Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Commercial Crew”

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 NTRS2012

Enabling Exploration Through Docking Standards

Human exploration missions beyond low earth orbit will likely require international cooperation in order to leverage limited resources. International standards can help enable cooperative missions by providing well understood, predefined interfaces allowing compatibility between unique spacecraft and systems. The International Space Station (ISS) partnership has developed a publicly available International Docking System Standard (IDSS) that provides a solution to one of these key interfaces by defining a common docking interface. The docking interface provides a way for even dissimilar spacecraft to dock for exchange of crew and cargo, as well as enabling the assembly of large space systems. This paper provides an overview of the key attributes of the IDSS, an overview of the NASA Docking System (NDS), and the plans for updating the ISS with IDSS compatible interfaces. The NDS provides a state of the art, low impact docking system that will initially be made available to commercial crew and cargo providers. The ISS will be used to demonstrate the operational utility of the IDSS interface as a foundational technology for cooperative exploration.

Hatfield, Caris A.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Automated Software for Crewed Spacecraft - Bridging the Gap from Sci Fi to Reality

With a voice command or a few taps on the console, the spacecraft pivots on a dime at high velocity and gently docks to an orbiting space platform. This is the image most people have of the complex software computations and integrated hardware performance necessary for a spacecraft to successfully perform an automated launch, rendezvous, and docking. Today’s reality is that while computer operations are advancing rapidly, science fiction over-simplifies and over-sells current capabilities. This paper discusses the integration of spacecraft computer automation into the operation of one of the United States’ new Commercial Crew vehicles - the Boeing CST-100 Starliner. Lessons learned by the Boeing Mission Operations team, a unique private-public partnership with NASA, from conceptual design through real-time operation of the first test flight will be discussed along with evolution of the system in preparation for the second uncrewed test flight. Focus will center on how operations has learned to use the automated software to their advantage while also knowing how to adjust the automation in response to spacecraft or mission anomalies.

Robert C. Dempsey↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Soyuz Landing Risk Characterization

INTRODUCTION United States On-orbit Segment (USOS) astronauts have been returning to Earth from the International Space Station (ISS) aboard the Russian Soyuz vehicle since 2003. The energetics associated with Soyuz landings are comparable to our next generation of US space vehicles (Orion, Crew Dragon, and Starliner). Soyuz also lands crew in a similar state of spaceflight deconditioning that is anticipated using the future vehicles. A number of injuries have now been observed during these Soyuz landings. Currently it is unknown how Soyuz landing accelerations and the numbers and types of associated injuries relate to the new occupant protection requirements levied upon future space vehicles. Understanding this relationship will allow better quantification of the risk of injury for future spacecraft designs. METHODS An estimate of injury occurrence during Soyuz landings has been determined using data contained in NASA flight medicine databases and supplemented with data collected from crewmembers and flight surgeons. At the time of this abstract, 96 USOS astronauts have returned to Earth in the Soyuz (59 US, 31 International Partner, and 6 spaceflight participants). Of that total, data from 80 individual crew landings has been collected through this study as of 2021. Injuries are classified either as contusions/abrasions, Class I (minor, no medical follow-up), Class II (moderate, medical follow-up necessary), Class III (severe), or Class IV (life threatening). Current NASA occupant protection standards are primarily based on the Multi-axial Dynamic Response Index (MDRI), which is a simple lumped-parameter spring, mass, damper model tuned to human impact responses in three orthogonal axes. RESULTS Using what is known about Soyuz landing dynamics from airborne and drop test data, the MDRI predicts essentially no Class IV or III injuries, < 1% Class II injuries, and < 5% Class I injuries. Approximately one-third of all USOS crewmembers for whom data has been gathered have suffered some sort of injury related to landing in the Soyuz vehicle. Most of these injuries fall into the contusion/abrasion category (21.3 %) (n.b. This is the percent for whom contusion/abrasion was the worst injury. Those with class I or II injuries typically also received contusions/abrasions). Class I injuries have been sustained by 5.0% of all crew, and Class II injuries have been observed in 3.8%. No Class III or IV injuries have been sustained to date. Forty-three injuries have been documented, with some crewmembers sustaining more than one injury in a single landing. The knee was the most likely area of injury (n=9), followed by the back (n=8), then the arm (n=7). CONCLUSION Soyuz landing dynamics are the most comparable analog environment for the anticipated loads associated with Orion and commercial crew vehicle landings. The MDRI under predicts the percentage of Class II injuries experienced during Soyuz landings, but it is better at predicting Class I injury occurrences. However, if contusions/abrasions are included in the minor injury Class I category, then the MDRI vastly under predicts those injuries as well. Given this data, it is important to re-evaluate the expected injury rates for future vehicles and work toward improving the predictive tools for spaceflight use. Spaceflight deconditioning may account for some of the under prediction, and work is ongoing to assess the relationship between landing injuries and impact tolerance changes due to spaceflight deconditioning. Future work includes expanding this study to involve private space missions on new vehicles to better characterize the effects of time in flight, suit and seat design, and vehicle dynamics.

