Engineering Papers⌕ Search

Engineering topics

Rucker, Michelle A.

Publications and source records attributed to Rucker, Michelle A..

At least 19 records
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2020

Strategic Implications of Phobos as a Staging Point for Mars Surface Missions

As human exploration endeavors begin to set sights beyond low Earth orbit to the surface of the Moon, exploration of the surface of Mars continues to serve as the “horizon destination” to help focus development and research efforts. One Mars exploration strategy often discussed is the notion of utilizing the moons of Mars, namely Phobos, as an exploration destination prior to Mars surface missions. The premise behind this is that staging missions from Mars’ moons as well as exploring the moons themselves would be less costly and risky. However, understanding potential advantages of Phobos staging and exploration must be done in the context of the overall end-to-end Mars surface exploration needs, goals, objectives, campaign approach, and systems required. This paper examines the strategic implications of utilizing the moons of Mars as a potential location for exploration of Mars. Operational concepts utilizing both Phobos and Mars orbital strategies will be examined to understand the architectural impacts of this staging strategy. The strategic implications of each operational concept are assessed to determine the overall key challenges and strategic links to other exploration destinations. Results from this analysis indicate that, if the objective is to conduct Mars surface missions, utilizing Phobos as an exploration destination adds little benefit toward the goal of exploration of Mars.

Drake, Bret G.↗
NASA NTRS2018

Advantages of a Modular Mars Surface Habitat Approach

Early crewed Mars mission concepts developed by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) assumed a single, large habitat would house six crew members for a 500-day Mars surface stay. At the end of the first mission, all surface equipment-including the habitat-would be abandoned and the process would be repeated at a different Martian landing site. This work was documented in a series of NASA publications culminating with the Mars Design Reference Architecture 5.0. More recent work, dubbed the Evolvable Mars Campaign (EMC), explored whether re-using surface equipment at a single landing site could be more affordable than the Apollo-style explore-abandon-repeat mission cadence. Initial EMC assumptions preserved the single, monolithic habitat-the only difference being a new requirement to reuse the surface habitat for multiple expedition crews. A trade study comparing a single large habitat versus smaller, modular habitats leaned towards the monolithic approach as more mass-efficient. More recent work has focused on the operational aspects of building up Mars surface infrastructure over multiple missions, and has identified compelling advantages of a modular approach that should be considered before making a final decision. This paper explores Mars surface mission operational concepts and integrated system analysis, and presents an argument for the modular habitat approach.

Rucker, Michelle A.↗
NASA NTRS2018

Seeking Signs of Life on Mars: A Strategy for Selecting and Analyzing Returned Samples from Hydrothermal Deposits

Highly promising locales for biosignature prospecting on Mars are ancient hydrothermal deposits, formed by the interaction of surface water with heat from volcanism or impacts. On Earth, they occur throughout the geological record (to at least approx. 3.5 Ga), preserving robust mineralogical, textural and compositional evidence of thermophilic microbial activity. Hydrothermal systems were likely present early in Mars' history, including at two of the three finalist candidate landing sites for M2020, Columbia Hills and NE Syrtis Major. Hydrothermal environments on Earth's surface are varied, constituting subaerial hot spring aprons, mounds and fumaroles; shallow to deep-sea hydrothermal vents (black and white smokers); and vent mounds and hot-spring discharges in lacustrine and fluvial settings. Biological information can be preserved by rapid, spring-sourced mineral precipitation, but also could be altered or destroyed by postdepositional events. Thus, field observations need to be followed by detailed laboratory analysis to verify potential biosignatures. See Attachment

