Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Repurpose”

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

Mitigation Strategies for Space Radiation Health Risks

Astronauts embarking on missions beyond low Earth orbit (LEO) will be exposed to a radiation field that may increase the risks of developing cancer, cardiovascular diseases, central nervous system disorders, and immune decrements. Operational parameters will be the primary determinants of crew radiation exposure. NASA uses integrated design tools and risk models to optimize these parameters to minimize radiation exposure. NASA is also considering medical countermeasures (MCMs) to reduce radiation-associated health risks. MCMs for potential use in space-based applications can be developed from a variety of sources, including: a) population-based chemoprevention trials against targeted diseases b) drug development efforts focused on treating acute effects from accidental radiation exposures c) drug development to mitigate side effects of radiotherapy d) mechanistic studies of distinct damage caused by high charge (Z) and energy (HZE) radiation. Use of agents developed for other applications, or repurposed, is advantageous because long-term safety in humans is already established.

Huff, Janice L.↗

Reduced Gravity Contributes to Neutrophil to Lymphocyte Ratio Shifting and Promotion of the Oxidative Stress Response

Spaceflight can cause immune system dysfunction, such as elevated white blood cells (WBC) and polymorphonuclear neutrophils (PMN), along with unchanged or reduced lymphocyte counts. A high PMN to lymphocyte ratio (NLR) can acts as a poor prognosis in cancer and a biomarker for subclinical inflammation however, the NLR has not been identified as a predictor of astronaut health during spaceflight. CBC data collected on board the International Space Station (ISS) was repurposed to determine the granulocyte to lymphocyte ratio (GLR) in humans and the NLR in rodents. The results displayed a progressive increase in GLR and NLR during spaceflight and at landing. The mechanism for increased NLR was assessed in vitro using the microgravity-analog, rotating wall vessel (RWV), with human WBCs. The results indicated that simulated microgravity led to increased GLR and NLR profiles, and production of reactive oxygen species (ROS) and myeloperoxidase (MPO). Interestingly, simulated microgravity increased the number of matured PMNs that showed impaired phagocytic function, while treatment with tert-Butyl hydroperoxide (TBHP), also reduced PMN phagocytosis. In addition, 30-days of simulated microgravity (hindlimb unloading) in mice, indicated an increased NLR and MPO gene expression, which were mitigated in mitochondrial catalase overexpressing transgenic mice, suggesting ROS scavenging is essential for maintaining homeostatic immunity. Collectively, we propose that the health status of astronauts during future short- and long-term space missions can be monitored by their NLR profile, in addition to utilizing this measurement as a tool for oxidative stress response countermeasure development to restore homeostatic immunity.

Paul, Amber M.↗

Characterization and Commissioning of a Ka-Band Ground Station for Cognitive Algorithm Development

In 2018, the Cognitive Communications and Propagation projects completed installation and checkout testing of a new Ka-Band ground station at the NASA Glenn Research Center in Cleveland, Ohio. The Cognitive Algorithms Demonstration Testbed (CADeT) was developed to provide a fully characterized and controllable dynamic link environment to researchers looking to demonstrate hardware and software aligned with atmospheric sensing and cognitive algorithms. CADeT integrates a host of precision control and measurement systems in addition to repurposing a 5.5 meter beam-waveguide dish platform previously used with the Advanced Communications Technology Satellite (ACTS). This paper will discuss the laboratory testing of ground station components with a emphasis on elements vital to achieving link budget requirements including characterization of the new Gallium Nitride (GaN) Solid State Power Amplifier (SSPA) and far-field measurements of the new antenna feed. Finally, the paper discusses in-situ tests conducted with CADeT and the Tracking and Data Relay Satellite System (TDRSS) to validate laboratory results and make necessary link budget adjustments before reviewing the lessons learned.