N Newby↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Soyuz Landing Risk Characterization

INTRODUCTION United States On-orbit Segment (USOS) astronauts have been returning to Earth from the International Space Station (ISS) aboard the Russian Soyuz vehicle since 2003. The energetics associated with Soyuz landings are comparable to our next generation of US space vehicles (Orion, Crew Dragon, and Starliner). Soyuz also lands crew in a similar state of spaceflight deconditioning that is anticipated using the future vehicles. A number of injuries have now been observed during these Soyuz landings. Currently it is unknown how Soyuz landing accelerations and the numbers and types of associated injuries relate to the new occupant protection requirements levied upon future space vehicles. Understanding this relationship will allow better quantification of the risk of injury for future spacecraft designs. METHODS An estimate of injury occurrence during Soyuz landings has been determined using data contained in NASA flight medicine databases and supplemented with data collected from crew members and flight surgeons. At the time of this abstract, 96 USOS astronauts have returned to Earth in the Soyuz (59 US, 31 International Partner, and 6 spaceflight participants). Of that total, data from 80individual crew landings has been collected through this study as of September 2023. Injuries are classified either as contusions/abrasions, Class I (minor, no medical follow-up), Class II (moderate, medical follow-up necessary), Class III (severe), or Class IV (life threatening). Current NASA occupant protection standards are primarily based on the Multi-axial Dynamic Response Index (MDRI), which is a simple lumped-parameter spring, mass, damper model tuned to human impact responses in three orthogonal axes. RESULTS Using what is known about Soyuz landing dynamics from airborne and drop test data, the MDRI predicts essentially no Class IV or III injuries, < 1% Class II injuries, and < 5% Class I injuries. Approximately one-third of all USOS crewmembers for whom data has been gathered have suffered some sort of injury related to landing in the Soyuz vehicle. Most of these injuries fall into the contusion/abrasion category (21.3%) (n.b. This is the percent for whom contusion/abrasion was the worst injury. Those with class I or II injuries typically also received contusions/abrasions). Class I injuries have been sustained by 5.0% of all crew, and Class II injuries have been observed in 3.8%. No Class III or IV injuries have been sustained to date. Forty-three injuries have been documented, with some crewmembers sustaining more than one injury in a single landing. The knee was the most likely area of injury (n=9), followed by the back (n=8), then the arm (n=7). CONCLUSION Soyuz landing dynamics are the most comparable analog environment for the anticipated loads associated with Orion and commercial crew vehicle landings. The MDRI under predicts the percentage of Class II injuries experienced during Soyuz landings, but it is better at predicting Class I injury occurrences. However, if contusions/abrasions are included in the minor injury Class I category, then the MDRI vastly under predicts those injuries as well. Given this data, it is important to re-evaluate the expected injury rates for future vehicles and work toward improving the predictive tools for spaceflight use. Spaceflight deconditioning may account for some of the under prediction, and work is ongoing to assess the relationship between landing injuries and impact tolerance changes due to spaceflight deconditioning. Future work includes expanding this study to involve private space missions on new vehicles to better characterize the effects of time in flight, suit and seat design, and vehicle dynamics.

