Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “Crew Accommodations”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 199 records · Page 11
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

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↗
NASA NTRS2018

Miniature Exercise Device-2 (MED-2): Preliminary ISS Evaluation Results for a Compact Motorized Resistive and Aerobic Rowing Exercise Device

Future human missions beyond Low Earth Orbit (LEO) will require onboard equipment to provide exercise capabilities for the crew to counter the adverse physiological effects of long-duration microgravity. To accomplish this within the physical constraints of a space vehicle or transit module, a single miniature device that provides both resistive and aerobic exercise modalities is required. To meet this need, Johnson Space Center’s (JSC) Software, Robotics, and Simulation Division (ER) developed the Miniature Exercise Device-2 (MED-2). MED-2 integrates a torque-controlled servomotor and a series-elastic actuator to provide highly-controllable load profiles and a large magnitude output performance in a very small package. This innovative technology is derived from years of JSC/ER design, development and operational experience with cutting-edge robotics, motor controllers, software and actuator/sensor miniaturization, including Robonaut 2 and MED-1. MED-2 was presented at the 2016 ISS R&D Conference. This is an update now that the last of six crewmembers will have completed planned MED-2 sessions on the International Space Station (ISS) in May 2018.Current state-of-the-art ISS exercise equipment consists of two treadmills, a resistive exercise device and two cycle ergometers with a total mass of several thousand pounds and a total volume of several cubic yards. This equipment has proven vital to mitigate the musculoskeletal and cardiovascular degradation effects of microgravity. However, due to the large operational volume and mass of these ISS devices, tailoring them for smaller vehicles, such as Orion, is not possible. In addition, each of the current ISS devices targets a single specific modality. Compared to the existing spaceflight (and even terrestrial) exercise equipment, MED-2 is a new archetype altogether. The combined features of compact size, multi-modality and high-performance is attributable to its innovative series elastic actuator and motor controller. Following its arrival on ISS in 2016, MED-2 was evaluated in two parts. The first and shorter evaluation was an engineering functional checkout of the hardware. As this was a novel exercise device previously never used on ISS, the initial checkout assessed the operation of the hardware and ensured the motion and dynamic range of the crew did not present any collision or other hazards. The second portion of the study collected the heart rates, kinematics and utilized operational volumes of six astronauts to determine the quality of both the resistive and aerobic exercise modalities as delivered by MED-2. Investigators from JSC Biomedical Research and Environmental Science Division (SK) and Glenn Research Center are currently evaluating the data and preparing preliminary results. For the resistive exercise modality, MED-2 demonstrated a range of constant resistive loads from 10-150 lbf. With a displacement range of 84 inches, the MED-2 accommodates users from 5th percentile Japanese female through 95th percentile American male for all of its certified exercises. The displacement measurement accuracy has also been verified within 2.5 percent full range. The crew was able to successfully perform all prescribed resistive exercises, except Goblet Squats which were not feasible with a constant load profile. For the aerobic exercise modality, MED-2 simulated a rowing motion with prescribed and user-selected resistance levels. It has demonstrated rates up to 60 strokes per minute on the ground. MED-2 loads and displacements performance are the same as those cited for the resistive modality. Although each of the crew was able to perform the prescribed aerobic rowing sets, there was considerable variability in the rowing motion among different crewmembers. Also, as expected, the crew was unable to get the full benefits of a typical terrestrial rowing stroke because the current configuration does not allow the user to reach past their feet. These observations have already informed the requirements for other microgravity rowing devices currently in development. One of the unique features of the MED-2 device is the intuitive touch-screen control system. This One Portal graphical user interface (GUI) was developed based on JSC/ER’s heritage knowledge and experience of developing and sustaining the current ISS exercise equipment. Through this interface, the crew easily performed prepared prescriptions as well as had the ability to adjust exercise modality, load and other exercise details such as number of repetitions and number of sets. This touch-screen and GUI fulfilled the MED-2 project goal to simplify the interaction between the user and the device. Furthermore, the extent to which MED-2 utilizes a touchscreen and GUI to control exercise equipment is unmatched among the existing ISS exercise devices. As a motorized device, MED-2 technology can provide a customizable force profile that can be varied as a function of strap displacement, strap velocity or a combination of these and other variables. During 2017, JSC/ER developed and flight-certified a resistive exercise algorithm that mimics the 1-G inertial effects of free-weights and enables adjustable eccentric-to-concentric loading ratios. Subsequent development will explore varying the load profiles and incorporating additional exercises beyond the current list of certified movements.