Cameron M Seidl↗

Medical Countermeasures for Radiation Induced Health Effects: Reports of an Interagency Panel Session Held at the NASA Human Research Program Investigator's Workshop, January 26, 2017

An Interagency Panel Session organized by the NASA Human Research Program Space Radiation Program Element (SRPE) was held during the NASA Human Research Program (HRP) Investigator’s Workshop (IWS) in Galveston, Texas on January 26, 2017 to identify complementary research areas that will advance the testing and development of medical countermeasures (MCM) in support of radioprotection and radiation mitigation on the ground and in space. There were several areas of common interest identified among the various participating agencies. This report provides a summary of the topics discussed by each agency along with potential areas of intersection for mutual collaboration opportunities. Common goals included repurposing of pharmaceuticals, neutraceuticals for use as radioprotectors and/or mitigators, low-dose/chronic exposure paradigms, late effects post-radiation exposure, mixed-field exposures of gamma-neutron, performance decrements, and methods to determine individual exposure levels.

Carnell, Lisa S.↗

Building the RS-25 Engine for NASA’s Next Generation of Exploration.

NASA is aggressively pursuing a human lunar return to the Moon with the Artemis Program. The Space Launch System (SLS) is critical to the transportation architecture, providing both crew and cargo capability. To accelerate SLS development, NASA settled on space shuttle heritage propulsion technologies. Early missions will use repurposed RS-25 engines from the Shuttle Program adapted to SLS requirements. For future missions, however, NASA and engine contractor Aerojet Rocketdyne are restarting RS-25 production with a goal of using the latest manufacturing technologies to produce an RS-25 variant that will cost at least 30 percent less than the shuttle-era engines developed and flown for almost 30 years. The prospect of restarting the production line on these engines after many years and modifying the engine to reduce cost and better match the needs of the SLS vehicle presented unique challenges and opportunities for NASA and Aerojet Rocketdyne. NASA and AR are now deep into the process of adapting 16 RS-25 engines for the first four SLS Artemis flights and building the first RS-25 “Restart” engines for future Artemis missions. In addition to navigating programmatic, technical, and logistical challenges with the current RS-25 production work, NASA and AR have partnered to pursue new methods of building this engine through advanced manufacturing techniques to further reduce the cost and schedule required to build each RS-25 engine to contribute to the long-term affordability of the SLS vehicle. This presentation will discuss the goals for the restart program, the challenges, and results to date.

Jessica Jean Wood↗

Going beyond reliability to robustness and resilience in space systems

The words reliability, robustness, and resilience, are often used interchangeably to describe tough and dependable systems but the distinctions between them suggest how to design more serviceable space systems. Reliability is simply the quality of consistently performing well. A system that dependably meets its design requirements in the specified environments is reliable. The designers may not consider themselves responsible for failures under unanticipated conditions. Robustness is the capability of performing without failure under a wide range of conditions, which can go beyond the expected range to include possible off-nominal conditions. Resilience is the ability to recover from or adapt to damaging events, such as failures, accidents, external disruptions, and repurposing. Such changes are usually unanticipated. They often invalidate the usual operating assumptions and cause system failure. Reliability, robustness, and resilience describe dependable performance under increasingly difficult conditions, first the specified environment, then a wider possible environment, and finally unanticipated damaging events. These three are increasingly desirable and increasingly difficult to achieve. Engineering for resilience would design systems that can ignore or repair failures, survive accidents, and recover from disruptions. Increasing the resilience of space systems, the ability to perform after unanticipated events, would greatly increase space crew safety. Improving reliability and robustness can be done by dealing with known sources of problems, but improving resilience requires implementing a general approach to reducing the impact of unknown future events. Two contrasting approaches are reducing system complexity and adding supervisory control. The need for resilience has been claimed for decades but little has been accomplished. Systems designers assume that they understand requirements, technologies, designs, architectures, integration, testing, operations, and environments. The potential problems of changes, failures, accidents, unknown environments, and unknown unknowns are ignored. Systems designers are typically overconfident and ignore the need for robustness and resilience.

