Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Artemis Base Camp”

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 19 records
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Using Open Standards and NASA Open Source Simulation Tools to Model Artemis Base Camp Mission Timelines

The United States’ National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) has announced that the Artemis Program will return humans to the Moon, establishing a persistent presence with the Artemis Base Camp (ABC), and extend human exploration to Mars. The NASA Exploration Systems Simulations (NExSyS) team at NASA’s Johnson Space Center is using internationally developed simulation interoperability standards and NASA open source simulation tools to support Artemis concept, analysis, designs, development, training, and ultimately operations. The NExSyS team has been tasked to support early ABC architecture and mission analysis using mission time lines developed by the crew operations mission planning team. The NExSyS team is developing a distributed simulation framework with initial Artemis element implementations to model the ABC mission timelines using the international simulation interoperability standard High Level Architecture (HLA), the Simulation Interoperability Standards Organization’s Space Reference Federation Object Model (SpaceFOM), the NASA open source Trick Simulation Environment, and another NASA open source interface package called TrickHLA. The ABC architecture is composed of a number of key surface elements and resources. Some examples of modeled elements (also known as entities) are landers, habitats, rovers, logistics carriers, and astronauts. Some examples of modeled transferable and consumable resources are power, water, oxygen, nitrogen, scientific samples, and food. These entities and resources are modeled in a collection of individual simulations called Federates. A coordinated collection of interoperable federates is called a Federation and when these federates are tied together in a coordinated simulation run, it is referred to as a Federation Execution. The federates communicate through HLA using data exchange formats defined by a collection of machine readable files called Federation Object Models (FOMs). These FOM files are based on extensions to the SpaceFOM. This enables the instantiation and sharing of objects and interactions between federates in the federation. These provide for entity and resource tracking, object transfer, and data collection. Federate interactions are used to trigger events and notify federates of entity or resource transfers. For the initial implementation, the constituent federates are Trick-based simulations that use TrickHLA to provide the required HLA-base interoperability. These Trick-based simulations provide the required modeling for the individual Artemis elements along with the associated element resources. These federates provide a means to explore traverses between surface elements and exploration sites as scheduled in a mission timeline and explore the affects traverse times have on the overall mission timeline. The mission time lines are modeled using a Trick input file event handling capabilities. Each timeline operation is handled as individual simulation events, and triggered based on previous event status, time of operation, and simulated task completions. In addition, the ABC Federation can be used to perform Monte Carlo analysis. The Monte Carlo tool can vary the inputs, timings, and malfunctions to show how various contingencies in the mission can affect the mission timeline.

Keaton Craig Dodd↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Integrated Logistics and Supportability Challenges of Sustained Human Lunar Exploration

NASA’s Artemis program plans to establish a sustained human presence on the lunar surface. The International Space Station other space station programs have demonstrated long-duration human spaceflight operations that reuse infrastructure in Low Earth Orbit, sometimes including long uncrewed “dormant” periods. In contrast, human lunar exploration to date has consisted solely of relatively short sortie missions, rather than a sustained presence. A sustained human outpost on the Moon that can support month-long crewed exploration missions and be reused by multiple crews will be more challenging than past operations, particularly from the perspective of logistics, supportability, and risk. This paper examines the integrated logistics and supportability challenges of sustained human lunar exploration and provides a review of historical spaceflight experience in terms of crewed mission endurance, uncrewed duration, transportation overhead, and access to abort. Planned Artemis Base Camp crewed mission endurance is approximately 2.5 times longer than past lunar surface crewed mission endurance, but similar to average time between resupply for the International Space Station. Sustained human spacecraft have only twice experienced uncrewed durations longer than the planned interval between Artemis Base Camp missions, and Artemis surface assets will face long uncrewed periods more regularly than any past sustained human spacecraft. Transportation of crew and cargo to and from the Moon will be more difficult and time-consuming than transportation to and from Low Earth Orbit, and crew access to abort will be more limited. The implications of Artemis lunar operations for crewed Mars mission planning are also discussed. Historical approaches to risk management—including logistics, supportability, and abort strategies—should be reexamined and re-optimized for this new mission context. Sustained lunar operations will provide a valuable proving ground for testing new approaches to crewed space exploration.

logistics↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Integrated Logistics and Supportability Challenges of Sustained Human Lunar Exploration

