Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Crew Size”

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

Humans to Mars, but How Many? Trade Space Analyses for Mars Mission Crew Size

Missions to Mars will differ from previous human spaceflight missions in that the crew of astronauts will be required to operate in an Earth-independent manner due to the long communication delays. Without a systematic, repeatable process to determine the number and composition of crew necessary to successfully accomplish these missions, NASA increases the risk that crew sizes may be too small to meet primary mission objectives under nominal conditions and, more consequentially, that crewmembers may not have the expertise needed to successfully respond to unforeseen failures without the real-time expertise of the Mission Control Central (MCC) team NASA currently relies upon. The NASA Engineering and Safety Center (NESC) developed a methodology for assessing the trade space of factors that affect the number of crew for Mars missions based on human performance and expertise modeling. This methodology includes the consideration of results from three human performance models developed using the Improved Performance Research and Integration Tool (IMPRINT) modeling platform as well as a custom-built model on expertise trained within the crew based on NASA’s crew qualification and responsibilities matrix (CQRM). We present example model results and discuss implications on trade space analyses for Mars mission crew size.

Mars Mission↗

Humans to Mars, but How Many? Using Imprint Human Performance Models to Inform Crew Size

HUMANS TO MARS, BUT HOW MANY? USING IMPRINT HUMAN PERFORMANCE MODELS TO INFORM CREW SIZE Missions to Mars will differ from previous human spaceflight missions in that the onboard crew of astronauts will be required to operate in an Earth-independent manner due to long communication delays. Without a systematic, repeatable process to determine the number and composition of crew necessary to successfully accomplish these missions, NASA increases the risk that crew sizes may be too small to meet primary mission objectives under nominal conditions and, more consequentially, that crewmembers may not have the expertise needed to successfully respond to unforeseen failures without the real-time expertise of the Mission Control Central (MCC) team NASA currently relies upon. The NASA Engineering and Safety Center (NESC) is developing a methodology for assessing the trade space of factors that affect the number of crew for future missions. This methodology includes the consideration of results from three human performance models developed using the Improved Performance Research and Integration Tool (IMPRINT) modeling platform as well as a custom-built model on expertise trained within the crew. The custom-built crew expertise model results will be presented in the training sub-tag. Here we present results of the three IMPRINT models. Two of these models were built using IMPRINT’s Operations Model capability, with detailed task networks for specific systems and scenarios allowing for a comprehensive mental workload analysis on certain crew positions. The third model was built using IMPRINT’s Force Model capability, allowing for a higher-level manpower analysis based on crew engagement in activities performed over a longer Mars transit scenario, and how those activities may be impacted by unplanned events and new tasking unique to the Mars mission. Differences between the models will be presented, as well as examples of model results and a discussion of how those results may inform future Mars mission manpower requirements, system design, and operating procedures.

Donna L Dempsey↗

Humans to Mars, but How Many? Using Training Requirements Modeling to Inform Crew Size

Missions to Mars will differ from previous human spaceflight missions in that the onboard crew of astronauts will be required to operate in an Earth-independent manner due to the long communication delays. Without a systematic, repeatable process to determine the number and composition of crew necessary to successfully accomplish these missions, NASA increases the risk that crew sizes may be too small to meet primary mission objectives under nominal conditions and, more consequentially, that crewmembers may not have the expertise needed to successfully respond to unforeseen failures without the real-time expertise of the Mission Control Central (MCC) team NASA currently relies upon. The NASA Engineering and Safety Center (NESC) is developing a methodology for assessing the trade space of factors that affect the number of crew for future missions. This methodology includes the consideration of results from three human performance models developed using the Improved Performance Research and Integration Tool (IMPRINT) modeling platform as well as a custom-built model on expertise trained within the crew. The IMPRINT results will be presented in the modeling and simulation sub-tag. Here we present results of a model based on NASA’s crew qualification and responsibility matrix (CQRM), a tool used to identify the crew qualifications for each area of responsibility (operation, system, and payload) for a mission. The model outputs an optimized allocation of training assignments along with a flight-assigned CQRM that can be used to consider the expertise that can be trained within a crew of a given size. We discuss the CQRM model result implications on the trade space for Mars mission crew size.

