Engineering Papers⌕ Search

Engineering topics

Robert L Howard, Jr.

Publications and source records attributed to Robert L Howard, Jr..

Recommended Crew Systems Capabilities for a Mars Ascent Vehicle as a Function of Flight Duration

In many human Mars exploration architectures, a Mars Ascent Vehicle (MAV) is used at the end of a surface stay to transport crew from the Martian surface to a waiting in-space transportation vehicle. It is possible for this transportation vehicle to be placed in any of several different Mars orbits, the selection of which drives the flight duration of the MAV from launch to docking and the amount of propellant required on the transportation vehicle to reach the same orbit. This paper identifies existing NASA standards and supplies habitability subject matter expert recommendations for the human habitation capabilities of the MAV as a function of flight duration. Living and working functions that may potentially be carried aboard a MAV are assessed. Flight durations considered include up to 8 hours, 8-24 hours, 1-2 days, 2-3 days, 3-4 days, and 4-7 days, which book end flight durations necessary to reach the transportation vehicle at different possible Mars orbits. This analysis will determine if there are key durations that serve as significant break points in required MAV capability.

MAV↗

An Initial Concept for a JUMP Mating Mechanism

Lunar landers currently under development for crew and cargo missions to the Moon are limited by the available boosters to launch them from Earth. Most landers are being developed for commercial launch vehicles (CLVs) in the Falcon Heavy / Vulcan / New Glenn / Atlas V class, limiting their performance with many lunar surface studies consequently restricted to 5-10 metric ton payloads. The JUMP Lander (Joinable Undercarriage to Maximize Payload) attempts to overcome this limitation by performing an in-space mating, linking multiple landers together. This research provides an initial proof of concept demonstration that two or more CLV-launched lunar landers can be mated in-space to produce a larger lander with greater payload capacity. Multiple rockets have been connected hundreds if not thousands of times in spaceflight history. An example is the space shuttle. The External Tank-Orbiter interface is an example where the 100-ton Orbiter is bolted to the side of the External Tank. This example serves as a concept metaphor for JUMP where a system of bolts is used as the mating system. This paper performs a high-level sizing analysis of the bolt, including the structural connection to each lander and the physical dimensions of the bolt, given the projected lander and payload masses. It sizes the necessary motors to perform the in-space mating and describes the motor to bolt integration. It describes the mounting and translation for the bolt-motor assembly, including structural supports, physical stops, and range of travel. It discusses active-active and active-passive implementations for the mating system and post-mating options to jettison no-longer-needed components of the assembly, including a discussion of benefits of jettisoning or not jettisoning. Finally, forward work for the mating mechanism and overall JUMP Lander concept is described.

Lunar Lander↗

Stowage Assessment of the Common Habitat Baseline Variants

This paper performs a stowage assessment of the four baseline variants of the Common Habitat, a SLS-derived long duration, multi-mission habitat. The Common Habitat can be utilized as a lunar surface outpost, a Mars surface outpost, or an in-space habitat for Mars transit flights. The paper will discuss the stowage philosophy applied to all baseline variants of the Common Habitat and will discuss the approaches taken to domain-specific stowage, bulk stowage, and fluid and gas stowage. Water and air stowage for the closed loop ECLS subsystem is described across the four variants. Stowage of other supplies, consumables, and equipment is also described across the four variants and based on logistics sizing studies, a self-contained mission endurance is predicted for each variant – e.g. how long a mission each can support without a docked logistics module. Finally, follow-on assessments, including a habitability evaluation, are discussed along with specific stowage issues relevant to these assessments.