NASA’s Artemis program plans to establish a sustained human presence on the lunar surface. The International Space Station and other space station programs have demonstrated long-duration human spaceflight operations that reuse infrastructure in Low Earth Orbit, sometimes including long uncrewed “dormant” periods. In contrast, all human exploration beyond Low Earth Orbit to date has consisted solely of relatively short sortie missions, rather than a sustained presence. A sustained human outpost on the Moon that can support month-long crewed exploration missions and be reused by multiple crews will be more challenging than past operations, particularly from the perspective of logistics, supportability, and risk. This paper examines the integrated logistics and supportability challenges of sustained human lunar exploration and provides a review of historical spaceflight experience in terms of crewed mission endurance, uncrewed duration, transportation overhead, and access to abort. Planned Artemis Base Camp crewed mission endurance is approximately 2.5 times longer than past lunar surface crewed mission endurance, but similar to the average time between resupply for the International Space Station. Sustained human spacecraft have only twice experienced uncrewed durations longer than the planned interval between Artemis Base Camp missions, and Artemis surface assets will face long uncrewed periods more regularly than any past sustained human spacecraft. Transportation of crew and cargo to and from the Moon will be more difficult and time-consuming than transportation to and from Low Earth Orbit, and crew access to abort will be more limited. The implications of Artemis lunar operations for crewed Mars mission planning are also discussed. Historical approaches to risk management—including logistics, supportability, and abort strategies—should be reexamined and re-optimized for this new mission context. Sustained lunar operations will provide a valuable proving ground for testing new approaches to crewed space exploration.

logistics↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Logistics Transfer Methods – Offloading SPLCs from CLPS

Presentation is accompanied by "Lunar Logistics Frequently Asked Questions" document. This document contains an evolving set of assumptions and ideas pertaining to the provision, delivery, transportation and accommodation of logistics for the lunar surface operations at Artemis Base Camp. It does not represent requirements, but a starting point from which partners can iterate. Given that the systems and the location for Artemis Base Camp are still being determined, the attached document represents a snapshot in time of ideas and some bounding constraints with respect to logistics operations. Partners are free to challenge operational constructs and assumptions to achieve better solutions. The concepts and assumptions in this document serve as a starting point for innovation to help identify factors that need to be considered for logistics operations and system design. It will be updated periodically as more information is developed and refined, and eventually serve as a basis for documenting ground rules and assumptions, leading eventually to requirements in the future.

Douglas A Craig↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Long -Term Architecture Development For The Moon And M

Developing an enterprise-level architecture encompassing future human-robotic science and exploration at the Moon and Mars requires a visionary approach that ensures NASA is responsive to national priorities and global science and technology advancement objectives. While the initial capabilities needed to return humans to the Moon may be well understood, NASA is still formulating a long-term infrastructure at the Moon and working to narrow the trade space for the first human missions to Mars. This paper will focus on the formulation and current status of engineering and design applications for a long-term and robust lunar architecture that will implement the Artemis Base Camp concept, including pre-formulation activities and elements currently in formulation. Authors will demonstrate how the Moon-to-Mars campaign approach fosters commonality of requirements and standards across individual mission elements, as well as multi-destination systems and operations, to reduce risk and encourage healthy competition in the growing space market. Among the Artemis Base Camp elements discussed will be multiple surface mobility elements, a fixed, anchoring surface habitat, fission surface power, and an in-situ resource development pilot plant. The narrative will clearly illustrate the direct evolution of the base camp elements to a minimal Mars architecture concept, and also outline unique development efforts that will be required in the next decade to make it possible to send humans to the Red Planet as early as the 2030s.

Greg Chavers↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Early Assessments of Crew Timelines for the Lunar Surface Habitat

