Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “EE”

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

Absence of Change in Total Daily Energy Expenditure (EE(sub TD)) in Young and Mature Rats During 14 Days of Hypergravity

Effect of age on the response of EE(sub TD) to an increase in gravity was assessed in young (Y; 1.5 month old) and mature (M; 8 month old) Sprague-Dawley rats. Rats were implanted with transmitters to monitor activity, and metabolism was determined by the double labeled water technique. Daily food intake was measured. For each age, rats (n=8 per treatment) were exposed to centrifugation at 2G, or remained at 1G. There was a difference in EE(sub TD) between age groups, 182 plus or minus 11 and 143 plus or minus 5 kcal/kg/day in Y and M, respectively. This difference was attributed in part to a lower activity level in M animals, 48% of Y rats. After day 6 there was no effect on EE(sub TD) of exposure to 2G, or on food intake per 100g BW. Prior studies show a 20% increase in resting EE with hypergravity. In our study the level of activity was reduced to 41% of 1G in both age groups during 2G. For Y at 1G resting EE accounted for 78% of the EE(sub TD) and activity 22%, while at 2G resting EE was 96% of EE(sub TD) and activity 4%. M rats had similar changes. Independent of age, with exposure to hypergravity EE(sub TD) is maintained by behavioral changes.

Wade, C. E.↗

3D Woven Mid-Density Carbon Phenolic (3MDCP) Full-Scale Heatshield Development for Mars Sample Return (MSR) Earth Entry System (EES)

The Mars Sample Return (MSR) mission will be returning samples of Martian soil to Earth. The samples will be returned in the Earth Entry System (EES). The EES capsule is protected by a new thermal protection system; the 3-Dimensionally Woven, Mid-Density, Carbon Phenolic (3MDCP) material which is derived from the Heatshield for Extreme Entry Environment Technology (HEEET). The baseline 3MDCP design is a single piece thermal protection system that avoids the manufacturing and certification challenges associated with a tiled configuration. A 3MDCP heatshield begins as a flat woven preform that is formed to the final heatshield shape and then infused with phenolic resin. A NASA Ames lead team, in collaboration with Spirit Textiles (formerly TEAM Inc.), Fiber Materials Inc. (FMI, a Spirit AeroSystems Company), and Kratos SRE, has been developing and demonstrating the processes to fabricate the 3MDCP heatshield and characterize the resulting properties. The process of forming the flat woven preform into the final heatshield shape, a sphere-cone geometry with a 52.5° cone angle, involves local but substantial movement of the yarns in the weave. This results in continuous fibers across the single piece heatshield, albeit with property variations between different regions of the heatshield. This presentation will provide a high-level status of 3MDCP development for the MSR EES heatshield. This will include an overview of the manufacturing processes with an emphasis on the impact of forming on fiber orientation, material properties, and performance. Results comparing preliminary formed and flat materials will be shown. Additionally, the presentation will layout the broader plan for property testing and tie-in to aerothermal performance.

Peter Edward Marshall↗

The effect of concentrator field layout on the EE-1 small community solar power system

The point-focusing distributed receiver (PFDR) concept is employed by a number of solar thermal power systems currently under development. One type of PFDR system which shows particular promise incorporates distributed energy generation. According to this concept each parabolic dish collector is a self-contained power generation module, and a conventional electrical system is used to interconnect the modules. The concept is thus modular, and any number of power modules can be combined to achieve the required plant size. Given the benefits of mass production, it appears that this type of system can produce electricity at lower cost than is projected for conventional (fossil) power systems over the next decade. An employment of organic Rankine cycle heat engines is considered.

Pons, R. L.↗

Study of composition of cosmic rays with energy .7 E 3 Ee

The longitudinal shower development of extensive air showers (EAS) observed in the fly's eye is used to determine the distribution of X sub max, the depth in the atmosphere of the EAS maximum. Data and Monte Carlo simulations of proton and iron primaries are compared. A substantial contribution from light primaries is noted.

