Engineering Papers⌕ Search

Engineering topics

Paul Kessler

Publications and source records attributed to Paul Kessler.

26 records · Page 2
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Mars Surface Habitat Concept Design

An initial Mars Surface Habitat (MSH) concept design study was conducted as part of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Habitation Systems Development Office’s effort to inform NASA crewed Mars architecture decisions. The study assessed the unique challenges, risks, and benefits of a surface habitation element within the Mars architecture trade space. The goal of the study was to identify unique functional capabilities necessary to support a crewed mission on the Martian surface, the unique challenges and risks associated with such an architecture, and the areas of further analysis required to make such a mission possible. Continuing NASA’s development and execution of the Moon to Mars lunar surface missions, attention will continue progressing toward the initial crewed Mars mission. To prepare for this, NASA’s Exploration Systems Development Mission Directorate (ESDMD) has established a strategic analysis cycle (SAC) where an architectural trade space is identified and evaluated. Given that the Mars architecture and mission profile are still in this trade space, the architecture and mission considered for this study is SAC21. In addition, reference conceptual designs are being refined for the Mars Transit Habitat (TH) and MSH systems which will enable crew to safely travel to and inhabit the surface of Mars. The NASA Mars architectures trade space includes the use of a Pressurized Rover (PR) to address both crew habitation and mobility needs. This study assesses the use of a dedicated habitat via the MSH and an unpressurized terrain vehicle for crew mobility and exploration in lieu of the PR. Determining the optimum mission architecture will require continued analysis by ESDMD teams and this study is intended to support of such a study. The MSH concept design team aims to explore this area of the Mars habitation trade space, and in doing so, inform and highlight the considerations associated with a MSH in the surface architecture. It is not the intention of this study to make specific habitation or architecture decisions, but instead to provide a habitation element concept compatible with the Mars architecture trade space.

Mars Surface Habitat↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Mars Surface Habitat (MSH) Concept Design

An initial Mars Surface Habitat (MSH) concept design study was conducted as part of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Habitation Systems Development Office’s effort to inform NASA crewed Mars architecture decisions. The study assessed the unique challenges, risks, and benefits of a surface habitation element within the Mars architecture trade space. The goal of the study was to identify unique functional capabilities necessary to support a crewed mission on the Martian surface, the unique challenges and risks associated with such an architecture, and the areas of further analysis required to make such a mission possible. Continuing NASA’s development and execution of the Moon to Mars lunar surface missions, attention will continue progressing toward the initial crewed Mars mission. To prepare for this, NASA’s Exploration Systems Development Mission Directorate (ESDMD) has established a strategic analysis cycle (SAC) where an architectural trade space is identified and evaluated. Given that the Mars architecture and mission profile are still in this trade space, the architecture and mission considered for this study is SAC21. In addition, reference conceptual designs are being refined for the Mars Transit Habitat (TH) and MSH systems which will enable crew to safely travel to and inhabit the surface of Mars. The NASA Mars architectures trade space includes the use of a Pressurized Rover (PR) to address both crew habitation and mobility needs. This study assesses the use of a dedicated habitat via the MSH and an unpressurized terrain vehicle for crew mobility and exploration in lieu of the PR. Determining the optimum mission architecture will require continued analysis by ESDMD teams and this study is intended to support of such a study. The MSH concept design team aims to explore this area of the Mars habitation trade space, and in doing so, inform and highlight the considerations associated with a MSH in the surface architecture. It is not the intention of this study to make specific habitation or architecture decisions, but instead to provide a habitation element concept compatible with the Mars architecture trade space.

Ryan Hughes↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Future Homes in Space: Development of Concepts for Exploration Space Habitats

