Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “CABIN ATMOSPHERE”

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 109 records · Page 6
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Medical Lessons Learned from the Exploration Atmospheres Study

Background: The National Aeronautics and Space Administration’s (NASA) Exploration Atmospheres study (EA) was done to evaluate alternative cabin atmospheres for future spacecraft designs and planetary surface exploration of the Moon, Mars and beyond. Deep space exploration involves creating habitats and environments safe for human occupancy and means to explore the outside environment (extravehicular activities, EVA). In order to validate alternative atmospheres and pre-spacewalk procedures, the EA study was conducted to evaluate factors such as hypoxia risks, denitrogenation protocols, food limitations, medications, and the impact of other factors on human performance. Overview: Space travel is constrained by mass, volume, power and the cost of vehicle development, which creates tradeoffs in various capabilities, including breathing gasses. Higher atmospheric pressure in a vehicle means more gas, and a stronger containment vessel/habitat; while lower pressure requires higher oxygen partial pressure, which may increase fire risk. NASA’s EA study evaluated a proposed alternative cabin environment (8.2 psia, 34% Oxygen), for future spacecraft habitat, and planetary EVAs. EA included both a 3-day and a 11-day trial. These trials included a depressurization and saturation to 8.2psi at 34% O2 with additional depresses to 4.3 psia at 85% O2 for simulated EVAs, (1 EVA during the 3-day and 5 during the 11-day trials). Discussion: Planning for and executing the medical monitoring and response plan for a trial of this scope was a huge undertaking with no prior practice to fall back on. Food obstacles, sleeping issues, medications, joint injury, equipment limitations, medical privacy, multiple cases of decompression sickness, and even a COVID outbreak among the support team proved challenging. Conclusion: Testing of this nature is an essential part NASA’s preparation for the upcoming Lunar Artemis missions. As spaceflight transitions beyond low earth orbit, to planetary, even more trials of this nature will be required to learn what are the optimal atmospheric and associated operational constraints to maintain the optimal health of the crew and achieve mission objectives.

R Sanders↗
NASA NTRS1992

Shuttle Orbiter Environmental Control and Life Support System - Flight experience

This paper describes the overall design of the Shuttle Orbiter Environmental Control and Life Support System (ECLSS). The Orbiter ECLSS consists of six major subsystems which accomplish the functions of providing a habitable pressurized cabin atmosphere and removing gaseous contaminants, controlling the temperature of the cabin and vehicle components within acceptable ranges, providing fire detection and suppression capability, maintaining a supply of potable water, collecting and removing metabolic waste materials, and providing utilities and access for extravehicular activity. The operational experience is summarized for the 45 space flights accomplished to date during which the Orbiter ECLSS has been demonstrated to perform reliably, and has proved to have the flexibility to meet a variety of mission needs. Significant flight problems are described, along with the design or procedure changes which were implemented to resolve the problems.

Winkler, H. E.↗
NASA NTRS1977

Atmospheric analyzer, carbon monoxide monitor and toluene diisocyanate monitor

The purpose of the atmospheric analyzer and the carbon monoxide and toluene diisocyanate monitors is to analyze the atmospheric volatiles and to monitor carbon monoxide and toluene diisocyanate levels in the cabin atmosphere of Skylab. The carbon monoxide monitor was used on Skylab 2, 3, and 4 to detect any carbon monoxide levels above 25 ppm. Air samples were taken once each week. The toluene diisocyanate monitor was used only on Skylab 2. The loss of a micrometeoroid shield following the launch of Skylab 1 resulted in overheating of the interior walls of the Orbital Workshop. A potential hazard existed from outgassing of an isocyanate derivative resulting from heat-decomposition of the rigid polyurethane wall insulation. The toluene diisocyanate monitor was used to detect any polymer decomposition. The atmospheric analyzer was used on Skylab 4 because of a suspected leak in the Skylab cabin. An air sample was taken at the beginning, middle, and the end of the mission.