N Newby↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Soyuz Landing Risk Characterization

INTRODUCTION United States On-orbit Segment (USOS) astronauts have been returning to Earth from the International Space Station (ISS) aboard the Russian Soyuz vehicle since 2003. The energetics associated with Soyuz landings are comparable to our next generation of US space vehicles (Orion, Crew Dragon, and Starliner). Soyuz also lands crew in a similar state of spaceflight deconditioning that is anticipated using the future vehicles. A number of injuries have now been observed during these Soyuz landings. Currently it is unknown how Soyuz landing accelerations and the numbers and types of associated injuries relate to the new occupant protection requirements levied upon future space vehicles. Understanding this relationship will allow better quantification of the risk of injury for future spacecraft designs. METHODS An estimate of injury occurrence during Soyuz landings has been determined using data contained in NASA flight medicine databases and supplemented with data collected from crewmembers and flight surgeons. At the time of this abstract, 96 USOS astronauts have returned to Earth in the Soyuz (59 US, 31 International Partner, and 6 spaceflight participants). Of that total, data from 80 individual crew landings has been collected through this study as of September 2023. Injuries are classified either as contusions/abrasions, Class I (minor, no medical follow-up), Class II (moderate, medical follow-up necessary), Class III (severe), or Class IV (life threatening). Current NASA occupant protection standards are primarily based on the Multi-axial Dynamic Response Index (MDRI), which is a simple lumped-parameter spring, mass, damper model tuned to human impact responses in three orthogonal axes. RESULTS Using what is known about Soyuz landing dynamics from airborne and drop test data, the MDRI predicts essentially no Class IV or III injuries, < 1% Class II injuries, and < 5% Class I injuries. Approximately one-third of all USOS crewmembers for whom data has been gathered have suffered some sort of injury related to landing in the Soyuz vehicle. Most of these injuries fall into the contusion/abrasion category (21.3 %) (n.b. This is the percent for whom contusion/abrasion was the worst injury. Those with class I or II injuries typically also received contusions/abrasions). Class I injuries have been sustained by 5.0% of all crew, and Class II injuries have been observed in 3.8%. No Class III or IV injuries have been sustained to date. Forty-three injuries have been documented, with some crewmembers sustaining more than one injury in a single landing. The knee was the most likely area of injury (n=9), followed by the back (n=8), then the arm (n=7). CONCLUSION Soyuz landing dynamics are the most comparable analog environment for the anticipated loads associated with Orion and commercial crew vehicle landings. The MDRI under predicts the percentage of Class II injuries experienced during Soyuz landings, but it is better at predicting Class I injury occurrences. However, if contusions/abrasions are included in the minor injury Class I category, then the MDRI vastly under predicts those injuries as well. Given this data, it is important to re-evaluate the expected injury rates for future vehicles and work toward improving the predictive tools for spaceflight use. Spaceflight deconditioning may account for some of the under prediction, and work is ongoing to assess the relationship between landing injuries and impact tolerance changes due to spaceflight deconditioning. Future work includes expanding this study to involve private space missions on new vehicles to better characterize the effects of time in flight, suit and seat design, and vehicle dynamics.

P Greenhalgh↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Soyuz Landing Risk Characterization