Mars↗

Humans to Mars, but How Many? Using Training Requirements Modeling to Inform Crew Size

Missions to Mars will differ from previous human spaceflight missions in that the onboard crew of astronauts will be required to operate in an Earth-independent manner due to the long communication delays. Without a systematic, repeatable process to determine the number and composition of crew necessary to successfully accomplish these missions, NASA increases the risk that crew sizes may be too small to meet primary mission objectives under nominal conditions and, more consequentially, that crewmembers may not have the expertise needed to successfully respond to unforeseen failures without the real-time expertise of the Mission Control Central (MCC) team NASA currently relies upon. The NASA Engineering and Safety Center (NESC) is developing a methodology for assessing the trade space of factors that affect the number of crew for future missions. This methodology includes the consideration of results from three human performance models developed using the Improved Performance Research and Integration Tool (IMPRINT) modeling platform as well as a custom-built model on expertise trained within the crew. The IMPRINT results will be presented in the modeling and simulation sub-tag. Here we present results of a model based on NASA’s crew qualification and responsibility matrix (CQRM), a tool used to identify the crew qualifications for each area of responsibility (operation, system, and payload) for a mission. The model outputs an optimized allocation of training assignments along with a flight-assigned CQRM that can be used to consider the expertise that can be trained within a crew of a given size. We discuss the CQRM model result implications on the trade space for Mars mission crew size.

Mars↗

Humans to Mars, But How Many? A Historical Review of Crew Size Determinations for Mars Missions

Three-quarters of a century have passed since the first engineering study of a human mission to Mars in 1948. During that time, dozens of study teams at NASA, its contractors, and other organizations in the U.S. and abroad have confronted what NASA mission architect John Connolly and his colleagues have called “the ultimate systems challenge.” This historical review of those studies focuses on the question of crew size and its relationship to crew workload.

Human Mars Missions↗

Moon Base Life Support Design Depends on Launch Cost, Crew Size, and Mission Duration

Brief human space missions such as Apollo and the Space Shuttle used material storage for life support but a long mission such as a space station uses a recycling life support system. The upcoming Moon visits will probably be brief with few crew at first but in the future there may be a long-term or even permanent Moon base with a large crew. The initial life support system will probably use storage and resupply of materials from Earth, but it could be replaced later by recycling, especially if launch cost per kilogram is high. Moon base life support design is investigated considering requirements, performance, reliability, cost, and risk. The launch cost, crew size, and mission duration are variable parameters that affect the life support design choice. Greater launch cost, crew size, or mission duration all tend to make recycling more cost-effective than resupply.

Jones, Harry W.↗

RePOWERD: Restoration of Power Outage from Wide-area Severe Weather Disruptions

The purpose of the RePOWERD project is to develop a probabilistic and a simulation based power restoration forecasting model for tropical storms based on geographic utility service areas, impacts to energy infrastructures and transportation networks, time-varying customer outage number, crew information (i.e., crew size, crew staging requirements), and utility restoration plans. Energy infrastructure is a critical lifeline essential for the United States’ national and economic security. Like other critical infrastructures, this infrastructure is aging and is at a high risk of damages from extreme weather events. Based on the number of reported outages in EAGLE-I during 2020 and 2021, it is evident that the current energy infrastructure is not equipped to handle extreme event impacts and will contribute to significant outages. From a resilience perspective, it is essential to forecast restoration time in the event of a severe weather induced power outage to assist the US Department of Energy, emergency managers, and first responders with resource planning. This project contributes to this crucial need. This report details the models, that were developed in this pilot study, to determine the rate of restoration and estimated time of restoration (ETR) during tropical storm events within counties and utility service areas based on damage to energy infrastructures and total number of customers experiencing outages.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗

A study of space station needs, attributes, and architectural options, volume 2, technical. Book 2: Mission implementation concepts

Space station systems characteristics and architecture are described. A manned space station operational analysis is performed to determine crew size, crew task complexity and time tables, and crew equipment to support the definition of systems and subsystems concepts. This analysis is used to select and evaluate the architectural options for development.

Source record↗

Living aloft: Human requirements for extended spaceflight

Human psychological and social adjustment to space is investigated. Studies and experiences bearing on human performance capability, psychological well being, and social organization, as they relate to space, were identified and assessed, and suggestions offered as to where further research could ease the Earth/space transition. Special emphasis was given to the variables of crew size, crew diversity, and mission duration, all of which can be expected to increase in future spaceflight. By providing a conceptual framework in which issues and related information can be integrated, the hope is to aid in discovering those conditions under which future space travelers can flourish.

