Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Fission Battery”

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.

15 records
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2016

Solar vs. Fission Surface Power for Mars

A multi-discipline team of experts from the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) developed Mars surface power system point design solutions for two conceptual missions. The primary goal of this study was to compare the relative merits of solar- versus fission-powered versions of each surface mission. First, the team compared three different solar power options against a fission power system concept for a sub-scale, uncrewed demonstration mission. The 4.5 meter (m) diameter pathfinder lander's primary mission would be to demonstrate Mars entry, descent, and landing techniques. Once on the Martian surface, the lander's In Situ Resource Utilization (ISRU) payload would demonstrate liquid oxygen propellant production using atmospheric resources. For the purpose of this exercise, location was assumed to be at the Martian equator. The three solar concepts considered included a system that only operated during daylight hours (at roughly half the daily propellant production rate of a round-the-clock fission design), a battery-augmented system that operated through the night (matching the fission concept's propellant production rate), and a system that operated only during daylight, but at a higher rate (again, matching the fission concept's propellant production rate). Including 30% mass growth allowance, total payload masses for the three solar concepts ranged from 1,116 to 2,396 kg, versus the 2,686 kg fission power scheme. However, solar power masses are expected to approach or exceed the fission payload mass at landing sites further from the equator, making landing site selection a key driver in the final power system decision. The team also noted that detailed reliability analysis should be performed on daytime-only solar power schemes to assess potential issues with frequent ISRU system on/off cycling. Next, the team developed a solar-powered point design solution for a conceptual four-crew, 500-day surface mission consisting of up to four landers per crewed expedition mission. Unlike the demonstration mission, a lengthy power outage due to the global dust storms that are known to occur on Mars would pose a safety hazard to a crewed mission. A similar fission versus solar power trade study performed by NASA in 2007 concluded that fission power was more reliable-with a much lower mass penalty-than solar power for this application. However, recent advances in solar cell and energy storage technologies and changes in operational assumptions prompted NASA to revisit the analysis. For the purpose of this exercise a particular landing site at Jezero Crater, located at 18o north latitude, was assumed. A fission power system consisting of four each 10 kW Kilopower fission reactors was compared to a distributed network of Orion-derived Ultraflex solar arrays and Lithium ion batteries mounted on every lander. The team found that a solar power system mass of about 9,800 kg would provide the 22 kilowatts (kW) keep-alive power needed to survive a dust storm lasting up to 120-days at average optical depth of 5, and 35 kW peak power for normal operations under clear skies. Although this is less than half the mass estimated during the 2007 work (which assumed latitudes up to 30o) it is still more than the 7,000 kg mass of the fission system which provides full power regardless of dust storm conditions.

Rucker, Michelle A.↗
NASA NTRS2016

Solar Versus Fission Surface Power for Mars

A multi-discipline team of experts from the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) developed Mars surface power system point design solutions for two conceptual missions to Mars using In-situ resource utilization (ISRU). The primary goal of this study was to compare the relative merits of solar- versus fission-powered versions of each surface mission. First, the team compared three different solar-power options against a fission power system concept for a sub-scale, uncrewed demonstration mission. This “pathfinder” design utilized a 4.5 meter diameter lander. Its primary mission would be to demonstrate Mars entry, descent, and landing techniques. Once on the Martian surface, the lander’s ISRU payload would demonstrate liquid oxygen propellant production from atmospheric resources. For the purpose of this exercise, location was assumed to be at the Martian equator. The three solar concepts considered included a system that only operated during daylight hours (at roughly half the daily propellant production rate of a round-the-clock fission design), a battery-augmented system that operated through the night (matching the fission concept’s propellant production rate), and a system that operated only during daylight, but at a higher rate (again, matching the fission concept’s propellant production rate). Including 30% mass growth allowance, total payload masses for the three solar concepts ranged from 1,128 to 2,425 kg, versus the 2,751 kg fission power scheme. However, solar power masses increase as landing sites are selected further from the equator, making landing site selection a key driver in the final power system decision. The team also noted that detailed reliability analysis should be performed on daytime-only solar power schemes to assess potential issues with frequent ISRU system on/off cycling.

