Results for “Volume rendering” — Page 7

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

2023 Artemis Crew Health and Performance System Model Development

While the NASA Human Research Program (HRP) utilizes a Crew Health and Performance (CHP) System to represent all the Agency’s efforts to ensure the health and performance of NASA astronauts, there is no shared mental model of a CHP system at NASA. Some groups may consider a CHP system to be only a medical kit, while others may not be using the concept at all. To facilitate the integration of functions and capabilities to ensure astronaut health and performance during vehicle development, HRP has proposed a CHP Shared Mental Model derived from the NASA Human Health, Medical, and Performance Spaceflight Standards (NASA-STD-3001 Vol.1/Vol.2). [1] Even though many vehicle, ground, and communication systems as well as mission operations are modeled for the Artemis Campaigns, no mission level CHP system model was created to achieve the intent of the HRP CHP Shared Mental Model. The lack of this model renders it difficult to visualize and understand how the many programs work together to provide the necessary cross program functions and capabilities to ensure the health and performance of the crew throughout an Artemis mission. For this purpose, the Exploration Medical Capability (ExMC) element of HRP developed a CHP system model for the Artemis III and IV missions to provide a view of how each program contributes to and interacts with the overall CHP system. To develop the 2023 Artemis CHP system model, ExMC leveraged existing data and models from the Moon to Mars Program Office, the Office of the Chief Health and Medical Officer (OCHMO) and the Orion, Gateway, Extravehicular Activity and Human Surface Mobility (EHP) and Human Landing System (HLS) programs. By using a Model-Based Systems Engineering (MBSE) approach, existing requirements, functions, and concepts of operations were combined to create a single system model focused on representing CHP from the launch to the return to Earth segments of the Artemis III and IV missions. Additionally, by incorporating the HRP Systems Platform for Aggregating and Relating Capabilities, or SPARC tool, the data from the programs was also related back to the 2nd volume of the NASA Human Health, Medical, and Performance Spaceflight Standard (NASA-STD-3001, Vol.2) and the human system risks identified by the Human System Risk Board (HSRB). The first version of the 2023 Artemis CHP system model was baselined in Fall of 2023 after the model was demonstrated to be a potentially useful tool for systems engineers integrating CHP capabilities in vehicle development as well as members of the Health and Medical Technical Authority providing oversight of those programs. The model may also be useful to any stakeholder of astronaut health and performance by providing insights on how an Artemis mission satisfies the NASA Human Health, Medical, and Performance Spaceflight Standards as well as how they mitigate the HSRB Human System Risks. This presentation highlights how the model was developed and the possible benefits of the model. [1] NASA HRP (2022), Crew Health and Performance System Whitepaper

Systems engineering↗

NASA NTRS2024

2023 Artemis Crew Health and Performance (CHP) System Model Development

While the NASA Human Research Program (HRP) utilizes a Crew Health and Performance (CHP) System to represent all the Agency’s efforts to ensure the health and performance of NASA astronauts, there is no shared mental model of a CHP system at NASA. Some groups may consider a CHP system to be only a medical kit, while others may not be using the concept at all. To facilitate the integration of functions and capabilities to ensure astronaut health and performance during vehicle development, HRP has proposed a CHP Shared Mental Model derived from the NASA Human Health, Medical, and Performance Spaceflight Standards (NASA-STD-3001 Vol.1/Vol.2). [1] Even though many vehicle, ground, and communication systems as well as mission operations are modeled for the Artemis Campaigns, no mission level CHP system model was created to achieve the intent of the HRP CHP Shared Mental Model. The lack of this model renders it difficult to visualize and understand how the many programs work together to provide the necessary cross program functions and capabilities to ensure the health and performance of the crew throughout an Artemis mission. For this purpose, the Exploration Medical Capability (ExMC) element of HRP developed a CHP system model for the Artemis III and IV missions to provide a view of how each program contributes to and interacts with the overall CHP system. To develop the 2023 Artemis CHP system model, ExMC leveraged existing data and models from the Moon to Mars Program Office, the Office of the Chief Health and Medical Officer (OCHMO) and the Orion, Gateway, Extravehicular Activity and Human Surface Mobility (EHP) and Human Landing System (HLS) programs. By using a Model-Based Systems Engineering (MBSE) approach, existing requirements, functions, and concepts of operations were combined to create a single system model focused on representing CHP from the launch to the return to Earth segments of the Artemis III and IV missions. Additionally, by incorporating the HRP Systems Platform for Aggregating and Relating Capabilities, or SPARC tool, the data from the programs was also related back to the 2nd volume of the NASA Human Health, Medical, and Performance Spaceflight Standard (NASA-STD-3001, Vol.2) and the human system risks identified by the Human System Risk Board (HSRB). The first version of the 2023 Artemis CHP system model was baselined in Fall of 2023 after the model was demonstrated to be a potentially useful tool for systems engineers integrating CHP capabilities in vehicle development as well as members of the Health and Medical Technical Authority providing oversight of those programs. The model may also be useful to any stakeholder of astronaut health and performance by providing insights on how an Artemis mission satisfies the NASA Human Health, Medical, and Performance Spaceflight Standards as well as how they mitigate the HSRB Human System Risks. This presentation highlights how the model was developed and the possible benefits of the model. [1] NASA HRP (2022), Crew Health and Performance System Whitepaper