Shannon, A. V.↗
NASA NTRS2015

Design Considerations for a Crewed Mars Ascent Vehicle

Exploration architecture studies identified the Mars Ascent Vehicle (MAV) as one of the largest "gear ratio" items in a crewed Mars mission. Because every kilogram of mass ascended from the Martian surface requires seven kilograms or more of ascent propellant, it is desirable for the MAV to be as small and lightweight as possible. Analysis identified four key factors that drive MAV sizing: 1) Number of crew: more crew members require more equipment-and a larger cabin diameter to hold that equipment-with direct implications to structural, thermal, propulsion, and power subsystem mass. 2) Which suit is worn during ascent: Extravehicular Activity (EVA) type suits are physically larger and heavier than Intravehicular Activity (IVA) type suits and because they are less flexible, EVA suits require more elbow-room to maneuver in and out of. An empty EVA suit takes up about as much cabin volume as a crew member. 3) How much time crew spends in the MAV: less than about 12 hours and the MAV can be considered a "taxi" with few provisions for crew comfort. However, if the crew spends more than 12 consecutive hours in the MAV, it begins to look like a Habitat requiring more crew comfort items. 4) How crew get into/out of the MAV: ingress/egress method drives structural mass (for example, EVA hatch vs. pressurized tunnel vs. suit port) as well as consumables mass for lost cabin atmosphere, and has profound impacts on surface element architecture. To minimize MAV cabin mass, the following is recommended: Limit MAV usage to 24 consecutive hours or less; discard EVA suits on the surface and ascend wearing IVA suits; Limit MAV functionality to ascent only, rather than dual-use ascent/habitat functions; and ingress/egress the MAV via a detachable tunnel to another pressurized surface asset.

Rucker, Michelle A.↗
NASA NTRS1972

Experimental evaluation of three leak detection and location concepts for space stations

Three leak (or precursor damage modes) detection and location concepts for space station overboard leakage were evaluated experimentally. The techniques are: (1) static and dynamic seal leak detector sensing of moisture or all gases in space cabin atmosphere, (2) active ultrasonic Lamb-wave detection of flaws or cracks in cabin wall, and (3) impact gage detection of stress waves induced in cabin pressure wall by meteoroid or orbital impact. The experimental results obtained in the program demonstrated that all three leak detection and location concepts are feasible. With further development, the methods can be integrated into an effective damage control system for advanced manned earth-orbital systems.

Scherb, M. V.↗
NASA NTRS2021

Thermal Radiator for CO2 Deposition in Deep Space Transit (FY21 XHab Final Report - University of North Texas)

This UNT Senior design team was tasked by NASA to develop a variable conductance thermal radiator prototype for CO2 deposition for deep space transit. NASA selects university teams every year to partake in the X-HAB Academic Innovation Challenge, with this year’s number of teams being six. Air Revitalization is a crucial system for any space travel, be it for Low Earth Orbit, such as the International Space Station, or for deep space transit. Current systems, such as the Carbon Dioxide Removal Apparatus aboard the ISS, require upkeep and maintenance, which cannot be done on long distance space missions. For the past several years, NASA has done research on Cryogenic systems for Carbon Dioxide removal. These systems operate on the fact that Carbon Dioxide freezes at a higher temperature than Oxygen and Nitrogen, so Carbon Dioxide can be frozen out of the cabin atmosphere without the use of filters, which degrade over time. To cool the cabin air down to a temperature where Carbon Dioxide freezes, Stirling cryocoolers have been used, which have shown promise in the hope of Carbon Dioxide deposition for Cabin Air Revitalization. Cryogenic systems are much more reliable but require significant energy input to operate. Physical systems, such as radiators, have generally not been used for this task, as there is a need to be able to “turn off” the rejection of heat to allow the frozen carbon dioxide to be collected. However, with working fluids pumped through a physical radiator, that aspect of operation can be achieved. The goal of this challenge is to determine the effectiveness of a variable conductance thermal radiator that can reject heat to deep space, without the use of a dedicated cryocooler to remove energy from the cabin air. The proposed design uses piping, hot and cold working fluids, and non-condensable gas to absorbl heat from the cabin air on one side of the radiator and reject the heat to deep space by means of thermal radiation. As well, the system will allow for the recovery of deposited Carbon Dioxide. The UNT X-HAB 2021 team will create a model radiator and test its performance with simulated heat sources and sinks and extrapolate those data points to analyze for real world conditions.