Rucker, Michelle A.↗
NASA NTRS2005

Realizing "2001: A Space Odyssey": Piloted Spherical Torus Nuclear Fusion Propulsion

A conceptual vehicle design enabling fast, piloted outer solar system travel was created predicated on a small aspect ratio spherical torus nuclear fusion reactor. The initial requirements were satisfied by the vehicle concept, which could deliver a 172 mt crew payload from Earth to Jupiter rendezvous in 118 days, with an initial mass in low Earth orbit of 1,690 mt. Engineering conceptual design, analysis, and assessment was performed on all major systems including artificial gravity payload, central truss, nuclear fusion reactor, power conversion, magnetic nozzle, fast wave plasma heating, tankage, fuel pellet injector, startup/re-start fission reactor and battery bank, refrigeration, reaction control, communications, mission design, and space operations. Detailed fusion reactor design included analysis of plasma characteristics, power balance/utilization, first wall, toroidal field coils, heat transfer, and neutron/x-ray radiation. Technical comparisons are made between the vehicle concept and the interplanetary spacecraft depicted in the motion picture 2001: A Space Odyssey.

Williams, Craig H.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

NASA Lunar Surface Operations & Power Grid

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Artemis Program is developing, testing, and demonstrating new capabilities and technologies required to support a sustainable human presence on the lunar surface and a longer-term vision of sending astronauts to Mars. Artemis lunar surface operations will begin with robotically exploring the lunar south polar regions for locations suitable for harvesting lunar surface resources. Over time activities on the lunar surface will expand beyond robotic operations to human lunar surface operations with the delivery of a lunar habitat and in-situ resource utilization (ISRU) assets increasing the need for highly reliable and available electrical power. As operations move beyond the Artemis technology demonstrations and exploration activities towards full commercial lunar surface activities, the ability to expand the original envisioned Artemis power system and repurpose power system components to support commercial activities will be crucial. One technology that will be necessary to support commercial lunar operations is a power grid. A lunar surface power grid would offer the ability to integrate various power sources to maximize power availability, including fission surface power (nuclear), solar arrays, batteries, and regenerative fuel cells. Newly designed terrestrial microgrids are flexible and can be designed to allow for islanded operation, where power is utilized near the loads to minimize power distribution losses or in a power sharing mode where power is transmitted longer distances. This capability is crucial during failures where overall power availability is reduced, and load demand exceeds generation/storage capability. These terrestrial microgrids will also allow for the power system to grow and evolve over time, meeting the need to expand beyond initial lunar surface activities. This presentation will discuss the NASA Artemis plans, potential power system architectures, and power distribution options that will enable growth from initial technology demonstrations towards a lunar economy with a lunar surface power grid that offers many of the advantages of terrestrial microgrids.

Microgrids↗
NASA NTRS2006

Can We Power Future Mars Missions?

The Vision for Space Exploration identified the exploration of Mars as one of the key pathways. In response, NASAs Mars Program Office is developing a detailed mission lineup for the next decade that would lead to future explorations. Mission architectures for the next decade include both orbiters and landers. Existing power technologies, which could include solar panels, batteries, radioisotope power systems, and in the future fission power, could support these missions. Second and third decade explorations could target human precursor and human in-situ missions, building on increasingly complex architectures. Some of these could use potential feed forward from earlier Constellation missions to the Moon, discussed in the ESAS study. From a potential Mars Sample Return mission to human missions the complexity of the architectures increases, and with it the delivered mass and power requirements also amplify. The delivered mass at Mars mostly depends on the launch vehicle, while the landed mass might be further limited by EDL technologies, including the aeroshell, parachutes, landing platform, and pinpoint landing. The resulting in-situ mass could be further divided into payload elements and suitable supporting power systems. These power systems can range from tens of watts to multi-kilowatts, influenced by mission type, mission configuration, landing location, mission duration, and season. Regardless, the power system design should match the power needs of these surface assets within a given architecture. Consequently, in this paper we will identify potential needs and bounds of delivered mass and architecture dependent power requirements to surface assets that would enable future in-situ exploration of Mars.

