Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Crew Return Vehicle”

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 NTRS1993

Reach performance while wearing the Space Shuttle launch and entry suit during exposure to launch accelerations

Crewmen aboard the Space Shuttle are subjected to accelerations during ascent (the powered flight phase of launch) which range up to +3 G(sub x). Despite having 33 missions and nine years experience, not to mention all the time spent in development prior to the first flight, no truly quantitative reach study wearing actual crew equipment, using actual Shuttle seats and restraints has ever been done. What little information exists on reach performance while under acceleration has been derived primarily from subjective comments gathered retrospectively from Shuttle flight crews during their post mission debrief. This lack of reach performance data has resulted in uncertainty regarding emergency procedures that can realistically be performed during and actual Shuttle ascent versus what is practiced in the ground-fixed and motion-based Shuttle Simulators. With the introduction on STS-26 of the current Shuttle escape system, the question of reach performance under launch accelerations was once again raised. The escape system's requirement that each crewman wear a Launch/Entry Suit (LES), parachute harness, and parachute were all anticipated to contribute to a further degradation of reach performance during Shuttle ascent accelerations. In order to answer the reach performance question in a quantitative way, a photogrammetric method was chosen so that the actual reach values and associated envelopes could be captured. This would allow quantitative assessment of potential task performance impact and identify areas where changes to our Shuttle ascent emergency procedures might be required. Also, such a set of reach values would be valid for any similar acceleration profile using the same crew equipment. Potential Space Station applications of this data include predicting reach performance during Assured Crew Return Vehicle (ACRV) operations.

Bagian, James P.↗
NASA NTRS1992

Proceedings of the 8th Annual Summer Conference: NASA/USRA Advanced Design Program

Papers presented at the 8th Annual Summer Conference are categorized as Space Projects and Aeronautics projects. Topics covered include: Systematic Propulsion Optimization Tools (SPOT), Assured Crew Return Vehicle Post Landing Configuration Design and Test, Autonomous Support for Microorganism Research in Space, Bioregenerative System Components for Microgravity, The Extended Mission Rover (EMR), Planetary Surface Exploration MESUR/Autonomous Lunar Rover, Automation of Closed Environments in Space for Human Comfort and Safety, Walking Robot Design, Extraterrestrial Surface Propulsion Systems, The Design of Four Hypersonic Reconnaissance Aircraft, Design of a Refueling Tanker Delivering Liquid Hydrogen, The Design of a Long-Range Megatransport Aircraft, and Solar Powered Multipurpose Remotely Powered Aircraft.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS1994

Emergency medical services

When NASA was established in 1958, it was known that space flight would require efforts beyond those of NASA to ensure the health and safety of our astronauts. On 10 Aug. 1958, a Secretary of Defense memorandum was signed that assigned the first Department of Defense (DOD) Manager to provide support to NASA for Project Mercury. This established a chain of command through the Joint Chiefs of Staff to the Secretary of Defense. The current charter is dated 19 Mar. 1986 and assigns the DOD Manager responsibilities to the Commander and Chief, US Space Command. The DOD Managers charter has many support areas and among them are recovery of astronauts and medical support. Today these efforts support the Space Shuttle and Space Station Programs. Briefly, the program works with each organization tasking the other through a requirements document. Level of care, communications, and recovery requirements are established; NASA and the DOD provide the capability to meet them. NASA is also responsible for the specialized training and equipment needed to meet these requirements. A Shuttle launch a KSC requires an Emergency Medical Services (EMS) coordinator on console to facilitate communications, ensure proper coverage, and coordinate with area hospitals. A contingent of NASA medical personnel are assembled to provide triage and medical support capabilities. The DOD provides medical evacuation (MEDEVAC) helicopters with surgeons and pararescue specialists (PJ's) or emergency medical technicians (EMT's). Each helicopter is equipped with at least one doctor and one PJ/EMT per astronaut crew member. Transoceanic abort landing (TAL) sites and end of mission (EOM) sites have similar structures, with TAL sites utilizing fixed wingg aircraft for MEDEVAC. The DOD also supports contingency planning for the support and return of crew members from the Space Station Freedom. Much of this support has been directed at the recovery of crew members following the landing of an Assured Crew Return Vehicle.

