Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “protocol validation testing”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 19 records
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2005

Joint Test Protocol for Validation of Alternative Low-Emission Surface Preparation/Depainting Technologies for Structural Steel

Headquarters National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) chartered the Acquisition Pollution Prevention (AP2) Office to coordinate agency activities affecting pollution prevention issues identified during system and component acquisition and sustainment processes. The primary objectives of the AP2 Office are to: (1) Reduce or eliminate the use of hazardous materials (HazMats) or hazardous processes at manufacturing, remanufacturing, and sustainment locations. (2) A void duplication of effort in actions required to reduce or eliminate HazMats through joint center cooperation and technology sharing. This project will identify, evaluate and approve alternative surface preparation technologies for use at NASA and Air Force Space Command (AFSPC) installations. Materials and processes will be evaluated with the goal of selecting those processes that will improve corrosion protection at critical systems, facilitate easier maintenance activity, extend maintenance cycles, eliminate flight hardware contamination and reduce the amount of hazardous waste generated. This Joint Test Protocol (JTP) contains the critical requirements and tests necessary to qualify alternative Low-Emission Surface Preparation/Depainting Technologies for Structural Steel Applications. These tests were derived from engineering, performance, and operational impact (supportability) requirements defined by a consensus of NASA and Air Force Space Command (AFSPC) participants. The Field Test Plan (FTP), entitled Joint Test Protocol for Validation of Alternative Low Emission Surface Preparation/Depainting Technologies for Structural Steel, prepared by ITB, defines the field evaluation and testing requirements for validating alternative surface preparation/depainting technologies and supplements the JTP.

Lewis, Pattie↗
NASA NTRS2007

Cost-Benefit Analysis for Alternatives to Aliphatic Isocyanate Polyurethanes

NASA and Air Force Space Command (AFSPC) have similar missions and therefore similar facilities and structures in similar environments. The standard practice for protecting metallic substrates in atmospheric environments is the application of an applied coating system. The most common topcoats used in coating systems are polyurethanes that contain isocyanates. Isocyanates are classified as potential human carcinogens and are known to cause cancer in animals. The primary objective of this effort was to demonstrate and validate alternatives to aliphatic isocyanate polyurethanes resulting in one or more isocyanate-free coatings qualified for use at AFSPC and NASA installations participating in this project. This Cost-Benefit Analysis (CBA) quantifies the estimated capital and process costs of coating alternatives and cost savings relative to the current coatings. The estimates in this CBA are to be used for assessing the relative merits of the selected alternatives. The actual economic effects at any specific facility will depend on the alternative material or technology implemented, the number of actual applications converted, future workloads, and other factors . The participants initially considered eighteen (18) alternative coatings as described in the Potential Alternatives Report entitled Potential Alternatives Report for Validation of Alternatives to Aliphatic Isocyanate Polyurethanes, prepared by ITB. Of those, 8 alternatives were selected for testing in accordance with the Joint Test Protocol entitled Joint Test Protocol for Validation of Alternatives to Aliphatic Isocyanate Polyurethanes, and the Field Test Plan entitled Field Evaluations Test Plan for Validation of Alternatives 10 Aliphatic Isocyanate Polyurethanes, both of which were prepared by ITB. A joint Test Report entitled Joint Test Report for Validation of Alternatives to Aliphatic Isocyanate Polyurethanes, prepared by ITB, documents the results of the laboratory and field testing, as well as any test modifications made during the execution of the testing. The coatings selected for evaluation in this CBA are shown in the table below. Only one control coating system is considered in this analysis. These coatings were either downselected for Phase II or performed well enough to be included in the Qualified Products List in the NASA technical standard NASA-STD-5008, Protective Coating of Carbon Steel, Stainless Steel, and Aluminum on Launch Structures, Facilities, and Ground Support Equipment.