Travis Seaver↗
NASA NTRS2010

Planetary Protection Considerations for Life Support and Habitation Systems

Life support systems for future human missions beyond low Earth orbit may include a combination of existing hardware components and advanced technologies. Discipline areas for technology development include atmosphere revitalization, water recovery, solid waste management, crew accommodations, food production, thermal systems, environmental monitoring, fire protection and radiation protection. Life support systems will be influenced by in situ resource utilization (ISRU), crew mobility and the degree of extravehicular activity. Planetary protection represents an additional set of requirements that technology developers have generally not considered. Planetary protection guidelines will affect the kind of operations, processes, and functions that can take place during future exploration missions, including venting and discharge of liquids and solids, ejection of wastes, use of ISRU, requirements for cabin atmospheric trace contaminant concentrations, cabin leakage and restrictions on what materials, organisms, and technologies that may be brought on missions. Compliance with planetary protection requirements may drive development of new capabilities or processes (e.g. in situ sterilization, waste containment, contaminant measurement) and limit or prohibit certain kinds of operations or processes (e.g. unfiltered venting). Ultimately, there will be an effect on mission costs, including the mission trade space. Planetary protection requirements need to be considered early in technology development programs. It is expected that planetary protection will have a major impact on technology selection for future missions.

Barta, Daniel J.↗
NASA NTRS2009

Status of the ISS Trace Contaminant Control System

A habitable atmosphere is a fundamental requirement for human spaceflight. To meet such a requirement, the cabin atmosphere must be constantly scrubbed to maintain human life and system functionality. The primary system for atmospheric scrubbing of the US on-orbit segment (USOS) of the International Space Station (ISS) is the Trace Contaminant Control System (TCCS). As part of the Environmental Control and Life Support Systems (ECLSS) atmosphere revitalization rack in the US Lab, the TCCS operates continuously, scrubbing trace contaminants generated primarily by two sources: the metabolic offgassing of crew members and the offgassing of equipment in the ISS. It has been online for approximately 95% since activated in February 2001. The TCCS is comprised of a charcoal bed, a catalytic oxidizer, and a lithium hydroxide post-sorbent bed, all of which are designed to be replaced onorbit when necessary. In 2006, all three beds were replaced following an observed increase in the system resistance that occurred over a period several months. The beds were returned to ground and subjected to a test, teardown and evaluation to investigate the root cause(s) of the decrease in flow rate through the system. In addition, various chemical and physical analyses of the bed materials were performed to determine contaminant loading and any changes in performance. This paper will mainly focus on the results of these analyses and how this correlates with what has been observed from archival sampling and onorbit events. This may provide insight into the future performance of the TCCS and rate of change for orbital replacement units in the TCCS.

Macatangay, Ariel V.↗
NASA NTRS2011

Crew Survivability After a Rapid Cabin Depressurization Event

Anecdotal evidence acquired through historic failure investigations involving rapid cabin decompression (e.g. Challenger, Columbia and Soyuz 11) show that full evacuation of the cabin atmosphere may occur within seconds. During such an event, the delta-pressure between the sealed suit ventilation system and the cabin will rise at the rate of the cabin depressurization; potentially at a rate exceeding the capability of the suit relief valve. It is possible that permanent damage to the suit pressure enclosure and ventilation loop components may occur as the integrated system may be subjected to delta pressures in excess of the design to pressures. Additionally, as the total pressure of the suit ventilation system decreases, so does the oxygen available to the crew. The crew may be subjected to a temporary incapacitating, but non-lethal, hypoxic environment. It is expected that the suit will maintain a survivable atmosphere on the crew until the vehicle pressure control system recovers or the cabin has otherwise attained a habitable environment. A common finding from the aforementioned reports indicates that the crew would have had a better chance at surviving the event had they been in a protective configuration, that is, in a survival suit. Making use of these lessons learned, the Constellation Program implemented a suit loop in the spacecraft design and required that the crew be in a protective configuration, that is suited with gloves on and visors down, during dynamic phases of flight that pose the greatest risk for a rapid and uncontrolled cabin depressurization event: ascent, entry, and docking. This paper details the evaluation performed to derive suit pressure garment and ventilation system performance parameters that would lead to the highest probability of crew survivability after an uncontrolled crew cabin depressurization event while remaining in the realm of practicality for suit design. This evaluation involved: (1) assessment of stakeholder expectations to validate the functionality being imposed; (2) review/refinement of concept of operations to establish the potential triggers for such an event and define the response of the spacecraft and suit ventilation loop pressure control systems; and (3) assessment of system capabilities with respect to structural capability and pressure control. 1 Crew and Thermal Systems Division, NASA Johnson Space Center, Mail Code: AES29, 2101 NASA Parkway, Houston,