Billica, Roger↗
NASA NTRS1993

Aerospace Safety Advisory Panel

The Aerospace Safety Advisory Panel (ASAP) provided oversight on the safety aspects of many NASA programs. In addition, ASAP undertook three special studies. At the request of the Administrator, the panel assessed the requirements for an assured crew return vehicle (ACRV) for the space station and reviewed the organization of the safety and mission quality function within NASA. At the behest of Congress, the panel formed an independent, ad hoc working group to examine the safety and reliability of the space shuttle main engine. Section 2 presents findings and recommendations. Section 3 consists of information in support of these findings and recommendations. Appendices A, B, C, and D, respectively, cover the panel membership, the NASA response to the findings and recommendations in the March 1992 report, a chronology of the panel's activities during the reporting period, and the entire ACRV study report.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS1993

Cooperative GN&C development in a rapid prototyping environment

The Navigation, Control and Aeronautics Division (NCAD) at NASA-JSC is exploring ways of producing Guidance, Navigation and Control (GN&C) flight software faster, better, and cheaper. To achieve these goals NCAD established two hardware/software facilities that take an avionics design project from initial inception through high fidelity real-time hardware-in-the-loop testing. Commercially available software products are used to develop the GN&C algorithms in block diagram form and then automatically generate source code from these diagrams. A high fidelity real-time hardware-in-the-loop laboratory provides users with the capability to analyze mass memory usage within the targeted flight computer, verify hardware interfaces, conduct system level verification, performance, acceptance testing, as well as mission verification using reconfigurable and mission unique data. To evaluate these concepts and tools, NCAD embarked on a project to build a real-time 6 DOF simulation of the Soyuz Assured Crew Return Vehicle flight software. To date, a productivity increase of 185 percent has been seen over traditional NASA methods for developing flight software.

Bordano, Aldo↗
NASA NTRS1998

Low Speed Aerodynamics of the X-38 CRV

This project was performed in support of the engineering development of the NASA X-38 Crew Return Vehicle (CRV)system. Wind tunnel experiments were used to visualize various aerodynamic phenomena encountered by the CRV during the final stages of descent and landing. Scale models of the CRV were used to visualize vortex structures above and below the vehicle, and in its wake, and to quantify their trajectories. The effect of flaperon deflection on these structures was studied. The structure and dynamics of the CRV's wake during the drag parachute deployment stage were measured. Regions of high vorticity were identified using surveys conducted in several planes using a vortex meter. Periodic shedding of the vortex sheets from the sides of the CRV was observed using laser sheet videography as the CRV reached high angles of attack during the quasi-steady pitch-up prior to parafoil deployment. Using spectral analysis of hot-film anemometer data, the Strouhal number of these wake fluctuations was found to be 0.14 based on the model span. Phenomena encountered in flight test during parafoil operation were captured in scale-model tests, and a video photogrammetry technique was implemented to obtain parafoil surface shapes during flight in the tunnel. Forces on the parafoil were resolved using tension gages on individual lines. The temporal evolution of the phenomenon of leading edge collapse was captured. Laser velocimetry was used to demonstrate measurement of the porosity of the parafoil surface. From these measurements, several physical explanations have been developed for phenomena observed at various stages of the X-38 development program. Quantitative measurement capabilities have also been demonstrated for continued refinement of the aerodynamic technologies employed in the X-38 project. Detailed results from these studies are given in an AIAA Paper, two slide presentations, and other material which are given on a Web-based archival resource. This is the Digital Library of the Georgia Tech Experimental Aerodynamics Group.