Campbell, K. A.↗
NASA NTRS2018

EVA Swab Tool to Support Planetary Protection and Astrobiology Evaluations

When we send humans to search for life on other planets, we'll need to know what we brought with us versus what may already be there. To ensure our crewed systems meet planetary protection requirements-and to protect our science from human contamination-we'll need to assess whether microorganisms may be leaking or venting from our spacecraft. Microbial sample collection outside of a pressurized spacecraft is complicated by temperature extremes, low pressures that preclude the use of laboratory standard (wetted) swabs, and operation either in bulky spacesuits or with robotic assistance. A team at the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) recently developed a swab kit for use in collecting microbial samples from the external surfaces of crewed spacecraft, including spacesuits. The Extravehicular Activity (EVA) Swab Kit consists of a single swab tool handle and an eight-canister sample caddy. The design team minimized development cost by re-purposing a heritage Space Shuttle tile repair handle that was designed to quickly snap into different tool attachments by engaging a mating device in each end effector. This allowed the tool handle to snap onto a fresh swab end effector much like popular shaving razor handles can snap onto a disposable blade cartridge. To disengage the handle from a swab, the user performs two independent functions, which can be done with a single hand. This dual operation mitigates the risk that a swab will be inadvertently released and lost in microgravity. Each swab end effector is fitted with commercially available foam swab tips, vendor-certified to be sterile for Deoxyribonucleic Acid (DNA). A microbial filter installed in the bottom of each sample container allows the container to outgas and re-pressurize without introducing microbial contaminants to internal void spaces. Extensive ground testing, post-test handling, and sample analysis confirmed the design is able to maintain sterile conditions as the canister moves between various pressure environments. To further minimize cost, the design team acquired extensive ground test experience in a relevant flight environment by piggy-backing onto suited crew training runs. These training runs allowed the project to validate tool interfaces with pressurized EVA gloves and collect user feedback on the tool design and function, as well as characterize baseline microbial data for different types of spacesuits. In general, test subjects found the EVA Swab Kit relatively straightforward to operate, but identified a number of design improvements that will be incorporated into the final design. Although originally intended to help characterize human forward contaminants, this tool has other potential applications, such as for collecting and preserving space-exposed materials to support astrobiology experiments.

Rucker, Michelle A.↗
NASA NTRS2018

Advantages of a Modular Mars Surface Habitat Approach

Early crewed Mars mission concepts developed by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) assumed a single, large habitat would house six crew members for a 500-day Mars surface stay. At the end of the first mission, all surface equipment, including the habitat, -would be abandoned and the process would be repeated at a different Martian landing site. This work was documented in a series of NASA publications culminating with the Mars Design Reference Mission 5.0 (NASA-SP-2009-566). The Evolvable Mars Campaign (EMC) explored whether re-using surface equipment at a single landing site could be more affordable than the Apollo-style explore-abandon-repeat mission cadence. Initial EMC assumptions preserved the single, monolithic habitat, the only difference being a new requirement to reuse the surface habitat for multiple expedition crews. A trade study comparing a single large habitat versus smaller, modular habitats leaned towards the monolithic approach as more mass-efficient. More recent work has focused on the operational aspects of building up Mars surface infrastructure over multiple missions, and has identified compelling advantages of the modular approach that should be considered before making a final decision. This paper explores Mars surface mission operational concepts and integrated system analysis, and presents an argument for the modular habitat approach.