Baltrusaitis, R. M.↗

Numerical Simulations of A Conceptual MSR-EES Shoulder Recession

The present study demonstrates our in-house material response solver, Icarus's capability to simulate the ablative conditions, including pyrolysis effects due to the interaction between hypersonic boundary layers and the thermal protection system (TPS). A conceptual aeroshell shoulder design, which undergoes mission-relevant flow and material conditions, is selected for the demonstration purpose. LAURA, a structured flow solver, is used to solve flow around the shoulder at several trajectory points of a flight path. The aerothermal dataset obtained from LAURA is used to enforce boundary conditions on the aeroshell wall to simulate ablation processes. The two-layered material system is stacked with HEEET (TPS) and Aluminum (actual material). A set of base parameters, such as the angle of material orientation with respect to the flow direction, convective heat-transfer co-efficient, and aerothermal boundary conditions on the rear end of the HEEET material layer, is selected to conduct a base-case simulation. A small amount of recession was observed, indicating that the design should be fine to go through the selected flow and material conditions. Furthermore, the parameters mentioned above are individually altered and are observed to affect the shoulder design's recession compared to the base case. Verification of our Icarus setup was also carried out using a one-dimensional grid and FIAT, a one-dimensional material-response solver, to build credibility for our results. As the current work is an uncoupled fluid-material-response simulation, a local sharp mesh deformation in the recessed surface near the shoulder corner is observed.

Prakash Shrestha↗

Exploration Exercise System (EES) Development

Exploration class missions will be required to have an exercise device that is lightweight, has a small footprint, and is capable of providing enough physical stimulus and exercise variability to be an effective countermeasure against muscle and bone loss that results from the microgravity environment. Exploration exercise device prototypes should be evaluated on the ground and in-orbit for feasibility of use in microgravity for long and short duration exploration missions and efficacy of the device to maintain multi-system health and performance. The European Enhanced Exploration Exercise Device (E4D) was selected as the exploration prototype device to be evaluated on ISS for efficacy and feasibility of use as a single multi-modality device for the exercise system for exploration missions. This effort supports the continued development, testing, and verification of E4D hardware and software, internal NASA integration (Human Health and Performance, ISS Vehicle Office, Engineering, and Flight Operations), and external integration across NASA, ESA, and the Danish Aerospace Company (DAC). Providing a feasibility and acceptability assessment from a physiological efficacy and hardware durability standpoint are critical for informing use and risk associated with use on exploration missions. Clearly defined objectives from end users, stakeholders, and Subject Matter Experts (SMEs) will be tested by crewmembers during acute use sessions and long duration use of the exercise device while on ISS. This effort will include a flight study where crewmembers will be asked to exercise using only the E4D during the duration of their mission and participate in a battery of physiological testing to evaluate the efficacy. Hardware is scheduled to launch in FY25 followed by 2 years of operational use after activation and checkout. A final recommendation will be provided to the Artemis program on acceptability of the device for exploration missions. The E4D needs a vibration isolation stabilization (VIS) system that serves as a platform for the exercise hardware to protect the vehicle from loads imparted during exercise. Exploration forward VIS systems will need to protect the vehicle and provide sufficient stabilization for the exerciser during performance of all critical exercises. These enabling capabilities need to be achieved within exploration vehicle power, thermal, mass, and volume limitations.

Kent Lawrence Kalogera↗

Exploration Exercise System (EES) Physiology

Exploration class missions will be required to have an exercise device that is lightweight, has a small footprint, and is capable of providing enough physical stimulus and exercise variability to be an effective countermeasure against muscle, bone, aerobic fitness, and sensorimotor loss that results from the microgravity environment. Ground studies, inflight studies, and results analyses are required to inform Moon2Mars Design Reference Missions (DRMs) and vehicle designs. This activity encompasses two related projects, an evaluation study called Zero T2 and a requirements development for an exploration treadmill (ET). Exploration class missions’ mass/power/volume restrictions have resulted in the development of exercise devices that are motorized and flywheel-based to provide both aerobic and resistive training on one platform. These devices provide a variety of full body resistance exercise options as well as rowing and cycling for aerobic exercise, but do not provide ambulatory exercise via a treadmill. Because a treadmill has been available for use on the ISS since 2001, we do not understand the efficacy of exploration exercise modalities on muscle performance, aerobic fitness, bone health, or sensorimotor performance. A retrospective study was performed to quantify the association between total exercise (including specific contributions of treadmill exercise) and functional performance upon landing. Due to the relatively small variation in treadmill usage inflight, there is a need to do a controlled study where inflight crewmembers will not use the ISS treadmill (called T2) for the duration of their flights. There will be 3 arms to the Zero T2 study: 1) participants use all currently available exercise platforms aboard ISS (control group), 2) participants use only ARED and CEVIS, and 3) participants use only European Enhanced Exploration Device (E4D). (Please see the TechPort Entry for Exploration Exercise System Development for further detail on the E4D.) This study started in Oct 2020 and will continue through Sep 2027. In a parallel effort, a team will be developing requirements for an exploration treadmill. This project will be broken into two phases. Phase 1 will develop and implement energy prediction models based on available in-flight exercise data to quantify energy expenditure during 0g treadmill running. Phase 2 will then use the available biomechanical and metabolic evidence from Phase 1 to determine the hardware specification requirements essential to providing the desired exercise stimulus. Subject Matter Experts (SMEs) will then leverage the Standardized Process for Evaluating Exercise Devices (SPEED) developed by the team to 1) assess available technologies for candidate treadmills which meet defined requirements, 2) perform hands-on evaluations of top candidates, 3) provide evaluation outcomes and recommendations to developers. This project will begin in 2025 and continue through Sep 2030.

