Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “human landers”

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 NTRS2020

Artemis Sustained Translational Acceleration Limits: Human Tolerance Evidence from Apollo to ISS

The designers of the next generation of lunar landers may adopt novel, crew-body orientations outside of our flight history or applied to flight durations and environments outside of our experience. Current sustained translational acceleration requirements in NASA-STD-3001 are applicable only to crewmembers in a seated posture and are thus inadequate to address human tolerance in non-seated configurations. Initial designs for the Apollo Lunar Module (LM) included seats for both commander and pilot; however, these were subsequently removed from the vehicle due to mass constraints and a willingness to accept the unknown risks for short-duration missions given the limited human physiologic data at the time. In the years since Apollo, our evidence base has grown immensely. Initial Artemis mission timelines under consideration will be longer than the longest Apollo mission, by a significant margin, with timeframes more analogous to longer Space Shuttle missions. Given the incidence of postflight orthostatic intolerance following shuttle missions, a significant risk may exist for lander design(s) pursuing a standing crew configuration similar to Apollo LM. New sustained translational acceleration limits developed to address this risk are presented herein. These limits were derived from evaluations of Apollo biomedical and flight profile data during lunar descent and ascent operations, Soyuz and Space Shuttle flight profile and post-landing biomedical data, and analogue bed rest post-exposure data on orthostatic intolerance.

James M. Pattarini↗
NASA NTRS2016

Water Electrolysis for In-Situ Resource Utilization (ISRU)

Sending humans to Mars for any significant amount of time will require capabilities and technologies that enable Earth independence. To move towards this independence, the resources found on Mars must be utilized to produce the items needed to sustain humans away from Earth. To accomplish this task, NASA is studying In Situ Resource Utilization (ISRU) systems and techniques to make use of the atmospheric carbon dioxide and the water found on Mars. Among other things, these substances can be harvested and processed to make oxygen and methane. Oxygen is essential, not only for sustaining the lives of the crew on Mars, but also as the oxidizer for an oxygen-methane propulsion system that could be utilized on a Mars ascent vehicle. Given the presence of water on Mars, the electrolysis of water is a common technique to produce the desired oxygen. Towards this goal, NASA designed and developed a Proton Exchange Membrane (PEM) water electrolysis system, which was originally slated to produce oxygen for propulsion and fuel cell use in the Mars Atmosphere and Regolith COllector/PrOcessor for Lander Operations (MARCO POLO) project. As part of the Human Exploration Spacecraft Testbed for Integration and Advancement (HESTIA) project, this same electrolysis system, originally targeted at enabling in situ propulsion and power, operated in a life-support scenario. During HESTIA testing at Johnson Space Center, the electrolysis system supplied oxygen to a chamber simulating a habitat housing four crewmembers. Inside the chamber, oxygen was removed from the atmosphere to simulate consumption by the crew, and the electrolysis system's oxygen was added to replenish it. The electrolysis system operated nominally throughout the duration of the HESTIA test campaign, and the oxygen levels in the life support chamber were maintained at the desired levels.

Lee, Kristopher A.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Analysis of Alternative Architectures for a 2024 Lunar Sortie

This study focused on performing a broad analysis of lunar architectures to identify key alternatives capable of performing a 2024 human lunar landing mission. The goal of the study was to identify architecture alternatives which exhibit robustness, as measured by launch vehicle payload margin, to absorb the natural growth that occurs during design maturation. The study consisted of up to three element architectures which perform the mission from cis-lunar aggregation, through the surface sortie, and return to cis-lunar space. More than 600,000 data points were evaluated utilizing a novel architecture synthesis framework currently being developed by NASA/MSFC. Key findings from the study indicate that architecture complexity can be reduced by minimizing the number of discrete, unique architecture elements, which in turn translates into reduced design, development, test, and evaluation (DDT&E) complexity. It was identified that heavy lift launch vehicles enable such architectures while also providing significant increases to launch vehicle margin over existing and near-term commercial launch vehicle (CLV) performance expected in the 2024 time frame. Additionally, the study identified storable propellant based lander architectures as leading alternatives in achieving a 2024 human lunar landing by providing reduced technology needs and development schedules.