As NASA progresses towards sustained crewed space missions, crew timelines will become increasingly important to achieving mission goals. While it is desirable to spend as much time as possible during crewed space missions on science activities and experiments, there are a large number of activities that crew members must perform each day in order to maintain both crew and vehicle health and safety. The time available for science activities in space is highly dependent on mandatory tasks required for crew and vehicle health and safety. The different crewed activities need to be planned accordingly long before the start of a mission in order to optimize crew time for science. To begin assessing the potential crew time for available for science, an understanding of the requirements to maintain crew and vehicle health and safety is needed. These additional activities may include sleep, exercise, vehicle maintenance, logistics handling, crew personal time, as well as many other tasks. The remaining time outside of these required tasks, within a reasonable crew work schedule, can be dedicated to science operations. This paper will detail a collaborative effort to analyzing crew times for sustained spaceflight missions and how the results of that analysis are applied to the crew timeline for the proposed Lunar Surface Habitat (SH).To determine the crew time for all of these required activities, an analysis was conducted utilizing defined agency requirements and historical crewed mission data. Predicted crew activity times were integrated into a daily schedule in order to optimize the crew’s time during the mission. This methodology was utilized to produce expected crew timelines for NASA’s proposed Artemis Base Camp (ABC) missions. The current plans for the ABC contain two different sustained habitats, the Pressurized Rover (PR) and the Surface Habitat (SH). While the crew are separated between the two habitats, the timelines for each element are dependent on the other element’s operations, so the two element timelines are formed in conjunction with one another. The results described in this paper, however, will focus solely on the crew timeline in the SH. This paper will explain the methodology behind predicting the required crew time spent in the SH for each activity, and the process of incorporating these predicted crew times into a coherent schedule.

Crew Time↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Artemis: An Overview of NASA’s Activities to Return Humans to the Moon

NASA is well underway in its plans to return humans to the Moon and build long-term infrastructure both in orbit and on the surface. Following the Artemis I and Artemis II flight tests, NASA will begin crewed landings and regular missions to the Moon. Artemis will return value to the American public and the global community, enable groundbreaking scientific discovery, and prepare NASA and its partners for exploration of the solar system. Work on the initial Human Landing System (HLS), procurement activities for future HLS, and work on the initial modules of the lunar-orbiting Gateway are underway. International partnerships are playing a critical role in the planning, development, and execution of these missions. As of December 2021, three international partners have entered agreements to contribute to the Gateway and 14 nations have signed the Artemis accords. A new spacesuit acquisition strategy will stimulate economic growth and meet the growing needs of NASA and emerging customers. Requirements development is underway for an unpressurized lunar surface rover and plans for a pressurized rover, foundation surface habitat, and the Artemis Base Camp are in work. This paper will provide an update on the HLS demonstration missions and the procurement status for HLS services; a comprehensive look at the Gateway’s components and related statuses; a summary of planned surface systems; and an outline of the strategies NASA will use to successfully implement these plans, preparing for humanity's next giant leap: Mars.

Artemis↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

The Lunar Lab Initiative

Analogous to terrestrial Antarctic basecamps at our south pole, space exploration outposts will be a combination of habitation and science-focused assets. The Artemis Exploration Roadmap endeavors to establish a sustained human presence on the lunar south pole starting in 2028. Within the planned Artemis Base Camp, most efforts to date have focused on the habitation assets or a mixture of science and habitation assets . With the recent advent of commercial lunar landing capabilities, the trade space can be further expanded to include dedicated science focused assets that ensure adequate science capability. To that end, the Forge, an innovation team initiative created at the Johnson Space Center (JSC), explored alternative ways to increase the science capabilities within the basecamp. The Forge uses structured brainstorming and facilitation to increase innovation within the assigned team, while executing its process in a rapid turnaround fashion for ideation and design study. As a pilot study for the Forge, a multi-disciplinary team investigated a lunar lab module to augment the lunar surface plans for Artemis. This formulation study evaluated the scientific and operational considerations for this dedicated crew space that would increase the capabilities of lunar surface science operations. The trade space evaluated single lunar lander delivery versus multiple lunar lander delivery for module assembly, alternative structural designs, the science instrument outfitting with mapping to scientific goals to maximize lunar science objectives, and how the lab would be operated. The lab operations options explored a stand-alone facility, as well as a facility integrated into a larger lunar surface complex, while evaluating crew usage and habitability considerations. The resulting alternatives were evaluated by the Forge team with a set of metrics to determine their originality, feasibility, and science performance, and thereby provide a recommendation to the lunar architecture planning team. Lessons learned from the lunar lab study were compiled to improve the process and tools for future Forge studies. Forward work, open issues, and challenges to further refine the design of the various science-focused asset options were also documented. By providing a robust science capability at humanity’s furthest outpost, we can plan for a sustained human lunar presence once the initial lunar surface access capability is well established.