Lewis, Pattie↗
NASA NTRS2011

Potential Alternatives Report for Validation of Alternatives to Aliphatic Isocyanate Polyurethanes

Identifying and selecting alternative materials and technologies that have the potential to reduce the identified HazMats and hazardous air pollutants (HAPs), while incorporating sound corrosion prevention and control technologies, is a complicated task due to the fast pace at which new technologies emerge and rules change. The alternatives are identified through literature searches, electronic database and Internet searches, surveys, and/or personal and professional contacts. Available test data was then compiled on the proposed alternatives to determine if the materials meet the test objectives or if further)laboratory or field-testing will be required. After reviewing technical information documented in the PAR, government representatives, technical representatives from the affected facilities, and other stakeholders involved in the process will select the list of viable alternative coatings for consideration and testing under the project's Joint Test Protocol entitled Joint Test Protocol for Validation of Alternatives to Aliphatic Isocyanate Polyurethanes and Field Test Plan entitled Field Evaluations Test Plan for Validation of Alternatives to Aliphatic Isocyanate Polyurethanes, both prepared by ITB. Test results will be reported in a Joint Test Report upon completion oftesting. The selection rationale and conclusions are documented in this PAR. A cost benefit analysis will be prepared to quantify the estimated capital and process costs of coating alternatives and cost savings relative to the current coating processes, however, some initial cost data has been included in this PAR. For this coatings project, isocyanates, as found in aliphatic isocyanate polyurethanes, were identified as the target HazMat to be eliminated. Table 1-1 lists the target HazMats, the related process and application, current specifications, and affected programs.

Lewis, pattie↗
NASA NTRS1985

Verification and performance tests of HYCAR program

The HYCAR program simulates the network protocols of HYPERchannel and Fiber Optic Demonstration System (FODS) and other related protocols. Verification tests of the program were conducted using the FODS protocol. The tests validated the operation of the program through deterministic and analytical means. Extensive experimentation with the simulator produced a set of performance characteristics for the FODS protocol under varied loading conditions. These characteristics are consistent with those expected, and are documented with the validation tests.

Bhatia, Veena↗
NASA NTRS2007

Joint Test Report for Validation of Alternative Low-Emission Surface Preparation/Depainting Technologies for Structural Steel

Headquarters National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) chartered the NASA Acquisition Pollution Prevention (AP2) Office to coordinate agency activities affecting pollution prevention issues identified during system and component acquisition and sustainment processes. The primary objectives of the AP2 Office are to: (1) Reduce or eliminate the use of hazardous materials or hazardous processes at manufacturing, remanufacturing, and sustainment locations. (2) Avoid duplication of effort in actions required to reduce or eliminate hazardous materials through joint center cooperation and technology sharing. The objective of this project was to qualify candidate alternative Low-Emission Surface Preparation/Depainting Technologies for Structural Steel applications at NASA facilities. This project compares the surface preparation/depainting performance of the proposed alternatives to existing surface preparation/depainting systems or standards. This Joint Test Report (JTR) contains the results of testing as per the outlines of the Joint Test Protocol (JTP), Joint Test Protocol for Validation of Alternative Low-Emission Surface Preparation/Depainting Technologies for Structural Steel, and the Field Test Plan (FTP), Field Evaluations Test Plan for Validation of Alternative Low-Emission Surface Preparation/Depainting Technologies for Structural Steel, for critical requirements and tests necessary to qualify alternatives for coating removal systems. These tests were derived from engineering, performance, and operational impact (supportability) requirements defined by a consensus of government and industry participants. This JTR documents the results of the testing as well as any test modifications made during the execution of the project. This JTR is made available as a reference for future pollution prevention endeavors by other NASA Centers, the Department of Defense and commercial users to minimize duplication of effort. The current coating removal processes identified herein are for polyurethane, epoxy and other paint systems applied by conventional wet-spray processes. A table summarizes the target hazardous materials, processes and materials, applications, affected programs, and candidate substrates.