Kent Lawrence Kalogera↗

Flight Mechanics Modeling and Simulation of the Earth Entry System

Introduction: The Mars Sample Return (MSR) Campaign being planned by NASA and ESA has the ambitious goal to return Mars samples back to Earth. This international collaboration had developed a concept of operations that included a ESA-designed Earth Return Orbiter (ERO) and NASA-designed Capture, Containment, and Return System (CCRS). The Earth Entry System (EES), consisting of a protective aeroshell that houses the samples as well as sample containment vessels, would conduct entry, descent, and landing (EDL) on a direct Earth trajectory. The EES would enter on a spin-stabilized ballistic trajectory with the goal to passively achieve aerodynamic stability throughout all regions of flight. The EDL sequence would end with the EES impacting the soft playa soil of the Utah Test and Training Range (UTTR). As of the submission of this abstract, the MSR campaign is undergoing a re-architecture leading to a pause in EES development. However, the novel approaches developed in flight mechanics modeling and simulation can significantly benefit the greater IPPW community in the development of Earth return vehicles. This paper will present the latest state of EES flight mechanics modeling and simulation. The paper will highlight the simulation architecture developed and key lessons learned from understanding of EDL trajectory sensitivities. Modeling and Simulation: Figure 1 provides a high-level concept of operations for the approach, entry, descent, and landing (AEDL) phase of the CCRS-portion of MSR. The objective of EES flight mechanics is to model and simulate the EES trajectory from ERO separation to ground impact at UTTR. A variety of flight mechanics simulation models were utilized to model both exo-atmopsheric and atmospheric portions of flight. 42, a 6-DOF simulation developed at Goddard Space Flight Center, is utilized for propagating the attitude of EES during exo-atmospheric flight. 42 allows for a variety of spin eject mechanism scenarios to be simulated for analysis. 10 minutes prior to entry, the 42 states are handed off to the EDL sims. The prime EDL sim utilized by EES is the Program to Optimize Simulated Trajectories II (POST2), a 6-DOF sim developed at Langley Research Center, and the independent verification and validation EDL sim utilized is DSENDS, a 6-DOF sim developed at Jet Propulsion Laboratory. Figure 2 provides a visualization of the flight mechanics simulation model flow through various points in the AEDL phase. Due to the existence of a variety of sim models, the EES flight mechanics team developed processes for data hand-off. These processes included the development of a centralized coordinate frame document, utilization of a single, centralized simulation input document for all sims to reference, and hand-off files containing both the technical data to be ingested by other flight mechanics sims as well as annotations of modeling assumptions utilized to generate the data. Figure~\ref{fig:post2simarchitecture} provides an overview of the POST2 sim architecture wherein POST2 ingests numerous subsystem models and input files. The dispersed state file generated by MONTE provides the position/velocity state of the trajectory while the 42 Handoff file provides the attitude. The aerodynamics database, delivered by the EES aeroscience team, is utilized to simulate the aerodynamic forces and moments experienced during EDL. A custom atmosphere model, developed by EES atmosphere team, is utilized to simulate the anticipated atmosphere environment around the region of Earth through which the EES trajectory flys. These inputs and subsystem models can be varied depending on the AEDL flight mechanics scenario being simulated. Monte Carlo simulations are utilized to generate statistical AEDL performance metrics in the form of scorecards and violin plots. Furthermore, outputs from the POST2 simulation are utilized for follow-on analyses including aerothermal and landing performance. \section{Flight Mechanics Lessons Learned} Though the EES flight mechanics team uncovered a variety of lessons learned through the analysis conducted to support CCRS through preliminary design review, this paper will highlight the most important lessons. A key AEDL performance goal is to ensure the landing footprint of EES remains on the UTTR south range. A common modeling strategy used in EDL analysis is One-Variable-At-a-Time (OVAT). OVAT analysis provides insight into the key drivers that affect AEDL performance metrics. Figure 3 shows the landing ellipses for single dispersion sources as compared to the baseline aggregate of all dispersions. The figure shows that atmosphere winds alone dominate the size of the footprint ellipse (note: EES does not use a parachute unlike previous Earth-return missions and is in wind-driven free fall for ~5min). The significance of the wind led the EES flight mechanics team to pursue the development of a Custom Atmosphere Model [4], in lieu of EarthGRAM [1], built on actual radiosonde wind measurements around the UTTR-region. This decision was driven by the realism in the generated footprint ellipses and lessons-learned from Stardust [5]. These findings will be invaluable for future Earth-return missions in providing an early understanding of the key drivers affecting footprint size and modeling considerations for which to account. Another lesson learned is tied to the AEDL performance goal of achieving passive stability throughout all regions of flight. It is well understood that blunt-body aeroshells are less stable as they transition from supersonic to subsonic. Eliminating a backshell does help improvestability; however, other phenomena such as roll-induced instability during terminal descent can still arise. The EES flight mechanics team developed stability metrics as tools to better understand the causes of and better predict the onset of dynamic instability. These tools were built upon analytical models developed by Jaffe [3] and Murphy [2]. The tools were shown to both be very accurate in correlation with actual unstable cases and useful in developing stability margin policies based on the vehicle design and simulation considerations (e.g. sphere-cone angle change, mass change, wind turbulence). These tools allowed for the current EES design to demonstrate the ability to achieve passive stability and can be an invaluable tool for consideration in the design of parachute-less Earth-return vehicles.