Architecture Analysis↗
NASA NTRS2007

Robotics

Lunar robotic functions include: 1. Transport of crew and payloads on the surface of the moon; 2. Offloading payloads from a lunar lander; 3. Handling the deployment of surface systems; with 4. Human commanding of these functions from inside a lunar vehicle, habitat, or extravehicular (space walk), with Earth-based supervision. The systems that will perform these functions may not look like robots from science fiction. In fact, robotic functions may be automated trucks, cranes and winches. Use of this equipment prior to the crew s arrival or in the potentially long periods without crews on the surface, will require that these systems be computer controlled machines. The public release of NASA's Exploration plans at the 2nd Space Exploration Conference (Houston, December 2006) included a lunar outpost with as many as four unique mobility chassis designs. The sequence of lander offloading tasks involved as many as ten payloads, each with a unique set of geometry, mass and interface requirements. This plan was refined during a second phase study concluded in August 2007. Among the many improvements to the exploration plan were a reduction in the number of unique mobility chassis designs and a reduction in unique payload specifications. As the lunar surface system payloads have matured, so have the mobility and offloading functional requirements. While the architecture work continues, the community can expect to see functional requirements in the areas of surface mobility, surface handling, and human-systems interaction as follows: Surface Mobility 1. Transport crew on the lunar surface, accelerating construction tasks, expanding the crew s sphere of influence for scientific exploration, and providing a rapid return to an ascent module in an emergency. The crew transport can be with an un-pressurized rover, a small pressurized rover, or a larger mobile habitat. 2. Transport Extra-Vehicular Activity (EVA) equipment and construction payloads. 3. Transport habitats and power modules over long distances, pre-positioning them for the arrival of crew on a subsequent lander. Surface Handling 1. Offload surface system payloads from the lander, breaking launch restraints and power/data connections. Payloads may be offloaded to a wheeled vehicle for transport. 2. Deploy payloads from a wheeled vehicle at a field site, placing the payloads in their final use site on the ground or mating them with existing surface systems. 3. Support regolith collection, site preparation, berm construction, or other civil engineering tasks using tools and implements attached to rovers. Human-Systems Interaction 1. Provide a safe command and control interface for suited EVA to ride on and drive the vehicles, making sure that the systems are also safe for working near dismounted crew. 2. Provide an effective control system for IV crew to tele-operate vehicles, cranes and other equipment from inside the surface habitats with evolving independence from Earth. .. Provide a supervisory system that allows machines to be commanded from the ground, working across the Earth-Lunar time delays on the order of 5-10 seconds (round trip) to support operations when crew are not resident on the surface. Technology Development Needs 1. Surface vehicles that can dock, align and mate with outpost equipment such as landers, habitats and fluid/power interfaces. 2. Long life motors, drive trains, seals, motor electronics, sensors, processors, cable harnesses, and dash board displays. 3. Active suspension control, localization, high speed obstacle avoidance, and safety systems for operating near dismounted crew. 4. High specific energy and specific power batteries that are safe, rechargeable, and long lived.

Ambrose, Robert O.↗
NASA NTRS2020

A Simulation Framework for Precision Landing and Hazard Avoidance Technology Assessments

To meet NASA’s challenge to return humans to the Moon in 2024 and establish a sustainable presence in 2028 requires advances in autonomous spacecraft navigation. The Safe and Precise Landing Integrated Capabilities Evolution (SPLICE) project, which leverages previous work at NASA to develop multi-mission precision landing and hazard avoidance technologies, is using a multi-faceted approach to achieve the advanced landing requirements. In addition to increasing the technology readiness level of key sensors and developing high performance space computing, SPLICE uses simulations to determine navigation requirements and evaluate sensor performance. The effort evaluates various precision landing concepts of operations, not only for the lunar human and robotic missions, but also for potential missions to other solar system destinations. This paper summarizes the six degree-of-freedom high fidelity simulation framework, trajectory design methodology, and sensor models being considered for a variety of precision lander missions. Initial results of the navigation sensor performance for a human Mars mission are presented. Finally, trade and sensitivity studies are outlined for future work to fully characterize sensor performance assumptions and modifications required to achieve precision landing and hazard avoidance.