Lewis, Pattie↗
NASA NTRS2007

Cost-Benefit Analysis For Alternative Low-Emission Surface Preparation/ Depainting Technologies for Structural Steel

Stennis Space Center (SSC), Kennedy Space Center (KSC) and Air Force Space Command (AFSPC) identified particulate emissions and waste generated from the depainting process of steel structures as hazardous materials to be eliminated or reduced. A Potential Alternatives Report, Potential Alternatives Report for Validation of Alternative Low Emission Surface Preparation/Depainting Technologies for Structural Steel, provided a technical analyses of identified alternatives to the current coating removal processes, criteria used to select alternatives for further analysis, and a list of those alternatives recommended for testing. The initial coating removal alternatives list was compiled using literature searches and stakeholder recommendations. The involved project participants initially considered approximately 13 alternatives. In late 2003, core project members selected the following depainting processes to be further evaluated: (1) Plastic Blast Media-Quickstrip(R)-A. (2) Hard Abrasive-Steel-Magic(R). (3) Sponge Blasting-Sponge-Jet(R). (4) Liquid Nitrogen-NItroJet(R). (5) Mechanical Removal with Vacuum Attachment-DESCO and OCM Clean-Air (6) Laser Coating Removal Alternatives were tested in accordance with the Joint Test Protocol for Validation of Alternative Low-Emission Surface Preparation/Depainting Technologies for Structural Steel, and the Field Evaluation Test Plan for Validation of Alternative Low-Emission Surface Preparation/Depainting Technologies for Structural Steel. Results of the testing are documented in the Joint Test Report. This Cost-Benefit Analysis (CBA) focuses on the three alternatives (Quickstrip(R)-A, SteelMagic (R), and Sponge-Jet(R)) that were considered viable alternatives for large area operations based on the results of the field demonstration and lab testing. This CBA was created to help participants determine if implementation of the candidate alternatives is economically justified. Each of the alternatives examined reduced Environmental Activity (EA) Costs-those costs associated with complying with environmental regulations. One alternative, Steel-Magic(R), also showed reduced Direct Costs and reduced total costs.

Lewis, Pattie↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Temporal Changes in Astronauts’ Muscle and Cardiorespiratory Physiology Before, During, and After Spaceflight

Background: NASA’s planned space exploration missions will require astronauts to safely perform extravehicular activity (EVA) and to safely egress vehicles in a variety of landing scenarios. Prolonged exposure to spaceflight can diminish tolerance for physical activity, decrease cardiovascular and sensorimotor function, cause loss of bone mineral density, as well as reduced muscle mass and strength. Although exercise can mitigate these spaceflight-induced physiological decrements, little is known regarding the time-course of changes in muscle and aerobic performance during spaceflight. Furthermore, these exercise countermeasures are not fully protective. For example, maximal aerobic capacity (VO2pk), lower body muscle cross-sectional area, and strength decrease by about 10% to 15% after short- (≈14 days) and long-duration (≈6 months) missions on the International Space Station (ISS). Future space missions longer in duration and further from Earth will employ exploration vehicles that will have exercise hardware with less robust and more constrained exercise capabilities than of those available on the ISS. Thus, countermeasures will need to be optimized to protect crew health and performance on exploration-class missions lasting up to 3 years. This requires a more detailed understanding of the dynamic effects of spaceflight on human health and performance, the ability of exercise to protect against this deconditioning, and the interaction of exercise with interrelated factors like nutrition, sleep, and environmental conditions. Methods: We will use standardized research and medical testing protocols previously validated in 1g and microgravity to quantify the time course and the inter-individual variability of changes in physical performance, including cardiorespiratory fitness and muscle strength and endurance, before, during, and after spaceflight missions lasting 2 months, 6 months, and 1 year. Additionally, we will use an extrapolation model to predict changes associated with multi-year exploration missions. Additionally, we will monitor in-flight exercise, nutrition, and sleep using in-flight assessment tools. Significance: Our testing protocols will provide valuable information for determining time course of change and the interindividual variability of spaceflight-induced deconditioning of aerobic capacity and muscle strength and endurance over the course of spaceflight missions up to and beyond 1 year. This information will be vital to assess whether humans can be physically ready for deep space exploration, such as on a mission to Mars, using current technology, or if additional mitigation strategies are necessary.