Deep space habitat↗

A Safe Haven Concept for the Common Habitat in Moon, Mars, and Transit Environments

The safe haven for the Common Habitat architectures, both the Deep Space Exploration Vehicle and the Moon/Mars surface basecamps, consists of the airlock, logistics modules, and in-space or surface pressurized rovers. These elements are repositioned to dock together and form a secondary habitable environment. The multiple elements that compose the safe haven and its ability to share utilities across docking ports give it multiple subsystem options to sustain the crew. In the safe haven configuration, the two logistics modules dock to the side hatches of the airlock outer chamber, one pressurized rover docks to the outermost airlock hatch, and the second pressurized rover docks to the first. This configuration provides no less than thirty days of habitation for the eight-person crew. It also allows the airlock inner chamber to be used for EVAs to both the exterior surface and the Common Habitat interior, which may have lost pressure during the event that triggered the need for a safe haven. These EVAs enable the crew to work to repair the habitat and restore habitation capability.

Base camp↗

A Multi-Gravity Docking and Utilities Transfer System for a Common Habitat Architecture

The Common Habitat architecture, a study architecture based on a large habitat derived from the SLS Core Stage Liquid Oxygen tank and designed to operate in microgravity, lunar surface, and Mars surface environments, requires a pressurized docking and berthing system that also works in all three domains. Prior flown docking systems have only been designed for microgravity, but a prototype suit port-derived docking system was developed under the Constellation program for the lunar surface. This system employed an active-active mating adapter approach consisting of a simplistic passive docking system on all spacecraft and a pressurized mating adapter with active systems on each end to form the docking connection. Derived from this approach, the Common Habitat architecture will use a multi-gravity active-active mating adapter (MGAAMA) to perform this function on the Moon, Mars, and in microgravity, connecting the various pressurized elements needed for surface base camps or deep space habitation. Design aspects and open trades of the MGAAMA system will be described. In addition to forming a structural connection and enabling the transfer of crew and equipment, the MGAAMA must also transfer utilities in the form of gases, fluids, power, and data. The MGAAMA is also designed with a degree of articulation in order to accommodate significant angular misalignment. Due to the environmental conditions the MGAAMA will experience, dust and thermal protection systems are discussed. Because the MGAAMA involves docking to spacecraft with different docking systems of different sizes, the MGAAMA is a family of docking systems with interfaces compatible with current and legacy spacecraft docking systems.

Docking↗

Configuration and Projected Capabilities of the Common Habitat Medical Care Facility