Lunar outpost↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Probabilistic Risk Assessment of a Sustained Lunar Presence

The Artemis Base Camp will be our first sustainable foothold on the lunar frontier. The base camp includes a lunar surface habitat, power systems, and infrastructure needed to develop capabilities on future missions to Mars. NASA Probabilistic Risk Assessment (PRA) methodologies tend to focus on in-flight Loss of Crew (LOC) or Loss of Vehicle (LOV) risk estimates for short mission durations. However, lunar habit support systems and power generation systems will need to continuously operate. Existing risk methodologies will need to adapt to understand risk drivers in new environments under different operating conditions, such as lunar dust and increased micro-meteoroid exposure. Insights from the nuclear and oil industries can provide guidance to NASA risk practitioners to tackle this new challenge.

risk assessment↗
NASA NTRS2022

Moon to Mars (M2M) Habitation Considerations: A Snap Shot As of January 2022

The following NASA Technical Memorandum (TM) is intended to provide a snapshot in time of NASA’s current considerations (ground rules and assumptions, functional allocations, logistics) for habitation systems for the lunar surface (non-roving) and Mars transits. As NASA continues to refine the reference designs to meet the needs of an evolving architecture, it is expected that this information will also be updated as a result. Where appropriate, relevant publicly released documents will be referenced to provide further detail. NASA’s human lunar exploration plan under the Artemis program calls for achieving the goal of sending the first woman and first person of color to the surface of the Moon in the mid- 2020s and working toward sustainable exploration by the end of the decade. Working with both commercial and international partners, NASA will establish a permanent human presence on the Moon to uncover new scientific discoveries and lay the foundation for private companies to build a lunar economy. Longer duration missions on the lunar surface and in lunar orbit will also serve as a test bed for technologies to support future Mars exploration campaigns. The agency will use what we learn on the Moon to prepare for humanity's next giant leap – sending astronauts to Mars. NASA intends to establish a sustained lunar presence with the development of the Artemis Base Camp to prove technologies and capabilities that will one day enable humans to live and work on Mars, beginning with core elements including the Lunar Terrain Vehicle (LTV), the Pressurized Rover (PR), the lunar Surface Habitat (SH), power systems, and in-situ resource utilization (ISRU) systems. For in space operations and eventual transport of humans to Mars, NASA will utilize a Mars Transit Habitat (TH). Following deployment, the TH will complete a series of longer duration missions and shakedown testing while docked at Gateway, leveraging Gateway’s habitation redundancy for safety measures. Proposed Gateway-TH missions will far exceed the longest duration cislunar human missions to date. They will be the first operational readiness tests of our long-duration deep space systems, and of the split crew (two crew on the surface, two crew in space) operations that are vital to the approach for the first human Mars mission. Both the SH and TH are major architectural elements of NASA’s Moon to Mars (M2M) approach, each with very different concepts of operation. The SH is intended for use on the lunar surface as a home for astronauts, surface operations base, science facility, hub for communications, extravehicular activity (EVA) equipment repair site, waste processing facility, and supply hub. It serves as an enabler for a sustained surface presence and preparation for partial gravity operations during Mars missions. The SH will be designed to be self-sufficient for operations on the lunar surface. The SH will independently provide several functions, including its own power generation, energy storage capability, sleep quarters, hygiene areas, work areas, and dining areas. It will be capable of communicating with surface assets, orbital assets, and directly with Earth ground stations. It is planned to operate with two crew in the habitat for ~28- day stays with crew swap-outs in which the PR crew of two trades places with the habitat crew. During the swap-out, the habitat will nominally support four crew for a short period of time. For contingency scenarios, the habitat must also be capable of supporting four crew for up to 7 days. The TH will be designed to be capable of up to ~1,200-day Mars missions with the ability to carry all food and supplies needed to support a crew of four for this duration. An assumed Mars mission profile for the TH is to carry crew and supplies for ~850-day roundtrips between Earth and Mars orbit that allows 30-day stays on the Martian surface. To test the systems for this long journey, the TH will be used to extend the duration of missions at Gateway, enabling the orbiting outpost to be used as a Mars analog. These analog missions will be accomplished by attaching the TH to Gateway and conducting lunar surface operations from the TH. The TH may also need to perform free-flying shakedown missions to test out all systems prior to leaving for Mars. The habitat provides many critical functions including: a contingency airlock, crew quarters, galley, hygiene areas, safe haven capability, and science equipment. It can receive docked items from either axial end or on a radial port.

Habitat↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Science Backroom Support for Sustained Lunar Surface

Sustained surface operations on the lunar surface will be supported by the Foundational Surface Habitat (FSH) at the Artemis Base Camp. Planning for FSH is still preliminary but includes notional science outfitting that will enable lunar science and support the science conducted during EVA traverses.