Alicia Dwyer Cianciolo↗
NASA NTRS2008

Launching Science: Science Opportunities Provided by NASA's Constellation System

In 2004 NASA began implementation of the first phases of a new space exploration policy. This implementation effort included the development of a new human-carrying spacecraft, known as Orion; the Altair lunar lander; and two new launch vehicles, the Ares I and Ares V rockets.collectively called the Constellation System (described in Chapter 5 of this report). The Altair lunar lander, which is in the very preliminary concept stage, is not discussed in detail in the report. In 2007 NASA asked the National Research Council (NRC) to evaluate the science opportunities enabled by the Constellation System. To do so, the NRC established the Committee on Science Opportunities Enabled by NASA's Constellation System. In general, the committee interpreted "Constellation-enabled" broadly, to include not only mission concepts that required Constellation, but also those that could be significantly enhanced by Constellation. The committee intends this report to be a general overview of the topic of science missions that might be enabled by Constellation, a sort of textbook introduction to the subject. The mission concepts that are reviewed in this report should serve as general examples of kinds of missions, and the committee s evaluation should not be construed as an endorsement of the specific teams that developed the mission concepts or of their proposals. Additionally, NASA has a well-developed process for establishing scientific priorities by asking the NRC to conduct a "decadal survey" for a particular discipline. Any scientific mission that eventually uses the Constellation System will have to be properly evaluated by means of this decadal survey process. The committee was impressed with the scientific potential of many of the proposals that it evaluated. However, the committee notes that the Constellation System has been justified by NASA and selected in order to enable human exploration beyond low Earth orbit.not to enable science missions. Virtually all of the science mission concepts that could take advantage of Constellation s unique capabilities are likely to be prohibitively expensive. Several times in the past NASA has begun ambitious space science missions that ultimately proved too expensive for the agency to pursue. Examples include the Voyager-Mars mission and the Prometheus program and its Jupiter Icy Moons Orbiter spacecraft (both examples are discussed in Chapter 1). Finding: The scientific missions reviewed by the committee as appropriate for launch on an Ares V vehicle fall, with few exceptions, into the "flagship" class of missions. The preliminary cost estimates, based on mission concepts that at this time are not very detailed, indicate that the costs of many of the missions analyzed will be above $5 billion (in current dollars). The Ares V costs are not included in these estimates. All of the costs discussed in this report are presented in current-year (2008) dollars, not accounting for potential inflation that could occur between now and the decade in which these missions might be pursued. In general, preliminary cost estimates for proposed missions are, for many reasons, significantly lower than the final costs. Given the large cost estimates for many of the missions assessed in this report, the potentially large impacts on NASA's budget by many of these missions are readily apparent.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS2001

Entry System Design Considerations for Mars Landers

The objective for the next generation or Mars landers is to enable a safe landing at specific locations of scientific interest. The 1st generation entry, descent and landing systems, ex. Viking and Pathfinder, provided successful landing on Mars but by design were limited to large scale, 100s of km, landing sites with minimal local hazards. The 2 nd generation landers, or smart landers, will provide scientists with access to previously unachievable landing sites by providing precision landing to less than 10 km of a target landing site, with the ability to perform local hazard avoidance, and provide hazard tolerance. This 2nd generation EDL system can be utilized for a range of robotic missions with vehicles sized for science payloads from the small 25-70 kg, Viking, Pathfinder, Mars Polar Lander and Mars Exploration Rover-class, to the large robotic Mars Sample Return, 300 kg plus, science payloads. The 2nd generation system can also be extended to a 3nd generation EDL system with pinpoint landing, 10's of meters of landing accuracy, for more capable robotic or human missions. This paper will describe the design considerations for 2nd generation landers. These landers are currently being developed by a consortium of NASA centers, government agencies, industry and academic institutions. The extension of this system and additional considerations required for a 3nd generation human mission to Mars will be described.

