Engineering topics

Anderson, Molly S.

Publications and source records attributed to Anderson, Molly S..

29 records · Page 2

NASA NTRS2011

Detailed Modeling of Distillation Technologies for Closed-Loop Water Recovery Systems

Detailed chemical process simulations are a useful tool in designing and optimizing complex systems and architectures for human life support. Dynamic and steady-state models of these systems help contrast the interactions of various operating parameters and hardware designs, which become extremely useful in trade-study analyses. NASA?s Exploration Life Support technology development project recently made use of such models to compliment a series of tests on different waste water distillation systems. This paper presents efforts to develop chemical process simulations for three technologies: the Cascade Distillation System (CDS), the Vapor Compression Distillation (VCD) system and the Wiped-Film Rotating Disk (WFRD) using the Aspen Custom Modeler and Aspen Plus process simulation tools. The paper discusses system design, modeling details, and modeling results for each technology and presents some comparisons between the model results and recent test data. Following these initial comparisons, some general conclusions and forward work are discussed.

Allada, Rama Kumar↗

NASA NTRS2011

Parametric Analysis of Life Support Systems for Future Space Exploration Missions

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration is in a process of evaluating future targets for space exploration. In order to maintain the welfare of a crew during future missions, a suite of life support technology is responsible for oxygen and water generation, carbon dioxide control, the removal of trace concentrations of organic contaminants, processing and recovery of water, and the storage and reclamation of solid waste. For each particular life support subsystem, a variety competing technologies either exist or are under aggressive development efforts. Each individual technology has strengths and weaknesses with regard to launch mass, power and cooling requirements, volume of hardware and consumables, and crew time requirements for operation. However, from a system level perspective, the favorability of each life support architecture is better assessed when the sub-system technologies are analyzed in aggregate. In order to evaluate each specific life support system architecture, the measure of equivalent system mass (ESM) was employed to benchmark system favorability. Moreover, the results discussed herein will be from the context of loop-closure with respect to the air, water, and waste sub-systems. Specifically, closure relates to the amount of consumables mass that crosses the boundary of the vehicle over the lifetime of a mission. As will be demonstrated in this manuscript, the optimal level of loop closure is heavily dependent upon mission requirements such as duration and the level of extra-vehicular activity (EVA) performed. Sub-system level trades were also considered as a function of mission duration to assess when increased loop closure is practical. Although many additional factors will likely merit consideration in designing life support systems for future missions, the ESM results described herein provide a context for future architecture design decisions toward a flexible path program.

Swickrath, Michael J.↗

NASA NTRS2011

Reliability Impacts in Life Support Architecture and Technology Selection

Equivalent System Mass (ESM) and reliability estimates were performed for different life support architectures based primarily on International Space Station (ISS) technologies. The analysis was applied to a hypothetical 1-year deep-space mission. High-level fault trees were initially developed relating loss of life support functionality to the Loss of Crew (LOC) top event. System reliability was then expressed as the complement (nonoccurrence) this event and was increased through the addition of redundancy and spares, which added to the ESM. The reliability analysis assumed constant failure rates and used current projected values of the Mean Time Between Failures (MTBF) from an ISS database where available. Results were obtained showing the dependence of ESM on system reliability for each architecture. Although the analysis employed numerous simplifications and many of the input parameters are considered to have high uncertainty, the results strongly suggest that achieving necessary reliabilities for deep-space missions will add substantially to the life support system mass. As a point of reference, the reliability for a single-string architecture using the most regenerative combination of ISS technologies without unscheduled replacement spares was estimated to be less than 1%. The results also demonstrate how adding technologies in a serial manner to increase system closure forces the reliability of other life support technologies to increase in order to meet the system reliability requirement. This increase in reliability results in increased mass for multiple technologies through the need for additional spares. Alternative parallel architecture approaches and approaches with the potential to do more with less are discussed. The tall poles in life support ESM are also reexamined in light of estimated reliability impacts.