Geolab↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

NASA LSII Lunar Simulant Project

Introduction: America has entered a new era of exploration. NASA’s Artemis program will lead humanity forward to the Moon and prepare us for the next giant leap, the exploration of Mars [1]. To champion technologies needed to live on and explore the Moon, NASA’s Space Technology Mission Directorate (STMD) established the Lunar Surface Innovation Initiative (LSII)[2].LSII's technology development portfolio includes: Utilizing the Moon’s resources; Establishing sustainable surface power; Building machinery and electronics that work in extreme environments, like super-chilly permanently shadowed craters; Mitigating lunar dust; Carrying out surface excavation, manufacturing and construction duties; and Extreme access which includes navigating and exploring the surface/subsurface. To support the development and testing of these technologies, LSII created the lunar simulant project, to create and/or acquire low-, medium-and high-fidelity lunar simulants to match the needs of STMD projects at all levels of technology readiness levels (TRL), as well as other NASA programs. There is not one bulk lunar simulant that will satisfy the needs of all projects. NASA's Approach to Simulants: Just as LSII's activities are being implemented through a combination of unique NASA work and public-private partnerships, NASA will work with commercial simulant providers to acquire simulants that meet NASA's needs. If warranted, NASA will develop simulants using government agencies, as was done with the NASA/USGS Lunar Highlands Type (NU-LHT)series of lunar simulants [3].NASA is also collaborating with the Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory(JHUAPL) Lunar Surface Innovation Consortium (LSIC) in the development and characterization of lunar simulants [4]. Within NASA, a small team (< 10 people) is coordinating simulant activities across the agency, with team members located at several NASA centers. The overall objective of the project is to procure lunar simulants in sufficient amounts for earth-based testing of subsystems and systems in a variety of environments (i.e., laboratory, high-bay, thermal-vacuum chambers), required for Artemis missions to the Moon, as well as other missions carrying NASA lunar payloads, such as the Commercial Lunar Payload Services (CLPS)program [5]. Lunar Highlands Simulant: NASA's Artemis Program is targeting the lunar south pole region for initial human missions and the Artemis Base Camp. Hence, the LSII lunar simulant project is currently focusing on the mineralogy and properties of lunar highlands regolith [6 and 7]. Plagioclase-rich rocks (e.g., anorthosite, norite) are the dominant constituent in highlands simulants, with Shawmere, Stillwater, and White Mountain anorthosites being used in commercially available simulants. However, because these feedstocks are terrestrial in nature, they include hydrated minerals, carbon-bearing minerals, and other chemical signatures that are not present on the Moon, and these minor mineral assemblages need to be taken into account when trying to understand test procedures and results. Glass Component: While much attention has been placed on the rock/mineral component of lunar simulants, glass is just as important when creating simulants. The glass component in lunar regoliths is often greater than 50% by volume [8]. This component includes impact melt glass, dark matrix breccias, and agglutinates. However, this component is difficult, time-consuming and expensive to make. Most lunar simulants, past and current, have relied on basaltic cinder as a feedstock for glass. Getting better glass components at a lower cost, particularly agglutinates and glass with an anorthositic composition is a near-term objective that the NASA simulant project is trying to address . Characterization: It is extremely important for lunar simulants to be characterized by several analytical methods. Gruener et al. [9] and JHUAPL LSIC [10] conducted initial assessments of some of the commercially available simulants in 2019 and early 2020, before the global pandemic. Further analyses are needed to better quantify important parameters such as, modal mineralogy and glass content, particle shape, and particle size distribution. These quantified results can then be used in determining figures of merit (FOM) that show how well simulants compare to lunar regolith [11 and 12].

J E Gruener↗
NASA NTRS2022

What would it take to manufacture perovskite solar cells in space?

Imagine, astronauts land on the moon. They verify their arrival with mission control, and perform system checks and validations. After the dust settles, they open the airlock of the landing vehicle and venture outside. A side hatch opens, and a flexible substrate slowly unfurls on a boom. A series of printer heads raster, hovering over the substrate and sequentially vapor-depositing the constituent layers of a perovskite solar module (Figure 1). In time, a 1-megawatt array has been manufactured on the moon and can now be connected to supply power to the Artemis Base Camp. This ambitious vision could someday become a reality. On August 29, 2021, a SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket launched a commercial resupply payload from Kennedy Space Center en route to the International Space Station (ISS). On board were perovskite solar cells that will fly for 6 months outside the ISS in low earth orbit (LEO) on the 15th Materials International Space Station Experiment (MISSE-15). This will be the first long duration flight of perovskite solar cell devices in LEO and a major step toward realizing the in-space operation and, potentially, manufacture of perovskite solar cells.