Systems engineering↗

NASA NTRS2010

Hydrogen Fire in a Storage Vessel

On October 23, 2007, the operations team began a procedure to sample the Liquid Hydrogen (LH2) storage vessels ("tanks"), and associated transfer system. This procedure was being performed to determine the conditions within the system, and if necessary, to purge the system of any excess Gaseous Hydrogen (GH2) in preparation for reactivation of the system. The system had not been used since 2003. The LH2 storage system contains two (2) spherical pressure vessels of 225,000 gallons in volume, with a maximum working pressure (MAWP) of 50 psig. Eight inch transfer piping connects them to the usage point. Operations began with activation of the burnstack for the LH2 storage area. Pneumatic (GN2) systems in the storage area were then activated and checked. Pressurization of storage tank number 1 with gaseous nitrogen (GN2) was initiated, with a target pressure of 10 psig, at which point samples were planned to be taken. At 5 psig, a loud noise was heard in the upper area of tank number 2. Smoke was seen exiting the burnstack and from the insulation on vent lines for both tanks. At this time tank number 1 was vented and the pressurization system was secured. The mishap resulted in physical damage to both storage tanks, as well as to some of the piping for both tanks. Corrective action included repair of the damaged hardware by a qualified contractor. Preventive action included documented organizational policy and procedures for establishing standby and mothball conditions for facilities and equipment, including provisions as detailed in the investigation report recommendations: Recommendation 1: The using organization should define necessary activities in order to place hydrogen systems in long term periods of inactivity. The defined activities should address requirements for rendering inert, isolation (i.e., physical disconnect, double block and bleed, etc.) and periodic monitoring. Recommendation 2: The using organization should develop a process to periodically monitor hazardous systems for proper configuration (i.e., a daily/weekly/monthly check sheet to verify critical purges are active).

Hester, Zena M.↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Interoperable Map Services with Performance Tuning for Earth Science Data through API-Tiles and Dynamic API-Styles

NASA’s Goddard Earth Sciences Data and Information Services Center (GES DISC) provides access to a wide range of global climate data from various satellite missions and models. However, the visualization and analysis of these data can be challenging due to their large volume, complex structure, and diverse formats. This study presents the implementation of interoperable map services (API-Maps) with performance tuning using API-Tiles and dynamic API-Styles. API-Maps is a standard for defining and exposing map services through RESTful (representational state transfer) APIs (application programming interfaces). API-Tiles is a technique for generating and delivering map tiles on demand from any data source. API-Styles is a method for dynamically applying styles to map tiles based on user preferences or data attributes. The use of API-Tiles and dynamic API-Styles enhances the performance and scalability of the map services, allowing for smooth and interactive visualization of large datasets. Two types of Earth Science data sources from the NASA GES DISC are used in the experiment: regularly gridded data, such as Global Precipitation Measurement (GPM) precipitation data, and low processing level data, such as low-level data of atmospheric composite measurements from the TROPOspheric Monitoring Instrument (TROPOMI) mission. Re-gridding of swath data (low level data - e.g. Level 2) of atmospheric composites (e.g. TROPOMI products, such as nitrogen dioxide, ozone and aerosol optical depth) is applied to enable the Web-based, interoperable, tiled, and styled mapping (rendering) services of such data. The results demonstrate the effectiveness of the proposed approach in providing fast and efficient access to Earth science data through interoperable map services.

