

Software↗

Systems Analysis of In-Space Manufacturing Applications for the International Space Station and the Evolvable Mars Campaign

Maintenance logistics support is a significant challenge for extended human operations in space, especially for missions beyond Low Earth Orbit (LEO). For missions to Mars (such as NASA's Evolvable Mars Campaign (EMC)), where timely resupply or abort in the event of emergency will not be possible, maintenance logistics mass is directly linked to the Probability of Loss of Crew (P(LoC)), and the cost of driving down risk is an exponential increase in mass requirements. The logistics support strategies that have maintained human operations in LEO will not be effective for these deep space missions. In-Space Manufacturing (ISM) is a promising technological solution that could reduce logistics requirements, mitigate risks, and augment operational capabilities, enabling Earth- independent human spaceflight. This paper reviews maintenance logistics challenges for spaceflight operations in LEO and beyond, and presents a summary of selected results from a systems analysis of potential ISM applications for the ISS and EMC. A quantitative modeling framework and sample assessment of maintenance logistics and risk reduction potential of this new technology is also presented and discussed.

Owens, Andrew C.↗

Modeling Operations Costs for Human Exploration Architectures

Operations and support (O&S) costs for human spaceflight have not received the same attention in the cost estimating community as have development costs. This is unfortunate as O&S costs typically comprise a majority of life-cycle costs (LCC) in such programs as the International Space Station (ISS) and the now-cancelled Constellation Program. Recognizing this, the Constellation Program and NASA HQs supported the development of an O&S cost model specifically for human spaceflight. This model, known as the Exploration Architectures Operations Cost Model (ExAOCM), provided the operations cost estimates for a variety of alternative human missions to the moon, Mars, and Near-Earth Objects (NEOs) in architectural studies. ExAOCM is philosophically based on the DoD Architecture Framework (DoDAF) concepts of operational nodes, systems, operational functions, and milestones. This paper presents some of the historical background surrounding the development of the model, and discusses the underlying structure, its unusual user interface, and lastly, previous examples of its use in the aforementioned architectural studies.

cost estimating↗

Mission Planning for Robotic and Human Exploration

Mission planning for spaceflight is a complex challenge for ground operators managing robotic or human missions. It requires integrating the needs of various disciplines and creating an effective, efficient, and safe plan to execute. NASA uses specialized tools to meet planning requirements and constraints. This talk will provide an overview of spaceflight mission planning as well as the software tools the Human-Computer Interaction Group has built to support scheduling and planning. Also, it identifies the future scheduling and planning challenges for human Mars missions and how we leverage Earth Analogs to learn about Mars operations.

Scheduling and planning↗

Evolution of Training in NASA's Mission Operations Directorate

NASA s Mission Operations Directorate provides all the mission planning, training, and operations support for NASA's human spaceflight missions including the International Space Station (ISS) and its fleet of supporting vehicles. MOD also develops and maintains the facilities necessary to conduct training and operations for those missions including the Mission Control Center, Space Station Training Facility, Space Vehicle Mockup Facility, and Neutral Buoyancy Laboratory. MOD's overarching approach to human spaceflight training is to "train like you fly." This approach means not only trying to replicate the operational environment in training but also to approach training with the same mindset as real operations. When in training, this means using the same approach for executing operations, responding to off-nominal situations, and conducting yourself in the operations environment in the same manner as you would for the real vehicle.

Hutt, Jason↗

Highlights of NASA's Special ETO Program Planning Workshop on rocket-based combined-cycle propulsion system technologies

A NASA workshop on rocket-based combined-cycle propulsion technologies is described emphasizing the development of a starting point for earth-to-orbit (ETO) rocket technologies. The tutorial is designed with attention given to the combined development of aeronautical airbreathing propulsion and space rocket propulsion. The format, agenda, and group deliberations for the tutorial are described, and group deliberations include: (1) mission and space transportation infrastructure; (2) vehicle-integrated propulsion systems; (3) development operations, facilities, and human resource needs; and (4) spaceflight fleet applications and operations. Although incomplete the workshop elevates the subject of combined-cycle hypersonic propulsion and develops a common set of priniciples regarding the development of these technologies.