Harry W Jones↗

Going Beyond Reliability to Robustness and Resilience in Space Life Support Systems

The words reliability, robustness, and resilience are often used interchangeably to describe tough and dependable systems but the distinctions between them suggest how to design more serviceable space systems. Reliability is simply the quality of consistently performing well. A system that dependably meets its design requirements in the specified environment is reliable. The designers may not consider themselves responsible for failures under unanticipated conditions. Robustness is the capability of performing without failure under a wide range of conditions, which can go beyond the expected range to include possible off-nominal conditions. Resilience is the ability to recover from or adapt to unanticipated damaging events, such as failures, accidents, external disruptions, and repurposing. Such changes can invalidate the usual operating assumptions and cause system failure. Reliability, robustness, and resilience describe dependable performance under increasingly difficult conditions, first the specified environment, then a wider possible environment, and finally unanticipated damaging conditions. These three qualities are increasingly desirable and increasingly difficult to achieve. Engineering for resilience would design systems that can ignore or repair failures, survive accidents, and recover from unanticipated disruptions. Increasing the resilience of space systems would greatly increase space crew safety. Improving reliability and robustness requires dealing with known problems, but improving resilience requires implementing a general approach to reducing the impact of unknown future events. The need for robustness and resilience has been stated for decades but little has been done. Systems designers often assume that they understand everything they need to know. The potential failures caused by changes, failures, accidents, unknown environments, and unknown unknowns can be ignored. Such overconfidence can lead to neglect of reliability, robustness, and resilience.

Harry W. Jones↗

Analysis of Alternative Architectures for Cargo Lunar Landers

NASA’s Human Landing System (HLS) program has been working with commercial partners to develop human-class lunar landers to return the first American woman and next American man to the lunar surface in the mid 2020’s. In an effort to expand human presence beyond low Earth orbit, NASA’s Artemis program aims to facilitate a sustainable, long-term human presence in cis-lunar space. A component of this will require significant infrastructure to be delivered to the lunar surface. Delivering this infrastructure will require a significant lander capability that has yet to be developed. A thorough understanding of cargo lunar lander architectures is required such that select alternatives can be identified that best support the Artemis program’s objective of sustainability. The goal of this study is to aid NASA and its partners in the understanding of the cargo lunar lander trades space, as well as identify potential robust alternatives. The results will support NASA as it moves forward with key activities such as requirements formulation, agency strategic planning, and potential cargo lunar lander procurements. The study builds off of recent work performed by the Human Landing System program’s Architecture and Systems Analysis group to encompass a broad trade space of cargo lunar lander architecture alternatives. The current trade space as depicted by the morphological matrix and mission graph in Fig. 1 and Fig. 2, respectively, includes key alternative options that have become highly relevant due to current HLS activities and include on-orbit refueling, active cryogenic fluid management, Earth orbit aggregation, and global lunar access. The authors believe that there is also a statistically relevant impact of lander-payload configuration on the primary structure of the vehicle that could greatly impact alternative selection. Because of this, several conceptual lander-payload configurations will be evaluated to determine the level of impact. The current set of conceptual configurations are shown in Fig. 3 and Fig. 4. To aid the conceptual evaluation of these configurations, a catalogue of notional payloads has been developed that represent a wide range of masses and volumes that are expected to be delivered in support of a sustained human lunar presence, including pressurized and unpressurized rovers, surface habitats, power systems, and other support infrastructure. In order to execute this study in a timely fashion, a similar approach to that utilized in a similar 2019 study focused on 2024 human lunar sorties will be employed [1]. The team utilized a novel architecture synthesis framework currently being developed by NASA/MSFC to evaluate over 600,000 lunar lander architectures over a two month time frame [2]. From this large data set, varying ground rules and assumptions were applied as filters to explore the trade space to identify alternatives which exhibited robustness, as measured by launch vehicle payload margin, to absorb the natural growth that occurs during design maturation. The set of Earth-Moon system Delta-Vs assumed from the 2019 study, shown in Fig. 5, will be repurposed to accelerate model formulation for this effort. Additionally, current efforts in collaboration with the Georgia Institute of Technology’s Aerospace System Design Lab will be integrated to provide probabilistic modeling of the cargo lunar lander architectures to aid in identifying robust design alternatives [3]. The approach will help minimize potential impacts due to large levels of uncertainty inherent to pre phase-A conceptual design. By leveraging these past and present studies and partnerships, a highly detailed set of data can be generated in a short time period to aid NASA in the coming years to support the goal of a sustained human lunar presence.