Lockwood, Mary Kae↗
NASA NTRS2017

What Machines Need to Learn to Support Human Problem-Solving

In the development of intelligent systems that interact with humans, there is often confusion between how the system functions with respect to the humans it interacts with and how it interfaces with those humans. The former is a much deeper challenge than the latter it requires a system-level understanding of evolving human roles as well as an understanding of what humans need to know (and when) in order to perform their tasks. This talk will focus on some of the challenges in getting this right as well as on the type of research and development that results in successful human-autonomy teaming. Brief Bio: Dr. Alonso Vera is Chief of the Human Systems Integration Division at NASA Ames Research Center. His expertise is in human-computer interaction, information systems, artificial intelligence, and computational human performance modeling. He has led the design, development and deployment of mission software systems across NASA robotic and human space flight missions, including Mars Exploration Rovers, Phoenix Mars Lander, ISS, Constellation, and Exploration Systems. Dr. Vera received a Bachelor of Science with First Class Honors from McGill University in 1985 and a Ph.D. from Cornell University in 1991. He went on to a Post-Doctoral Fellowship in the School of Computer Science at Carnegie Mellon University from 1990-93.

intelligent systems↗
NASA NTRS2020

Recent Efforts Enabling Martian Rotorcraft Missions

The Mars Helicopter (MH), launching as a part of the Mars 2020 mission, will begin a new era of planetary exploration. Mars research has historically been conducted through landers, rovers, and satellites. As both government and private industries prepare for human exploration of the Martian surface within two decades, more in depth knowledge of what awaits on the surface is critical. Planetary aerial vehicles increase the range of terrain that can be examined, compared to traditional landers and rovers and have more near surface capability than orbiters. The Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) and NASA Ames are currently exploring possibilities for a Mars Science Helicopter (MSH), a second-generation Mars rotorcraft with the capability of conducting science investigations independently of a lander or rover (although this type of vehicle could also be used assist rovers or landers in future missions). Preliminary designs of coaxial-helicopter and hexacopter configurations have targeted the minimum capability of lifting a payload in the range of two to three kilograms with an overall vehicle mass of approximately twenty kilograms. These MSH designs’ sizes are constrained by the aeroshell dimensions(currently focused on employing legacy Pathfinder or MSL aeroshells), rather than vehicle structural or aeroperformance limitations. Feasibility of the MSH configurations has been investigated considering packaging/deployment, rotor aerodynamics, and structural analysis studies. Initial findings suggest not only the overall feasibility of MSH configurations but also indicate that improvements up to 11.1 times increase in range or 1.3 times increase in hover time might be achievable, even with an additional science payload, compared to the current design of the MH.

Withrow-Maser, Shannah↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

New Developments in Retropropulsion Testing for Mars Entry, Descent and Landing

NASA’s plans for landing human-scale payloads on Mars in the next decade require that retrorockets be used to decelerate the atmospheric entry vehicle continuously from supersonic conditions through soft touchdown. Conventional Mars entry vehicle architectures that include a single parachute for supersonic-to-subsonic descent are not scalable to the sizes needed to land humans on Mars (~20 metric tons). The major aerosciences risks are the uncertainties in predicting aerodynamic stability and performance during powered free-flight and landing. These risks are influenced partially by current limitations in relevant data and testing methods. Consequently, trajectory simulations currently depend on unvalidated powered descent and landing aerodynamics models. NASA engineers have identified gaps in testing methods that, if addressed, would improve the ability to validate these models. There are gaps in capabilities to test multi-engine hot-gas retropropulsion systems in US wind tunnels. This is partially due to the successful use of parachutes as decelerators for human spaceflight at Earth and for the entire Mars lander program to date. Retropulsion test data historically and to this day are limited to using high pressure air jets, at comparatively low temperatures,as engine plume simulants on subscale wind tunnel models. Additionally, the ability to directly measure aerodynamic interference force and moments is limited by existing flow-through balance capabilities. This paper briefly covers historical and recent test data, and identifies new ground test techniques as a means to provide more relevant test data for powered flight and landing aerodynamic model validation.These techniques include using heated inert gases as a substitute for combustion products, additively manufactured 6-component flow-through force and moment balances, and off-body quantitative diagnostic measurements.