Exercise↗
NASA NTRS2012

NASA's Space Launch System: A Flagship for Exploration Beyond Earth's Orbit

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration s (NASA) Space Launch System (SLS) Program, managed at the Marshall Space Flight Center, is making progress toward delivering a new capability for exploration beyond Earth orbit in an austere economic climate. This fact drives the SLS team to find innovative solutions to the challenges of designing, developing, fielding, and operating the largest rocket in history. To arrive at the current SLS plan, government and industry experts carefully analyzed hundreds of architecture options and arrived at the one clear solution to stringent requirements for safety, affordability, and sustainability over the decades that the rocket will be in operation. This paper will explore ways to fit this major development within the funding guidelines by using existing engine assets and hardware now in testing to meet a first launch by 2017. It will explain the SLS Program s long-range plan to keep the budget within bounds, yet evolve the 70 metric ton (t) initial lift capability to 130-t lift capability after the first two flights. To achieve the evolved configuration, advanced technologies must offer appropriate return on investment to be selected through a competitive process. For context, the SLS will be larger than the Saturn V that took 12 men on 6 trips for a total of 11 days on the lunar surface over 4 decades ago. Astronauts train for long-duration voyages on the International Space Station, but have not had transportation to go beyond Earth orbit in modern times, until now. NASA is refining its mission manifest, guided by U.S. Space Policy and the Global Exploration Roadmap. Launching the Orion Multi-Purpose Cargo Vehicle s first autonomous certification flight in 2017, followed by a crewed flight in 2021, the SLS will offer a robust way to transport international crews and the air, water, food, and equipment they need for extended trips to asteroids, Lagrange Points, and Mars. In addition, the SLS will accommodate high-priority science experiments. SLS affordability initiatives include streamlining interfaces, applying risk-based insight into contracted work, centralizing systems engineering and integration, and nurturing a learning culture that continually benchmarks its performance against successful ventures. As this paper will explain, the SLS is making measurable progress toward becoming a global infrastructure asset for robotic and human scouts of all nations by harnessing business and technological innovations to deliver sustainable solutions for space exploration.

May, Todd↗
NASA NTRS2012

NASA's Space Launch System: A Flagship for Exploration Beyond Earth's Orbit

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration's (NASA) Space Launch System (SLS) Program, managed at the Marshall Space Flight Center, is making progress toward delivering a new capability for exploration beyond Earth orbit in an austere economic climate. This fact drives the SLS team to find innovative solutions to the challenges of designing, developing, fielding, and operating the largest rocket in history. To arrive at the current SLS plan, government and industry experts carefully analyzed hundreds of architecture options and arrived at the one clear solution to stringent requirements for safety, affordability, and sustainability over the decades that the rocket will be in operation. This paper will explore ways to fit this major development within the funding guidelines by using existing engine assets and hardware now in testing to meet a first launch by 2017. It will explain the SLS Program s long-range plan to keep the budget within bounds, yet evolve the 70 metric ton (t) initial lift capability to 130-t lift capability after the first two flights. To achieve the evolved configuration, advanced technologies must offer appropriate return on investment to be selected through a competitive process. For context, the SLS will be larger than the Saturn V that took 12 men on 6 trips for a total of 11 days on the lunar surface over 4 decades ago. Astronauts train for long-duration voyages on the International Space Station, but have not had transportation to go beyond Earth orbit in modern times, until now. NASA is refining its mission manifest, guided by U.S. Space Policy and the Global Exploration Roadmap. Launching the Orion Multi-Purpose Crew Vehicle s (MPCV s) first autonomous certification flight in 2017, followed by a crewed flight in 2021, the SLS will offer a robust way to transport international crews and the air, water, food, and equipment they need for extended trips to asteroids, Lagrange Points, and Mars. In addition, the SLS will accommodate high-priority science experiments. SLS affordability initiatives include streamlining interfaces, applying risk-based insight into contracted work, centralizing systems engineering and integration, and nurturing a learning culture that continually benchmarks its performance against successful ventures. As this paper will explain, the SLS is making measurable progress toward becoming a global infrastructure asset for robotic and human scouts of all nations by harnessing business and technological innovations to deliver sustainable solutions for space exploration.