The Common Habitat is a large, long-duration habitat being explored as part of a conceptual study (not an active NASA program) that uses an SLS core stage Liquid Oxygen (LOX) tank as its primary structure. It is intended for use on the Moon as part of a permanently occupied outpost, on Mars as part of an outpost that will be occupied for hundreds of days at a time, and in deep space as part of the Deep Space Exploration Vehicle where it will support crewed missions up to 1200 days in duration. A study of internal orientation and crew size resulted in a Common Habitat configuration sized for a crew of eight with a three-deck horizontal orientation. Additional work outside the scope of this paper is developing a vertical translation system, a crew mobility aids system based on wearable gecko-derived grippers, and a crew seating/restraint system. These systems are all assumed for use in conjunction with the Medical Care Facility, which is needed to maintain crew well-being during these missions, where distance from Earth precludes the possibility of evacuation to Earth. This paper describes recent improvements in the Common Habitat Medical Care Facility and associated benefits for crew survivability in long duration missions beyond Earth orbit. These improvements were made with the assistance of a NASA Pathways intern whose experience includes a tour of duty in Afghanistan as an Army combat medic with the 691st GHOST-T, attached to the 1st and 7th US Special Forces Groups as part of Operation Freedom’s Sentinel, where he helped provide far-forward surgical capabilities in austere combat environments. The initial baseline Medical Care Facility was developed working in conjunction with University of Houston Space Architecture graduate students. The facility was placed on the upper deck of the Common Habitat in a location that provided privacy, operational volume, and was close to the vertical translation pathway. The notional outfitting repurposed component CAD models from unrelated studies and notionally indicated a level of care roughly equivalent to that aboard the International Space Station. The CAD modeling provided notional stowage volumes, a deployable surface, some fixed equipment, an ultrasound, and a potentially reconfigurable treatment table. While this facility is clearly a competent arrangement, it was desired to leverage available expertise and upgrade the station given the vast distances from Earth to be experienced by the Common Habitat. Key driving requirements applied to the upgrade included to provide Medical Level of Care V, offer enhanced telemedicine capabilities, provide patient physical accommodation, provide caregiver access to the patient from all sides, include sliding pocket doors for access to hygiene and to the Vertical Translation System, and to add any additional capability possible for the best achievable medical care. The first step in the facility upgrade was to quantify the current medical inventory on the International Space Station and ensure that sufficient stowage volume was present for this purpose. To that end, the ISS medical kits were reviewed, and eight full size mid deck lockers were placed in the facility. A number of additional devices were also added, based on the intern’s combat medic experience. Also, two fixed shelves and one horizontal work surface were added to the Medical Care Facility, with the shelves providing storage space for the additional devices and the work surface providing a location for the caregiver to work or stage equipment. Four display monitors were added to the wall above the horizontal work surface, supporting data display, telemedicine, conferencing, or other needs. The existing treatment table was replaced with a mobile surgical stretcher-chair. Two additional doors were added to the Medical Care Facility. One leads directly to the hygiene compartment, allowing it to support medical operations in addition to providing galley/wardroom support. The other door leads directly into the Vertical Translation System. The wall adjacent to the subsystems bay was moved, adding additional volume to the Medical Care Facility. This improved caregiver access to the patient and allowed for a larger number of caregivers to be present. It also provided options for relocation of support equipment relative to the patient as needed. In the upgraded Medical Care Facility, the Surgical Stretcher-Chair and the Vertical Translation System can work together to provide incapacitated crew member transport from a site of injury on any deck of the Common Habitat to the Medical Care Facility. It can also support patient treatment in a variety of positions including a variety of sitting postures and a supine posture at a variety of pitch angles. The facility can also support caregiver office work for review of examination results, private consultation, inventory and maintenance, and a variety of other purposes. A forward activity will be to conduct evaluations of the Medical Care Facility with different medical scenarios. Additionally, ambient and task lighting selections remain as forward work. The eight mid deck lockers can be augmented to use as portable equipment carts, similar to a manner in which maintenance facility stowage was used as portable carts during the NASA Desert Research and Technology Studies in the Constellation Program. Trash accommodation will also need forward work to assess, including provision for wet trash, dry trash, and biological waste. It will be important to assess a redesign of the surgical stretcher-chair. The commercial version used in the upgrade can only enable vertical translation in the seated configuration, requiring the patient to bend both hips and knees. A possible redesign of the chair will allow for vertical translation without requiring any bending at the hip or knees. Also, the commercial version is wheeled, making it mobile in gravity but unanchored in microgravity. Work will be needed to adapt the chair for gravity-independent performance. The hygiene compartment can be redesigned for dual-use medical scrub and galley handwash facility. Pending sufficient volume, it may also be possible to place sanitation equipment in this location to clean medical tools. Finally, most space architectures have never allowed for more than one incapacitated crew member, but several scenarios could potentially injure two or more crew in the same incident. This facility could be assessed to determine its present ability to address two or more injured crew in parallel and determine the potential upper limit for number of treatable crew in a multi-crew injury scenario, or to treat polytrauma of a single patient.

Habitat↗

NASA's Ground Test Unit (GTU) Lunar Terrain Vehicle (LTV) Conceptual Hand Controllers Studies