Komerath, N. M.↗
NASA NTRS2000

X-38 Experimental Controls Laws

X-38 Experimental Control Laws X-38 is a NASA JSC/DFRC experimental flight test program developing a series of prototypes for an International Space Station (ISS) Crew Return Vehicle, often called an ISS "lifeboat." X- 38 Vehicle 132 Free Flight 3, currently scheduled for the end of this month, will be the first flight test of a modem FCS architecture called Multi-Application Control-Honeywell (MACH), originally developed by the Honeywell Technology Center. MACH wraps classical P&I outer attitude loops around a modem dynamic inversion attitude rate loop. The dynamic inversion process requires that the flight computer have an onboard aircraft model of expected vehicle dynamics based upon the aerodynamic database. Dynamic inversion is computationally intensive, so some timing modifications were made to implement MACH on the slower flight computers of the subsonic test vehicles. In addition to linear stability margin analyses and high fidelity 6-DOF simulation, hardware-in-the-loop testing is used to verify the implementation of MACH and its robustness to aerodynamic and environmental uncertainties and disturbances.

Munday, Steve↗
NASA NTRS2000

Design and Testing of the X-38 Spacecraft Primary Parafoil

In August of 1995 the NASA began testing large ram-air parafoils for potential use in the landing phase of spacecraft recovery. This effort eventually became a part of the X-38 project, a technology demonstrator for the International Space Station Emergency Crew Return Vehicle. This paper traces how the original parafoil, used in the U.S. Army Graded Precision Air Delivery System (GPADS), was modified to improve the initial deployment dynamics. A discussion of how test experience with 750 sq ft parafoils has been used to scale up to the full-scale 5500 sq ft and 7500 sq ft parafoils is presented. In particular, the development of two techniques that have greatly improved the repeatability of the parafoil initial deployment and decreased the first stage deployment dynamics are discussed: a first stage upper surface energy modulator and floor vents. Comparisons of trends and results from the various scale parachutes are presented as well as constraints that at times have driven the direction that the design has taken.

DESIGN OPTIMIZATION↗
NASA NTRS1999

X-38 NASA/DLR/ESA-Dassault Aviation Integrated Aerodynamic and Aerothermodynamic Activities

The characterization of the aeroshape selected for the X-38 [Crew Return Vehicle (CRV) demonstrator] is presently being performed as a cooperative endeavour between NASA, DLR (through its TETRA Program), and European Space Agency (ESA) with Dassault Aviation integrating the aerodynamic and aerothermodynamic activities. The methodologies selected for characterizing the aerodynamic and aerothermodynamic environment of the X-38 are presented. Also, the implications for related disciplines such as Guidance Navigation and Control (GN&C) with its corresponding Flight Control System (FCS), Structural, and Thermal Protection System (TPS) design are discussed. An attempt is made at defining the additional activities required to support the design of a derived operational CRV.

Labbe, Steve G.↗
NASA NTRS2000

Radiation Susceptibility Assessment of Off the Shelf (OTS) Hardware

The reduction in budgets, shortening of schedules and necessity of flying near state of the art technology have forced projects and designers to utilize not only modern, non-space rated EEE parts but also OTS boards, subassemblies and systems. New instrumentation, communications, portable computers and navigation systems for the International Space Station, Space Shuttle, and Crew Return Vehicle are examples of the realization of this paradigm change at the Johnson Space Center. Because of this change, there has been a shift in the radiation assessment methodology from individual part testing using low energy heavy ions to board and box level testing using high-energy particle beams. Highlights of several years of board and system level testing are presented along with lessons learned, present areas of concern, insights into test costs, and future challenges.