May, Todd A.↗
NASA NTRS2018

Accommodations for Secondary Payloads in NASA's Space Launch System

NASA's new heavy-lift launch vehicle, the Space Launch System (SLS), is moving closer to its planned 2019 launch, with the in-space stage and spacecraft adapters complete and all other major elements of the rocket manufactured and currently being outfitted for flight. Exploration Mission-1 (EM-1), the first flight of SLS and the new Orion crew vehicle, will verify and validate new systems and provide an unparalleled opportunity for 13 6U CubeSat-class payloads to be released into deep space. Payloads are being developed by NASA, industry, international and academic partners and were selected for the EM-1 flight to address strategic knowledge gaps in the agency's plans for human deep space exploration. Destinations range from the lunar surface to an asteroid to an orbit around the Earth-moon L2 libration point. Missions include studying the effects of space radiation on a living organism (yeast), landing the smallest lander to date on the moon, and searching for water in permanently shaded lunar craters. Propulsion technology demonstrations include solar sails, use of inert water to carry out lunar gravity assist maneuvers, and use of new "green" chemical propellants. SLS employs an evolutionary design approach, with an initial capability of at least 26 metric tons (t) to trans-lunar injection (TLI). The later Block 1B configuration, which will become the Agency's workhorse launch vehicle into the 2020s, will lift at least 34 t to TLI in its crew configuration and at least 37 t in the cargo configuration. In addition to greater lift capability, Block 1B will also offer larger payload volume than Block 1 for both co-manifested and secondary payloads. In Block 1B, various combinations of 6U, 12U and 27U payloads may be accommodated in the vehicle's stage adapter. Opportunities for deep space research once out of reach for small science payloads will be within reach, opening many possibilities for exciting new technology demonstrations and scientific missions. This paper will provide an overview of the capabilities and the status of the Block 1 vehicle, with particular emphasis on the secondary payload accommodations and the deployment system. Brief descriptions of the 13 6U EM-1 payloads will be included. In addition, a discussion of the payload developers' responsibilities and the Space Launch System Program's roles and responsibilities in accommodating these and future payloads will be included. Finally, the author will look ahead to SLS Block 1B and missions beyond EM-1 and the opportunities for 6U, 12U and 27U CubeSats.

Robinson, Kimberly F.↗
NASA NTRS2006

Conducting Closed Habitation Experiments: Experience from the Lunar Mars Life Support Test Project

The Lunar-Mars Life Support Test Project (LMLSTP) was conducted from 1995 through 1997 at the National Aeronautics and Space Administration s (NASA) Johnson Space Center (JSC) to demonstrate increasingly longer duration operation of integrated, closed-loop life support systems that employed biological and physicochemical techniques for water recycling, waste processing, air revitalization, thermal control, and food production. An analog environment for long-duration human space travel, the conditions of isolation and confinement also enabled studies of human factors, medical sciences (both physiology and psychology) and crew training. Four tests were conducted, Phases I, II, IIa and III, with durations of 15, 30, 60 and 91 days, respectively. The first phase focused on biological air regeneration, using wheat to generate enough oxygen for one experimental subject. The systems demonstrated in the later phases were increasingly complex and interdependent, and provided life support for four crew members. The tests were conducted using two human-rated, atmospherically-closed test chambers, the Variable Pressure Growth Chamber (VPGC) and the Integrated Life Support Systems Test Facility (ILSSTF). Systems included test articles (the life support hardware under evaluation), human accommodations (living quarters, kitchen, exercise equipment, etc.) and facility systems (emergency matrix system, power, cooling, etc.). The test team was managed by a lead engineer and a test director, and included test article engineers responsible for specific systems, subsystems or test articles, test conductors, facility engineers, chamber operators and engineering technicians, medical and safety officers, and science experimenters. A crew selection committee, comprised of psychologists, engineers and managers involved in the test, evaluated male and female volunteers who applied to be test subjects. Selection was based on the skills mix anticipated for each particular test, and utilized information from psychological and medical testing, data on the knowledge, experience and skills of the applicants, and team building exercises. The design, development, buildup and operation of test hardware and documentation followed the established NASA processes and requirements for test buildup and operation.