INTRODUCTION United States On-orbit Segment (USOS) astronauts have been returning to Earth from the International Space Station (ISS) aboard the Russian Soyuz vehicle since 2003. The energetics associated with Soyuz landings are comparable to our next generation of US space vehicles (Orion, Crew Dragon, and Starliner). Soyuz also lands crew in a similar state of spaceflight deconditioning that is anticipated using the future vehicles. A number of injuries have now been observed during these Soyuz landings. Currently it is unknown how Soyuz landing accelerations and the numbers and types of associated injuries relate to the new occupant protection requirements levied upon future space vehicles. Understanding this relationship will allow better quantification of the risk of injury for future spacecraft designs. METHODS An estimate of the occurrences of injury during Soyuz landings has been determined using data contained in NASA flight medicine databases and supplemented with data collected from crewmembers and flight surgeons. At the time of this abstract, 96 USOS astronauts have returned to Earth in the Soyuz (59 US, 31 International Partner, and 6 spaceflight participants). Of that total, data from 80 individual crew landings has been collected through this study. Injuries are classified as either contusions/abrasions, Class I (minor, no medical follow-up), Class II (moderate, medical follow-up necessary), Class III (severe), and Class IV (life threatening). Current NASA occupant protection standards are primarily based on the Multi-axial Dynamic Response Index (MDRI), which is a simple lumped-parameter spring, mass, damper model tuned to human impact responses in three orthogonal axes. RESULTS Using what is known about Soyuz landing dynamics from airborne and drop test data, the MDRI predicts essentially no Class IV or III injuries, < 1% Class II injuries, and < 5% Class I injuries. Approximately one-third of all USOS crewmembers for whom data has been gathered have suffered some sort of injury related to landing in the Soyuz vehicle. Most of these injuries fall into the contusion/abrasion category (21.3 %). Class I injuries have been sustained by 5.0% of all crew, and Class II injuries have been observed in 3.8%. No Class III or IV injuries have been sustained to date. Forty-three injuries have been documented, with some crewmembers sustaining more than one injury in a single landing. The knee was the most likely area of injury (n=9), followed by the back (n=8), and then the arm (n=7). CONCLUSION Soyuz landing dynamics are the most comparable analog environment for the anticipated loads associated with Orion and commercial crew vehicle landings. The MDRI under predicts the percentage of Class II injuries experienced during Soyuz landings. The MDRI is better at predicting Class I injury occurrences. However, if contusions/abrasions are included in the minor injury Class I category, then the MDRI also vastly under predicts those injuries as well. Given this data, it will be important to re-evaluate the expected injury rates for future vehicles, and work toward improving the predictive tools for spaceflight use. Spaceflight deconditioning may account for some of the under prediction, and work is ongoing to assess the relationship between landing injuries and impact tolerance changes due to spaceflight deconditioning.

N Newby↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Global Rescue Response to a Multivehicle Deorbit from the International Space Station

The U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) has been tasked to support rescue efforts in the event of an off-nominal landing of a Commercial Crew Program vehicle transporting NASA crewmembers to or from the International Space Station. The DoD is further tasked to support returning U.S. and International Partner crewmembers on Russian Soyuz spacecraft missions, specifically to ensure aeromedical evacuation capability in the event of a crewmember injury at the time of launch or landing. This DoD mission is primarily considered during planned launch and landing operations, with forces placed in an alert posture to support if needed. However, overall mission concept of operations encompasses a no-notice rescue capability in the event of an on-orbit emergency. Such contingency scenarios are pre-coordinated and simulated to ensure a ready posture of associated DoD assets and to promote coordination of government, commercial, and military stakeholders. To date, planning and simulations have focused on execution of a single rescue mission; the possibility of a multi-vehicle evacuation and rescue scenario has not been adequately explored. This presentation will examine the process of responding to an emergency onboard the International Space Station that results in the early departure and deorbit of multiple docked vehicles to preserve the health and safety of the crew. We will highlight the complexity of this recovery scenario and discuss potential complications that could arise, as well as identify areas in which deliberate planning and simulation can better ensure successful preparation for such a multifaceted recovery operation.

Travis Levon Houser↗
NASA NTRS2017

Review of Significant Incidents and Close Calls in Human Spaceflight from a Human Factors Perspective

This project aims to identify poor human factors design decisions that led to error-prone systems, or did not facilitate the flight crew making the right choices; and to verify that NASA is effectively preventing similar incidents from occurring again. This analysis was performed by reviewing significant incidents and close calls in human spaceflight identified by the NASA Johnson Space Center Safety and Mission Assurance Flight Safety Office. The review of incidents shows whether the identified human errors were due to the operational phase (flight crew and ground control) or if they initiated at the design phase (includes manufacturing and test). This classification was performed with the aid of the NASA Human Systems Integration domains. This in-depth analysis resulted in a tool that helps with the human factors classification of significant incidents and close calls in human spaceflight, which can be used to identify human errors at the operational level, and how they were or should be minimized. Current governing documents on human systems integration for both government and commercial crew were reviewed to see if current requirements, processes, training, and standard operating procedures protect the crew and ground control against these issues occurring in the future. Based on the findings, recommendations to target those areas are provided.