Architectures↗

Sun search desgin for the Psyche spacecraft

Psyche is a scientific mission to explore the large asteroid (16) Psyche that orbits the Sun at ~3 AU. Managed by JPL, it is the first instance of Maxar’s product line of geosynchronous communication satellites being repurposed for deep space. This paper presents the design of a unique sun sensor configuration for Safe Mode of the spacecraft. It enables quick, robust, and propellant-efficient safing while leveraging sensors, avionics, and algorithms that have extensive, flight-proven heritages

Turner, Eric↗

Going beyond reliability to achieve robustness

Reliability is the ability to perform well and consistently. More formally, reliability is defined as the mathematical probability that a system does not fail during a specified time period under its specified operating conditions. The specified operating conditions often go beyond the nominal environment to include variations and challenges encountered in operational use. The difficulty is that systems are often operated outside of their specified operating conditions and, if they fail, the designers are in theory blameless. Unanticipated damaging events include internal failures, external disruptions in supporting systems, accidents, and repurposing. The most common explanation of a system failure is human error, which is usually the first assumption of the system designers. Robustness is the capability to perform without failure under a wide range of conditions that go beyond the specified operating conditions. The first step towards improving robustness would be to expand the system’s specified operating conditions to include a wider range of anticipated challenges, especially human error. Beyond this, there is a need for general approach to reduce the impact of unanticipated future events, the unknown unknowns, by improving the system’s general ability to cope. Robustness can be improved by providing additional processing capacity, larger flow control buffers, increased backup storage, more online redundancy, and more capable supervisory monitoring and control.

Harry W Jones↗

Nancy Grace Roman Space Telescope Observatory Implementation and Challenges

NASA’s Nancy Grace Roman Space Telescope (Roman), previously referred to as Wide Field Infrared Survey Telescope (WFIRST), was named after Dr. Nancy Grace Roman, an astronomer and NASA pioneer of modern space-based astronomy who is known as the “mother of the Hubble Space Telescope”. Roman is a deep space infrared observatory with a Hubble-sized telescope and wide field of view instrument (greater than 100 times that of Hubble’s) that will conduct a high latitude time-domain survey, a high latitude imaging and spectroscopic survey, and a galactic bulge time-domain survey to characterize dark energy and expand the census of exoplanets in our galaxy while allowing a broad range of astrophysics research. Roman will also demonstrate exoplanet coronagraphy with active wave front control technology and provide general investigator programs for the science community. Roman is finishing the critical design phase and is planning for launch in 2026. It will operate in a quasi-halo orbit about Sun-Earth L2, 1.5 million kilometers from Earth, for a five-year primary mission life. The Observatory features an Optical Telescope Assembly with an existing, repurposed 2.4m primary mirror, a Wide Field Instrument with a focal plane array comprised of 18 HgCdTe near-infrared detectors and a grism, prism and filter elements for imaging and spectroscopy in support of the primary surveys, as well as a Coronagraph instrument technology demonstration with starlight suppression technology for direct imaging and spectroscopy of exoplanets. The telescope is mounted to the Instrument Carrier composite truss structure which also optically meters each instrument, includes a Launch Load and Vibration Isolation System to provide passive isolation of spacecraft jitter sources while also supporting the payload during launch and is attached to the Spacecraft Bus. The Spacecraft also includes a Solar Array Sunshield ,Deployable Aperture Cover, Lower Instrument Sunshade, High Gain Antenna System, and Outer Barrel Assembly. Figure 1 shows an overview of the Roman Observatory. When fully integrated, Roman will be the largest Observatory assembled and tested at NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center. Figure 1. Roman Observatory Overview Development of scientific satellites is challenging by nature, as the pursuit to broaden scientific knowledge always pushes the boundary of what has come before. The implementation of the Roman mission is a prime example and expected challenges have been augmented by the foundational decision to use the existing telescope components, developed in the early 2000s by another Government agency for a different application. Other unique aspects of the Roman mission, such as its survey nature, the vast amount of data required to meet science objectives, and packaging of the Observatory elements around the existing telescope components, create constrained design spaces that drive competing requirements across Observatory subsystems. Given these challenges, systems engineering has been a critical discipline in balancing implementation decisions for the Roman mission and will continue to play a key role going forward. This paper will discuss details of the Roman Observatory configuration, as well as some of the systems engineering challenges and the decision-making process used to mature the Roman Space Telescope preliminary design to implementation.