Escher, W. J. D.↗

NASA Human System Risk Assessment Process

NASA utilizes an evidence based system to perform risk assessments for the human system for spaceflight missions. The center of this process is the multi-disciplinary Human System Risk Board (HSRB). The HSRB is chartered from the Chief Health and Medical Officer (OCHMO) at NASA Headquarters. The HSRB reviews all human system risks via an established comprehensive risk and configuration management plan based on a project management approach. The HSRB facilitates the integration of human research (terrestrial and spaceflight), medical operations, occupational surveillance, systems engineering and many other disciplines in a comprehensive review of human system risks. The HSRB considers all factors that influence human risk. These factors include pre-mission considerations such as screening criteria, training, age, sex, and physiological condition. In mission factors such as available countermeasures, mission duration and location and post mission factors such as time to return to baseline (reconditioning), post mission health screening, and available treatments. All of the factors influence the total risk assessment for each human risk. The HSRB performed a comprehensive review of all potential inflight medical conditions and events and over the course of several reviews consolidated the number of human system risks to 30, where the greatest emphasis is placed for investing program dollars for risk mitigation. The HSRB considers all available evidence from human research and, medical operations and occupational surveillance in assessing the risks for appropriate mitigation and future work. All applicable DRMs (low earth orbit for 6 and 12 months, deep space for 30 days and 1 year, a lunar mission for 1 year, and a planetary mission for 3 years) are considered as human system risks are modified by the hazards associated with space flight such as microgravity, exposure to radiation, distance from the earth, isolation and a closed environment. Each risk has a summary two-page assessment representing the state of knowledge/evidence of that risk, available risk mitigations, traceability to the Space Flight Human System Standards (SFHSS) and program requirements, and future work required. These data then can drive coordinated budgets across the Human Research Program, the International Space Station, Crew Health and Safety and Advanced Exploration System budgets to provide the most economical and timely mitigations. The risk assessments were completed for the 6 DRMs and serve as the baseline for which subsequent research and technology development and crew health care portfolios can be assessed. The HSRB reviews each risk at least annually or when new evidence/information is available that adds to the body of evidence. The current status of each risk can be reported to program management for operations, budget reviews and general oversight of the human system risk management program.

Francisco, D.↗

Avoiding Human Error in Mission Operations: Cassini Flight Experience

Operating spacecraft is a never-ending challenge and the risk of human error is ever- present. Many missions have been significantly affected by human error on the part of ground controllers. The Cassini mission at Saturn has not been immune to human error, but Cassini operations engineers use tools and follow processes that find and correct most human errors before they reach the spacecraft. What is needed are skilled engineers with good technical knowledge, good interpersonal communications, quality ground software, regular peer reviews, up-to-date procedures, as well as careful attention to detail and the discipline to test and verify all commands that will be sent to the spacecraft. Two areas of special concern are changes to flight software and response to in-flight anomalies. The Cassini team has a lot of practical experience in all these areas and they have found that well-trained engineers with good tools who follow clear procedures can catch most errors before they get into command sequences to be sent to the spacecraft. Finally, having a robust and fault-tolerant spacecraft that allows ground controllers excellent visibility of its condition is the most important way to ensure human error does not compromise the mission.

guidance and control↗

Space Rescue

Space Rescue has been a topic of speculation for a wide community of people for decades. Astronauts, aerospace engineers, diplomats, medical and rescue professionals, inventors and science fiction writers have all speculated on this problem. Martin Caidin's 1964 novel Marooned dealt with the problems of rescuing a crew stranded in low earth orbit. Legend at the Johnson Space Center says that Caidin's portrayal of a Russian attempt to save the American crew played a pivotal role in convincing the Russians to join the real joint Apollo-Soyuz mission. Space Rescue has been a staple in science fiction television and movies portrayed in programs such as Star Trek, Stargate-SG1 and Space 1999 and movies such as Mission To Mars and Red Planet. As dramatic and as difficult as rescue appears in fictional accounts, in the real world it has even greater drama and greater difficulty. Space rescue is still in its infancy as a discipline and the purpose of this chapter is to describe the issues associated with space rescue and the work done so far in this field. For the purposes of this chapter, the term space rescue will refer to any system which allows for rescue or escape of personnel from situations which endanger human life in a spaceflight operation. This will span the period from crew ingress prior to flight through crew egress postlanding. For the purposes of this chapter, the term primary system will refer to the spacecraft system that a crew is either attempting to escape from or from which an attempt is being made to rescue the crew.