Rucker, Michelle A.↗
NASA NTRS2018

EVA Swab Tool to Support Planetary Protection and Astrobiology Evaluations

When we send humans to search for life on other planets, we'll need to know what we brought with us versus what may already be there. To ensure our crewed systems meet planetary protection requirements-and to protect our science from human contamination-we'll need to assess whether microorganisms may be leaking or venting from our spacecraft. Microbial sample collection outside of a pressurized spacecraft is complicated by temperature extremes, low pressures that preclude the use of laboratory standard (wetted) swabs, and operation either in bulky spacesuits or with robotic assistance. Engineers at the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) recently developed a swab kit for use in collecting microbial samples from the external surfaces of crewed spacecraft, including spacesuits. The Extravehicular Activity (EVA) Swab Kit consists of a single swab tool handle and an eight-canister sample caddy. The design team minimized development cost by re-purposing a heritage Space Shuttle tile repair handle that was designed to quickly snap into different tool attachments by engaging a mating device in each attachment. This allowed the tool handle to snap onto a fresh swab attachment much like popular shaving razor handles can snap onto a disposable blade cartridge. To disengage the handle from a swab, the user performs two independent functions, which can be done with a single hand. This dual operation mitigates the risk that a swab will be inadvertently released and lost in microgravity. Each swab attachment is fitted with commercially available foam swab tips, vendor-certified to be sterile for Deoxyribonucleic Acid (DNA). A microbial filter installed in the bottom of each sample container allows the container to outgas and repressurize without introducing microbial contaminants to internal void spaces. Extensive ground testing, post-test handling, and sample analysis confirmed the design is able to maintain sterile conditions as the canister moves between various pressure environments. To further minimize cost, the design team acquired extensive ground test experience in a relevant flight environment by piggy-backing onto suited crew training runs. These training runs allowed the project to validate tool interfaces with pressurized EVA gloves and collect user feedback on the tool design and function, as well as characterize baseline microbial data for different types of spacesuits. In general, test subjects found the EVA Swab Kit relatively straightforward to operate, but identified a number of design improvements that will be incorporated into the final design. Although originally intended to help characterize human forward contaminants, this tool has other potential applications, such as for collecting and preserving space-exposed materials to support astrobiology experiments.

Rucker, Michelle A.↗
NASA NTRS2018

Human Mars Surface Mission Nuclear Power Considerations

A key decision facing Mars mission designers is how to power a crewed surface field station. Unlike the solar-powered Mars Exploration Rovers (MER) that could retreat to a very low power state during a Martian dust storm, human Mars surface missions are estimated to need at least 15 kilowatts of electrical (kWe) power simply to maintain critical life support and spacecraft functions. 'Hotel' loads alone for a pressurized crew rover approach two kWe; driving requires another five kWe-well beyond what the Curiosity rover’s Radioisotope Power System (RPS) was designed to deliver. Full operation of a four-crew Mars field station is estimated at about 40 kWe. Clearly, a crewed Mars field station will require a substantial and reliable power source, beyond the scale of robotic mission experience. This paper explores the applications for both fission and RPS nuclear options for Mars.

Rucker, Michelle A.↗
NASA NTRS2017

Center Innovation Fund: JSC CIF Characterize Human Forward Contamination

Let's face it: wherever we go, we will inevitably carry along the little critters that live in and on us. Conventional wisdom has long held that it's unlikely those critters could survive the space environment, but in 2007 microscopic animals called Tardigrades survived exposure to space and in 2008 Cyanobacteria lived for 548 days outside the International Space Station (ISS). But what about the organisms we might reasonably expect a crewed spacecraft to leak or vent? Do we even know what they are? How long might our tiny hitch-hikers survive in close proximity to a warm spacecraft that periodically leaks/vents water or oxygen-and how might they mutate with long-duration exposure? Unlike the Mars rovers that we cleaned once and sent on their way, crew members will provide a constantly regenerating contaminant source. Are we prepared to certify that we can meet forward contamination protocols as we search for life at new destinations?