solar panels↗
NASA NTRS1970

America in Space: The First Decade - Spacecraft Power

Electrical power is necessary for every manned and unmanned spacecraft, with the exception of a few special-purpose Earth satellites. It is the reliable flow and availability of electrical power that allows man to extend his personal ventures safely beyond the atmosphere and keeps unmanned scientific payloads serving as useful tools for space exploration and applications. Electric power is essential to space communications, guidance, control, tracking, telemetry, life-support systems, sensors, data handling and storage, and to assure the proper functioning of countless experimental and housekeeping systems and subsystems aboard operating spacecraft. It remains the task of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, since NASA's founding in 1958, to fully investigate the chemical, nuclear and solar sources of energy and to see how best they can be converted to reliable spacecraft power. The research and technology of power-generating systems illustrates a seldom recognized goal of NASA - to assure this Nation a freedom of choice; the choice, in this case, being that of going where we wish to go in the atmosphere or in space. Technical capability is the key to such freedom. Power requirements and profiles are reviewed and power sources, including batteries, fuel cells, solar cell, RTGs and nuclear fission power plants in space, are highlighted.

Corliss, William R.↗
NASA NTRS2005

Electric Power System Technology Options for Lunar Surface Missions

In 2004, the President announced a 'Vision for Space Exploration' that is bold and forward-thinking, yet practical and responsible. The vision explores answers to longstanding questions of importance to science and society and will develop revolutionary technologies and capabilities for the future, while maintaining good stewardship of taxpayer dollars. One crucial technology area enabling all space exploration is electric power systems. In this paper, the author evaluates surface power technology options in order to identify leading candidate technologies that will accomplish lunar design reference mission three (LDRM-3). LDRM-3 mission consists of multiple, 90-day missions to the lunar South Pole with 4-person crews starting in the year 2020. Top-level power requirements included a nominal 50 kW continuous habitat power over a 5-year lifetime with back-up or redundant emergency power provisions and a nominal 2-kW, 2-person unpressurized rover. To help direct NASA's technology investment strategy, this lunar surface power technology evaluation assessed many figures of merit including: current technology readiness levels (TRLs), potential to advance to TRL 6 by 2014, effectiveness of the technology to meet the mission requirements in the specified time, mass, stowed volume, deployed area, complexity, required special ground facilities, safety, reliability/redundancy, strength of industrial base, applicability to other LDRM-3 elements, extensibility to Mars missions, costs, and risks. For the 50-kW habitat module, dozens of nuclear, radioisotope and solar power technologies were down-selected to a nuclear fission heat source with Brayton, Stirling or thermoelectric power conversion options. Preferred energy storage technologies included lithium-ion battery and Proton Exchange Membrane (PEM) Regenerative Fuel Cells (RFC). Several AC and DC power management and distribution architectures and component technologies were defined consistent with the preferred habitat power generation technology option and the overall lunar surface mission. For rover power, more than 20 technology options were down-selected to radioisotope Stirling, liquid lithium-ion battery, PEM RFC, or primary fuel cell options. The author discusses various conclusions that can be drawn from the findings of this surface power technologies evaluation.

Kerslake, Thomas W.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Human Mars Surface Mission Surface Power Impacts on Timeline and Traverse Capabilities