Connors, M. M.↗

Maintenance and supply options

The object of the Maintenance and Supply Option was to develop a high level operational philosophy related to maintenance and supply operations and incorporate these concepts into the Lunar Base Study. Specific products to be generated during this task were three trade studies and a conceptual design of the Logistic Supply Module. The crew size study was performed to evaluate crew sizes from the baseline size of four to a crew size of eight and determine the preferred crew size. The second trade study was to determine the impact of extending surface stay times and recommend a preferred duration of stay time as a function of crew, consumables, and equipment support capabilities. The third trade study was an evaluation of packaging and storage methods to determine the preferred logistics approach to support the lunar base. A modified scenario was developed and served as the basis of the individual trade studies. Assumptions and guidelines were also developed from experience with Apollo programs, Space Shuttle operations, and Space Station studies. With this information, the trade studies were performed and a conceptual design for the Logistic Supply Module was developed.

Source record↗

Advanced Cardiac Life Support (ACLS) utilizing Man-Tended Capability (MTC) hardware onboard Space Station Freedom

Because of the time and distance involved in returning a patient from space to a definitive medical care facility, the capability for Advanced Cardiac Life Support (ACLS) exists onboard Space Station Freedom. Methods: In order to evaluate the effectiveness of terrestrial ACLS protocols in microgravity, a medical team conducted simulations during parabolic flights onboard the KC-135 aircraft. The hardware planned for use during the MTC phase of the space station was utilized to increase the fidelity of the scenario and to evaluate the prototype equipment. Based on initial KC-135 testing of CPR and ACLS, changes were made to the ventricular fibrillation algorithm in order to accommodate the space environment. Other constraints to delivery of ACLS onboard the space station include crew size, minimum training, crew deconditioning, and limited supplies and equipment. Results: The delivery of ACLS in microgravity is hindered by the environment, but should be adequate. Factors specific to microgravity were identified for inclusion in the protocol including immediate restraint of the patient and early intubation to insure airway. External cardiac compressions of adequate force and frequency were administered using various methods. The more significant limiting factors appear to be crew training, crew size, and limited supplies. Conclusions: Although ACLS is possible in the microgravity environment, future evaluations are necessary to further refine the protocols. Proper patient and medical officer restraint is crucial prior to advanced procedures. Also emphasis should be placed on early intubation for airway management and drug administration. Preliminary results and further testing will be utilized in the design of medical hardware, determination of crew training, and medical operations for space station and beyond.

Smith, M.↗

Balanced Expertise Distribution in Remote Ultrasound Imaging Aboard The International Space Station (ISS)

Astronaut training for ISS operations usually ensures independent performance. With small crew size same crews also conduct all science work onboard. With diverse backgrounds, a good "match" between the existing and required skills can only be anecdotal. Furthermore, full proficiency in most of the complex tasks can be attained only through long training and practice, which may not be justified and may be impossible given the scarcity of training time. To enable a number of operational and science advancements, authors have developed a new approach to expertise distribution in time and among the space and ground personnel. Methods: As part of NASA Operational Ultrasound Project (1998-2003) and the NASA-solicited experiment "Advanced Diagnostic Ultrasound in Microgravity-ADUM" (P.I. -S.D., ongoing), the authors have created a "Balanced Expertise Distribution" approach to perform complex ultrasound imaging tasks on ISS for both operational and science use. The four components of expertise are a) any pre-existing pertinent expertise; b) limited preflight training c) adaptive onboard proficiency enhancement tools; d) real-time ' guidance from the ground. Throughout the pre-flight training and flight time preceding the experiments, the four components are shaped in a dynamic fashion to meet in an optimum combination during the experiment sessions. Results: Procedure validation sessions and feasibility studies have given encouraging results. While several successful real-time remote guidance sessions have been conducted on ISS, Expedition 8 is the first to use an "on-orbit proficiency enhancement" tool. Conclusions: In spite of severely limited training time, daring peer-reviewed research and operational enhancements are feasible through a balanced distribution of expertise in time, as well as among the crewmembers and ground personnel. This approach shows great promise for biomedical research, but may be applicable for other areas of micro gravity-based science

Sargsyan, Ashot↗

The HAL 9000 Space Operating System Real-Time Planning Engine Design and Operations Requirements