planetary protection↗
NASA NTRS2016

Large Payload Ground Transportation and Test Considerations

During test and verification planning for the Altair lunar lander project, a National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) study team identified several ground transportation and test issues related to the large payload diameter. Although the entire Constellation Program-including Altair-has since been canceled, issues identified by the Altair project serve as important lessons learned for payloads greater than 7 m diameter being considered for NASA's new Space Launch System (SLS). A transportation feasibility study found that Altair's 8.97 m diameter Descent Module would not fit inside available aircraft. Although the Ascent Module cabin was only 2.35 m diameter, the long reaction control system booms extended nearly to the Descent Module diameter, making it equally unsuitable for air transportation without removing the booms and invalidating assembly workmanship screens or acceptance testing that had already been performed. Ground transportation of very large payloads over extended distances is not generally permitted by most states, so overland transportation alone would not be an option. Limited ground transportation to the nearest waterway may be possible, but water transportation could take as long as 66 days per production unit, depending on point of origin and acceptance test facility; transportation from the western United States would require transit through the Panama Canal to access the Kennedy Space Center launch site. Large payloads also pose acceptance test and ground processing challenges. Although propulsion, mechanical vibration, and reverberant acoustic test facilities at NASA's Plum Brook Station have been designed to accommodate large spacecraft, special handling and test work-arounds may be necessary, which could increase cost, schedule, and technical risk. Once at the launch site, there are no facilities currently capable of accommodating the combination of large payload size and hazardous processing such as hypergolic fuels, pyrotechnic devices, and high pressure gasses. Ironically, the limiting factor to a national heavy lift strategy may not be the rocket technology needed to throw a heavy payload, but rather the terrestrial infrastructure-roads, bridges, airframes, and buildings-necessary to transport, acceptance test, and process large spacecraft. Failure to carefully consider where and how large spacecraft are manufactured, tested, and launched could result in unforeseen cost to modify existing (or develop new) infrastructure, or incur additional risk due to increased handling operations or eliminating key verifications.

Rucker, Michelle A.↗
NASA NTRS2016

Solar vs. Fission Surface Power for Mars

A multi-discipline team of experts from the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) developed Mars surface power system point design solutions for two conceptual missions. The primary goal of this study was to compare the relative merits of solar- versus fission-powered versions of each surface mission. First, the team compared three different solar power options against a fission power system concept for a sub-scale, uncrewed demonstration mission. The 4.5 meter (m) diameter pathfinder lander's primary mission would be to demonstrate Mars entry, descent, and landing techniques. Once on the Martian surface, the lander's In Situ Resource Utilization (ISRU) payload would demonstrate liquid oxygen propellant production using atmospheric resources. For the purpose of this exercise, location was assumed to be at the Martian equator. The three solar concepts considered included a system that only operated during daylight hours (at roughly half the daily propellant production rate of a round-the-clock fission design), a battery-augmented system that operated through the night (matching the fission concept's propellant production rate), and a system that operated only during daylight, but at a higher rate (again, matching the fission concept's propellant production rate). Including 30% mass growth allowance, total payload masses for the three solar concepts ranged from 1,116 to 2,396 kg, versus the 2,686 kg fission power scheme. However, solar power masses are expected to approach or exceed the fission payload mass at landing sites further from the equator, making landing site selection a key driver in the final power system decision. The team also noted that detailed reliability analysis should be performed on daytime-only solar power schemes to assess potential issues with frequent ISRU system on/off cycling. Next, the team developed a solar-powered point design solution for a conceptual four-crew, 500-day surface mission consisting of up to four landers per crewed expedition mission. Unlike the demonstration mission, a lengthy power outage due to the global dust storms that are known to occur on Mars would pose a safety hazard to a crewed mission. A similar fission versus solar power trade study performed by NASA in 2007 concluded that fission power was more reliable-with a much lower mass penalty-than solar power for this application. However, recent advances in solar cell and energy storage technologies and changes in operational assumptions prompted NASA to revisit the analysis. For the purpose of this exercise a particular landing site at Jezero Crater, located at 18o north latitude, was assumed. A fission power system consisting of four each 10 kW Kilopower fission reactors was compared to a distributed network of Orion-derived Ultraflex solar arrays and Lithium ion batteries mounted on every lander. The team found that a solar power system mass of about 9,800 kg would provide the 22 kilowatts (kW) keep-alive power needed to survive a dust storm lasting up to 120-days at average optical depth of 5, and 35 kW peak power for normal operations under clear skies. Although this is less than half the mass estimated during the 2007 work (which assumed latitudes up to 30o) it is still more than the 7,000 kg mass of the fission system which provides full power regardless of dust storm conditions.