N Strock↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Temporal Changes in Astronauts’ Muscle and Cardiorespiratory Physiology Before, During and After Spaceflight

Background: NASA’s planned space exploration missions will require astronauts to safely perform extravehicular activity (EVA) and to safely egress vehicles in a variety of landing scenarios. Prolonged exposure to spaceflight can diminish tolerance for physical activity, decrease cardiovascular and sensorimotor function, and cause loss of bone mineral density, and reduced muscle mass and strength. Although exercise can mitigate these spaceflight-induced physiological decrements, little is known regarding the time-course of changes in muscle and aerobic performance during spaceflight. Furthermore, these exercise countermeasures are not fully protective. For example, maximal aerobic capacity (VO2pk), lower body muscle cross-sectional area, and strength decrease by about 10% to 15% after short- (~ 14 days) and long-duration (~ 6 months) missions on the International Space Station (ISS). Future space missions that are longer in duration and further from Earth will employ exploration vehicles that will have exercise hardware with less robust and more constrained exercise capabilities than of those available on the ISS. Thus, countermeasures will need to be optimized to protect crew health and performance on exploration-class missions that will last up to 3 years. This will require a more detailed understanding of the dynamic effects of spaceflight on human health and performance, and the ability of exercise to protect against this deconditioning, and the interaction of exercise with interrelated factors like nutrition, sleep, and environmental conditions. Methods: We will use standardized research and medical testing protocols previously validated in 1-G and 0-G to quantify the time course and the inter-individual variability of changes in physical performance, including cardiorespiratory fitness, and muscle strength, and endurance, before, during and after spaceflight missions lasting 2 months, 6 months, and 1 year. Additionally, we will use an extrapolation model to predict changes associated with 2–3-year exploration missions. Additionally, we will monitor in-flight exercise, nutrition, and sleep using in-flight assessment tools. Significance: Our testing protocols will provide valuable information for determining time course of change and the interindividual variability of spaceflight-induced deconditioning of aerobic capacity and muscle strength and endurance over the course of spaceflight missions up to and beyond 1 year. This information will be vital to assess whether humans can be physically ready for deep space exploration, such as on a mission to Mars, using current technology, or if additional mitigation strategies are necessary.

countermeasures↗
NASA NTRS1992

CAPTIONALS: A computer aided testing environment for the verification and validation of communication protocols

This paper covers the verification and protocol validation for distributed computer and communication systems using a computer aided testing approach. Validation and verification make up the so-called process of conformance testing. Protocol applications which pass conformance testing are then checked to see whether they can operate together. This is referred to as interoperability testing. A new comprehensive approach to protocol testing is presented which address: (1) modeling for inter-layer representation for compatibility between conformance and interoperability testing; (2) computational improvement to current testing methods by using the proposed model inclusive of formulation of new qualitative and quantitative measures and time-dependent behavior; (3) analysis and evaluation of protocol behavior for interactive testing without extensive simulation.

Feng, C.↗
NASA NTRS2024

Updates to NASA’s Break-in-Prebreathe Rules Due to Type II Decompression Sickness Risk Considerations

INTRODUCTION. Investigation of a central neurological decompression sickness (DCS) case during ground testing at Johnson Space Center identified a break-in-prebreathe (BIP) 13 minutes prior to depressurization as the leading credible cause despite applicable prebreathe payback rules being followed. Applicable NASA rules, for ground and flight, directed 2:1 payback of breaks up to 10 mins in duration, regardless of when a break occurs relative to depress. Full restart of prebreathe is directed following breaks > 10 min. The adequacy of NASA’s BIP rules was evaluated prior to resuming hypobaric ground testing or ISS extravehicular activities. METHODS. The following information sources were reviewed prior to formulating recommendations: i) Type II DCS case report and investigation findings; ii) documented rationale for existing flight rules, iii) consultations with subject matter experts involved in definition of existing flight rules (several of whom had since left NASA), iv) relevant published literature, v) model estimates of tissue on-gassing and off-gassing, and vi) NASA’s operational experience with late breaks in prebreathe. RESULTS. NASA’s nominal prebreathe protocols are validated via extensive ground testing to ensure DCS risk is reduced to within acceptable limits. Conversely, there exists a paucity of data, no validated models, and limited documentation regarding BIP risk for NASA prebreathe protocols. Flight rules implemented for shuttle and later ISS are based primarily on expert opinion and an assumption of symmetric on-gassing and off-gassing, which would make 2:1 payback a conservative mitigation for a BIP. Assumption of exponential gas kinetics makes late breaks higher risk, or require greater payback, than earlier breaks. Two BIPs have occurred using the current ISS prebreathe protocol, each of which was followed by greater than 2:1 payback and at least 59 minutes of 100% O2 pre-depress. No DCS cases have been reported during shuttle or ISS EVA operations. DISCUSSION. Interim changes were implemented to protect against late breaks during ground and flight prebreathes by ensuring negligible difference in conservatively modeled ppN2 pre-depress compared to nominal validated protocols. Additional documentation and literature review as well as chamber test planning are ongoing with the objective of further ground and flight rule updates and validation of a BIP risk model.