Lisa Ml Bartusek↗

Going Beyond Reliability to Robustness and Resilience in Space Life Support Systems

The words reliability, robustness, and resilience are often used interchangeably to describe tough and dependable systems but the distinctions between them suggest how to design more serviceable space systems. Reliability is simply the quality of consistently performing well. A system that dependably meets its design requirements in the specified environment is reliable. The designers may not consider themselves responsible for failures under unanticipated conditions. Robustness is the capability of performing without failure under a wide range of conditions, which can go beyond the expected range to include possible off-nominal conditions. Resilience is the ability to recover from or adapt to unanticipated damaging events, such as failures, accidents, external disruptions, and repurposing. Such changes can invalidate the usual operating assumptions and cause system failure. Reliability, robustness, and resilience describe dependable performance under increasingly difficult conditions, first the specified environment, then a wider possible environment, and finally unanticipated damaging conditions. These three qualities are increasingly desirable and increasingly difficult to achieve. Engineering for resilience would design systems that can ignore or repair failures, survive accidents, and recover from unanticipated disruptions. Increasing the resilience of space systems would greatly increase space crew safety. Improving reliability and robustness requires dealing with known problems, but improving resilience requires implementing a general approach to reducing the impact of unknown future events. The need for robustness and resilience has been stated for decades but little has been done. Systems designers often assume that they understand everything they need to know. The potential failures caused by changes, failures, accidents, unknown environments, and unknown unknowns can be ignored. Such overconfidence can lead to neglect of reliability, robustness, and resilience.

Harry W. Jones↗

Retired Satellites: A chance to shed light

Satellite data are vital to decisions about both environmental and human health. As satellites are replaced and decommissioned, they could be repurposed to spark new scientific insights.

Eleanor C Stokes↗

Mars Sample Return (MSR) Sample Receiving Facility (SRF) Assessment Study (MSAS)

NASA, in partnership with the European Space Agency (ESA), is seeking to return Martian geological and atmospheric samples to Earth for scientific study in the early 2030s. Due to the possibility that the samples could contain extraterrestrial life, Mars Sample Return (MSR) is classified as a Category V: Restricted Earth Return mission by the NASA Planetary Protection Office. As a result of this classification, a MSR Sample Receiving Facility (SRF) must not only provide a pristine environment to ensure samples are protected from terrestrial contamination for scientific investigations, it must also provide high-containment (biosafety level 4 [BSL-4]-equivalence) to isolate the samples from Earth’s biosphere until the samples are deemed safe for release and/or sterilized. The nominal utilization period for a SRF is anticipated to be 2-5 years and is intended to enable curation activities, biohazard assessment, select early science activities, and the rapid release of samples to the scientific community. However, to account for possible delays in schedule or the identification of extant life, this anticipated period of time must be flexible to accommodate schedule extensions and contingency plans. Due to requirements for high-level biological containment and cleanliness, a traditional receiving/curation facility cannot be utilized for MSR. Therefore, beginning in 2022, NASA Johnson Space Center is performing a MSR SRF Assessment Study (MSAS) to investigate the most optimal facility modality for a MSR SRF, as well as start to define programmatic early estimate of costs and schedules before the initial design phase begins. NASA is partnering with industry contractors (architectural and engineering firms with BSL-4 and cleanroom technology experience, as well as other contracted infrastructure and construction specialists) along with selected experts from NASA, ESA, existing U.S. BSL-4 facilities, and other U.S. government agencies, to carry out the assessment study. The MSAS should also aid in the future refinement of the science requirements (e.g., contamination control, equipment accommodations) before site-specific design would commence. As part of the MSAS, NASA is planning to assess an array of possibilities for a MSR SRF. One of the main considerations is the facility modality and whether an existing BSL-4 facility can be utilized (for some or all functions); or, if new constructure would be required, would a traditional fixed facility or a modular facility the best choice. MSAS will also investigate the ability of the modalities to accommodate two different facility capability endmembers: 1) a minimal facility focusing on biohazard assessment and curation tasks with a small footprint, and 2) an enhanced facility with additional capabilities to enable expedited processing and the completion of time-sensitive and (some) sterilization-sensitive science. The assessment is intended to generate information that will inform the selection of facility modalities for high-level conceptual design development. While the assessment study will focus on SRF requirements for accommodating curation, science, and sample safety assessment infrastructure, it will also consider an array of other factors, such as ease of access for international users, decommissioning, repurposing, future sale or lease following MSR’s use of the facility, and uncontained preparatory laboratory spaces. Upon completion of the study, the preferred modality and refined requirements would be utilized for site-specific design but will not be finalized until NASA’s completion of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) process.