Barta, Daniel J.↗
NASA NTRS2004

Conducting Closed Habitation Experiments: Experience from the Lunar Mars Life Support Test Project

The Lunar-Mars Life Support Test Project (LMLSTP) was conducted from 1995 through 1997 at the National Aeronautics and Space Administration s (NASA) Johnson Space Center (JSC) to demonstrate increasingly longer duration operation of integrated, closed-loop life support systems that employed biological and physicochemical techniques for water recycling, waste processing, air revitalization, thermal control, and food production. An analog environment for long-duration human space travel, the conditions of isolation and confinement also enabled studies of human factors, medical sciences (both physiology and psychology) and crew training. Four tests were conducted, Phases I, II, IIa and III, with durations of 15, 30,60 and 91 days, respectively. The first phase focused on biological air regeneration, using wheat to generate enough oxygen for one experimental subject. The systems demonstrated in the later phases were increasingly complex and interdependent, and provided life support for four crew members. The tests were conducted using two human-rated, atmospherically-closed test chambers, the Variable Pressure Growth Chamber (VPGC) and the Integrated Life Support Systems Test Facility (ILSSTF). Systems included test articles (the life support hardware under evaluation), human accommodations (living quarters, kitchen, exercise equipment, etc.) and facility systems (emergency matrix system, power, cooling, etc.). The test team was managed by a lead engineer and a test director, and included test article engineers responsible for specific systems, subsystems or test articles, test conductors, facility engineers, chamber operators and engineering technicians, medical and safety officers, and science experimenters. A crew selection committee, comprised of psychologists, engineers and managers involved in the test, evaluated male and female volunteers who applied to be test subjects. Selection was based on the skills mix anticipated for each particular test, and utilized information from psychological and medical testing, data on the knowledge, experience and skills of the applicants, and team building exercises. The design, development, buildup and operation of test hardware and documentation followed the established NASA processes and requirements for test buildup and operation.

Barta, Daniel J.↗
NASA NTRS2001

ISS Microgravity Research Payload Training Methodology

The NASA Microgravity Research Discipline has multiple categories of science payloads that are being planned and currently under development to operate on various ISS on-orbit increments. The current program includes six subdisciplines; Materials Science, Fluids Physics, Combustion Science, Fundamental Physics, Cellular Biology and Macromolecular Biotechnology. All of these experiment payloads will require the astronaut various degrees of crew interaction and science observation. With the current programs planning to build various facility class science racks, the crew will need to be trained on basic core operations as well as science background. In addition, many disciplines will use the Express Rack and the Microgravity Science Glovebox (MSG) to utilize the accommodations provided by these facilities for smaller and less complex type hardware. The Microgravity disciplines will be responsible to have a training program designed to maximize the experiment and hardware throughput as well as being prepared for various contingencies both with anomalies as well as unexpected experiment observations. The crewmembers will need various levels of training from simple tasks as power on and activate to extensive training on hardware mode change out to observing the cell growth of various types of tissue cultures. Sample replacement will be required for furnaces and combustion type modules. The Fundamental Physics program will need crew EVA support to provide module change out of experiment. Training will take place various research centers and hardware development locations. It is expected that onboard training through various methods and video/digital technology as well as limited telecommunication interaction. Since hardware will be designed to operate from a few weeks to multiple research increments, flexibility must be planned in the training approach and procedure skills to optimize the output as well as the equipment maintainability. Early increment lessons learned will be addressed.