Silva-Martinez, Jackelynne↗
NASA NTRS2016

Simulation of Mission Phases

This position with the Simulation and Graphics Branch (ER7) at Johnson Space Center (JSC) provided an introduction to vehicle hardware, mission planning, and simulation design. ER7 supports engineering analysis and flight crew training by providing high-fidelity, real-time graphical simulations in the Systems Engineering Simulator (SES) lab. The primary project assigned by NASA mentor and SES lab manager, Meghan Daley, was to develop a graphical simulation of the rendezvous, proximity operations, and docking (RPOD) phases of flight. The simulation is to include a generic crew/cargo transportation vehicle and a target object in low-Earth orbit (LEO). Various capsule, winged, and lifting body vehicles as well as historical RPOD methods were evaluated during the project analysis phase. JSC core mission to support the International Space Station (ISS), Commercial Crew Program (CCP), and Human Space Flight (HSF) influenced the project specifications. The simulation is characterized as a 30 meter +V Bar and/or -R Bar approach to the target object's docking station. The ISS was selected as the target object and the international Low Impact Docking System (iLIDS) was selected as the docking mechanism. The location of the target object's docking station corresponds with the RPOD methods identified. The simulation design focuses on Guidance, Navigation, and Control (GNC) system architecture models with station keeping and telemetry data processing capabilities. The optical and inertial sensors, reaction control system thrusters, and the docking mechanism selected were based on CCP vehicle manufacturer's current and proposed technologies. A significant amount of independent study and tutorial completion was required for this project. Multiple primary source materials were accessed using the NASA Technical Report Server (NTRS) and reference textbooks were borrowed from the JSC Main Library and International Space Station Library. The Trick Simulation Environment and User Training Materials version 2013.0 release was used to complete the Trick tutorial. Multiple network privilege and repository permission requests were required in order to access previous simulation models. The project was also an introduction to computer programming and the Linux operating system. Basic C++ and Python syntax was used during the completion of the Trick tutorial. Trick's engineering analysis and Monte Carlo simulation capabilities were observed and basic space mission planning procedures were applied in the conceptual design phase. Multiple professional development opportunities were completed in addition to project duties during this internship through the System for Administration, Training, and Education Resources for NASA (SATERN). Topics include: JSC Risk Management Workshop, CCP Risk Management, Basic Radiation Safety Training, X-Ray Radiation Safety, Basic Laser Safety, JSC Export Control, ISS RISE Ambassador, Basic SharePoint 2013, Space Nutrition and Biochemistry, and JSC Personal Protective Equipment. Additionally, this internship afforded the opportunity for formal project presentation and public speaking practice. This was my first experience at a NASA center. After completing this internship I have a much clearer understanding of certain aspects of the agency's processes and procedures, as well as a deeper appreciation from spaceflight simulation design and testing. I will continue to improve my technical skills so that I may have another opportunity to return to NASA and Johnson Space Center.

Carlstrom, Nicholas Mercury↗
NASA NTRS2010

Risk Mitigation Approach to Commercial Resupply to the International Space Station