Retropropulsion↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Feasibility Study of a Robotic Science Arm on Future Martian Rotorcraft

Science arms are indispensable tools for planetary exploration, allowing vehicles to interact with and manipulate their surroundings in a manner similar to a human field geologist. A majority of the rovers and landers sent to Mars, beginning with Viking I and II in 1976, have made extensive use of these articulated, arm-like devices that allow for sample collection, surface preparation, instrument positioning, and the deployment of ground-contact sensors. Although proven useful, traditional rovers and landers are limited by the rough and difficult terrain of Mars. However, given the successful demonstration of flight on Mars by the Ingenuity helicopter, efforts are underway to outfit larger rotorcraft with science payloads to allow them to explore Mars’ surface and lower atmosphere with significantly more efficiency than land vehicles. Such vehicles could also be designed to work in tandem with landers or rovers. The Mars Science Helicopter (MSH) is a conceptual hexacopter design that is currently under early development by both NASA Ames and JPL. Equipping a vehicle like MSH with a science arm has the potential to further expand its scientific capabilities. This paper approaches the mission and design requirements to equip a science arm on MSH while highlighting the unique technical challenges for robotic arm and science instrument capability. Current plans for MSH development do not include the addition of a robotic arm to the vehicle. However, it is anticipated that future variants of the MSH design might well incorporate such adaptable surface interactive capabilities.

Robotic Science Arm↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Extravehicular Activity on the Lunar Surface: Mapping Mitigation Risk Consequence for Crew Needing Assistance or Rescue

Extravehicular activity (EVA) on the lunar surface presents unique risks to crew with possibility for injury. Without appropriate assistance or rescue capability, inability to nominally ambulate and return to a lander, especially during early Artemis missions, could have catastrophic consequences. Mapping likelihood and consequence safety risk associated with identified injury scenarios establishes a baseline from which to assess potential mitigation solutions to ensure crew health and safety. Causes leading to the need for incapacitated crew rescue (ICR) during EVA on the lunar surface were previously identified and classified using an ICR/Acute Injury scenario spectrum. Severe scenarios are those when the affected astronaut requires either partial or full continuous assistance from the rescuer. Evaluation of these continual reliance conditions included calculating event probabilities (likelihoods) associated with an early Artemis mission and mapping them to established Exploration System Directorate (ESD) probability thresholds; safety consequences were analyzed and correlated to defined ESD personnel safety categories. These resulting likelihood and consequence values served as a baseline for assessing risk reduction of three mitigation capabilities: crew assistance (rescuer crew) only, walking assist devices, and a wheeled transport device. Of the twenty-five continual reliance conditions, ten were evaluated as “catastrophic” (Level 5, loss of life) during EVA on the lunar surface with probabilities ranging from moderate to very low during an early Artemis mission. Crew assistance only and walking assist devices showed similar potential for risk reduction, with four of the ten causes decreasing to Level 4. A wheeled transport device further increased risk reduction with six of the ten conditions decreasing to Level 4. Given the catastrophic consequence of several identified conditions, assessments should be performed to determine the feasibility of mitigation capabilities. It is currently unknown whether a rescuer astronaut could effectively provide continuous assistance to enable both crew to return safely to the lander from the standpoint of both suit geometry and human performance. Although resulting in an increase in resources, providing a wheeled transport provides the highest risk reduction potential, and walking assist devices may have prevention as well as mitigation benefits.

lunar surface↗
NASA NTRS2010

Altair Descent and Ascent Reference Trajectory Design and Initial Dispersion Analyses