In support of future deep space manned missions, an autonomous/automated vehicle, providing crew autonomy and an autonomous response planning system, will be required due to the light time delays in communication. Vehicle capabilities as a whole must provide for tactical response to vehicle system failures and space environmental effects induced failures, for risk mitigation of permanent loss of communication with Earth, and for assured crew return capabilities. The complexity of human rated space systems and the limited crew sizes and crew skills mix drive the need for a robust autonomous capability on-board the vehicle. The HAL 9000 Space Operating System[2] designed for such missions and space craft includes the first distributed real-time planning / re-planning system. This paper will detail the software architecture of the multiple planning engine system, and the interface design for plan changes, approval and implementation that is performed autonomously. Operations scenarios will be defined for analysis of the planning engines operations and its requirements for nominal / off nominal activities. An assessment of the distributed realtime re-planning system, in the defined operations environment, will be provided as well as findings as it pertains to the vehicle, crew, and mission control requirements needed for implementation.

Stetson, Howard↗

Trade Space Analyses: Balancing Crew and Mission Design Parameters

In 2020, the Associate Administrator for Human Exploration and Operations and the Agency’s Federated Board requested an assessment to develop a methodology for trade space analysis comparing crew size for Mars missions against mission design parameters. The NASA Engineering and Safety Center (NESC) conducted an assessment to develop a methodology for systematic, repeatable trade space analysis for crew size and developed an initial set of human performance models and a list of candidate crew tasks for NASA’s first mission to Mars. This report contains the results of the NESC assessment.

Humans to Mars↗

Vertical Translation System for the Common Habitat Architecture

The Common Habitat is a large, long-duration habitat that uses an SLS core stage Liquid Oxygen (LOX) tank as its primary structure. Measuring 8.4 meters in diameter and 15 meters in length, it is manufactured as a habitat and launched as such into space. It is intended for use on the Moon as part of a permanently occupied outpost, on Mars as part of an outpost that will be occupied for hundreds of days at a time, and in deep space as part of the Deep Space Exploration Vehicle where it will support crewed missions up to 1200 days in duration. A study of internal orientation and crew size resulted in a Common Habitat configuration sized for a crew of eight with a three-deck horizontal orientation. The Common Habitat Vertical Translation System provides a means for transporting crew and cargo between decks in a Common Habitat spacecraft in gravity levels varying from 0g to 1g. A crowdsourcing campaign was conducted through the GrabCAD platform to initially solicit ideas for restraints and mobility aids, including vertical translation. Four of the five top responses repeated ideas that would be incorporated into features of the Vertical Translation System. The first was a safety barrier (to prevent falls into the opening between decks) that could collapse to form a floor surface covering the opening when not in use. The second idea was a folding ladder that could be stowed in the ceiling when not in use. The third idea was an elevator platform that could traverse the ladder. Several key driving requirements were established for the Vertical Translation System: it may not penetrate into or through the lower deck; it must work on the Earth, Moon, Mars, and in microgravity; it must be easy to operate; it must enable translation of any item that can fit through the Common Habitat’s 40” x 60” hatches, inclusive of suited and unsuited crew with any degree of