Rucker, Michelle A.↗
NASA NTRS2016

Large Payload Ground Transportation and Test Considerations

Many spacecraft concepts under consideration by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration’s (NASA’s) Evolvable Mars Campaign take advantage of a Space Launch System payload shroud that may be 8 to 10 meters in diameter. Large payloads can theoretically save cost by reducing the number of launches needed--but only if it is possible to build, test, and transport a large payload to the launch site in the first place. Analysis performed previously for the Altair project identified several transportation and test issues with an 8.973 meters diameter payload. Although the entire Constellation Program—including Altair—has since been canceled, these issues serve as important lessons learned for spacecraft designers and program managers considering large payloads for future programs. A transportation feasibility study found that, even broken up into an Ascent and Descent Module, the Altair spacecraft would not fit inside available aircraft. Ground transportation of such large payloads over extended distances is not generally permitted, so overland transportation alone would not be an option. Limited ground transportation to the nearest waterway may be possible, but water transportation could take as long as 67 days per production unit, depending on point of origin and acceptance test facility; transportation from the western United States would require transit through the Panama Canal to access the Kennedy Space Center launch site. Large payloads also pose acceptance test and ground processing challenges. Although propulsion, mechanical vibration, and reverberant acoustic test facilities at NASA’s Plum Brook Station have been designed to accommodate large spacecraft, special handling and test work-arounds may be necessary, which could increase cost, schedule, and technical risk. Once at the launch site, there are no facilities currently capable of accommodating the combination of large payload size and hazardous processing such as hypergolic fuels, pyrotechnic devices, and high pressure gasses. Ironically, the limiting factor to a national heavy lift strategy may not be the rocket technology needed to throw a heavy payload, but rather the terrestrial infrastructure—roads, bridges, airframes, and buildings—necessary to transport, acceptance test, and process large spacecraft. Failure to carefully consider where and how large spacecraft are manufactured, tested, and launched could result in unforeseen cost to modify existing (or develop new) infrastructure, or incur additional risk due to increased handling operations or eliminating key verifications. Although this paper focuses on the canceled Altair spacecraft as a case study, the issues identified here have wide applicability to other large payloads, including concepts under consideration for NASA’s Evolvable Mars Campaign.

Rucker, Michelle A.↗
NASA NTRS2016

Solar Versus Fission Surface Power for Mars

A multi-discipline team of experts from the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) developed Mars surface power system point design solutions for two conceptual missions to Mars using In-situ resource utilization (ISRU). The primary goal of this study was to compare the relative merits of solar- versus fission-powered versions of each surface mission. First, the team compared three different solar-power options against a fission power system concept for a sub-scale, uncrewed demonstration mission. This “pathfinder” design utilized a 4.5 meter diameter lander. Its primary mission would be to demonstrate Mars entry, descent, and landing techniques. Once on the Martian surface, the lander’s ISRU payload would demonstrate liquid oxygen propellant production from atmospheric resources. For the purpose of this exercise, location was assumed to be at the Martian equator. The three solar concepts considered included a system that only operated during daylight hours (at roughly half the daily propellant production rate of a round-the-clock fission design), a battery-augmented system that operated through the night (matching the fission concept’s propellant production rate), and a system that operated only during daylight, but at a higher rate (again, matching the fission concept’s propellant production rate). Including 30% mass growth allowance, total payload masses for the three solar concepts ranged from 1,128 to 2,425 kg, versus the 2,751 kg fission power scheme. However, solar power masses increase as landing sites are selected further from the equator, making landing site selection a key driver in the final power system decision. The team also noted that detailed reliability analysis should be performed on daytime-only solar power schemes to assess potential issues with frequent ISRU system on/off cycling.