Culpepper, William X.↗
NASA NTRS1998

International Space Station General Resource Reel

The construction and evolution of the International Space Station (ISS) is seen through various clips. Live footage shows the following: (1) the Zarya Module under construction and during launch preparations; (2) the Unity Module under construction, during launch preparations, and being lowered into the payload canister; (3) STS-88 Mission Specialists Jerry Ross and Jim Newman during training for their spacewalks, including activities in the Neutral Buoyancy Laboratory (NBL); (4) Zarya and Unity docking to the Service Module; (5) the Expedition 1 crew (William Shepherd, Yuri Gidzenko, and Sergei Krikalev) during emergency escape training in the Black Sea and during water survival training at Johnson Space Center; (6) the X-38 Crew Return Vehicle Drop Test; and (7) the US Destiny Laboratory Module, Pressurized Mating Adapter (PMA), Service Module, Italian Multi-Purpose Logistics Module, US Airlock, and US Habitation Module under construction. Computerized animations show the following: (1) an ISS fly-around; (2) the STS-88 Space Shuttle as it docks with Zarya and attaches Zarya to the Unity Module; (3) the Space Shuttle as it docks with ISS and installs the Z1 truss segment and PMA; (4) the Soyuz spacecraft as it docks with ISS; (5) interior and exterior views of the Columbus Attached Pressurized Module; and (6) a Transhab animation showing the interior and exterior and marking the components.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS2001

Retractable Trunnion Pin Mechanism

The X-38 is a technology demonstration project for the proposed International Space Station Crew Return Vehicle. The project consists of several atmospheric flight vehicles and an unmanned spacecraft. This paper will discuss the design, development, and testing of a Retractable Trunnion Pin Mechanism used to mount the spacecraft in the payload bay of the space shuttle orbiter for launch.

Jermstad, Wayne↗
NASA NTRS2001

X-38 Seal Development

This viewgraph presentation provides information on the development of seals for the X-38 spacecraft. This seals will be an important part of the X-38's thermal protection system (TPS) in its service as a crew return vehicle (CRV) associated with the International Space Station (ISS).

Curry, Donald M.↗
NASA NTRS1992

Small Business Innovations (Automated Information)

Bruce G. Jackson & Associates Document Director is an automated tool that combines word processing and database management technologies to offer the flexibility and convenience of text processing with the linking capability of database management. Originally developed for NASA, it provides a means to collect and manage information associated with requirements development. The software system was used by NASA in the design of the Assured Crew Return Vehicle, as well as by other government and commercial organizations including the Southwest Research Institute.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS2003

STS-112 Mission Highlights Resource, Part 3 of 3

The STS-112 Mission begins with a view of the center radiator on the S(1) Truss. A good view of the International Space Station's (ISS) Destiny Laboratory, Soyuz Crew Return Vehicle and Quest Airlock are shown from a video camera located at the end of the S(1) Truss Segment. The ISS Canadarm 2 is shown getting in position for spacewalk three. Highlights of flight day eight begin with Pilot Pam Melroy and Mission Specialist Fyodur Yurchikhin shown inside of the Quest Airlock closing the hatch as spacewalkers David Wolf and Piers Sellers move in the outer compartment of the Airlock to begin Extravehicular Activity 3 (EVA 3). During EVA 3, Dave Wolf and Piers Sellers are installing spool positioning devices on ammonia lines located on the ISS. Robot Arm Operators Peggy Whitson and Sandy Magnus are shown reviewing procedures for operating the robot arm. A view of Piers Seller climbing back into the Quest Airlock is presented. During flight day nine, robot arm operators Pam Melroy, Jeff Ashby and Peggy Whitson are in the process of removing spacesuits worn by David Wolf and Piers Sellers. A final farewell of the nine crewmembers shown inside of the Destiny Laboratory is presented during flight day ten. The undocking of Space Shuttle Atlantis from the International Space Station is shown on flight day eleven. This presentation ends on flight day 12 with a view of head up displays and the actual landing of the Space Shuttle Atlantis.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS1991

Does the Health Maintenance Facility Provide Speciality Capabilities?

The Health Maintenance Facility (HMF) is capable of handling all minor illnesses, most moderate illnesses, and some major illnesses on board a space station. Its primary purpose should be to treat problems that are mission threatening, not life threatening. The HMF will have greater medical capabilities than those currently on Navy submarines. Much of the discussion in this document focuses on the possibilities of treating specific medical conditions on board a space station. The HMF will be limited to caring for critically ill patients for a few days, so a crew return vehicle will be important.