Rohan Deshmukh↗

Heterogeneity in Short Gamma-Ray Bursts

We analyze the Swift/BAT sample of short gamma-ray bursts, using an objective Bayesian Block procedure to extract temporal descriptors of the bursts' initial pulse complexes (IPCs). The sample comprises 12 and 41 bursts with and without extended emission (EE) components, respectively. IPCs of non-EE bursts are dominated by single pulse structures, while EE bursts tend to have two or more pulse structures. The medians of characteristic timescales - durations, pulse structure widths, and peak intervals - for EE bursts are factors of approx 2-3 longer than for non-EE bursts. A trend previously reported by Hakkila and colleagues unifying long and short bursts - the anti-correlation of pulse intensity and width - continues in the two short burst groups, with non-EE bursts extending to more intense, narrower pulses. In addition we find that preceding and succeeding pulse intensities are anti-correlated with pulse interval. We also examine the short burst X-ray afterglows as observed by the Swift/XRT. The median flux of the initial XRT detections for EE bursts (approx 6 X 10(exp -10) erg / sq cm/ s) is approx > 20 x brighter than for non-EE bursts, and the median X-ray afterglow duration for EE bursts (approx 60,000 s) is approx 30 x longer than for non-EE bursts. The tendency for EE bursts toward longer prompt-emission timescales and higher initial X-ray afterglow fluxes implies larger energy injections powering the afterglows. The longer-lasting X-ray afterglows of EE bursts may suggest that a significant fraction explode into more dense environments than non-EE bursts, or that the sometimes-dominant EE component efficiently p()wers the afterglow. Combined, these results favor different progenitors for EE and non-EE short bursts.

Norris, Jay P.↗

Contractors Road Heavy Equipment Area SWMU 055 Corrective Measures Implementation Progress Report Kennedy Space Center, Florida

This Corrective Measures Implementation (CMI) Progress Report documents: (i) activities conducted as part of supplemental assessment activities completed from June 2009 through November 2014; (ii) Engineering Evaluation (EE) Advanced Data Packages (ADPs); and (iii) recommendations for future activities related to corrective measures at the Site. Applicable meeting minutes are provided as Appendix A. The following EE ADPs for CRHE are included with this CMI Progress Report: center dot Supplemental Site Characterization ADP (Step 1 EE) (Appendix B) center dot Site Characterization ADP (Step 1 EE) for Hot Spot 1 (HS1) (Appendix C) center dot Remedial Alternatives Evaluation (Step 2 EE) ADP for HS1 (Appendix D) center dot Interim Measures Work Plan (Step 3 EE) ADP for HS1 (Appendix E) center dot Site Characterization ADP (Step 1 EE) ADP for Hot Spot 2 (HS2), High Concentration Plume (HCP), and Low Concentration Plume (LCP) (Appendix F) A summary of direct-push technology (DPT) and groundwater monitoring well sampling results are provided in Appendices G and H, respectively. The Interim Land Use Control Implementation Plan (LUCIP) is provided as Appendix I. Monitoring well completion reports, other applicable field forms, survey data, and analytical laboratory reports are provided as Appendices J through M, respectively, in the electronic copy of this document. Selected Site photographs are provided in Appendix N. The interim groundwater monitoring plan and document revision log are included as Appendices O and P, respectively. KSC Electronic Data Deliverable (KEDD) files are provided on the attached compact disk.