In August 2006, NASA awarded Space Act Agreements (SAAs) for Commercial Orbital Transportation Services (COTS) under the Commercial Crew and Cargo Project Office at Johnson Space Center. One of the goals of the SAAs is to facilitate U.S. private industry demonstration of cargo transportation capabilities, ultimately achieving reliable, cost effective access to low-Earth orbit (LEO). Each COTS provider is required to complete International Space Stations (ISS) Integration activities, which includes meeting the physical and functional interfaces and interface requirements between the ISS and COTS vehicles. These requirements focus on the areas of risk to the ISS during rendezvous and proximity operations, as well as the integration operations while the COTS vehicle is berthed to the ISS. On December 23, 2008, NASA awarded Commercial Resupply Service (CRS) contracts to provide resupply services to the ISS, following the Shuttle retirement. In addition to performing any ISS Integration activities, NASA will be performing independent assessments of the launch vehicle and orbital vehicle to evaluate the readiness of the contractor to deliver NASA cargo safely to the ISS. This paper will address the activities NASA Centers, both JSC and KSC, in the oversight and insight function over commercial visiting vehicles to the ISS.

Koons, Diane S.↗
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 NTRSDate not supplied

Recent Langley Aerothermodynamic Laboratory Testing (2019-2022)

In support of flight programs, multiple wind tunnel entries were conducted on reentry vehicle configurations to investigate blunt body aeroheating environments. Blunt body block thermal protection system (TPS) roughness, the Low-Earth Orbit Flight Test of an Inflatable Decelerator aeroshell scalloping, and a woven TPS all were tested to determine the effects of those parameters on increased surface heating to the vehicle. Commercial Crew Program studies also utilized the speed and ease of testing in the LAL to analyze parametric databases of low-earth reentry configurations, like the Boeing CST-100, and vehicles designed to travel to the moon or Mars, such as the SpaceX Starship. LAL wind tunnel investigations also supported several DoD and AFRL flight projects, such as HIFiRE 6 and BOLT. External customers leveraged the LAL testing capability to advance their research programs, including UPSTAR, RocketLab, and Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory. Academia groups benefitted from the inexpensive cost to test in the tunnels for many university collaborations, such as studies conducted in partnership with the University of Maryland on a flat plate, using a pressure rake and investigating fluid structure interactions. Multiple studies in collaboration with Purdue considered boundary layer transition on various cone configurations. Another study was conducted using a cone with shaped roughness elements borrowed from the Arnold Engineering Development Complex. Internal testing included studies using a phosphor thermography system that can measure higher temperatures than the current LAL phosphor capability and a characterization study of the noise in the wind tunnel flow. The breadth of testing across research and commercial paradigms, both internal and external to NASA, different configurations, a variety of test techniques and aerodynamic and aerothermal environments will be discussed in this overview presentation of the recent work conducted in the LAL.

wind tunnel test↗
NASA NTRS2011

Operational Philosophy Concerning Manned Spacecraft Cabin Leaks

The last thirty years have seen the Space Shuttle as the prime United States spacecraft for manned spaceflight missions. Many lessons have been learned about spacecraft design and operation throughout these years. Over the next few decades, a large increase of manned spaceflight in the commercial sector is expected. This will result in the exposure of commercial crews and passengers to many of the same risks crews of the Space Shuttle have encountered. One of the more dire situations that can be encountered is the loss of pressure in the habitable volume of the spacecraft during on orbit operations. This is referred to as a cabin leak. This paper seeks to establish a general cabin leak response philosophy with the intent of educating future spacecraft designers and operators. After establishing a relative definition for a cabin leak, the paper covers general descriptions of detection equipment, detection methods, and general operational methods for management of a cabin leak. Subsequently, all these items are addressed from the perspective of the Space Shuttle Program, as this will be of the most value to future spacecraft due to similar operating profiles. Emphasis here is placed upon why and how these methods and philosophies have evolved to meet the Space Shuttle s needs. This includes the core ideas of: considerations of maintaining higher cabin pressures vs. lower cabin pressures, the pros and cons of a system designed to feed the leak with gas from pressurized tanks vs. using pressure suits to protect against lower cabin pressures, timeline and consumables constraints, re-entry considerations with leaks of unknown origin, and the impact the International Space Station (ISS) has had to the standard Space Shuttle cabin leak response philosophy. This last item in itself includes: procedural management differences, hardware considerations, additional capabilities due to the presence of the ISS and its resource, and ISS docking/undocking considerations with a cabin leak occurring. The paper also offers a look at how different equipment configurations on future spacecraft impact the previously defined cabin leak operational philosophy and includes additional operational methods and considerations that result due to various configurations. The intent is to showcase these various considerations and highlight the variability they allow. The paper concludes with a selection of the author s personal observations from a spacecraft operator's point of view and recommendations with the goal of improving the design and operations of future spacecraft.