Over that past year, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) has been preparing and developing a set of standardized testing protocols for the commercial LTV vendor selection. Two studies have been conducted on two possible hand controller concepts specifically designed for the operation of NASA’s Ground Test Unit (GTU) Lunar Terrain Vehicle (LTV) that can be applied to the heretofore unknown designs developed by future LTV vendors. The objective for the two studies were to determine which hand controller enable acceptable operation of the LTV in a simulated lunar traverse. In the first evaluation a total of nine subjects in shirtsleeves with ungloved hands performed two simulated lunar driving courses in an engineering simulator with each hand controller. Controller concept one was the T-handle fashioned after the Apollo Lunar Roving Vehicle’s (LRV) T-Handle controller. The rational for using this design is it’s a proven design while in a pressurized suit. However, the LTV does have a driving mode the LRV did not consider. The mode of crabbing or strafing the vehicle at different angles; thus, the idea of a dual T-Handle controllers to accommodate this function without using a switch or display was introduced. The second concept controller is a new innovative controller call the Tri-Rotor [NASA patent review MSC-27385-1]. Inspired by Formula One race steering, the Tri-Rotor was designed to take advantage of the restricted movement and dexterity of a pressurized space suit. During testing, all subjects were able to successfully navigate through two test courses of varying lengths and complexity. Results indicated the dual Thandle had minimal recommendations for improvement while the Tri-Rotor had more extensive ones. It must be noted, the Tri-Rotor is a first-generation prototype and has some known mechanical concerns; thus, recommendations from this study will be incorporated into the second generation.

Human Factors↗

A Crew and Logistics Lander for the Common Habitat Architecture

The Common Habitat Architecture is a conceptual study that explores the use of a large habitat derived from the Space Launch System (SLS) liquid oxygen tank as a core habitation element that can be used for crew missions or training in 0g, 1/6g, 3/8g, and 1g. This is not part of current NASA Artemis mission planning, but instead represents an architecture that could potentially follow after the Artemis missions and initial human Mars landings. This architecture leverages Starship-derived vehicles for crew landing on and ascent from the Moon and Mars in support of long-duration surface missions with pressurized crew transfer baselined as a nominal capability. This is not the Human Landing System variant of Starship but represents a number of modifications to enable long-duration surface missions with an eight-person crew size. A rapid brainstorming study was conducted in February of 2021, using only public data, to identify options to deliver the 90-ton Common Habitat to the surface and emplace it at the intended habitation site. This study compared three lunar lander concepts and three Mars lander concepts before ultimately selecting the SpaceX Starship as the most viable lander. The Common Habitat Architecture assumes that this Starship variant can further be modified for crew and cargo delivery, assuming that the use of a common system will lead to cost benefits. It is assumed that the Starship will expend too much propellant in landing crew and logistics to be able to launch, given the assumed absence of surface propellant production. Consequently, a separable ascent stage is used for crew ascent. The pressurized elements of this modified Starship are discussed: Starship Ascent Module, Airlock, Transfer Tunnel, Pressurized Crew Transfer Module, and Logistics Modules. For each element, a description, dimensions, rough mass estimates, core capabilities, and design features are presented. Key mechanisms and internal structures of the starship are also discussed. This will include flame diverters for the ascend module, the orbital docking hatch, Pressurized Crew Transfer Module Garage door, Starship Ascent Module fairing, flame diverter blow-out panels, Pressurized Crew Transfer Module lift system, logistics module lift system, contingency crew ascent via the logistics module lift system, internal catwalks, and structural interfaces. Concept of Operations will be discussed for both Moon and Mars. This will include in-space crew rendezvous and transfer, crewed landing, shirtsleeve crew transfer, crew departure, contingency surface operations, and final element disposition. Key differences for Mars will be discussed, such as the Martian atmosphere, dust storms, the absence of crew handover, and Deep Space Exploration Vehicle rendezvous. Contingency microgravity maintenance access will also be discussed. This work will demonstrate viable pressurized crew transfer with a Starship-based lander architecture. Forward work includes Garage lighting and camera systems, Starship Ascent Module propulsion system and docking port trades, contingency habitation trades, and mass/power equipment estimation. Finally, forward work includes developing a heavy cargo return system derived from the Crew and Logistics Starship. The goal of this system is the return of at least 10,000 kg payloads from the surfaces of the Moon and Mars.

Lunar Lander↗