Johnson, Jill W.↗

Design and Technology Maturation of the Stratospheric Projectile Experiment of Entry Dynamics

The supersonic and transonic dynamic stability of blunt-body reentry vehicles currently poses large risks in all of NASA’s ongoing entry missions (MSR SRL, MSR EES, and Dragonfly). These projects have allocated millions of dollars to testing and modeling efforts to buy down risk by using the current state-of-the-art (SoA) facilities at NASA’s disposal. While these facilities have heritage in supplying dynamics data to reentry missions, their availability is severely limited – particularly with the high number of concur-rent projects requesting simultaneous testing– and are costly when considering the science density per dollar. None of the current SoA facility methodologies allow the test model to have the dynamics fully develop through a flight relevant free-stream profile and as such require extrapolations with resultant high uncertainties in order to relate the test dynamics to flight expectations. SPEED is a NASA Ames Center Innovation Fund (CIF) project that is developing a highly tailorable and cost-effective test methodology to better assess the dynamic stability of blunt-body reentry vehicles via a stratospheric balloon flight. This is accomplished by dropping a suite of instrumented capsules from a stratospheric balloon to gain a statistically relevant dataset of scaled reentry vehicles in mission relevant free-flight conditions. This presentation will walk through how the test methodology is being implemented specifically for the Mars Sample Return (MSR) Earth Entry System (EES) geometry in an awarded Flight Opportunities Program (FOP) test flight in early CY24. SPEED Application to MSR: SPEED consists of three main mechanical systems: the Drop Platform, the Projectile, and the test Capsule. SPEED is being developed as a set of guidelines and recommendations for how to test with the proposed Concept of Operations (Conops) since the specific design parameters will vary depending on the specific project’s reference trajectory and entry vehicle design. As such, this presentation will walk through the development time-line as shown in Fig. 2. This is meant to serve as a blueprint for further missions as desired. Mechanical and Avionics Design. The SPEED test platform designed for the MSR-EES capsule geometry with nominal entry parameters has the ability to carry 10 Capsules to altitude instrumented with: 1. 3-Axis Accelerometer 2. IMU 3. Gyroscope 4. Magnetometer 5. Pressure Transducer cruciform 6. Uplook and Horizon Cameras To package the avionics/instrumentation suite, the capsule is approximately 1’ in diameter with the Outer Mold Line (OML) centroid-scaled from the full EES design. The internal volume is gutted and custom-shaped to fit the desired instrumentation suite, as well as to allow for the positioning of ballast mass such that the Center of Gravity is analogous to the flight vehicle. All structural components in the Capsule and Projectile are 3D printed, which significantly reduces the cost of each flight unit to around $1500 including all instrumentation, avionics, and structural components. Flight Conops. The test Capsule is accelerated to the desired altitude and Mach number while stowed in the Projectile, a missile-like vehicle consisting of steel ballast in the nose, a low-drag OML, and an Ejection Mechanism to reliably release the Capsule into the free-flow supersonic conditions. For the MSR-EES design, the capsule employs ~3kg of ballast mass at the nose to accelerate the 1.25kg test Capsule to ~Mach 1.7 at 23km altitude. This requires an initial release altitude of 40km, the quoted limit of a 80kg payload by the FOP-contracted balloon provider. Once the Ejection Mechanism avionics detect the proper conditions, the spring-loaded Ejection Mechanism will release and – guided by the sabot – expose the test Capsule to the desired test conditions for ~5 seconds of free-flight in the supersonic/transonic regimes. Dynamics in the subsonic regime will also be captured with the instrumentation suite with post-flight recovery operations aimed at recovering the high-G-load capable SD cards after the planned hard impact landings. Testing and Development: In the few months the SPEED project has worked the development of MSR-EES flight test, the team has performed lab and drone based testing which this presentation will overview. After the first design phase, the team fabricated Engineering Demonstration Units (EDUs) of all subsystems to perform validation testing shown in Fig. 5. After validation was completed on the subsystem level, a drone-drop test was performed at the recreational flight ceiling of 400ft altitude to assess the SPEED systems in a flight environment. Parameters such as in-flight stability, hard impact landing performance, and avionics performance were quantified and qualified. The FY23 CIF will culminate in a helicopter drop test aboard an Air National Guard Blackhawk. This will prepare the team for the CY24 FOP stratospheric balloon flight that should provide the final verification to begin offering the test platform for mission support. Focus of Presentation: This presentation will outline the technology maturation path of the SPEED implementation to the MSR-EES capsule baseline as well as the details regarding the mechanical system, avionics and instrumentation, and flight operations. Note that a complementary presentation is being submitted for a methodology overview of the SPEED test platform, introducing the testing technique and benefits as well as the full application space of the technology.