The Altair Lunar Lander is the linchpin in the Constellation Program (CxP) for human return to the Moon. Altair is delivered to low Earth orbit (LEO) by the Ares V heavy lift launch vehicle, and after subsequent docking with Orion in LEO, the Altair/Orion stack is delivered through translunar injection (TLI). The Altair/Orion stack separating from the Earth departure stage (EDS) shortly after TLI and continues the flight to the Moon as a single stack. Altair performs the lunar orbit insertion (LOI) maneuver, targeting a 100-km circular orbit. This orbit will be a polar orbit for missions landing near the lunar South Pole. After spending nearly 24 hours in low lunar orbit (LLO), the lander undocks from Orion and performs a series of small maneuvers to set up for descending to the lunar surface. This descent begins with a small deorbit insertion (DOI) maneuver, putting the lander on an orbit that has a perilune of 15.24 km (50,000 ft), the altitude where the actual powered descent initiation (PDI) commences. At liftoff from Earth, Altair has a mass of 45 metric tons (mt). However after LOI (without Orion attached), the lander mass is slightly less than 33 mt at PDI. The lander currently has a single descent module main engine, with TBD lb(sub f) thrust (TBD N), providing a thrust-to-weight ratio of approximately TBD Earth g's at PDI. LDAC-3 (Lander design and analysis cycle #3) is the most recently closed design sizing and mass properties iteration. Upgrades for loss of crew (LDAC-2) and loss of mission (LDAC-3) have been incorporated into the lander baseline design (and its Master Equipment List). Also, recently, Altair has been working requirements analyses (LRAC-1). All nominal data here are from the LDAC-3 analysis cycle. All dispersions results here are from LRAC-1 analyses.

Kos, Larry D.↗
NASA NTRS2011

Technology Development to Support Human Health and Performance in Exploration Beyond Low Earth Orbit

In the course of defining the level of risks and mitigating the risks for exploration missions beyond low Earth orbit, NASA s Human Research Program (HRP) has identified the need for technology development in several areas. Long duration missions increase the risk of serious medical conditions due to limited options for return to Earth; no resupply; highly limited mass, power, volume; and communication delays. New space flight compatible medical capabilities required include: diagnostic imaging, oxygen concentrator, ventilator, laboratory analysis (saliva, blood, urine), kidney stone diagnosis & treatment, IV solution preparation and delivery. Maintenance of behavioral health in such an isolated, confined and extreme environment requires new sensory stimulation (e.g., virtual reality) technology. Unobtrusive monitoring of behavioral health and treatment methods are also required. Prolonged exposure to weightlessness deconditions bone, muscle, and the cardiovascular system. Novel exercise equipment or artificial gravity are necessary to prevent deconditioning. Monitoring of the degree of deconditioning is required to ensure that countermeasures are effective. New technologies are required in all the habitable volumes (e.g., suit, capsule, habitat, exploration vehicle, lander) to provide an adequate food system, and to meet human environmental standards for air, water, and surface contamination. Communication delays require the crew to be more autonomous. Onboard decision support tools that assist crew with real-time detection and diagnosis of vehicle and habitat operational anomalies will enable greater autonomy. Multi-use shield systems are required to provide shielding from solar particle events. The HRP is pursuing the development of these technologies in laboratories, flight analog environments and the ISS so that the human health and performance risks will be acceptable with the available resources.

Kundrot, C.E.↗
NASA NTRS2010

Overview of the Altair Lunar Lander Thermal Control System Design and the Impacts of Global Access

NASA s Constellation Program (CxP) was developed to successfully return humans to the Lunar surface prior to 2020. The CxP included several different project offices including Altair, which was planned to be the next generation Lunar Lander. The Altair missions were architected to be quite different than the Lunar missions accomplished during the Apollo era. These differences resulted in a significantly dissimilar Thermal Control System (TCS) design. The current paper will summarize the Altair mission architecture and the various operational phases associated with the planned mission. In addition, the derived thermal requirements and the TCS designed to meet these unique and challenging thermal requirements will be presented. During the past year, the design team has focused on developing a vehicle architecture capable of accessing the entire Lunar surface. Due to the widely varying Lunar thermal environment, this global access requirement resulted in major changes to the thermal control system architecture. These changes, and the rationale behind the changes, will be detailed throughout the current paper.