A.D. Harrington↗

Configuration and Projected Capabilities of the Common Habitat Medical Care Facility

The Common Habitat is a large, long-duration habitat being explored as part of a conceptual study (not an active NASA program) that uses an SLS core stage Liquid Oxygen (LOX) tank as its primary structure. It is intended for use on the Moon as part of a permanently occupied outpost, on Mars as part of an outpost that will be occupied for hundreds of days at a time, and in deep space as part of the Deep Space Exploration Vehicle where it will support crewed missions up to 1200 days in duration. A study of internal orientation and crew size resulted in a Common Habitat configuration sized for a crew of eight with a three-deck horizontal orientation. Additional work outside the scope of this paper is developing a vertical translation system, a crew mobility aids system based on wearable gecko-derived grippers, and a crew seating/restraint system. These systems are all assumed for use in conjunction with the Medical Care Facility, which is needed to maintain crew well-being during these missions, where distance from Earth precludes the possibility of evacuation to Earth. This paper describes recent improvements in the Common Habitat Medical Care Facility and associated benefits for crew survivability in long duration missions beyond Earth orbit. These improvements were made with the assistance of a NASA Pathways intern whose experience includes a tour of duty in Afghanistan as an Army combat medic with the 691st GHOST-T, attached to the 1st and 7th US Special Forces Groups as part of Operation Freedom’s Sentinel, where he helped provide far-forward surgical capabilities in austere combat environments. The initial baseline Medical Care Facility was developed working in conjunction with University of Houston Space Architecture graduate students. The facility was placed on the upper deck of the Common Habitat in a location that provided privacy, operational volume, and was close to the vertical translation pathway. The notional outfitting repurposed component CAD models from unrelated studies and notionally indicated a level of care roughly equivalent to that aboard the International Space Station. The CAD modeling provided notional stowage volumes, a deployable surface, some fixed equipment, an ultrasound, and a potentially reconfigurable treatment table. While this facility is clearly a competent arrangement, it was desired to leverage available expertise and upgrade the station given the vast distances from Earth to be experienced by the Common Habitat. Key driving requirements applied to the upgrade included to provide Medical Level of Care V, offer enhanced telemedicine capabilities, provide patient physical accommodation, provide caregiver access to the patient from all sides, include sliding pocket doors for access to hygiene and to the Vertical Translation System, and to add any additional capability possible for the best achievable medical care. The first step in the facility upgrade was to quantify the current medical inventory on the International Space Station and ensure that sufficient stowage volume was present for this purpose. To that end, the ISS medical kits were reviewed, and eight full size mid deck lockers were placed in the facility. A number of additional devices were also added, based on the intern’s combat medic experience. Also, two fixed shelves and one horizontal work surface were added to the Medical Care Facility, with the shelves providing storage space for the additional devices and the work surface providing a location for the caregiver to work or stage equipment. Four display monitors were added to the wall above the horizontal work surface, supporting data display, telemedicine, conferencing, or other needs. The existing treatment table was replaced with a mobile surgical stretcher-chair. Two additional doors were added to the Medical Care Facility. One leads directly to the hygiene compartment, allowing it to support medical operations in addition to providing galley/wardroom support. The other door leads directly into the Vertical Translation System. The wall adjacent to the subsystems bay was moved, adding additional volume to the Medical Care Facility. This improved caregiver access to the patient and allowed for a larger number of caregivers to be present. It also provided options for relocation of support equipment relative to the patient as needed. In the upgraded Medical Care Facility, the Surgical Stretcher-Chair and the Vertical Translation System can work together to provide incapacitated crew member transport from a site of injury on any deck of the Common Habitat to the Medical Care Facility. It can also support patient treatment in a variety of positions including a variety of sitting postures and a supine posture at a variety of pitch angles. The facility can also support caregiver office work for review of examination results, private consultation, inventory and maintenance, and a variety of other purposes. A forward activity will be to conduct evaluations of the Medical Care Facility with different medical scenarios. Additionally, ambient and task lighting selections remain as forward work. The eight mid deck lockers can be augmented to use as portable equipment carts, similar to a manner in which maintenance facility stowage was used as portable carts during the NASA Desert Research and Technology Studies in the Constellation Program. Trash accommodation will also need forward work to assess, including provision for wet trash, dry trash, and biological waste. It will be important to assess a redesign of the surgical stretcher-chair. The commercial version used in the upgrade can only enable vertical translation in the seated configuration, requiring the patient to bend both hips and knees. A possible redesign of the chair will allow for vertical translation without requiring any bending at the hip or knees. Also, the commercial version is wheeled, making it mobile in gravity but unanchored in microgravity. Work will be needed to adapt the chair for gravity-independent performance. The hygiene compartment can be redesigned for dual-use medical scrub and galley handwash facility. Pending sufficient volume, it may also be possible to place sanitation equipment in this location to clean medical tools. Finally, most space architectures have never allowed for more than one incapacitated crew member, but several scenarios could potentially injure two or more crew in the same incident. This facility could be assessed to determine its present ability to address two or more injured crew in parallel and determine the potential upper limit for number of treatable crew in a multi-crew injury scenario, or to treat polytrauma of a single patient.