Sargusingh, Miriam J.↗
NASA NTRS2012

Crew Survivability After a Rapid Cabin Depressurization Event

Anecdotal evidence acquired through historic failure investigations involving rapid cabin decompression (e.g. Challenger, Columbia and Soyuz 11) show that full evacuation of the cabin atmosphere may occur within seconds. During such an event, the delta-pressure between the sealed suit ventilation system and the cabin will rise at the rate of the cabin depressurization; potentially at a rate exceeding the capability of the suit relief valve. It is possible that permanent damage to the suit pressure enclosure and ventilation loop components may occur as the integrated system may be subjected to delta pressures in excess of the design-to pressures. Additionally, as the total pressure of the suit ventilation system decreases, so does the oxygen available to the crew. The crew may be subjected to a temporarily incapacitating, but non-lethal, hypoxic environment. It is expected that the suit will maintain a survivable atmosphere on the crew until the vehicle pressure control system recovers or the cabin has otherwise attained a habitable environment. A common finding from the aforementioned reports indicates that the crew would have had a better chance at surviving the event had they been in a protective configuration, that is, in a survival suit. Making use of these lessons learned, the Constellation Program implemented a suit loop in the spacecraft design and required that the crew be in a protective configuration, that is suited with gloves on and visors down, during dynamic phases of flight that pose the greatest risk for a rapid and uncontrolled cabin depressurization event: ascent, entry, and docking. This paper details the evaluation performed to derive suit pressure garment and ventilation system performance parameters that would lead to the highest probability of crew survivability after an uncontrolled crew cabin depressurization event while remaining in the realm of practicality for suit design. This evaluation involved: (1) assessment of stakeholder expectations to validate the functionality being imposed; (2) review/refinement of concept of operations to establish the potential triggers for such an event and define the response of the spacecraft and suit ventilation loop pressure control systems; and (3) assessment of system capabilities with respect to structural capability and pressure control.

Sargusingh, Miriam J.↗
NASA NTRS2009

A Survey of Terrestrial Approaches to the Challenge of Lunar Dust Containment

Numerous technical challenges exist to successfully extend lunar surface exploration beyond the tantalizing first steps of Apollo. Among these is the challenge of lunar dust intrusion into the cabin environment. Addressing this challenge includes the design of barriers to intrusion as well as techniques for removing the dust from the cabin atmosphere. Opportunities exist for adapting approaches employed in dusty industrial operations and pristine manufacturing environments to cabin environmental quality maintenance applications. A survey of process technologies employed by the semiconductor, pharmaceutical, food processing, and mining industries offers insight into basic approaches that may be suitable for adaptation to lunar surface exploration applications.

Aguilera, Tatiana↗
NASA NTRS2005

Development of an Amine-based System for Combined Carbon Dioxide, Humidity, and Trace Contaminant Control

A number of amine-based carbon dioxide (CO2) removal systems have been developed for atmosphere revitalization in closed loop life support systems. Most recently, Hamilton Sundstrand developed an amine-based sorbent, designated SA9T, possessing approximately 2-fold greater capacity compared to previous formulations. This new formulation has demonstrated applicability for controlling CO2 levels within vehicles and habitats as well as during extravehicular activity (EVA). System volume is competitive with existing technologies. Further enhancements in system performance can be realized by incorporating humidity and trace contaminant control functions within an amine-based atmosphere revitalization system. A 3-year effort to develop prototype hardware capable of removing CO2, H2O, and trace contaminants from a cabin atmosphere has been initiated. Progress pertaining to defining system requirements and identifying alternative amine formulations and substrates is presented.

Nalette, Tim↗