The National Aeronautics and Aerospace Administration’s (NASA) Mars Architecture Team (MAT) developed a concept for power management operations to support a thirty-day, minimal infrastructure Mars surface mission. The surface elements in this minimal surface mission concept include three landers as platforms for surface operations, a crewed Mars ascent vehicle (MAV), an unpressurized rover, and a pressurized rover where the crew will live for the duration of the thirty-day mission. In this analysis the power system is a ten kilowatt fission power system, which has been selected for its resiliency to dust storms, and will provide power for all aspects of the surface mission including thermal management of propellant and electronic systems, communications, and battery recharge of mobile surface assets. Developing a power management plan with the consideration of the various elements and mission phases helps define the traverse and exploration capabilities for the crew in the pressurized rover. Also, considerations need to be made for the different power requirements for each phase of the surface mission including arrival, offload, surface exploration, launch preparation, and departure. The described analysis aims to achieve a balance of maintaining power to critical systems while enabling desired traverse and exploration range in the pressurized rover. Additionally, a few enhancing technologies were explored that could expand the power capability if the additional capacity is necessary in the future. This study is used as a baseline to understand the constraints on all aspects of the surface mission for a minimal surface infrastructure human Mars campaign if a ten-kilowatt fission surface power system is available on the surface.

Michael B. Chappell↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Human Mars Mission Surface Power Impacts on Timeline and Traverse Capabilities

The National Aeronautics and Aerospace Administration’s (NASA) Mars Architecture Team (MAT) developed a concept for power management operations to support a thirty-day, minimal infrastructure Mars surface mission. The surface elements in this minimal surface mission concept include three landers as platforms for surface operations, a crewed Mars ascent vehicle (MAV), an unpressurized rover, and a pressurized rover where the crew will live for the duration of the thirty-day mission. In this analysis the power system is a ten kilowatt fission power system, which has been selected for its resiliency to dust storms, and will provide power for all aspects of the surface mission including thermal management of propellant and electronic systems, communications, and battery recharge of mobile surface assets. Developing a power management plan with the consideration of the various elements and mission phases helps define the traverse and exploration capabilities for the crew in the pressurized rover. Also, considerations need to be made for the different power requirements for each phase of the surface mission including arrival, offload, surface exploration, launch preparation, and departure. The described analysis aims to achieve a balance of maintaining power to critical systems while enabling desired traverse and exploration range in the pressurized rover. Additionally, a few enhancing technologies were explored that could expand the power capability if the additional capacity is necessary in the future. This study is used as a baseline to understand the constraints on all aspects of the surface mission for a minimal surface infrastructure human Mars campaign if a ten-kilowatt fission surface power system is available on the surface.

Michael B Chappell↗
NASA NTRS1980

Comparative health and safety assessment of the SPS and alternative electrical generation systems

A comparative analysis of health and safety risks is presented for the Satellite Power System and five alternative baseload electrical generation systems: a low-Btu coal gasification system with an open-cycle gas turbine combined with a steam topping cycle; a light water fission reactor system without fuel reprocessing; a liquid metal fast breeder fission reactor system; a central station terrestrial photovoltaic system; and a first generation fusion system with magnetic confinement. For comparison, risk from a decentralized roof-top photovoltaic system with battery storage is also evaluated. Quantified estimates of public and occupational risks within ranges of uncertainty were developed for each phase of the energy system. The potential significance of related major health and safety issues that remain unquantitied are also discussed.

Habegger, L. J.↗
NASA NTRS1982

Comparison of evolving photovoltaic and nuclear power systems for earth orbital applications

Photovoltaic and fission reactor orbital power systems are compared in terms of the end-to-end system power-to-mass ratios. Three PV systems are examined, i.e., a solid substrate with a cell array and a NiCd battery, a modified SEP array and an NiH2 battery, and a 62-micron Si cell array and a fuel cell. All arrays were modeled to be 13.5% efficient and to produce 25 kW dc. The SP-100 reactor consists of the heat source, radiation shield, heat pipes to transfer thermal energy from the reactor to thermoelectric elements, and a waste heat radiator. Consideration is given to system applications in orbits ranging from LEO to GEO, and to mission durations of 1, 5, and 10 yr. PV systems are concluded to be flight-proven, useful out of radiation belts, and best for low to moderate power levels. Limitations exist for operations where atmospheric drag may become a factor and due to the size of a large PV power supply. Space nuclear reactors will continue under development and uses at high power levels and in low altitude orbits are foreseen.