incapacitation and any equipment or cargo item; and it must include three component systems – deploying floor / safety barriers, a deployable ladder, and an elevator platform. Additional requirements were established for each of the component systems. The safety barriers must form a roughly 40-inch tall, complete wall enclosure on all four sides when deployed; it must include an easy to open gate that allows access to/from the ladder when deployed; and when retracted, the safety barrier must form a smooth, load-bearing floor that can be walked on, and wheeled objects can be rolled across in gravity, without being a trip hazard. The deployable ladder must be composed of multiple ladders that work together; it must stow in the ceiling when not in use; and it must not penetrate into the 40” x 60” vertical passage corridor. The elevator platform must work with the deployable ladder system; it must be able to bridge any gap in ladders between decks; it must stop at each deck flush with the deck surface; it must be capable of transporting an incapacitated crew member as a single rescuer operation; it must be capable of transporting a full-size subsystems pallet; it must function as an elevator for a crew member carrying large objects; it must have safety functions to prevent falls from the platform, or crew/cargo collisions with edges of hatch openings, or entanglement with ladder rungs/structure; it must stow when not in use; and it must autonomously both connect itself to the ladder and deploy itself to any deck where needed when called (e.g., a crew member on any deck can call for the platform and it must connect itself to the ladders without assistance and translate to the requestor’s deck). These requirements were developed into a system concept with the assistance of a NASA Pathways Intern who also added the requirement to size the design based on the use of commercial components, using existing motors and other mechanisms to ensure that the resulting system could be inexpensively produced. The Floor and Safety Barrier consists of four panels, two roughly 40 inches long and two roughly 60 inches long that can fold into the floor on top of each other when not in use. The uppermost panel is load bearing and acts as the floor surface. When deployed, they connect with each other to form a rigid barrier surrounding the vertical passageway. One of the panels contains a hinged gate that can be opened when deployed to allow for access to/from the passageway. The Deploying Ladder consists of two ladder segments, one mounted on the ceiling of the lower deck and the other mounted on the ceiling of the mid deck. A rotating mechanism is mounted on the ladder to allow it to rotate into a horizontal position against the ceiling for stowage, or down to a vertical position for use. A second rotating mechanism is built into the ladder, allowing the rungs to rotate. A toothed surface intended to work with the elevator platform covers the front of the ladder rails and the top and bottom of the rails are designed to be flush when aligned with another ladder segment. The elevator platform is essentially a motorized, self-propelled deck. It has a mechanism that holds it in contact with the ladder rails and drives itself against the toothed surface. This mechanism allows the elevator platform to ascend or descend the ladder. In order to stow the platform when not in use, a set of short ladder rails (without rungs) are mounted to the ceiling of the mid deck. When the mid deck ladder is stowed, it is flush with these rails and the platform can drive itself onto those short rails for stowage. An additional mechanism on the platform can pitch its deck surface 90 degrees, such that when the ladder is to be stowed, the platform can fold up against the ceiling. As a consequence of the ladder and elevator platform design, the opening between decks in the Common Habitat was enlarged to ensure that the elevator platform can accept a payload up to 40”x60” in dimension.