Prebreathe↗
NASA NTRS2024

Updates to NASA’s Break-in-Prebreathe Rules Due to Type II Decompression Sickness Risk Considerations

INTRODUCTION. Investigation of a central neurological decompression sickness (DCS) case during ground testing at Johnson Space Center identified a break-in-prebreathe (BIP) 13 minutes prior to depressurization as the leading credible cause despite applicable prebreathe payback rules being followed. Applicable NASA rules, for ground and flight, directed 2:1 payback of breaks up to 10 mins in duration, regardless of when a break occurs relative to depress. Full restart of prebreathe is directed following breaks > 10 min. The adequacy of NASA’s BIP rules was evaluated prior to resuming hypobaric ground testing or ISS extravehicular activities. METHODS. The following information sources were reviewed prior to formulating recommendations: i) Type II DCS case report and investigation findings; ii) documented rationale for existing flight rules, iii) consultations with subject matter experts involved in definition of existing flight rules (several of whom had since left NASA), iv) relevant published literature, v) model estimates of tissue on-gassing and off-gassing, and vi) NASA’s operational experience with late breaks in prebreathe. RESULTS. NASA’s nominal prebreathe protocols are validated via extensive ground testing to ensure DCS risk is reduced to within acceptable limits. Conversely, there exists a paucity of data, no validated models, and limited documentation regarding BIP risk for NASA prebreathe protocols. Flight rules implemented for shuttle and later ISS are based primarily on expert opinion and an assumption of symmetric on-gassing and off-gassing, which would make 2:1 payback a conservative mitigation for a BIP. Assumption of exponential gas kinetics makes late breaks higher risk, or require greater payback, than earlier breaks. Two BIPs have occurred using the current ISS prebreathe protocol, each of which was followed by greater than 2:1 payback and at least 59 minutes of 100% O2 pre-depress. No DCS cases have been reported during shuttle or ISS EVA operations. DISCUSSION. Interim changes were implemented to protect against late breaks during ground and flight prebreathes by ensuring negligible difference in conservatively modeled ppN2 pre-depress compared to nominal validated protocols. Additional documentation and literature review as well as chamber test planning are ongoing with the objective of further ground and flight rule updates and validation of a BIP risk model.

Prebreathe↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Viability of Small Dimension Crew Quarters for Surface Habitation

It is possible that in the next twenty years NASA may fly crew quarters on twice as many spacecraft as it has in the past fifty years. In short, US experience with spacecraft crew quarters is limited and with few available standards to guide their design there is significant uncertainty facing spacecraft currently in development, several of which are also subject to substantial mass and volume challenges. Those spacecraft developments will face considerable pressure to minimize crew quarters size, including those intended for use on the lunar surface. Given that a crew quarters is the only space a crew member can call his or her own during missions that can last weeks to years in duration, providing an appropriate volume is especially important. This is even more critical when one considers the reality that all crew quarters flown to date have been smaller than minimum standards for US jail cells. This research will categorize functional capabilities of crew quarters and explore physical and virtual prototypes of small crew quarters that have attempted to include these capabilities. The Exploration Atmospheres Test at NASA Johnson Space Center represents the first opportunity to collect multi-day test data on crew quarters of this size in a gravitational environment. Intended to validate exploration prebreathe protocols, this test will house eight people inside a vacuum chamber that has been outfitted as a habitat prototype for twelve days. In addition to their other test activity, the crew will evaluate the acceptability of their crew quarters. This data will aid in establishing design guidelines for crew quarters in both short and long duration missions beyond low Earth orbit.