Lyndsey McMillon-Brown↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Uncrewed Lunar Surface Operations and Support Activities

Sustained human presence on the surface of the Moon and future missions to Mars require increased independence from surface crews and Earth-based mission control to operate efficiently, safely, and reliably. The time for surface crews to perform tasks will be limited. Extravehicular activities by surface personnel are burdensome and time-consuming, even when a continuous human presence on the surface occurs. Identifying and balancing human/automation roles and tasks and infusing automation and autonomy practices early in a system’s lifecycle will be essential to achieve mission objectives. Among these objectives are attaining a sustained human presence, improving performance and mission effectiveness, reducing operations and maintenance (O&M) costs, and ensuring operations that are robust to communication delays. To achieve these objectives, an operational shift toward increased automation and autonomy with less reliance on humans is needed. Uncrewed lunar surface operations and support activities occur when surface crews are not present or are independent of surface crew timeline activities requiring no surface crew oversight or intervention. These uncrewed surface opportunities can also be planned to minimize crew workload that avoids routine maintenance and support tasks, thus maximizing crew exploration time. Uncrewed preparations such as staging and prepositioning equipment and materials before the crew arrives could improve crew task efficiency. Additional opportunities exist to conduct uncrewed science, exploration, and utilization. Uncrewed surface architecture functions can include science and exploration; habitation; launch and landing support; surface communication and navigation; surface power generation and distribution; human surface mobility; lifting, handling, manipulating; excavation, construction, and site preparation; logistics management; maintenance and repair; surface resource utilization; integrated site operations and shared support services (e.g., site scheduling/prioritization, dust mitigation/contamination control, and surface safety). Early robotic lunar surface campaigns will provide information on the availability of resources, such as oxygen and water, and demonstrate surface-based technologies. After the Artemis III human lunar return mission, a series of landers will deliver surface systems, cargo, supplies, science packages, spare parts, and commodities. A balance of crewed and uncrewed surface operations will enable a sustained lunar surface presence at the South Pole of the Moon at a site that will be known as the Artemis Base Camp (ABC). It is envisioned that base camp operations on and around the Moon will then help prepare for the mission durations and activities needed to support the first human mission to Mars. Before long-duration crew missions to the base camp can occur, the necessary surface infrastructure will be pre-deployed and verified operational. Surface assets will be teleoperated and remotely managed from Earth. Additionally, robotic and short-duration crewed missions to the ABC will ensure the site’s merit to achieve long-term science objectives, availability of usable resources, and that terrain, seasonal variations, and illumination conditions are acceptable. ABC will consist of different areas where specific functions and services are rendered, including: • Launch and Landing Area • Habitation Area • Power Production Area • Resource Areas Launch and Landing Area—The launch and landing area will support associated functions for the arrival and departure of vehicles, such as crewed landing and ascent and uncrewed cargo deliveries and offloading. It will evolve from an unimproved site at the beginning of the exploration campaign to a more sustainable landing and launch area that can support repeated arrivals and departures. Initial uncrewed Lunar Terrain Vehicle (LTV) surface operations may include emplacement of navigation beacons and communication equipment, real-time video and photography of landing/liftoff events, and element repositioning, such as portable utility power (PUP) (applicable for other landed assets at other areas). Site preparations, such as surface leveling, soil compaction, and berm/path construction, may be needed for a more sustainable launch and landing area capable of accommodating vehicles that are increasingly more reusable and reduce the effects of plume surface interactions and ejecta impacts on nearby surface assets. During the ABC missions, cargo and logistics will be delivered to the lunar surface via robotic cargo landers before the crew arrives. These shipments, which can arrive in pressurized logistics carriers, will deliver the logistics necessary to support a crewed mission and include items such as food, water, equipment spares, etc. Providing the capability