Rockey, D. E.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

NASA's Habitation Development Status: Current Concepts and ISRU Opportunities

Introduction: The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) is embarking on a bold journey to return humankind to the Moon and onward to Mars with innovative commercial, international, and academic partnerships [1]. Under the Artemis series of missions, NASA seeks to establish sustained human exploration of deep space through an objectives-based approach [2]. This approach drives the identification of needed system functionality and the current and future capabilities which will eventually allow humanity to sustainably live beyond Earth. Providing evolvable and scalable habitation is a cornerstone function that calls for the collection and integration of current, developmental, and future technologies that can meet near-term exploration needs while growing into long-term sustained presence. NASA is advancing in-space habitation through its Next Space Technologies for Exploration Partnerships (NextSTEP) model while designing lunar, Mars transit, and Mars surface habitat government reference concepts for Artemis missions. These efforts have unveiled possible near-term opportunities for the in-space resource utilization community if human habitation is considered a future customer of space resources. NextSTEP Habitation Development: NASA is closely working with commercial partners under its NextSTEP Appendix A model to advance habitation systems in the arena of inflatable and composite habitation structures. Such efforts promise efficiencies in volumetric packaging and overall spacecraft mass respectively. Recent testing by commercial partners have helped to quantify possible failure mechanisms for inflatable structures while advancing their technology towards eventual flight certification. The advancement of such Class II habitation structures, in which the habitat is only fully deployed once in-space or on a planetary surface [3], is critical to providing increased habitable volume for long-duration missions with no additional mass penalties. The progression of such technology is infused into NASA’s government reference concepts for notional deep space habitation concepts. Current Government Reference Concepts: To best inform the formulation of future collaborative solicitations, NASA employs the practice of internally developing reference concepts for future exploration elements. These concepts aid in identifying the functions and capabilities needed to complete NASA missions as well as feasible solutions within the timeframe needed. Government reference concepts for a lunar Surface Habitat, Mars Transit Habitat, and Mars Sur-face Habitat are continuously being developed and updated to better guide the Agency’s overall exploration architecture. Lunar Surface Habitat. As NASA returns to the Moon, it is evaluating possible lunar surface habitation concepts. The Surface Habitat (SH) reference concept entails a hybrid metallic-inflatable structure capable of initially housing two crew for surface stays of up to 30 days in duration [4]. While initial missions may span ~7 days in duration, consideration is being given to expanding SH’s capability to support a crew of four for up to 60 days over its 15-year design life [5]. Functionally, the SH serves as a ‘hub’ for all Artemis crewed surface operations, providing internal volume for maintenance, medical, logistics, science utilization, and extravehicular activity (EVA) support in addition to core habitation functionality such as environmental control and life support (ECLS) and power generation and distribution among many others. Additionally, NASA has entered a study agreement with the Italian Space Agency (Agenzia Spaziale Italiana – ASI) to investigation a possible Multi-Purpose