Lange, Kevin E.↗

NASA NTRS2011

Evaluation of Technologies to Prevent Precipitation During Water Recovery from Urine

The International Space Station (ISS) Urine Processor Assembly (UPA) experienced a hardware failure in the Distillation Assembly (DA) in October 2010. Initially the UPA was operated to recover 85% of the water from urine through distillation, concentrating the contaminants in the remaining urine. The DA failed due to precipitation of calcium sulfate (gypsum) which caused a loss of UPA function. The ISS UPA operations have been modified to only recover 70% of the water minimizing gypsum precipitation risk but substantially increasing water resupply needs. This paper describes the feasibility assessment of several technologies (ion exchange, chelating agents, threshold inhibitors, and Lorentz devices) to prevent gypsum precipitation. The feasibility assessment includes the development of assessment methods, chemical modeling, bench top testing, and validation testing in a flight-like ground UPA unit. Ion exchange technology has been successfully demonstrated and has been recommended for further development. The incorporation of the selected technology will enable water recovery to be increased from 70% back to the original 85% and improve the ISS water balance.

Broyan, James L., Jr.↗

NASA NTRS2011

Issues and Design Drivers for Deep Space Habitats

A cross-disciplinary team of scientists and engineers applied expertise gained in Lunar Lander development to the conceptual design of a long-duration, deep space habitat for Near Earth Asteroid (NEA) missions. The design reference mission involved two launches to assemble a 5-module vehicle for a 380-day round trip mission carrying 4 crew members. The conceptual design process yielded a number of interesting debates, some of which could be significant design drivers in a detailed Deep Space Habitat (DSH) design. These issues include: a) Launch loads: Potentially drives layout of equipment mounted to module floors or walls, and whether temporary internal structure is required to distribute launch loads to minimize shell mass; b) Unmanned loiter time: When added to an already lengthy mission, loiter time further drives risk and reliability, and poses issues for equipment shelf life such as material degradation or cryogenic fluids boil-off; c) Pointing and Visibility: A habitat embedded in a 5-module stack may drive Communications, Tracking, Guidance, and Navigation equipment out onto long booms to maintain line-of-sight visibility with targets. However, long booms will be more susceptible to disruption from exercise-induced vibration, potential damage during docking/undocking operations, and increased power distribution mass; d) Water: although it is assumed that a water processor will collect and recycle water, several interesting question were posed, such as: How much water to start with? Should potable water serve double-duty as radiation protection? And if so, should it be stowed in a single large tank, or smaller, portable containers? e) Design for repairability: one of the worst-case scenarios identified was a cabin depressurization that required suited repair from inside the module, potentially driving the need for long umbilical hoses or special equipment to allow smaller, mated modules to be used as safe havens for up to 180 days;

Anderson, Molly S.↗

NASA NTRS2010

Lunar Outpost Life Support Architecture Study Based on a High-Mobility Exploration Scenario

This paper presents results of a life support architecture study based on a 2009 NASA lunar surface exploration scenario known as Scenario 12. The study focuses on the assembly complete outpost configuration and includes pressurized rovers as part of a distributed outpost architecture in both stand-alone and integrated configurations. A range of life support architectures are examined reflecting different levels of closure and distributed functionality. Monte Carlo simulations are used to assess the sensitivity of results to volatile high-impact mission variables, including the quantity of residual Lander oxygen and hydrogen propellants available for scavenging, the fraction of crew time away from the outpost on excursions, total extravehicular activity hours, and habitat leakage. Surpluses or deficits of water and oxygen are reported for each architecture, along with fixed and 10-year total equivalent system mass estimates relative to a reference case. System robustness is discussed in terms of the probability of no water or oxygen resupply as determined from the Monte Carlo simulations.