DeSimpelaere, Edward↗
NASA NTRS2011

Nutrition Research: Basis for Station Requirements

Prior to the Shuttle program, all understanding of nutritional needs in space came from Skylab metabolic research. Because Shuttle flights were short, most less than 14 days, research focused on major nutritional issues: energy (calories), protein and amino acids, water and electrotypes, with some more general physiology studies that related to iron and calcium. Using stable isotope tracer studies and diet intake records, we found that astronauts typically did not consume adequate calories to meet energy expenditure. To monitor energy and nutrient intake status and provide feedback to the flight surgeon and the astronauts, the International Space Station (ISS) program implemented a weekly food frequency questionnaire and routine body mass measurements. Other Shuttle investigations found that protein turnover was higher during flight, suggesting there was increased protein degradation and probably concurrent increase in protein synthesis, and this occurred even in cases of adequate protein and caloric intake. These results may partially explain some of the loss of leg muscle mass. Fluid and electrolyte flight studies demonstrated that water intake, like energy intake, was lower than required. However, sodium intakes were elevated during flight and likely related to other concerns such as calcium turnover and other health-related issues. NASA is making efforts to have tasty foods with much lower salt levels to reduce sodium intake and to promote fluid intake on orbit. Red blood cell studies conducted on the Shuttle found decreased erythrogenesis and increased serum ferritin levels. Given that the diet is high in iron there may be iron storage health concerns, especially related to the role of iron in oxidative damage, complicated by the stress and radiation. The Shuttle nutrition research lead to new monitoring and research on ISS. These data will be valuable for future NASA and commercial crewed missions.

Lane, Helen W.↗
NASA NTRS2011

Development of Space Shuttle Rescue and Recovery Operations

As the first Space Shuttle launch was still in our future, many from NASA, the Department of Defense (DoD) and NASA contractors were busy planning for not only a nominal launch and return, but contingency operations at the launch pad and landing sites. Prior to the first launch, detailed coordination, planning and simulations were conducted at all three locations and internal rescue procedures were taught at Kennedy Space Center (KSC). Later in the Program, the Transoceanic Abort Landing (TAL) sites were added in Europe and Africa. For the 51L mission a new TAL site was brought on line in Morocco. However, upon launch, the Shuttle Program experienced it's first lost. During the following months a complete review of all contingency operations (launch and landing) was completed. Many enhancements were made based on the reviews following. A Mode VIII water rescue was developed for NASA by the DoD before the STS-26 launch. Different concepts were explored and being debated by NASA. Training of the contingency forces was required before final decisions were made forcing the teaching of two different sets of procedures. To assist with training, a video was developed for the fire/crash/rescue personnel. This accompanied the detailed extraction procedures that were developed by a combination of KSC and DoD firemen. Training for the fire/crash/rescue personnel at Vandenberg AFB was also being planned before the accident happen. The fire/crash/rescue mockup that was being built at Chanute AFB was diverted to Edwards AFB. Educational Objectives: With the emphasis on Commercial Crew Programs for Space flight it is important that all involved understand what is required to prepare for contingencies. Cost effective means of being prepared for contingencies are needed. Questions: 1. When should planning for nominal and contingency operations begin? 2. What type of training aids are needed for contingency operations? 3. Who were the major contributors to Shuttle contingency operations?