to retrieve, offload, and transport the logistics closer to the ABC site before the arrival of the crew will increase the overall efficiency of crew operations once they arrive. In the sustained phase of exploration, other supporting services may be needed, such as lander propellant servicing, surface power services, commodity refreshes, and additional inspection, maintenance, and repair capabilities, to sustain a cadence of extended personnel stays and cargo arrivals and departures. Habitation Area—Uncrewed support to surface habitation could involve supporting activation and pre-entry operations of the habitat while the crew is in orbit at the Gateway outpost preparing for a surface landing. Surface Habitat (SH) uncrewed operations may include bringing the cabin environment to a habitable temperature and air mix and activating other critical crew support systems. Potential crop production uncrewed tasks in the SH could also include autonomous watering and tending. Additionally, when the crew departs, the SH enters dormancy for the long period of uncrewed operation. A logistical staging area could also be collocated near the SH. If so, staging operations for crew supplies, waste re-location, and recycling operations may be opportunities for uncrewed operations. Power Production Area—The Fission Surface Power (FSP) element and its supporting distribution equipment provide power to surface elements as needed across the ABC to supplement day-to-day operations and survive lunar nights. Uncrewed support of this power system includes any initial LTV-assisted deployments of cables and other distributed equipment, associated electrical connections, and system testing and activation operations. Robotically performing some inspections, maintenance, or repair tasks on the power distribution equipment could reduce the surface crew workload. Resource Area— Uncrewed resource prospecting, mapping, and characterizing possible resource sites is likely to be time-consuming and represents an opportunity for uncrewed operations between crewed missions. Uncrewed mobile equipment operations will be needed in the extreme environments of permanently shadowed locations where resource extractions occur. As In-Situ Resource Utilization (ISRU) pilot plant operations begin, uncrewed surface support activities with available mobile and portable assets (LTV, PUP, etc.) will better support these operations. Any produced commodities can be stored at a centralized storage location for future use. Also associated with these operations is the use of mobile robotic excavators for resource acquisition and robotic/autonomous regolith processing. The waste tailings generated during excavation and regolith processing would also need to be transported and deposited at a dedicated location. Surface assets will continue operating between crew visits to maintain surface capabilities, conduct lunar surface science, technology demonstrations, and public outreach opportunities. Additionally, certain sustaining tasks that would consume valuable crew time could be performed before crew arrival, or after their departure. This capability may offer more affordable options to construct, activate, test, and maintain a broad set of surface assets. Telerobotically operated human surface mobility systems, such as the LTV and Pressurized Rover (PR), can be utilized for various tasks. Surface environmental conditions pose a distinct challenge for all these activities. Surface illumination and localized shadows are one such factor. Night-survival operations could consist of thermal management, battery pre-charging, and load shedding. Some surface systems may hibernate through the night and then awake and continue nominal operations. Uncrewed mobile assets may use a more adaptive approach to optimize their power and operations; one method is to follow the sunlight. Night-survival operations may be initiated remotely by teleoperation, automated, or accomplished by supervised autonomous operation. The ability to pre-deploy and control remote assets in orbit or on Mars before the arrival of the mission crew is a key capability that can be simulated on the moon. The base camp provides a venue where these advanced operational concepts, technologies, and autonomous methods and techniques, including the incorporation of time delays to simulate Earth-Mars latency can be replicated to help buy down future Mars mission risks. This paper will examine the evolution of uncrewed lunar surface operations and support activities. It will also discuss the lunar surface environmental conditions (thermal, lighting, terrain, topography, communications) along with the challenges they pose on uncrewed surface operations, and the performance of these activities with limited to minimal human interaction and/or teleoperation. Since lunar missions include Mars mission analogs, such investigation provides the framework for future uncrewed Mars mission support.