Boyce, Joey↗
NASA NTRS2002

Real-Time Embedded Software Verification and Validation 2001

As the space applications become more complex and timing constraints on control actions are more stringent, the task of integrating and testing NASA's real-time systems (such as X-38 Crew Return Vehicle, and certain International Space Station autonomous systems) has become a great challenge. A testing environment where can preserve consistent temporal behaviors as in the target execution must be established for system-level verification and software quality assurance. Our goal is to develop an analysis suite for validation and verification of real-time systems that are used to perform human- in-the-loop control operations during safety-critical missions. The suite will be able to carry out quantitative approaches of coverage diagnostic and temporal behavior evaluation in order to measure test coverage, to optimize test utilization, and to verify timing correctness.

Lee, Yann-Hang↗
NASA NTRS2000

Proposal Drafted for Allocating Space-to-Space Frequencies in the GPS Spectrum Bands

Radionavigation Satellite Service (RNSS) systems such as the U.S. Global Positioning System (GPS) and the Russian Global Navigation Satellite System (GLONASS) are primarily being used today in the space-to-Earth direction (i.e., from GPS satellite to Earth user) for a broad range of applications such as geological surveying; aircraft, automobile, and maritime navigation; hiking and mountain climbing; and precision farming and mining. However, these navigation systems are being used increasingly in space. Beginning with the launch of the TOPEX/Poseidon remote-sensing mission in 1992, over 90 GPS receivers have flown onboard spacecraft for such applications as real-time spacecraft navigation, three-axis attitude control, precise time synchronization, precision orbit determination, and atmospheric profiling. In addition to use onboard many science spacecraft, GPS has been used or is planned to be used onboard the shuttles, the International Space Station, the International Space Station Emergency Crew Return Vehicle, and many commercial satellite systems such as Orbcomm, Globalstar, and Teledesic. From a frequency spectrum standpoint, however, one important difference between the space and terrestrial uses of GPS is that it is being used in space with no interference protection. This is because there is no frequency allocation for the space-to-space use of GPS (i.e., from GPS satellite to user spacecraft) in the International Telecommunications Union (ITU) regulatory table of frequency allocations. If another space-based or groundbased radio system interferes with a spaceborne GPS user, the spaceborne user presently has no recourse other than to accept the interference. Consequently, for the past year and a half, the NASA Glenn Research Center at Lewis Field and other Government agencies have been working within ITU toward obtaining a GPS space-to-space allocation at the next World Radio Conference in the year 2000 (WRC 2000). Numerous interference studies have been conducted in support of a primary space-tospace allocation in the 1215- to 1260-MHz and 1559- to 1610-MHz RNSS bands. Most of these studies and analyses were performed by Glenn and submitted as U.S. input documents to the international Working Party 8D meetings in Geneva, Switzerland. In the structure of the ITU, Working Party 8D is responsible for frequency spectrum issues in the RNSS and the mobile satellite service (MSS). The full texts of the studies are available from the ITU web site under Working Party 8D contributions. Note that because spaceborne RNSS receivers operate in a receive-only mode with navigation signals already being broadcast toward the Earth, the addition of a space-tospace allocation will not result in interference with other systems. A space-based RNSS receiver, however, could experience interference from systems of other services, including intraservice interference from other RNSS systems. The interference scenarios examined in the studies can be inferred from the following frequency allocation charts. In these charts, services labeled in all capital letters (e.g., "ARNS") have primary status, whereas those labeled with sentence-style capitalization (e.g., "Amateur radio") have secondary status (i.e., a service with secondary status cannot claim interference protection from or cause harmful interference to a service with primary status). Charts showing the ITU frequency allocations in the 960 to 1350 MHZ range and the 1525-1660 MHZ range are discussed and presented.

Spence, Rodney L.↗