Habitat (MPH) as an additional or augmenting habit-able element for the lunar surface [6]. Mars Transit Habitat. NASA’s current architectural concept for initial human missions to Mars entails the utilization of a transit habitat (TH) to transport a four-person crew to and from Mars orbit, departing from and returning to a lunar near-rectilinear halo orbit (NRHO), over the course of a ~1,200-day mission [5]. While holding a similar 15-year design lifetime, TH will also support a series of analog mission activities in NRHO to gradually test the systems and interaction with lunar surface elements, some of which may be adapted for Mars surface exploration. Holding similar functional capabilities as SH, TH is sized to support much longer durations in space and greater logistical independence. Mars Surface Habitat. NASA is still exploring the concept of operations for initial crewed missions to Mars. As such, the Mars Surface Habitat (MSH) concept is still in its infancy as options for mobile, pressurized habitation and stationary habitats are being explored. It is expected MSH will leverage heavily from the lunar SH and possible lunar pressurized rover, however the very different Martian environment will likely necessitate modifications. ISRU Opportunities: Despite the advancements under NASA’s NextSTEP habitation work and continually optimized reference concepts, NASA is facing near-term mass and power challenges that may create opportunities to the ISRU community by providing yet another possible customer for space resources. While NASA desires to use regenerative ECLS systems (ECLSS) for all habitation concepts, their operation comes with initial mass penalties and maintenance overheads when compared to simpler open-loop architectures. Because of this, NASA is currently pro-posing an open-loop, consumables-based architecture for its surface habitats to achieve initial launch and delivery lander mass targets while scarring for the in-corporation of regenerative ECLSS to meet longer mission durations and sustained presence. With such an architecture, oxygen and potable water are needed consumables, which initial ISRU systems may be able to provide in a pilot capacity. Although the TH is expecting to utilize regenerative ECLSS, advancements in lunar surface-based ISRU and possible re-supply of spacecraft in lunar or Mars orbit could significantly reduce the logistical need for ECLSS related spares on TH and possibly allow a similar open-loop and consumables-based architecture. Table 1 Notional ECLSS consumables per mission use for SH and TH [5]. SH (28-day) Open Loop: Water (kg) 288 | Oxygen (kg) 30 TH (1110-day) Closed-Loop: Water (kg) 182 | Oxygen (kg) 123 In addition to ECLSS mass concerns, the SH is facing challenges with energy storage to support operations over periods of darkness exceeding 100 hours. Both battery and fuel cell-based power architectures are being traded, opening options for external power generation and energy storage. One possibility is ISRU-produced H2 and O2 feeding external primary fuel cell systems which could supplement habitation power generation while reducing initial mass and volume until much more powerful fission power systems might be deployed. Conclusion: Significant advancements are being made in evolvable habitation concepts that span from near-term technologies, such as inflatable structures under NextSTEP, to potentially revolutionary capabilities like the lunar surface construction as funded through the Moon-to-Mars Planetary Autonomous Construction Technologies (MMPACT) project [7]. As NASA investigates both heritage capabilities and rap-idly advancing, disruptive technologies, there are likely many near-term opportunities for initial ISRU capabilities to significantly aid human habitation and increase self-sufficiency beyond Earth.