NASA’s Artemis campaign seeks to return humans to the moon and establish a sustained presence on the lunar surface. This session will emphasize how habitation capabilities on the moon and in cislunar space can potentially contribute to the sustainability objectives of Artemis. Habitable elements represent opportunities to enable longer duration stays, increase the number of crew members present, enhance science and utilization activities, drive technology development for future Mars exploration, perform analog missions, and fuel economic opportunities for US industry. Panelists include Paul Kessler (NASA Marshall Space Flight Center, deputy lead for lunar surface habitation); Andrew Choate (NASA Marshall Space Flight Center, Mars habitation lead); Krystofer Dudzinski (NASA Marshall Space Flight Center, a space architect within the MSFC Advanced Concepts Office); and Larry Toups (retired from NASA Johnson Space Center, currently an adjunct professor at University of Houston in space architecture). The panel is moderated by Tracie Prater (NASA Marshall Space Flight Center, Habitation Systems Development Office). The panel will begin with an overview of the history of habitation concepts and an academic perspective on general considerations in space habitat design (Larry Toups). Paul Kessler and Andrew Choate will introduce NASA’s principle of “architecting from the right” to help define objectives for Artemis missions, needs/characteristics, use cases, and functions (as published in the agency’s Architecture Definition Document) and provide perspective on how this principle informs habitation concept development work. NASA panelists will discuss key engineering challenges identified for developing, deploying, and operating habitable assets on the lunar surface and/or in deep space. These may include dust mitigation, outfitting of inflatable softgoods (for concepts which may use softgoods as a primary structural material), survival in lunar darkness, human health and performance considerations, maintenance/repair/sparing, and autonomy. These identified challenges represent risks for habitation systems development and relate closely to capability gaps identified by the agency. While the work of NASA Marshall Space Flight Center’s habitation development office is primarily focused on habitats which are launched from earth pre-integrated (referred to as Class I in the framework previously developed by NASA space architects Kennedy/Cohen) or launched from earth and deployed at the point of use (Class II), there is also extensive work in NASA, academia, and companies on constructed habitats, which would be built on a planetary surface using indigenous resources (Class III habitats). Panelist Krystopher Dudzinski will discuss potential evolutionary pathways from Class I and Class II habitats to Class III habitats, unique and common architectural challenges within each habitat class, and key gaps in implementing Class III habitats from an architectural perspective. NASA panelists and the moderator will also provide an overview of partnership opportunities and avenues for further engagement to advance habitation systems for the SpaceCom audience. NASA is currently developing notional concepts for a lunar surface habitat and Mars transit habitat, which will be discussed during this panel session and used as examples. These concepts represent options for habitation system design and are a point of departure. They do not represent a final plan or formal recommendation on the part of the agency. Based on the most recent analysis cycle, NASA’s lunar surface habitat (SH) concept nominally supports two crew members for 30 days, with the capacity to support four crew during a surge period where crew will swap between the SH and another surface asset, such as a pressurized rover. This example design has a metallic airlock for ingress/egress and the upper portion is an inflatable material system which serves as the habitation module. The notional interior of the habitat is a three-deck layout/configuration which supports all crew mission functions, including exercise, stowage, extravehicular activity (EVA), sleep, hygiene waste collection, maintenance and repair, and meal preparation. Under analysis assumptions for habitation, the Mars Transit Habitat (TH) concept would support four crew on an up to 1,200 day Mars mission. One option for the concept is to initially dock Transit Habitat at Gateway, where it can be used to increase the duration of crew stays in cislunar space and perform shakedown and analog missions prior to a Mars departure. One challenge in longer duration missions which involve both surface exploration and transit is understanding crew adaptation when transitioning between partial gravity and microgravity environments. TH at Gateway offers an opportunity to study this transition and in doing so reduce risks associated with future Mars exploration. Like lunar SH, the most recent analysis cycle concept of a Mars TH is a hybrid structure design, with a metallic section supporting EVAs, axial/radial docking, and Safe Haven capabilities, and an inflatable softgoods structure for the primary habitation function. Interior layouts to optimize crew usability and livability are currently under trade. The panel will include presentation material, but also seeks to engage the audience in a highly interactive conversation regarding the potential role for habitation in future exploration initiatives. Potential topics for discussion include the influence of the crew experience on habitation systems design and livability/usability considerations, the benefits of space habitation development in terrestrial applications, and challenges and opportunities in “feeding forward” lunar surface habitation systems development to Mars exploration.

space habitats↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Assessing the Relocation of Artemis Foundational Lunar Surface Concepts

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) has defined a functionally based Moon to Mars (M2M) architecture consisting of four key human exploration segments: human lunar return (HLR), foundational exploration (FE), sustained lunar evolution (SLE), and humans to Mars (H2M). These segments are portions of the architecture which represent a stepwise increase in complexity and achievement of M2M objectives [1]. As systems are deployed during the FE segment, it may be desired or even necessary to relocate these elements on the lunar surface as the architecture transitions into the SLE segment. While some Artemis elements under development, such as rovers, are being designed for mobility during both crewed and uncrewed/dormant periods, other architectural concepts do not currently carry a mobility capability. In preparation for the Agency’s 2023 Architecture Concept Review (ACR), a team was assembled to establish a methodology for assessing the relocation feasibility of normally stationary elements. Such a capability could be applied locally or regionally, and might allow for re-purposing previously occupied terrain, expansion of exploration range, aggregation of habitation elements, or retiring systems at the end of their useful service life. The assembled NASA team investigated the relocation trade space through defining a representative concept of operations (ConOps) and assessing possible system impacts. The team focused predominately on the relocation of medium and large surface habitat architectural concepts through surface-based traverses utilizing separable mobility platforms (SMP). A representative mobility platform model was placed through simulation to analyze the possible energy requirements and dynamic illumination impacts. Preliminary assessment indicated that element relocation might be achievable, however significant system and architectural-level risks still need to be quantified. Future analysis will assist in determining what degree of element relocation provides the greatest benefit to achieving a sustained lunar presence. [1] NASA. (2022). Moon to Mars Objectives. Retrieved from: https://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/atoms/files/m2m-objectives-exec-summary.pdf

Artemis↗