Human Centered Design↗

Configuration and Projected Capabilities of the Common Habitat Medical Care Facility

The Common Habitat is a large, long-duration habitat being explored as part of a conceptual study (not an active NASA program) that uses an SLS core stage Liquid Oxygen (LOX) tank as its primary structure. It is intended for use on the Moon as part of a permanently occupied outpost, on Mars as part of an outpost that will be occupied for hundreds of days at a time, and in deep space as part of the Deep Space Exploration Vehicle where it will support crewed missions up to 1200 days in duration. A study of internal orientation and crew size resulted in a Common Habitat configuration sized for a crew of eight with a three-deck horizontal orientation. Additional work outside the scope of this paper is developing a vertical translation system, a crew mobility aids system based on wearable gecko-derived grippers, and a crew seating/restraint system. These systems are all assumed for use in conjunction with the Medical Care Facility, which is needed to maintain crew well-being during these missions, where distance from Earth precludes the possibility of evacuation to Earth. This paper describes recent improvements in the Common Habitat Medical Care Facility and associated benefits for crew survivability in long duration missions beyond Earth orbit. These improvements were made with the assistance of a NASA Pathways intern whose experience includes a tour of duty in Afghanistan as an Army combat medic with the 691st GHOST-T, attached to the 1st and 7th US Special Forces Groups as part of Operation Freedom’s Sentinel, where he helped provide far-forward surgical capabilities in austere combat environments. The initial baseline Medical Care Facility was developed working in conjunction with University of Houston Space Architecture graduate students. The facility was placed on the upper deck of the Common Habitat in a location that provided privacy, operational volume, and was close to the vertical translation pathway. The notional outfitting repurposed component CAD models from unrelated studies and notionally indicated a level of care roughly equivalent to that aboard the International Space Station. The CAD modeling provided notional stowage volumes, a deployable surface, some fixed equipment, an ultrasound, and a potentially reconfigurable treatment table. While this facility is clearly a competent arrangement, it was desired to leverage available expertise and upgrade the station given the vast distances from Earth to be experienced by the Common Habitat. Key driving requirements applied to the upgrade included to provide Medical Level of Care V, offer enhanced telemedicine capabilities, provide patient physical accommodation, provide caregiver access to the patient from all sides, include sliding pocket doors for access to hygiene and to the Vertical Translation System, and to add any additional capability possible for the best achievable medical care. The first step in the facility upgrade was to quantify the current medical inventory on the International Space Station and ensure that sufficient stowage volume was present for this purpose. To that end, the ISS medical kits were reviewed, and eight full size mid deck lockers were placed in the facility. A number of additional devices were also added, based on the intern’s combat medic experience. Also, two fixed shelves and one horizontal work surface were added to the Medical Care Facility, with the shelves providing storage space for the additional devices and the work surface providing a location for the caregiver to work or stage equipment. Four display monitors were added to the wall above the horizontal work surface, supporting data display, telemedicine, conferencing, or other needs. The existing treatment table was replaced with a mobile surgical stretcher-chair. Two additional doors were added to the Medical Care Facility. One leads directly to the hygiene compartment, allowing it to support medical operations in addition to providing galley/wardroom support. The other door leads directly into the Vertical Translation System. The wall adjacent to the subsystems bay was moved, adding additional volume to the Medical Care Facility. This improved caregiver access to the patient and allowed for a larger number of caregivers to be present. It also provided options for relocation of support equipment relative to the patient as needed. In the upgraded Medical Care Facility, the Surgical Stretcher-Chair and the Vertical Translation System can work together to provide incapacitated crew member transport from a site of injury on any deck of the Common Habitat to the Medical Care Facility. It can also support patient treatment in a variety of positions including a variety of sitting postures and a supine posture at a variety of pitch angles. The facility can also support caregiver office work for review of examination results, private consultation, inventory and maintenance, and a variety of other purposes. A forward activity will be to conduct evaluations of the Medical Care Facility with different medical scenarios. Additionally, ambient and task lighting selections remain as forward work. The eight mid deck lockers can be augmented to use as portable equipment carts, similar to a manner in which maintenance facility stowage was used as portable carts during the NASA Desert Research and Technology Studies in the Constellation Program. Trash accommodation will also need forward work to assess, including provision for wet trash, dry trash, and biological waste. It will be important to assess a redesign of the surgical stretcher-chair. The commercial version used in the upgrade can only enable vertical translation in the seated configuration, requiring the patient to bend both hips and knees. A possible redesign of the chair will allow for vertical translation without requiring any bending at the hip or knees. Also, the commercial version is wheeled, making it mobile in gravity but unanchored in microgravity. Work will be needed to adapt the chair for gravity-independent performance. The hygiene compartment can be redesigned for dual-use medical scrub and galley handwash facility. Pending sufficient volume, it may also be possible to place sanitation equipment in this location to clean medical tools. Finally, most space architectures have never allowed for more than one incapacitated crew member, but several scenarios could potentially injure two or more crew in the same incident. This facility could be assessed to determine its present ability to address two or more injured crew in parallel and determine the potential upper limit for number of treatable crew in a multi-crew injury scenario, or to treat polytrauma of a single patient.

Habitat↗

Configuration and Projected Capabilities of the Common Habitat Medical Care Facility