Schlagheck, Ronald↗
DOE OSTI2023

Identifying human failure events (HFEs) for external hazard probabilistic risk assessment

In recent years, several advancements in nuclear power plant (NPP) probabilistic risk assessment (PRA) have been driven by increased understanding of external hazards, plant response, and uncertainties. However, major sources of uncertainty associated with external hazard PRA remain. One important source is how risk-significant human actions that are carried out to enable plant response and recovery from natural hazards cause the close coupling of physical impacts on plants and overall plant risk during these hazard events. This makes human reliability and human-plant interactions important elements to consider in resolving PRA gaps in external hazards. One of the challenges in considering human response in external hazard probabilistic risk assessment (XHPRA) is that most existing human reliability analysis (HRA) models were not developed for assessing actions outside the control room (termed ex-control room actions) and hazard response. To support this new scope, HRA models will need to be developed or modified to support identification of human activities, causal factors, and uncertainties inherent in external hazard response, thereby providing insights regarding event timing and physical event conditions as they relate to human performance. In this study, there are two main objectives: (1) evaluate the applicability of an existing cognitive-based HRA method, Phoenix, to ex-control room actions, and (2) identify sources of uncertainty to be characterized or reduced in order to make this method suitable for XHPRA. The first step of such work is performed by assessing the suitability of existing HRA methods to support identifying human failure events (HFEs) for human response to flooding hazards. These HFEs are human actions or inactions that are involved in human responses to flooding hazards and could contribute to the loss of a critical function for the plant in the scenario being examined. Here, in this work, decomposition analyses using the cognitive-based Phoenix HRA model are used to identify HFEs. The Phoenix method was found to be suitable for analyzing ex-control room actions as well as identifying specific HFEs and underlying crew failure modes (CFMs). However, the method's suitability for use in ex-control room actions would benefit from expanding the available CFMs to accommodate a larger variety of physical and communication tasks.

42 ENGINEERING↗
NASA NTRS1973

The space station: Key to living in space

Design and scientific equipment for the Manned Orbiting Laboratory and Skylab are elaborated. Multideck designs accommodate both zero gravity and artificial gravity conditions as well as a core module potentially useful as a planetary mission module for a 12-man crew. Artificial gravity approaches consider assembly rotation and differential spin rates for the various decks. Counterrotation systems are projected to go from a station to a 50-man space base concept.

Lord, D. R.↗
NASA NTRS1990

The role of Space Station Freedom in the Human Exploration Initiative

Exploration accommodation requirements for Space Station Freedom (SSF) and mission-supporting capabilities have been studied. For supporting the Human Exploration Initiative (HEI), SSF will accommodate two functions with augmentations to the baseline Assembly Complete configuration. First, it will be an earth-orbiting transportation node providing facilities and resources (crew, power, communications) for space vehicle assembly, testing, processing and postflight servicing. Second, it will be an in-space laboratory for science research and technology development. The evolutionary design of SSF will allow the on-orbit addition of pressurized laboratory and habitation modules, power generation equipment, truss structure, and unpressurized vehicle processing platforms.

Ahlf, P. R.↗
NASA NTRS1990

Environmental Control and Life Support System Evolution

Viewgraphs on Environmental Control and Life Support System (ECLSS) evolution are presented. The Space Station Freedom ECLSS will have to accommodate the changes to Freedom as it evolves over the design life of 30 years or more. Requirements will change as pressurized modules are added, crew numbers increase, and as the tasks to be performed change. This evolution will result in different demands on the ECLSS and the numbers ECLSS will have to adapt. Technologies other than the baselined ones may be better able to perform the various tasks and technological advances will result in improved life support hardware having better performance, increased reliability, reduced power consumption, weight, and volume, greater autonomy, and fewer resupply requirements. A preliminary study was performed to look at alternative technologies for life support and evaluate them for their integration requirements.