Lange, Kevin E.↗

NASA NTRS2010

Parametric Analysis of Life Support Systems for Future Space Exploration Missions

Having adopted a flexible path approach to space exploration, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration is in a process of evaluating future targets for space exploration. In order to maintain the welfare of a crew during future missions, a suite of life support technology is responsible for oxygen and water generation, carbon dioxide control, the removal of trace concentrations of organic contaminants, processing and recovery of water, and the storage and reclamation of solid waste. For each particular life support subsystem, a variety competing technologies either exist or are under aggressive development efforts. Each individual technology has strengths and weaknesses with regard to launch mass, power and cooling requirements, volume of hardware and consumables, and crew time requirements for operation. However, from a system level perspective, the favorability of each life support architecture is better assessed when the sub-system technologies are analyzed in aggregate. In order to evaluate each specific life support system architecture, the measure of equivalent system mass (ESM) was employed to benchmark system favorability. Moreover, the results discussed herein will be from the context of loop-closure with respect to the air, water, and waste sub-systems. Specifically, closure relates to the amount of consumables mass that crosses the boundary of the vehicle over the lifetime of a mission. As will be demonstrated in this manuscript, the optimal level of loop closure is heavily dependent upon mission requirements such as duration and the level of extra- vehicular activity (EVA) performed. Sub-system level trades were also considered as a function of mission duration to assess when increased loop closure is practical. Although many additional factors will likely merit consideration in designing life support systems for future missions, the ESM results described herein provide a context for future architecture design decisions toward a flexible path program.

Swickrath, Michael J.↗

NASA NTRS2009

Providing Oxygen for the Crew of a Lunar Outpost

Oxygen (O2) is obviously essential for human space missions, but it is important to examine all the different ways it will be used and the potential sources that it may come from. This effort will lead to storage and delivery requirements and help to determine the optimum architecture from an overall systems engineering point of view. Accounting for all the oxygen in a Lunar Outpost mission includes meeting the metabolic needs of the crew while in the surface Habitat, leakage through the Habitat or Pressurized Rover walls, recharge of the space suit backpack and emergency situations. Current plans indicate that both primary and secondary O2 bottles for the space suit will be filled to a pressure of 20.7 MPa (3000 psia). Other uses of O2 require much lower pressure. Sources of O2 at a Lunar Outpost include compressed or liquefied O2 brought along specifically for life support, scavenged O2 from the Lander propulsion system, recovered O2 from waste water or exhaled carbon dioxide and O2 mined from the moon itself. Previously, eight technology options were investigated to provide the high pressure space suit O2. High pressure O2 storage was treated as the baseline technology and compared to the other seven. The other seven were cryogenic storage followed by high pressure vaporization, scavenging liquid oxygen (LOX) from Lander followed by vaporization, LOX delivery followed by sorption compression, low pressure water electrolysis followed by mechanical compression, high pressure water electrolysis, sharing a high pressure electrolyzer with a regenerative fuel cell power system, and making use of In- Situ Resource Utilization (ISRU). This system-level analysis was conducted by comparing equivalent system mass of the eight technologies in open and closed loop life support architectures. The most promising high pressure O2 generation technologies were recommended for development. Updates and an expansion of the earlier study have been made and the results are reported in this paper. Examples of recent analyses include feasibility of recovering space suit purge O2 in a Pressurized Rover and using sub-critical LOX for primary supply while using high-pressure gaseous O2 as the secondary supply for the space-suit. Preliminary analysis on scavenging LOX from the Lander and delivering it to the Habitat has also been incorporated into this integrated lunar fluids analysis

Ewert, Michael K.↗

NASA NTRS2009

High-Pressure Oxygen Generation for Outpost EVA Study

The amount of oxygen consumption for crew extravehicular activity (EVA) in future lunar exploration missions will be significant. Eight technologies to provide high pressure EVA O2 were investigated. They are: high pressure O2 storage, liquid oxygen (LOX) storage followed by vaporization, scavenging LOX from Lander followed by vaporization, LOX delivery followed by sorption compression, water electrolysis followed by compression, stand-alone high pressure water electrolyzer, Environmental Control and Life Support System (ECLSS) and Power Elements sharing a high pressure water electrolyzer, and ECLSS and In-Situ Resource Utilization (ISRU) Elements sharing a high pressure electrolyzer. A trade analysis was conducted comparing launch mass and equivalent system mass (ESM) of the eight technologies in open and closed ECLSS architectures. Technologies considered appropriate for the two architectures were selected and suggested for development.