Rucker, Michelle A.↗
NASA NTRS2016

Mars Surface Tunnel Element Concept

How crews get into or out of their ascent vehicle has profound implications for Mars surface architecture. Extravehicular Activity (EVA) hatches and Airlocks have the benefit of relatively low mass and high Technology Readiness Level (TRL), but waste consumables with a volume depressurization for every ingress/egress. Perhaps the biggest drawback to EVA hatches or Airlocks is that they make it difficult to keep Martian dust from being tracked back into the ascent vehicle, in violation of planetary protection protocols. Suit ports offer the promise of dust mitigation by keeping dusty suits outside the cabin, but require significant cabin real estate, are relatively high mass, and current operational concepts still require an EVA hatch to get the suits outside for the first EVA, and back inside after the final EVA. This is primarily because current designs don't provide enough structural support to protect the suits from ascent/descent loads or potential thruster plume impingement. For architectures involving more than one surface element-such as an ascent vehicle and a rover or surface habitat-a retractable tunnel is an attractive option. By pushing spacesuit don/doff and EVA operations to an element that remains on the surface, ascended vehicle mass and dust can be minimized. What's more, retractable tunnels provide operational flexibility by allowing surface assets to be re-configured or built up over time. Retractable tunnel functional requirements and design concepts being developed as part of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration's (NASA) Evolvable Mars Campaign (EMC) work will add a new ingress/egress option to the surface architecture trade space.

Rucker, Michelle A.↗
NASA NTRS2016

EVA-Compatible Microbial Swab Tool

When we send humans to search for life on Mars, we'll need to know what we brought with us versus what may already be there. To ensure our crewed spacecraft meet planetary protection requirements—and to protect our science from human contamination—we'll need to know whether micro-organisms are leaking/venting from our ships and spacesuits. This is easily done by swabbing external vents and suit surfaces for analysis, but requires a specialized tool for the job. Engineers at the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) recently developed an Extravehicular Activity (EVA)-compatible swab tool that can be used to sample current space suits and life support systems. Data collected now will influence Mars life support and EVA hardware early in the planning process, before design changes become difficult and expensive.NASA’s EVA swab tool pairs a Space Shuttle-era tool handle with a commercially available swab tip mounted into a custom-designed end effector. A glove-compatible release mechanism allows the handle to quickly switch between swab tips, much like a shaving razor handle can snap onto a disposable blade cartridge. Swab tips are stowed inside individual sterile containers, each fitted with a microbial filter that allows the container to equalize atmospheric pressure, but prevents cabin contaminants from rushing into the container when passing from the EVA environment into a pressurized cabin. A bank of containers arrayed inside a tool caddy allows up to six individual samples to be collected during a given spacewalk.NASA plans to use the tool in 2016 to collect samples from various spacesuits during ground testing to determine what (if any) human-borne microbial contamination leaks from the suit under simulated thermal vacuum conditions. Next, the tool will be used on board the International Space Station to assess the types of microbial contaminants found on external environmental control and life support system vents. Data will support advanced EVA and life support system maturation studies, helping to answer questions such as “how close can an EVA-suited crew member approach an area of scientific interest without compromising the science?”

Rucker, Michelle A.↗
NASA NTRS2016

Mars Surface Tunnel Element Concept

How Mars surface crews get into their ascent vehicle has profound implications for Mars surface architecture. To meet planetary protection protocols, the architecture has get Intravehicular Activity (IVA)-suited crew into a Mars Ascent Vehicle (MAV) without having to step outside into the Mars environment. Pushing EVA suit don/doff and EVA operations to an element that remains on the surface also helps to minimize MAV cabin volume, which in turn can reduce MAV cabin mass. Because the MAV will require at least seven kilograms of propellant to ascend each kilogram of cabin mass, minimal MAV mass is desired. For architectures involving more than one surface element-such as an ascent vehicle and a pressurized rover or surface habitat-a retractable tunnel is an attractive solution. Beyond addressing the immediate MAV access issue, a reusable tunnel may be useful for other surface applications once its primary mission is complete. A National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) team is studying the optimal balance between surface tunnel functionality, mass, and stowed volume as part of the Evolvable Mars Campaign (EMC). The "Minimum Functional Tunnel" is a conceptual design that performs a single function. Having established this baseline configuration, the next step is to trade design options, evaluate other applications, and explore alternative solutions.

Rucker, Michelle A.↗