Habitat↗

A Deployable 40 kWe Lunar Fission Surface Power Concept

Continuous power at the kilowatt level will be imperative for future lunar users including crew infrastructure, future science, and in-situ resource utilization (ISRU). The Compass Team explored both 10 kWe and 40 kWe concepts, assuming planned lander and rover capabilities. Both concepts found that a crew pressurized rover chassis, repurposed for deploying reactor power components, could place a fission surface power system (FSPS) at least one km from users. While the 10 kWe fission power system (FPS) could be deployed as a single unit, the 40 kWe system was too large and had to be deployed in multiple trips with the same rover. Key technologies and design approaches included a high-assay low-enriched uranium (HALEU), yttrium hydride (YH) moderated heat pipe reactor, Stirling convertors, deployable radiators based on International Space Station (ISS) designs, and power conversion/transmission at ±2800 VDC for a one km remote distance.

Fission Power↗

Open-source Wireless Sensor Network (Wi-Se Net) for Flexible Deployment

Wireless sensors, especially if battery powered, have a number of advantages over wired sensors for flexible or temporary diagnostic deployment in a field or lab setting. Recent advances in wireless technology and microprocessor boards have produced a variety of inexpensive off-the shelf chips which can communicate wirelessly with simple protocols. This paper describes the design and implementation of a highly customizable wireless sensor network (called WiSe Net) using inexpensive open-source hardware components as wireless nodes. These wireless sensor nodes can transmit data at a rate <250 Hz, can be battery powered, and have a small footprint (2x5 cm). In addition, a preliminary over-the-air programming system was developed to allow for simple wireless configuration when active. The network performance was demonstrated by taking distributed and electrically isolated temperature measurements on a high-voltage lab apparatus. Although this test case is in a laboratory setting, this network architecture could be easily repurposed for various other forms of monitoring

Wireless Sensor Network↗

Configuration and Projected Capabilities of the Common Habitat Medical Care Facility