pitch damping coefficient↗

Resting Energy Expenditure of Rats Acclimated to Hyper-Gravity

To determine the influence of body mass and age on resting energy expenditure (EE) following acclimation to hyper-gravity, oxygen consumption (VO2) and carbon dioxide production (VCO2) were measured to calculate resting energy expenditure (EE), in male rats, ages 40 to 400 days, acclimated to 1.23 or 4.1 G for a minimum of two weeks. Animals were maintained on a centrifuge to produce the hyper-gravity environment. Measurements were made over three hours in hyper-gravity during the period when the lights were on, the inactive period of rats. In rats matched for body mass (approximately 400 g) hyper-gravity increased VO2 by 18% and VCO2 by 27% compared to controls, resulting in an increase in RER, 0.80 to 0.87. There were increases in resting EE with an increase in gravity. This increase was greater when the mass of the rat was larger. Rating EE for 400g animals were increased from 47 +/- 1 kcal/kg/day at 1 G, to 57 +/- 1.5 and 5.8 +/- 2.2 kcal/kg/day at 2,3 and 4.1 G, respectively. There was no difference between the two hyper-gravity environments. When differences in age of the animals were accounted for, the increase in resting EE adjusted for body mass was increased by over 36% in older animals due to exposure to hyper-gravity. Acclimation to hyper-gravity increases the resting EE of rats, dependent upon body mass and age, and appears to alter substrate metabolism. Increasing the level of hyper-gravity, from 2.3 to 4.1 G, produced no further changes raising questions as to a dose effect of gravity level on resting metabolism.

Wade, Charles E.↗

Energy expenditure and balance during spaceflight on the space shuttle

The objectives of this study were as follows: 1) to measure human energy expenditure (EE) during spaceflight on a shuttle mission by using the doubly labeled water (DLW) method; 2) to determine whether the astronauts were in negative energy balance during spaceflight; 3) to use the comparison of change in body fat as measured by the intake DLW EE, 18O dilution, and dual energy X-ray absorptiometry (DEXA) to validate the DLW method for spaceflight; and 4) to compare EE during spaceflight against that found with bed rest. Two experiments were conducted: a flight experiment (n = 4) on the 16-day 1996 life and microgravity sciences shuttle mission and a 6 degrees head-down tilt bed rest study with controlled dietary intake (n = 8). The bed rest study was designed to simulate the flight experiment and included exercise. Two EE determinations were done before flight (bed rest), during flight (bed rest), and after flight (recovery). Energy intake and N balance were monitored for the entire period. Results were that body weight, water, fat, and energy balance were unchanged with bed rest. For the flight experiment, decreases in weight (2.6 +/- 0.4 kg, P < 0.05) and N retention (-2. 37 +/- 0.45 g N/day, P < 0.05) were found. Dietary intake for the four astronauts was reduced in flight (3,025 +/- 180 vs. 1,943 +/- 179 kcal/day, P < 0.05). EE in flight was 3,320 +/- 155 kcal/day, resulting in a negative energy balance of 1,355 +/- 80 kcal/day (-15. 7 +/- 1.0 kcal. kg-1. day-1, P < 0.05). This corresponded to a loss of 2.1 +/- 0.4 kg body fat, which was within experimental error of the fat loss determined by 18O dilution (-1.4 +/- 0.5 kg) and DEXA (-2.4 +/- 0.4 kg). All three methods showed no change in body fat with bed rest. In conclusion, 1) the DLW method for measuring EE during spaceflight is valid, 2) the astronauts were in severe negative energy balance and oxidized body fat, and 3) in-flight energy (E) requirements can be predicted from the equation: E = 1.40 x resting metabolic rate + exercise.

Non-NASA Center↗