Crew Quarters↗
NASA NTRS1994

Experimental control in software reliability certification

There is growing interest in software 'certification', i.e., confirmation that software has performed satisfactorily under a defined certification protocol. Regulatory agencies, customers, and prospective reusers all want assurance that a defined product standard has been met. In other industries, products are typically certified under protocols in which random samples of the product are drawn, tests characteristic of operational use are applied, analytical or statistical inferences are made, and products meeting a standard are 'certified' as fit for use. A warranty statement is often issued upon satisfactory completion of a certification protocol. This paper outlines specific engineering practices that must be used to preserve the validity of the statistical certification testing protocol. The assumptions associated with a statistical experiment are given, and their implications for statistical testing of software are described.

Trammell, Carmen J.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Development, Validation and Approval of A Planetary Extravehicular Activity Prebreathe Protocol: NASA Exploration Atmosphere Tests 1 & 2

INTRODUCTION: Denitrogenation prebreathe protocols used to mitigate DCS risk for Space Shuttle and International Space Station EVAs are validated for the microgravity environment, but the significantly increased risk of DCS during equivalent ambulatory surface EVAs make these protocols inapplicable to planetary/Lunar missions as planned by the Artemis program. Living in an “Exploration Atmosphere” of 56.5 kPa (8.2 psia), 34% O2, 66% N2 has been recommended by NASA for future Moon and Mars missions as a compromise that balances pre-EVA prebreathe duration, hypoxia, and flammability risk, assuming a 29.6 kPa (4.3 psi) spacesuit. A prebreathe validation campaign at NASA’s Johnson Space Center in 2022–2023 has aimed to validate the prebreathe durations and is being operationalized by NASA for use in upcoming Lunar EVAs. METHODS: Twelve volunteers lived in a hyboparic chamber for 11 days with an “exploration atmosphere” of 56.6kPa/34% O2 66% N2. Subjects acclimated to this atmosphere for 48 hrs and thereafter participated in five 6-hour simulated EVAs at 34kPa/85% O2 / 15% N2 over the course of 11 days. Prior to each simulated EVA, subjects underwent a 20-minute prebreathe at 85% O2. The EVA simulation was designed to include tasks that are physically and ergonomically representative of future planetary EVAs, proportionate to the subject’s VO2max. Decompression stress was evaluated during the simulated EVA by serial doppler and echocardiographs alternating every 15 min, as well as clinical monitoring for DCS signs/symptoms. Venous gas emboli (VGE) and DCS outcomes were verified against NASA Standard 3001, which guides allowable prebreathe protocol acceptance criteria. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION: Venous gas emboli (VGE) were identified during EVAs. No Grade IV VGE were observed. Two cases of mild, Type I DCS were identified in the subjects over the course of 50 EVA exposures. Ten planned EVA exposures were eliminated due to mask fit, metabolic rate, or subject safety concerns. One subject was removed from the study due to presence of left ventricular VGE. Additionally, two doppler techs also experienced DCS, and one case of hypoxia was noted. All cases of DCS resolved with treatment. No cases of severe DCS were observed. The observed incidence (4%, 1.1–13.5% at 95% confidence) met the NASA Standard 3001 criteria leading to the transition of this protocol from research to operational use for upcoming Lunar missions.

Exploration Atmosphere↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Nasa Exploration Atmosphere Tests 3 & 4: Development and Validation of Planetary Extravehicular Activity Prebreathe Protocols for Alternate Atmospheres and Suit Pressures