Geographic Information System↗

NASA NTRS1999

Three Paradigms of Lunar Regolith Evolution

Integration of diverse datasets on the Moon may render some paradigms of lunar science either better-defended or vulnerable. We will consider three paradigms commonly used for understanding the processes of lunar regolith evolution in light of new and accumulated data. Our premise is that all data-sets should converge to a single interpretation if a concept or model is to be accepted as a paradigm. If a convergence is lacking, the paradigm needs fresh scrutiny. SteadyState: Lunar regolith evolution is currently understood in terms of comminution, agglutination, and replenishment as described by McKay and coworkers). Briefly, the model envisages continued micrometeoritic bombardment to comminute exposed soil particles to finer sizes while continued agglutination consumes finer sizes to produce larger constructional particles. Eventually, a balance between these two opposing processes achieves a steady state; soils at steady state maintain their mean grain size (M(sub z)). Episodic higher-energy impacts excavate fresh coarse material from below the soil cover, disturb the steady state, and restart the process to achieve a new steady state. It follows that the thickness of the regolith at any site would control the frequency of replenishment; indeed, the thickness of the regolith at Apollo landing sites was predicted by McKay et al. from the average M(sub z) of local soils. However, replenishment may come also from disintegrating boulders and cobbles at the lunar surface, and rates of comminution and agglutination may depend on the properties of target material. Regression between M(sub z) and I(sub s)/Fe(sup 0) (a measure of maturity or total surface exposure) of Apollo soils at different sites shows the following relations and estimated M(sub z) at a high maturity of I(sub s)/Fe(sup 0)= 100. It is possible that Apollo 12 and 15 sites have the thickest regolith and the Apollo 16 site has the thinnest. It is also possible that Apollo 12 and 15 basalts are comminuted faster than Apollo 16 highland rocks and Apollo 14 and 17 soils are products of mixed parentage. If a soil becomes continually finer as it matures until agglutination catches up, and if comminution is differential-dependent on the physical properties of the constituents, then the composition of the bulk soil has to match the composition of some "fulcrum" grain size fraction, say X Grain size fractions >X and <X will complement each other; their mass balance is the bulk soil. It appears that the 10-20-micron size fraction may be the fulcrum. In general, trace-element chemistry and IR reflectance spectra of this size fraction are closest to that of the bulk soil, regardless of maturity that is surprising. Disaggregated products of regolith breccias may also show similar relationships. If the 10-20 gm is the fulcrum (i.e., X as above) for many soil properties (e.g., major element composition, FMR, solar-wind-implanted elements), then this may be the ultimate mean grain size of lunar soils at steady state. However, different properties of soils may find steady states at different grain size fractions. The steady state of solar-wind-implanted elements, on the other hand, will climb up the grain-size scale as agglutinates transfer surface-correlated components into volume correlated components until a saturation level is reached or the rates of replenishment and implantation become equal. The same will be the case with vapor-deposited reduced metals as they too are incorporated inside constructional particles. Properties that are directly affected by soil-maturation processes will thus have different pathways of achieving steady states. Maturity, i.e., cumulative surface exposure, of lunar soils is best quantified by the amount of nanophase superparamagnetic Fe(sup 0) (np-Fe(sup 0)) normalized to Fe content (=I(sub s)/Fe(sup 0). The majority consensus (paradigm?) for the production of np-Fe(sup 0) is associated with the production of agglutinates. Because large doses of solar-wind H are implanted in all lunar soils upon exposure, any melting (e.g., during agglutinate production) triggers a chemical reduction of Fe-bearing minerals resulting in np-Fe(sup 0) production. The quantity of np-Fe(sup 0) is thus dependent on melting events, (i.e., exposure), and limited by the Fe content of the soil. All freshly produced np-Fe(sup 0) resides in agglutinitic glass, as new TEM images show. Apparently, the correction procedure developed by Lucey et al. to estimate the Fe content of the lunar surface from IR-reflectance spectra depends on accepting the above. However, the process of producing np-Fe(sup 0) may be physical rather than chemical. All np-Fe(sup 0) could be deposits from a vapor produced by micrometeoritic impact on lunar soils. If metal-O bonds in target phases are broken, O being "most volatile" will escape leaving an O-deficient vapor to facilitate the production of np-Fe(sup 0). If so, the quantity of np-Fe(sup 0) is dependent on the vaporizing events, (i.e., exposure), and limited by the efficiency of breaking metal-O bonds and the escape of 0. To the extent that strengths of metal-O bonds are dependent on the local crystal field, production of np-Fe(sup 0) may be limited by the mineral composition of target soils and not by their total Fe content. According to this model, vapor-deposited np-Fe(sup 0) should be found at any retentive sites on lunar soil grains. Indeed, TEM images show np-Fe(sup 0) on plagioclase and ilmenite. Incorporation of such pre-irradiated np-Fe(sup 0)-bearing grains into agglutinates may account for eventual increased emplacement of np-Fe(sup 0) in agglutinates. Such a paradigm shift in understanding the origin of np-Fe(sup 0) will raise questions ranging from the unquestionable use of Is/FeO as the universal maturity parameter of lunar soils to global elemental maps of the Moon from remote-sensing data. Additional information is contained in the original.

Basu, A.↗