habitation↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

NASA's Habitation Development Status: Current Concepts and ISRU Opportunities

Introduction: The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) is embarking on a bold journey to return humankind to the Moon and onward to Mars with innovative commercial, international, and academic partnerships. Under the Artemis series of missions, NASA seeks to establish sustained human exploration of deep space through an objectives-based approach. This approach drives the identification of needed system functionality and the current and future capabilities which will eventually allow humanity to sustainably live beyond Earth. Providing evolvable and scalable habitation is a cornerstone function that calls for the collection and integration of current, developmental, and future technologies that can meet near-term exploration needs while growing into long-term sustained presence. NASA is advancing in-space habitation through its Next Space Technologies for Exploration Partnerships (NextSTEP) model while designing lunar, Mars transit, and Mars surface habitat government reference concepts for Artemis missions. These efforts have unveiled possible near-term opportunities for the in-space resource utilization community if human habitation is considered a future customer of space resources. NextSTEP Habitation Development: NASA is closely working with commercial partners under its NextSTEP Appendix A model to advance habitation systems in the arena of inflatable and composite habitation structures. Such efforts promise efficiencies in volumetric packaging and overall spacecraft mass respectively. Recent testing by commercial partners have helped to quantify possible failure mechanisms for inflatable structures while advancing their technology towards eventual flight certification. The advancement of such Class II habitation structures, in which the habitat is only fully deployed once in-space or on a planetary surface, is critical to providing increased habitable volume for long-duration missions with no additional mass penalties. The progression of such technology is infused into NASA’s government reference concepts for notional deep space habitation concepts. Current Government Reference Concepts: To best inform the formulation of future collaborative solicitations, NASA employs the practice of internally developing reference concepts for future exploration elements. These concepts aid in identifying the functions and capabilities needed to complete NASA missions as well as feasible solutions within the timeframe needed. Government reference concepts for a lunar Surface Habitat, Mars Transit Habitat, and Mars Sur-face Habitat are continuously being developed and updated to better guide the Agency’s overall exploration architecture. Lunar Surface Habitat. As NASA returns to the Moon, it is evaluating possible lunar surface habitation concepts. The Surface Habitat (SH) reference concept entails a hybrid metallic-inflatable structure capable of initially housing two crew for surface stays of up to 30 days in duration. While initial missions may span ~7 days in duration, consideration is being given to expanding SH’s capability to support a crew of four for up to 60 days over its 15-year design life. Functionally, the SH serves as a ‘hub’ for all Artemis crewed surface operations, providing internal volume for maintenance, medical, logistics, science utilization, and extravehicular activity (EVA) support in addition to core habitation functionality such as environmental control and life support (ECLS) and power generation and distribution among many others. Additionally, NASA has entered a study agreement with the Italian Space Agency (Agenzia Spaziale Italiana – ASI) to investigation a possible Multi-Purpose Habitat (MPH) as an additional or augmenting habit-able element for the lunar surface. Mars Transit Habitat. NASA’s current architectural concept for initial human missions to Mars entails the utilization of a transit habitat (TH) to transport a four-person crew to and from Mars orbit, departing from and returning to a lunar near-rectilinear halo orbit (NRHO), over the course of a ~1,200-day mission. While holding a similar 15-year design lifetime, TH will also support a series of analog mission activities in NRHO to gradually test the systems and interaction with lunar surface elements, some of which may be adapted for Mars surface exploration. Holding similar functional capabilities as SH, TH is sized to support much longer durations in space and greater logistical independence. Mars Surface Habitat. NASA is still exploring the concept of operations for initial crewed missions to Mars. As such, the Mars Surface Habitat (MSH) concept is still in its infancy as options for mobile, pressurized habitation and stationary habitats are being explored. It is expected MSH will leverage heavily from the lunar SH and possible lunar pressurized rover, however the very different Martian environment will likely necessitate modifications. ISRU Opportunities: Despite the advancements under NASA’s NextSTEP habitation work and continually optimized reference concepts, NASA is facing near-term mass and power challenges that may create opportunities to the ISRU community by providing yet another possible customer for space resources. While NASA desires to use regenerative ECLS systems (ECLSS) for all habitation concepts, their operation comes with initial mass penalties and maintenance overheads when compared to simpler open-loop architectures. Because of this, NASA is currently pro-posing an open-loop, consumables-based architecture for its surface habitats to achieve initial launch and delivery lander mass targets while scarring for the in-corporation of regenerative ECLSS to meet longer mission durations and sustained presence. With such an architecture, oxygen and potable water are needed consumables, which initial ISRU systems may be able to provide in a pilot capacity. Although the TH is expecting to utilize regenerative ECLSS, advancements in lunar surface-based ISRU and possible re-supply of spacecraft in lunar or Mars orbit could significantly reduce the logistical need for ECLSS related spares on TH and possibly allow a similar open-loop and consumables-based architecture. In addition to ECLSS mass concerns, the SH is facing challenges with energy storage to support operations over periods of darkness exceeding 100 hours. Both battery and fuel cell-based power architectures are being traded, opening options for external power generation and energy storage. One possibility is ISRU-produced H2 and O2 feeding external primary fuel cell systems which could supplement habitation power generation while reducing initial mass and volume until much more powerful fission power systems might be deployed. Conclusion: Significant advancements are being made in evolvable habitation concepts that span from near-term technologies, such as inflatable structures under NextSTEP, to potentially revolutionary capabilities like the lunar surface construction as funded through the Moon-to-Mars Planetary Autonomous Construction Technologies (MMPACT) project. As NASA investigates both heritage capabilities and rap-idly advancing, disruptive technologies, there are likely many near-term opportunities for initial ISRU capabilities to significantly aid human habitation and increase self-sufficiency beyond Earth.

habitation↗
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↗