Jeng, Frank F.↗

NASA NTRS2009

Lunar Outpost Life Support Architecture Study Based on a High Mobility Exploration Scenario

As scenarios for lunar surface exploration and habitation continue to evolve within NASA s Constellation program, so must studies of optimal life support system architectures and technologies. This paper presents results of a life support architecture study based on a 2009 NASA scenario known as Scenario 12. Scenario 12 represents a consolidation of ideas from earlier NASA scenarios and includes an outpost near the Lunar South Pole comprised of three larger fixed surface elements and four attached pressurized rovers. The scenario places a high emphasis on surface mobility, with planning assuming that all four crewmembers spend roughly 50% of the time away from the outpost on 3-14 day excursions in two of the pressurized rovers. Some of the larger elements can also be mobilized for longer duration excursions. This emphasis on mobility poses a significant challenge for a regenerative life support system in terms of cost-effective waste collection and resource recovery across multiple elements, including rovers with very constrained infrastructure resources. The current study considers pressurized rovers as part of a distributed outpost life support architecture in both stand-alone and integrated configurations. A range of architectures are examined reflecting different levels of closure and distributed functionality. Different lander propellant scavenging options are also considered involving either initial conversion of residual oxygen and hydrogen propellants to water or initial direct oxygen scavenging. Monte Carlo simulations are used to assess the sensitivity of results to volatile high-impact mission variables, including the quantity of residual lander propellants available for scavenging, the fraction of crew time away from the outpost on excursions, total extravehicular activity hours, and habitat leakage. Architectures are evaluated by estimating surpluses or deficits of water and oxygen per 180-day mission and differences in fixed and 10-year-total equivalent system mass (ESM) relative to a reference case. Results are presented based on current assumptions for Scenario 12 and based on Monte Carlo simulations with assumed probability distributions for the high-impact mission variables. The calculated probability of no water or oxygen resupply from Monte Carlo simulations provides a quantitative measure of system robustness that can be used for cost/benefit analyses to identify leading architecture candidates. Areas of technology improvement that are likely to have a significant impact are also suggested.

Lange, Kevin E.↗

NASA NTRS2008

Lunar Outpost Life Support Trade Studies

Engineering trade-off studies of life support system architecture and technology options were conducted for potential lunar surface mission scenarios within NASA's Constellation Program. The scenarios investigated are based largely on results of the NASA Lunar Architecture Team (LAT) Phase II study. In particular, the possibility of Hosted Sortie missions, the high cost of power during eclipse periods, and the potential to reduce life support consumables through scavenging, in-situ resources, and alternative EVA technologies were all examined. These trade studies were performed within the Systems Integration, Modeling and Analysis (SIMA) element of NASA's Exploration Life Support (ELS) technology development project. The tools and methodology used in the study are described briefly, followed by a discussion of mission scenarios, life support technology options and results presented in terms of equivalent system mass for various regenerative life support technologies and architectures. Three classes of repeated or extended lunar surface missions were investigated in this study along with several life support resource scenarios for each mission class. Individual mission durations of 14 days, 90 days and 180 days were considered with 10 missions assumed for each at a rate of 2 missions per year. The 14-day missions represent a class of Hosted Sortie missions where a pre-deployed and potentially mobile habitat provides life support for multiple crews at one or more locations. The 90-day and 180-day missions represent lunar outpost expeditions with a larger fixed habitat. The 180-day missions assume continuous human presence and must provide life support through eclipse periods of up to 122 hours while the 90-day missions are planned for best-case periods of nearly continuous sunlight. This paper investigates system optimization within the assumptions of each scenario and addresses how the scenario selected drives the life support system to different designs. Subsequently, these analysis results can be used to determine which technologies may be good choices throughout a broad range of architectures.

Lange, Kevin E.↗