The Common Habitat is a large, long-duration habitat being explored as part of a conceptual study (not an active NASA program) that uses an SLS core stage Liquid Oxygen (LOX) tank as its primary structure. It is intended for use on the Moon as part of a permanently occupied outpost, on Mars as part of an outpost that will be occupied for hundreds of days at a time, and in deep space as part of the Deep Space Exploration Vehicle where it will support crewed missions up to 1200 days in duration. A study of internal orientation and crew size resulted in a Common Habitat configuration sized for a crew of eight with a three-deck horizontal orientation. Additional work outside the scope of this paper is developing a vertical translation system, a crew mobility aids system based on wearable gecko-derived grippers, and a crew seating/restraint system. These systems are all assumed for use in conjunction with the Medical Care Facility, which is needed to maintain crew well-being during these missions, where distance from Earth precludes the possibility of evacuation to Earth. This paper describes recent improvements in the Common Habitat Medical Care Facility and associated benefits for crew survivability in long duration missions beyond Earth orbit. These improvements were made with the assistance of a NASA Pathways intern whose experience includes a tour of duty in Afghanistan as an Army combat medic with the 691st GHOST-T, attached to the 1st and 7th US Special Forces Groups as part of Operation Freedom’s Sentinel, where he helped provide far-forward surgical capabilities in austere combat environments. The initial baseline Medical Care Facility was developed working in conjunction with University of Houston Space Architecture graduate students. The facility was placed on the upper deck of the Common Habitat in a location that provided privacy, operational volume, and was close to the vertical translation pathway. The notional outfitting repurposed component CAD models from unrelated studies and notionally indicated a level of care roughly equivalent to that aboard the International Space Station. The CAD modeling provided notional stowage volumes, a deployable surface, some fixed equipment, an ultrasound, and a potentially reconfigurable treatment table. While this facility is clearly a competent arrangement, it was desired to leverage available expertise and upgrade the station given the vast distances from Earth to be experienced by the Common Habitat. Key driving requirements applied to the upgrade included to provide NASA’s Medical Level of Care V, offer enhanced telemedicine capabilities, provide patient physical accommodation, provide caregiver access to the patient from all sides, include sliding pocket doors for access to hygiene and to the Vertical Translation System, and to add any additional capability possible for the best achievable medical care. The first step in the facility upgrade was to quantify the current medical inventory on the International Space Station and ensure that sufficient stowage volume was present for this purpose. To that end, the ISS medical kits were reviewed, and eight full size mid deck lockers were placed in the facility. A number of additional devices were also added, based on the co-author’s combat medic experience. Also, two fixed shelves and one horizontal work surface were added to the Medical Care Facility, with the shelves providing storage space for the additional devices and the work surface providing a location for the caregiver to work or stage equipment. Four display monitors were added to the wall above the horizontal work surface, supporting data display, telemedicine, conferencing, or other needs. The existing treatment table was replaced with a mobile surgical stretcher-chair. Two additional doors were added to the Medical Care Facility. One leads directly to the hygiene compartment, allowing it to support medical operations in addition to providing galley/wardroom support. The other door leads directly into the Vertical Translation System. The wall adjacent to the subsystems bay was moved, adding additional volume to the Medical Care Facility. This improved caregiver access to the patient and allowed for a larger number of caregivers to be present. It also provided options for relocation of support equipment relative to the patient as needed. In the upgraded Medical Care Facility, the Surgical Stretcher-Chair and the Vertical Translation System can work together to provide incapacitated crew member transport from a site of injury on any deck of the Common Habitat to the Medical Care Facility. It can also support patient treatment in a variety of positions including a variety of sitting postures and a supine posture at a variety of pitch angles. The facility can also support caregiver office work for review of examination results, private consultation, inventory and maintenance, and a variety of other purposes. A forward activity will be to conduct evaluations of the Medical Care Facility with different medical scenarios. Additionally, ambient and task lighting selections remain as forward work. The eight middeck lockers can be augmented to use as portable equipment carts, similar to a manner in which maintenance facility stowage was used as portable carts during the NASA Desert Research and Technology Studies in the Constellation Program. Trash accommodation will also need forward work to assess, including provision for wet trash, dry trash, and biological waste. It will be important to assess a redesign of the surgical stretcher-chair. The commercial version used in the upgrade can only enable vertical translation in the seated configuration, requiring the patient to bend both hips and knees. A possible redesign of the chair will allow for vertical translation without requiring any bending at the hip or knees. Also, the commercial version is wheeled, making it mobile in gravity but unanchored in microgravity. Work will be needed to adapt the chair for gravity-independent performance. The hygiene compartment can be redesigned to serve both as a medical scrub facility and for galley hand washing. Pending sufficient volume, it may also be possible to place sanitation equipment in this location to clean medical tools. Finally, most space architectures have never allowed for more than one incapacitated crew member, but several scenarios could potentially injure two or more crew in the same incident. This facility could be assessed to determine its present ability to address two or more injured crew in parallel and determine the potential upper limit for number of treatable crew in a multi-crew injury scenario, or to treat polytrauma of a single patient.

Common Habitat↗

Concept definition for an extended duration orbiter ECLSS

Extending the seven-day Shuttle Orbiter baseline mission requires an evaluation of the Environmental Control and Life Support (ECLS) System in order to determine those changes necessary or desirable so that the Orbiter payload capability will not be seriously compromised. The ECLSS requirements and subsystem options for extended duration Orbiter missions are defined. Each major ECLS subsystem was examined, and potential methods of extending the mission capability were studied. The mission evaluated most extensively for this effort was a 30 day mission with a crew size of seven men. However, missions up to 90 days duration with crew sizes of three to ten men were also examined.

Brose, H.↗