Wieland, Paul↗
NASA NTRS1992

The Centrifuge Facility Life Sciences Glovebox configuration study

Crew operations associated with nonhuman life sciences research on Space Station Freedom will be conducted in the Life Sciences Glovebox, whose enclosed work volume must accommodate numerous life science procedures. Two candidate Glovebox work volume concepts have been developed: one in which two operators work side-by-side, and another that conforms to the reach envelope of a single operator. Six test volunteers tested the concepts according to preestablished operational criteria. The wrap-around, single-operator concept has been judged the superior system.

Sun, Sidney C.↗
NASA NTRS1990

Environmental Control and Life Support System Evolution

The Space Station Freedom Environmental Control and Life Support System (ECLSS) will have to accommodate the changes to Freedom as it evolves over the design life of 30 years or more. Requirements will change as pressurized modules are added, crew numbers increase, and as the tasks to be performed change. This evolution will result in different demands on the ECLSS and the ECLSS wilt have to adapt. Technologies other than the baselined ones may be better able to perform the various tasks and technological advances will result in improved life support hardware having better performance, increased reliability, reduced power consumption, weight, and volume, greater autonomy, and fewer resupply requirements. A preliminary study was performed to look at alternative technologies for life support and evaluate them for their integration requirements, focusing on the fluid line interface requirements. (A follow-on study will expand greatly on the scope of this preliminary study.) The integration requirements of the alternative technologies may be different from those of the baselined technologies. If this is the case, then by designing the initial space station to have the necessary fluid lines, etc. required by the selected alternative technologies then the task of replacing the baselined ones will be greatly simplified, thereby reducing the cost in on-orbit time as well as dollars.

Wieland, Paul↗
NASA NTRS2022

SpaceVPX Interoperability Assessment

The existing VMEbus (VersaModular Eurocard bus) International Trade Association (VITA)-78 industry standard, also known as SpaceVPX, is an avionics board- and chassis-level standard derived from the OpenVPX standard as defined in VITA-65. While VITA-65 defines backplane and board-level profiles from COTS vendors to ensure interoperability of products used in developing systems and subsystems, the VITA-78 standard defines SpaceVPX to incorporate fault tolerance features that are required by many spaceflight systems. However, VITA-78 allows so much flexibility that interoperability between modules cannot be assured. This assessment provides guidelines on the use of, and extensions to, the VITA-78 standard to enable avionics interoperability for future NASA missions. The assessment team was comprised of subject matter experts (SMEs) from Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC), the Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL), Johnson Space Center (JSC), and Langley Research Center (LaRC). The team included valuable external consulting support from a SME who was a key participant in the development of the VITA-78 standard. The team had extensive collaboration with the NASA Space Technology Mission Directorate (STMD) High Performance Spaceflight Computing (HPSC) project, specifically in the development of SpaceVPX interconnect findings, observations, and NESC recommendations. To provide an understanding of the breadth of implementations that SpaceVPX must accommodate, multiple NASA use cases were analyzed to assess the requirements for SpaceVPX implementations across a wide range of NASA missions (Appendix C). Applications included crewed missions, science missions, and orbital and surface robotic systems. Product surveys were conducted to assess the level of industry support for SpaceVPX, applications, and the variations in their implementations (Appendix D). In-depth analysis was conducted in the areas of: (a) power management and distribution, (b) form factors and daughtercards, (c) interconnect, and (d) fault tolerance. Leveraging the use cases, product surveys, and SMEs from multiple NASA Centers, these areas were analyzed to determine the range of implementations permitted by the VITA-78 standard and potential interoperability issues. Applicable findings and NESC recommendations were provided for each area. During this assessment, there were multiple opportunities to engage with other agencies to learn about their interest in SpaceVPX, their strategies for implementing SpaceVPX-based systems, and their internal development efforts. These engagements also generated findings and NESC recommendations. Based on this assessment analysis, NESC recommendations were made regarding the feature set and module profiles to support NASA SpaceVPX implementations. This feature set includes restrictions on features in VITA-78, and extensions to the standard. Key recommendations in this area include the use of 10 Gigabit Ethernet and Peripheral Component Interconnect Express (PCIe) as high bandwidth interconnect on the backplane, the retention of SpaceWire interconnect for control functions, and support for 3U (unit) and 6U, form factors for NASA systems. Restrictions were proposed on the usage of user-defined signals to promote interoperability, and specific power managements and distribution schemes for 3U systems. Beyond the technical implementation of SpaceVPX, recommendations were made on areas that warrant further investigation. Primary among these is the recommendation for NASA to collaborate with other space-going agencies and industry to incorporate recommendations into a future ‘dot spec’ of VITA-78. This would ensure wide adoption and availability of the modules that comply with the specification. The assessment includes appendices with candidate module profiles that can be considered as a starting point for this activity, and example systems based on the recommendations. Follow-on studies are recommended for architectures beyond SpaceVPX to address potential enhancements including condensed set of interconnect, software required to implement protocol layers on the interconnect (and other features), alternative power architectures, and system-level testability.