Muratore, John F.↗

NASA Human Health and Performance Strategy

In May 2007, what was then the Space Life Sciences Directorate, issued the 2007 Space Life Sciences Strategy for Human Space Exploration. In January 2012, leadership and key directorate personnel were once again brought together to assess the current and expected future environment against its 2007 Strategy and the Agency and Johnson Space Center goals and strategies. The result was a refined vision and mission, and revised goals, objectives, and strategies. One of the first changes implemented was to rename the directorate from Space Life Sciences to Human Health and Performance to better reflect our vision and mission. The most significant change in the directorate from 2007 to the present is the integration of the Human Research Program and Crew Health and Safety activities. Subsequently, the Human Health and Performance Directorate underwent a reorganization to achieve enhanced integration of research and development with operations to better support human spaceflight and International Space Station utilization. These changes also enable a more effective and efficient approach to human system risk mitigation. Since 2007, we have also made significant advances in external collaboration and implementation of new business models within the directorate and the Agency, and through two newly established virtual centers, the NASA Human Health and Performance Center and the Center of Excellence for Collaborative Innovation. Our 2012 Strategy builds upon these successes to address the Agency s increased emphasis on societal relevance and being a leader in research and development and innovative business and communications practices. The 2012 Human Health and Performance Vision is to lead the world in human health and performance innovations for life in space and on Earth. Our mission is to enable optimization of human health and performance throughout all phases of spaceflight. All HHPD functions are ultimately aimed at achieving this mission. Our activities enable mission success, optimizing human health and productivity in space before, during, and after the actual spaceflight experience of our crews, and include support for ground-based functions. Many of our spaceflight innovations also provide solutions for terrestrial challenges, thereby enhancing life on Earth. Our strategic goals are aimed at leading human exploration and ISS utilization, leading human health and performance internationally, excelling in management and advancement of innovations in health and human system integration, and expanding relevance to life on Earth and creating enduring support and enthusiasm for space exploration.

Davis, Jeffrey R.↗

NASA Human Health and Performance Strategy

In May 2007, what was then the Space Life Sciences Directorate, issued the 2007 Space Life Sciences Strategy for Human Space Exploration. In January 2012, leadership and key directorate personnel were once again brought together to assess the current and expected future environment against its 2007 Strategy and the Agency and Johnson Space Center goals and strategies. The result was a refined vision and mission, and revised goals, objectives, and strategies. One of the first changes implemented was to rename the directorate from Space Life Sciences to Human Health and Performance to better reflect our vision and mission. The most significant change in the directorate from 2007 to the present is the integration of the Human Research Program and Crew Health and Safety activities. Subsequently, the Human Health and Performance Directorate underwent a reorganization to achieve enhanced integration of research and development with operations to better support human spaceflight and International Space Station utilization. These changes also enable a more effective and efficient approach to human system risk mitigation. Since 2007, we have also made significant advances in external collaboration and implementation of new business models within the directorate and the Agency, and through two newly established virtual centers, the NASA Human Health and Performance Center and the Center of Excellence for Collaborative Innovation. Our 2012 Strategy builds upon these successes to address the Agency's increased emphasis on societal relevance and being a leader in research and development and innovative business and communications practices. The 2012 Human Health and Performance Vision is to lead the world in human health and performance innovations for life in space and on Earth. Our mission is to enable optimization of human health and performance throughout all phases of spaceflight. All HH&P functions are ultimately aimed at achieving this mission. Our activities enable mission success, optimizing human health and productivity in space before, during, and after the actual spaceflight experience of our crews, and include support for ground-­‐ based functions. Many of our spaceflight innovations also provide solutions for terrestrial challenges, thereby enhancing life on Earth. Our strategic goals are aimed at leading human exploration and ISS utilization, leading human health and performance internationally, excelling in management and advancement of innovations in health and human system integration, and expanding relevance to life on Earth and creating enduring support and enthusiasm for space exploration.