The Common Habitat is a large, long-duration habitat being explored as part of a conceptual study (not an active NASA program) that uses an SLS core stage Liquid Oxygen (LOX) tank as its primary structure. It is intended for use on the Moon as part of a permanently occupied outpost, on Mars as part of an outpost that will be occupied for hundreds of days at a time, and in deep space as part of the Deep Space Exploration Vehicle where it will support crewed missions up to 1200 days in duration. A study of internal orientation and crew size resulted in a Common Habitat configuration sized for a crew of eight with a three-deck horizontal orientation. Additional work outside the scope of this paper is developing a vertical translation system, a crew mobility aids system based on wearable gecko-derived grippers, and a crew seating/restraint system. These systems are all assumed for use in conjunction with the Medical Care Facility, which is needed to maintain crew well-being during these missions, where distance from Earth precludes the possibility of evacuation to Earth. This paper describes recent improvements in the Common Habitat Medical Care Facility and associated benefits for crew survivability in long duration missions beyond Earth orbit. These improvements were made with the assistance of a NASA Pathways intern whose experience includes a tour of duty in Afghanistan as an Army combat medic with the 691st GHOST-T, attached to the 1st and 7th US Special Forces Groups as part of Operation Freedom’s Sentinel, where he helped provide far-forward surgical capabilities in austere combat environments. The initial baseline Medical Care Facility was developed working in conjunction with University of Houston Space Architecture graduate students. The facility was placed on the upper deck of the Common Habitat in a location that provided privacy, operational volume, and was close to the vertical translation pathway. The notional outfitting repurposed component CAD models from unrelated studies and notionally indicated a level of care roughly equivalent to that aboard the International Space Station. The CAD modeling provided notional stowage volumes, a deployable surface, some fixed equipment, an ultrasound, and a potentially reconfigurable treatment table. While this facility is clearly a competent arrangement, it was desired to leverage available expertise and upgrade the station given the vast distances from Earth to be experienced by the Common Habitat. Key driving requirements applied to the upgrade included to provide NASA’s Medical Level of Care V, offer enhanced telemedicine capabilities, provide patient physical accommodation, provide caregiver access to the patient from all sides, include sliding pocket doors for access to hygiene and to the Vertical Translation System, and to add any additional capability possible for the best achievable medical care. The first step in the facility upgrade was to quantify the current medical inventory on the International Space Station and ensure that sufficient stowage volume was present for this purpose. To that end, the ISS medical kits were reviewed, and eight full size mid deck lockers were placed in the facility. A number of additional devices were also added, based on the co-author’s combat medic experience. Also, two fixed shelves and one horizontal work surface were added to the Medical Care Facility, with the shelves providing storage space for the additional devices and the work surface providing a location for the caregiver to work or stage equipment. Four display monitors were added to the wall above the horizontal work surface, supporting data display, telemedicine, conferencing, or other needs. The existing treatment table was replaced with a mobile surgical stretcher-chair. Two additional doors were added to the Medical Care Facility. One leads directly to the hygiene compartment, allowing it to support medical operations in addition to providing galley/wardroom support. The other door leads directly into the Vertical Translation System. The wall adjacent to the subsystems bay was moved, adding additional volume to the Medical Care Facility. This improved caregiver access to the patient and allowed for a larger number of caregivers to be present. It also provided options for relocation of support equipment relative to the patient as needed. In the upgraded Medical Care Facility, the Surgical Stretcher-Chair and the Vertical Translation System can work together to provide incapacitated crew member transport from a site of injury on any deck of the Common Habitat to the Medical Care Facility. It can also support patient treatment in a variety of positions including a variety of sitting postures and a supine posture at a variety of pitch angles. The facility can also support caregiver office work for review of examination results, private consultation, inventory and maintenance, and a variety of other purposes. A forward activity will be to conduct evaluations of the Medical Care Facility with different medical scenarios. Additionally, ambient and task lighting selections remain as forward work. The eight middeck lockers can be augmented to use as portable equipment carts, similar to a manner in which maintenance facility stowage was used as portable carts during the NASA Desert Research and Technology Studies in the Constellation Program. Trash accommodation will also need forward work to assess, including provision for wet trash, dry trash, and biological waste. It will be important to assess a redesign of the surgical stretcher-chair. The commercial version used in the upgrade can only enable vertical translation in the seated configuration, requiring the patient to bend both hips and knees. A possible redesign of the chair will allow for vertical translation without requiring any bending at the hip or knees. Also, the commercial version is wheeled, making it mobile in gravity but unanchored in microgravity. Work will be needed to adapt the chair for gravity-independent performance. The hygiene compartment can be redesigned to serve both as a medical scrub facility and for galley hand washing. Pending sufficient volume, it may also be possible to place sanitation equipment in this location to clean medical tools. Finally, most space architectures have never allowed for more than one incapacitated crew member, but several scenarios could potentially injure two or more crew in the same incident. This facility could be assessed to determine its present ability to address two or more injured crew in parallel and determine the potential upper limit for number of treatable crew in a multi-crew injury scenario, or to treat polytrauma of a single patient.

Common Habitat↗