SpaceVPX↗
NASA NTRS2008

An EXPRESS Rack Overview and Support for Microgravity Research on the International Space Station (ISS)

The EXpedite the PRocessing of Experiments to Space Station or EXPRESS Rack System has provided accommodations and facilitated operations for microgravity-based research payloads for over 6 years on the International Space Station (ISS). The EXPRESS Rack accepts Space Shuttle middeck type lockers and International Subrack Interface Standard (ISIS) drawers, providing a modular-type interface on the ISS. The EXPRESS Rack provides 28Vdc power, Ethernet and RS-422 data interfaces, thermal conditioning, vacuum exhaust, and Nitrogen supply for payload use. The EXPRESS Rack system also includes payload checkout capability with a flight rack or flight rack emulator prior to launch, providing a high degree of confidence in successful operations once an-orbit. In addition, EXPRESS trainer racks are provided to support crew training of both rack systems and subrack operations. Standard hardware and software interfaces provided by the EXPRESS Rack simplify the integration processes for ISS payload development. The EXPRESS Rack is designed to accommodate multidiscipline research, allowing for the independent operation of each subrack payload within a single rack. On-orbit operations began for the EXPRESS Rack Project on April 24, 2001, with one rack operating continuously to support high-priority payloads. The other on-orbit EXPRESS Racks operate based on payload need and resource availability. Over 50 multi-discipline payloads have now been supported on-orbit by the EXPRESS Rack Program. Sustaining engineering, logistics, and maintenance functions are in place to maintain hardware, operations and provide software upgrades. Additional EXPRESS Racks are planned for launch prior to ISS completion in support of long-term operations and the planned transition of the U.S. Segment to a National Laboratory.

Pelfrey, Joseph J.↗
NASA NTRS1987

Space station accommodations for lunar base elements: A study

The results of a study conducted at NASA-LaRC to assess the impact on the space station of accommodating a Manned Lunar Base are documented. Included in the study are assembly activities for all infrastructure components, resupply and operations support for lunar base elements, crew activity requirements, the effect of lunar activities on Cape Kennedy operations, and the effect on space station science missions. Technology needs to prepare for such missions are also defined. Results of the study indicate that the space station can support the manned lunar base missions with the addition of a Fuel Depot Facility and a heavy lift launch vehicle to support the large launch requirements.

Weidman, Deene J.↗
NASA NTRS1987

Orbiter transfer vehicle concept definition and system analysis study. Volume 4: Space station accommodations. Revision 1

A brief summary is given of the key objectives of Task 5 of the Space Station Accommodations Concept Definition. Space station accommodations were assessed and defined for each potential candidate Space-Based OTV concept and for the composite OTV fleet. To accomplish this, the functional and physical interactions between each OTV concept and the space station were defined. Then, conceptual accommodation designs were prepared and optimized for approach and configuration. Initial space station requirements were identified, including the ability to accommodate and support evolution to maturity, and then a time-phasing of accommodations was prepared showing that evolution. In the process of developing physical and functional interactions, operational requirements were defined, together with associated timelines. In that the crew complement is subject to limitations, the operational requirements derivation is biased toward automation wherever possible. For each candidate Ground-Based OTV concept, operating in conjunction with the space station, the above process was repeated.

Randall, Roger M.↗