Davis, Jeffrey R.↗

Evaluation of the Oxygen Concentrator Prototypes: Pressure Swing Adsorption Prototype and Electrochemical Prototype

An oxygen concentrator is needed to provide enriched oxygen in support of medical contingency operations for future exploration human spaceflight programs. It would provide continuous oxygen to an ill or injured crew member in a closed cabin environment. Oxygen concentration technology is being pursued to concentrate oxygen from the ambient environment so oxygen as a consumable resource can be reduced. Because oxygen is a critical resource in manned spaceflight, using an oxygen concentrator to pull oxygen out of the ambient environment instead of using compressed oxygen can provide better optimization of resources. The overall goal of this project is to develop an oxygen concentrator module that minimizes the hardware mass, volume, and power footprint while still performing at the required clinical capabilities. Should a medical event occur that requires patient oxygenation, the release of 100 percent oxygen into a small closed cabin environment can rapidly raise oxygen levels to the vehicles fire limit. The use of an oxygen concentrator to enrich oxygen from the ambient air and concentrate it to the point where it can be used for medical purposes means no oxygen is needed from the ultra-high purity (99.5+% O2) oxygen reserve tanks. By not adding oxygen from compressed tanks to the cabin environment, oxygen levels can be kept below the vehicle fire limit thereby extending the duration of care provided to an oxygenated patient without environmental control system intervention to keep the cabin oxygen levels below the fire limits. The oxygen concentrator will be a Food and Drug Administration (FDA) clearable device. A demonstration unit for the International Space Station (ISS) is planned to verify the technology and provide oxygen capability. For the ISS, the demonstration unit should not exceed 10 kg (approximately 22 lb), which is the soft stowage mass limit for launch on resupply vehicles for the ISS. The unit's size should allow for transport within the spacecraft to an ill crewmember. The user interface needs to be designed for ease of use by the local care provider and with consideration to the limited amount of training available to the astronaut corps for medical equipment and procedures.

Gilkey, Kelly M.↗

Achieving the Proper Balance Between Crew and Public Safety

A paramount objective of all human-rated launch and reentry vehicle developers is to ensure that the risks to both the crew onboard and the public are minimized within reasonable cost, schedule, and technical constraints. Past experience has shown that proper attention to range safety requirements necessary to ensure public safety must be given early in the design phase to avoid additional operational complexities or threats to the safety of people onboard, and the design engineers must give these requirements the same consideration as crew safety requirements. For human spaceflight, the primary purpose and operational concept for any flight safety system is to protect the public while maximizing the likelihood of crew survival. This paper will outline the policy considerations, technical issues, and operational impacts regarding launch and reentry vehicle failure scenarios where crew and public safety are intertwined and thus addressed optimally in an integrated manner. An overview of existing range and crew safety policy requirements will be presented. Application of these requirements and lessons learned from both the Space Shuttle and Constellation Programs will also be discussed. Using these past programs as examples, the paper will detail operational, design, and analysis approaches to mitigate and balance the risks to people onboard and in the public. Manned vehicle perspectives from the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and Air Force organizations that oversee public safety will be summarized as well. Finally, the paper will emphasize the need to factor policy, operational, and analysis considerations into the early design trades of new vehicles to help ensure that both crew and public safety are maximized to the greatest extent possible.

Gowan, John↗

Making Spaceflight Practical and Affordable: Spacecraft Designs and Their Degree of Operability

As we push toward new and diverse space transportation capabilities, reduction in operations cost will become increasingly important. Achieving affordable and safe human spaceflight capabilities will be the mark of success for new programs and new providers. This paper reviews NASA s history in developing and operating human rated spacecraft, reviewing the key aspects of spacecraft design and their resultant impacts on operations phase complexity and cost. Specific examples from current and past programs are provided to tie together early program requirements, design implementation and resulting real-time operations experience into a complete "story" of design decisions and operational results. Based on these experiences, recommended techniques are outlined to enable earlier and more effective assessment of operations concerns during the design process.

Crocker, Alan R.↗