INTRODUCTION: Space suits operate at low pressures to optimize astronauts’ performance. The drop in pressure from the habitat environment to the suit carries a risk of decompression sickness (DCS), which is mitigated by a 95% O2 prebreathe protocol. Prebreathe protocols for the lunar surface have a significantly higher risk compared to International Space Station microgravity Extravehicular Activities (EVA). In previous studies, we validated a prebreathe protocol from a 56.5 kPa 34% O2 cabin to a 29.6 kPa EVA pressure; however, the enriched oxygen cabin environment poses a flammability risk that requires significant changes to material design and selections. Here, we report outcomes for prebreathe protocols from a sub-30% O2 cabin and associated changes necessary to control DCS risk critical to upcoming lunar missions. METHODS: Fourteen volunteers completed 11-day hypobaric chamber studies with an “alternate exploration atmosphere” of 66.2kPa, 28.5% O2. Subjects acclimated for 48 hrs and then participated in five 6-hour simulated EVAs at 29.6 or 35.6kPa, 95% O2. Prior to EVA, subjects underwent a 20, 90, or 150-minute prebreathe. The EVA simulation was designed to be representative of future planetary EVAs, proportionate to the subject’s VO2max. Decompression stress was monitored by real-time doppler and echocardiograph alternating every 15 min, as well as clinical monitoring for DCS signs/symptoms. Venous gas emboli (VGE) and DCS outcomes were verified against NASA-STD-3001 acceptance criteria. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION: Venous gas emboli (VGE) were identified during all EVAs. A neurological DCS case was identified in the 90-min/29.6kPa prebreathe, terminating further testing of this protocol. No DCS cases were identified in the 150 min/29.6kPa protocol. The 20 min/36.5kPa protocol was rejected due to a Type II DCS case. All DCS symptoms resolved with treatment, with no sequelae post initial treatment of DCS. These various test points highlighted to the significant benefit of elevated suit pressure to shorten prebreathe protocols, but also the difficulty in assessing and managing DCS during sustained EVA operations in remote planetary surfaces.

decompression sickness↗
NASA NTRS2005

Materials on the International Space Station - Forward Technology Solar Cell Experiment

This paper describes a space solar cell experiment currently being built by the Naval Research Laboratory (NRL) in collaboration with NASA Glenn Research Center (GRC), and the US Naval Academy (USNA). The experiment has been named the Forward Technology Solar Cell Experiment (FTSCE), and the purpose is to rapidly put current and future generation space solar cells on orbit and provide validation data for these technologies. The FTSCE is being fielded in response to recent on-orbit and ground test anomalies associated with space solar arrays that have raised concern over the survivability of new solar technologies in the space environment and the validity of present ground test protocols. The FTSCE is being built as part of the Fifth Materials on the International Space Station (MISSE) Experiment (MISSE-5), which is a NASA program to characterize the performance of new prospective spacecraft materials when subjected to the synergistic effects of the space environment. Telemetry, command, control, and communication (TNC) for the FTSCE will be achieved through the Amateur Satellite Service using the PCSat2 system, which is an Amateur Radio system designed and built by the USNA. In addition to providing an off-the-shelf solution for FTSCE TNC, PCSat2 will provide a communications node for the Amateur Radio satellite system. The FTSCE and PCSat2 will be housed within the passive experiment container (PEC), which is an approximately 2ft x2ft x 4in metal container built by NASA Langley Research Center (NASA LaRC) as part of the MISSE-5 program. NASA LaRC has also supplied a thin film materials experiment that will fly on the exterior of the thermal blanket covering the PCSat2. The PEC is planned to be transported to the ISS on a Shuttle flight. The PEC will be mounted on the exterior of the ISS by an astronaut during an extravehicular activity (EVA). After nominally one year, the PEC will be retrieved and returned to Earth. At the time of writing this paper, the subsystems of the experiment are being integrated at NRL, and we are preparing to commence environmental testing.

Walters, R. J.↗
NASA NTRS2007

Promoting Robust Design of Diode Lasers for Space: A National Initiative

The Diode-laser Array Working Group (DAWG) is a national-level consumer/provider forum for discussion of engineering and manufacturing issues which influence the reliability and survivability of high-power broad-area laser diode devices in space, with an emphasis on laser diode arrays (LDAs) for optical pumping of solid-state laser media. The goals of the group are to formulate and validate standardized test and qualification protocols, operational control recommendations, and consensus manufacturing and certification standards. The group is using reliability and lifetime data collected by laser diode manufacturers and the user community to develop a set of standardized guidelines for specifying and qualifying laser diodes for long-duration operation in space, the ultimate goal being to promote an informed U.S. Government investment and procurement strategy for assuring the availability and durability of space-qualified LDAs. The group is also working to establish effective implementation of statistical design techniques at the supplier design, development, and manufacturing levels to help reduce product performance variability and improve product reliability for diodes employed in space applications

Tratt, David M.↗