Chandler, Michael↗
NASA NTRS2011

Legacy of Biomedical Research During the Space Shuttle Program

The Space Shuttle Program provided many opportunities to study the role of spaceflight on human life for over 30 years and represented the longest and largest US human spaceflight program. Outcomes of the research were understanding the effect of spaceflight on human physiology and performance, countermeasures, operational protocols, and hardware. The Shuttle flights were relatively short, < 16 days and routinely had 4 to 6 crewmembers for a total of 135 flights. Biomedical research was conducted on the Space Shuttle using various vehicle resources. Specially constructed pressurized laboratories called Spacelab and SPACEHAB housed many laboratory instruments to accomplish experiments in the Shuttle s large payload bay. In addition to these laboratory flights, nearly every mission had dedicated human life science research experiments conducted in the Shuttle middeck. Most Shuttle astronauts participated in some life sciences research experiments either as test subjects or test operators. While middeck experiments resulted in a low sample per mission compared to many Earth-based studies, this participation allowed investigators to have repetition of tests over the years on successive Shuttle flights. In addition, as a prelude to the International Space Station (ISS), NASA used the Space Shuttle as a platform for assessing future ISS hardware systems and procedures. The purpose of this panel is to provide an understanding of science integration activities required to implement Shuttle research, review biomedical research, characterize countermeasures developed for Shuttle and ISS as well as discuss lessons learned that may support commercial crew endeavors. Panel topics include research integration, cardiovascular physiology, neurosciences, skeletal muscle, and exercise physiology. Learning Objective: The panel provides an overview from the Space Shuttle Program regarding research integration, scientific results, lessons learned from biomedical research and countermeasure development.

Hayes, Judith C.↗
NASA NTRS2012

An Affordability Comparison Tool (ACT) for Space Transportation

NASA bas recently emphasized the importance of affordability for Commercial Crew Development Program (CCDP), Space Launch Systems (SLS) and Multi-Purpose Crew Vehicle (MPCV). System architects and designers are challenged to come up with architectures and designs that do not bust the budget. This paper describes the Affordability Comparison Tool (ACT) analyzes different systems or architecture configurations for affordability that allows for a comparison of: total life cycle cost; annual recurring costs, affordability figures-of-merit, such as cost per pound, cost per seat, and cost per flight, as well as productivity measures, such as payload throughput. Although ACT is not a deterministic model, the paper develops algorithms and parametric factors that use characteristics of the architectures or systems being compared to produce important system outcomes (figures-of-merit). Example applications of outcome figures-of-merit are also documented to provide the designer with information on the relative affordability and productivity of different space transportation applications.

McCleskey, C. M.↗
NASA NTRS2013

Process Optimization of Bismaleimide (BMI) Resin Infused Carbon Fiber Composite

Engineers today are presented with the opportunity to design and build the next generation of space vehicles out of the lightest, strongest, and most durable materials available. Composites offer excellent structural characteristics and outstanding reliability in many forms that will be utilized in future aerospace applications including the Commercial Crew and Cargo Program and the Orion space capsule. NASA's Composites for Exploration (CoEx) project researches the various methods of manufacturing composite materials of different fiber characteristics while using proven infusion methods of different resin compositions. Development and testing on these different material combinations will provide engineers the opportunity to produce optimal material compounds for multidisciplinary applications. Through the CoEx project, engineers pursue the opportunity to research and develop repair patch procedures for damaged spacecraft. Working in conjunction with Raptor Resins Inc., NASA engineers are utilizing high flow liquid infusion molding practices to manufacture high-temperature composite parts comprised of intermediate modulus 7 (IM7) carbon fiber material. IM7 is a continuous, high-tensile strength composite with outstanding structural qualities such as high shear strength, tensile strength and modulus as well as excellent corrosion, creep, and fatigue resistance. IM7 carbon fiber, combined with existing thermoset and thermoplastic resin systems, can provide improvements in material strength reinforcement and deformation-resistant properties for high-temperature applications. Void analysis of the different layups of the IM7 material discovered the largest total void composition within the [ +45 , 90 , 90 , -45 ] composite panel. Tensile and compressional testing proved the highest mechanical strength was found in the [0 4] layup. This paper further investigates the infusion procedure of a low-cost/high-performance BMI resin into an IM7 carbon fiber material and the optical, chemical, and mechanical analyses performed.

Ehrlich, Joshua W.↗