Mark E Lewis↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Evaluating Extravehicular Activity Access Options for a Lunar Surface Habitat

NASA’s upcoming return to the moon includes a plan for longer duration lunar missions that prioritize science and surface exploration. The current Artemis Base Camp reference proposes a Surface Habitat (SH) that will support 2 to 4 crewmembers with adequate capability for living and working for 30 days or more. An important aspect of the SH’s design will be its ability to support a high frequency of Extravehicular Activities (EVAs) for scientific purposes. There are multiple airlock designs that can support EVA access from inside the SH out to the lunar surface. This paper explores three unique options for EVA access: a traditional airlock, a suitlock, and a suitport-airlock.A traditional airlock is accessed by use of a hatch, crewmembers don and doff their EVA suits inside the airlock, and it must be depressurized and repressurized for every EVA. A suitlock is also depressurized and repressurized for every EVA but thesuits are donned through a suitport attached to the airlock bulkhead. A suitport-airlock is access through suitports that are attached to the airlock bulkhead as well, but the suitport-airlock stays in vacuum, and it does not have to be depressurized and repressurized for each EVA. This study also evaluated the use of an Airlock Airsave System in the cases of a traditional airlock and suitlock. This system captures a fraction of the airlock gas instead of venting all of the gas pre-EVA. The captured gas isthen used to partially repressurize the airlock post-EVA.In this study, each option is evaluated based on seven different areas of analysis. The metrics include overhead time for EVAs, dust mitigation, consumables for resupply mass, systems mass, system power, safety and mission assurances, and programmatic considerations. The EVA access options are evaluated and compared under each area of analysis. While the baseline case assumes the SH is at 8.2 psia, the authors also investigate the impact of a 10.2 psia habitat as an alternative in this analysis. Following the conclusion of the analysis, the authors recommend the usage of a Suitport-Airlock for Lunar SH missions and detail the reasoning behind the recommendation.

EVA↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Artemis Internal Science Team Update: Deployed Payloads

Artemis will reestablish human presence on the Moon and lead to a new era of scientific discovery and exploration. Led by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), the Artemis effort includes a collaboration of space agencies and companies from around the world [1]. In support of Artemis, a cross-disciplinary effort of science, engineering, operations, and human factors personnel is currently developing the best methods, facilities, and field locations to test hardware, train astronauts, and evaluate concepts of operations. This abstract, as part of the Artemis Internal Science Team (AIST) [2], provides an update to NASA’s plans for the solicitation, development, and operations of deployed surface payloads. In calendar year 2023, NASA’s Science Mission Directorate will solicit proposals for instruments to be deployed by crew on the surface of the Moon (Fig. 1), beginning with Artemis III [3]. The Artemis III mission will land in the south polar region of the Moon, within 6º of latitude from the south pole, in the vicinity of both persistently illuminated and permanently shadowed areas of the Moon, with potential access to surface-accessible volatile deposits [4]. Several of the proposed landing regions are located among some of the oldest parts of the Moon, and together with the permanently shadowed regions, provide the opportunity to learn about the history of the Moon through previously unexplored lunar regions [5]. Deployed payloads will be a critical part of a notional program that captures the highest-priority science for Artemis III and provides the greatest feedforward to follow-on missions and the build-up to the Artemis Base Camp

R. C. Weber↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Evaluating Extravehicular Activity Access Options for a Lunar Surface Habitat

NASA’s upcoming return to the moon includes a plan for longer duration lunar missions that prioritize science and surface exploration. The current Artemis Base Camp reference proposes a Surface Habitat (SH) that will support 2 to 4 crewmembers with adequate capability for living and working for 30 days or more. An important aspect of the SH’s design will be its ability to support a high frequency of Extravehicular Activities (EVAs) for scientific purposes. There are multiple airlock designs that can support EVA access from inside the SH out to the lunar surface. This paper explores three unique options for EVA access: a traditional airlock, a suitlock, and a suitport-airlock. A traditional airlock is accessed by use of a hatch, crewmembers don and doff their EVA suits inside the airlock, and it must be depressurized and repressurized for every EVA. A suitlock is also depressurized and repressurized for every EVA but the suits are donned through a suitport attached to the airlock bulkhead. A suitport-airlock is accessed through suitports that are attached to the airlock bulkhead as well, but the suitport-airlock stays in vacuum, and it does not have to be depressurized and repressurized for each EVA. This study also evaluated the use of an Airlock Airsave System in the cases of a traditional airlock and suitlock. This system captures a fraction of the airlock gas instead of venting all of the gas pre-EVA. The captured gas is then used to partially repressurize the airlock post-EVA. In this study, each option is evaluated based on seven different areas of analysis. The metrics include overhead time for EVAs, dust mitigation, consumables for resupply mass, systems mass, system power, safety and mission assurances, and programmatic considerations. The EVA access options are evaluated and compared under each area of analysis. While the baseline case assumes the SH is at 8.2 psia, the authors also investigate the impact of a 10.2 psia habitat as an alternative in this analysis. Following the conclusion of the analysis, the authors recommend the usage of a Suitport-Airlock for Lunar SH missions and detail the reasoning behind the recommendation.

EVA↗