Engineering topics
Publications and source records attributed to Melanie L Grande.
As noted in the 2022 Architecture Concept Review Systems Analysis of Architecture Drivers white paper, exploration architectures are heavily influenced by the order in which driving questions are answered. Decisions in one part of the architecture will ripple through other parts of the architecture and beyond, often in ways that are not intuitively obvious.
The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Space Technology Mission Directorate (STMD) has been developing a new Strategic Framework to guide investment prioritization and communication of STMD strategic goals to stakeholders. STMD’s analysis of global trends identified four overarching drivers which are anticipated to shape the needs of civilian space research for years to come. These Mega-Drivers form the foundation of the Strategic Framework. The Increasing Access Mega-Driver reflects the increase in the availability of launch options, more capable propulsion systems, access to planetary surfaces, and the introduction of new platforms to enable exploration, science, and commercial activities. Accelerating Pace of Discovery reflects the exploration of more remote and challenging destinations, drives increased demand for improved abilities to communicate and process large datasets. The Democratization of Space reflects the broadening participation in the space industry, from governments to private investors to citizens. Growing Utilization of Space reflects space market diversification and growth. This paper will further describe the observable trends that inform each of these Mega Drivers, as well as the interrelationships between them within STMD’s new Strategic Framework.
In October 2016, NASA’s Space Technology Mission Directorate (STMD) began adopting a new strategic framework that focuses investment prioritization and communication on impacts, outcomes, and challenges. The structure of the framework has been modeled after one successfully pioneered by NASA’s Aeronautics Research Mission Directorate over the past five years, incorporating lessons learned and changes where appropriate. The Framework is driven by two major factors: (a) dialogue with the community and (b) analysis of the overarching trends shaping the course of civilian space research. These factors are captured in the Framework as Mega-Drivers, which represent major axes of change within the space industry and are characterized by a collection of industry trends and projections. In response to these Mega-Drivers, STMD has developed its understanding of the vision for the future of civilian space relative to STMD space research, captured in five Strategic Thrusts that represent the major lines of investment within STMD’s portfolio. Within each of these Strategic Thrusts, multiple measurable, community-level goals have been established that STMD chooses to pursue as part of a joint effort across the community. STMD chose these goals based upon their potential impact, refers to them as Outcomes within the Framework. These outcomes are decomposed into the products and/or capabilities that will be delivered by STMD, represented in the framework as Technical Challenges. This paper will further describe the framework structure and the progress that has been in defining each of the above elements to date.
NASA is preparing to return humans to the lunar surface as a first step to a human exploration campaign of Mars. Both a sustained lunar campaign and a campaign of missions to Mars will require tens to hundreds of tonnes of propellant. Although this propellant could be delivered from Earth, an alternative approach is to use the potentially vast quantities of lunar ice to enable in-situ propellant production on the lunar surface. This study evaluates the cost breakeven for using lunar-derived propellants, as opposed to those delivered from Earth, in support of an extended human exploration campaign with both a multi-year presence on the Moon as well as multiple crewed missions to Mars. In so doing, the value of lunar propellant production is considered in the context of future exploration priorities, addressing the question: over what range of human missions to the lunar surface and Mars does in-situ propellant production trade favorably with propellant delivery from Earth on the basis of cost? The results of this analysis show that the magnitude and duration of the lunar campaign, more so than the Mars campaign, drive the breakeven and that without long lifetime ISRU systems, with greater than 5 years of autonomous operation before replacement, the demand in cis-lunar space for a Mars campaign favors propellant delivery from Earth.
NASA is preparing to return humans to the lunar surface as a first step to a human exploration campaign of Mars. Both a sustained lunar campaign and a campaign of missions to Mars will require tens to hundreds of tonnes of propellant. Although this propellant could be delivered from Earth, an alternative approach is to use the potentially vast quantities of lunar ice to enable in-situ propellant production on the lunar surface. This study evaluates the cost breakeven for using lunar-derived propellants, as opposed to those delivered from Earth, in support of an extended human exploration campaign with both a multi-year presence on the Moon as well as multiple crewed missions to Mars. In so doing, the value of lunar propellant production is considered in the context of future exploration priorities, addressing the question: over what range of human missions to the lunar surface and Mars does in-situ propellant production trade favorably with propellant delivery from Earth on the basis of cost? The results of this analysis show that the magnitude and duration of the lunar campaign, more so than the Mars campaign, drive the breakeven and that without long lifetime ISRU systems, with greater than 5 years of autonomous operation before replacement, the demand in cis-lunar space for a Mars campaign favors propellant delivery from Earth.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
NASA’s Artemis program will send astronauts to the lunar surface for extended mission durations throughout the 2030s, with a focus on sustainability and extensibility for Mars exploration, as described in NASA’s “Artemis Plan”. However, NASA must place more emphasis on protecting both the crew and the exploration surface systems if they hope to achieve long-duration sustainability on the lunar surface. It is now reasonably achievable with excavation, construction, and autonomy technologies to achieve a significant level of protection that architectures have been unable to achieve to date. The Lunar Safe Haven (LSH) was proposed to protect astronauts, electronics, and other surface exploration systems from the hazards of the lunar environment, including radiation, micrometeoroid strikes, lunar dust, thermal vacuum, etc. During the study, Level Zero Requirements were developed for the LSH, and a decision analysis framework was baselined to evaluate concepts. The LSH Study also performed a comprehensive trade study, during which it identified numerous alternatives for establishing and maintaining a safe haven shelter on the lunar surface. This paper reviews the products developed during the study and presents the final recommendations.
NASA’s plan to return humans to the lunar surface faces many challenges, especially in the sustained phases of the Artemis program. In combination with a habitat, a Lunar Safe Haven (LSH) would provide additional protection to crew, electronics, and equipment from the hazards of the space environment such as radiation, thermal extremes, micrometeoroids, and lunar dust. Influenced by the NASA Artemis program goals, the Lunar Safe Haven Study defined the high-level requirements, outlined the trade space for a LSH concept, and evaluated a set of concepts using a decision analysis structure. This paper will provide additional detail for two concepts that were designed and evaluated during the LSH study, the logic behind the choices, and some of the main driving design parameters.
To enable a sustainable, permanent human lunar presence, NASA must provide a safe haven shelter to protect astronauts and equipment from radiation, thermal extremes, and micro-meteoroids (MM). Planning and development for a robust Safe Haven includes an examination of NASA activities in site preparation, excavation, regolith transfer, surface operations, autonomous monitoring and maintenance, advanced manufacturing, and in-situ resource utilization (ISRU) for identifying the best approaches when implementing a safe haven shelter. These NASA activities were reviewed as a part of a trade study conducted at NASA Langley to assess technological needs and estimated technology readiness levels (TRL). This paper presents a thorough review of the role and level of autonomy in the establishment and sustainment operations of a Lunar Safe Haven.
To enable a sustainable, permanent human lunar presence, NASA must provide a safe haven shelter to protect astronauts and equipment from radiation, thermal extremes, and micro-meteoroids (MM). Planning and development for a robust Safe Haven includes an examination of NASA activities in site preparation, excavation, regolith transfer, surface operations, autonomous monitoring and maintenance, advanced manufacturing, and in-situ resource utilization (ISRU) for identifying the best approaches when implementing a safe haven shelter. These NASA activities were reviewed as a part of a trade study conducted at NASA Langley to assess technological needs and estimated technology readiness levels (TRL). This paper presents a thorough review of the role and level of autonomy in the establishment and sustainment operations of a Lunar Safe Haven.