Stephan, Ryan A.↗
NASA NTRS2011

Overview of the Altair Lunar Lander Thermal Control System Design and the Impacts of Global Access

NASA's Constellation Program (CxP) was developed to successfully return humans to the Lunar surface prior to 2020. The CxP included several different project offices including Altair, which was planned to be the next generation Lunar Lander. The Altair missions were architected to be quite different than the Lunar missions accomplished during the Apollo era. These differences resulted in a significantly dissimilar Thermal Control System (TCS) design. The current paper will summarize the Altair mission architecture and the various operational phases associated with the planned mission. In addition, the derived thermal requirements and the TCS designed to meet these unique and challenging thermal requirements will be presented. During the past year, the design team has focused on developing a vehicle architecture capable of accessing the entire Lunar surface. Due to the widely varying Lunar thermal environment, this global access requirement resulted in major changes to the thermal control system architecture. These changes, and the rationale behind the changes, will be detailed throughout the current paper.

Stephan, Ryan A.↗
NASA NTRS2011

HERRO: A Science-Oriented Strategy for Crewed Missions Beyond LEO

This paper presents an exploration strategy for human missions beyond Low Earth Orbit (LEO) and the Moon that combines the best features of human and robotic spaceflight. This "Human Exploration using Real-time Robotic Operations" (HERRO) strategy refrains from placing humans on the surfaces of the Moon and Mars in the near-term. Rather, it focuses on sending piloted spacecraft and crews into orbit around exploration targets of interest, such as Mars, and conducting astronaut exploration of the surfaces using telerobots and remotely controlled systems. By eliminating the significant communications delay with Earth due to the speed of light limit, teleoperation provides scientists real-time control of rovers and other sophisticated instruments, in effect giving them a "virtual presence" on planetary surfaces, and thus expanding the scientific return at these destinations. It also eliminates development of the numerous man-rated landers, ascent vehicles and surface systems that are required to land humans on planetary surfaces. The propulsive requirements to travel from LEO to many destinations with shallow gravity-wells in the inner solar system are quite similar. Thus, a single spacecraft design could perform a variety of missions, including orbit-based surface exploration of the Moon, Mars and Venus, and rendezvous with Near Earth Asteroids (NEAs), as well as Phobos and Deimos. Although HERRO bypasses many of the initial steps that have been historically associated with human space exploration, it opens the door to many new destinations that are candidates for future resource utilization and settlement. HERRO is a first step that takes humans to exciting destinations beyond LEO, while expanding the ability to conduct science within the inner solar system.

Schmidt, George R.↗
NASA NTRS2008

Structural Definition and Mass Estimation of Lunar Surface Habitats for the Lunar Architecture Team Phase 2 (LAT-2) Study

The Lunar Architecture Team Phase 2 study defined and assessed architecture options for a Lunar Outpost at the Moon's South Pole. The Habitation Focus Element Team was responsible for developing concepts for all of the Habitats and pressurized logistics modules particular to each of the architectures, and defined the shapes, volumes and internal layouts considering human factors, surface operations and safety requirements, as well as Lander mass and volume constraints. The Structures Subsystem Team developed structural concepts, sizing estimates and mass estimates for the primary Habitat structure. In these studies, the primary structure was decomposed into a more detailed list of components to be sized to gain greater insight into concept mass contributors. Structural mass estimates were developed that captured the effect of major design parameters such as internal pressure load. Analytical and empirical equations were developed for each structural component identified. Over 20 different hard-shell, hybrid expandable and inflatable soft-shell Habitat and pressurized logistics module concepts were sized and compared to assess structural performance and efficiency during the study. Habitats were developed in three categories; Mini Habs that are removed from the Lander and placed on the Lunar surface, Monolithic habitats that remain on the Lander, and Habitats that are part of the Mobile Lander system. Each category of Habitat resulted in structural concepts with advantages and disadvantages. The same modular shell components could be used for the Mini Hab concept, maximizing commonality and minimizing development costs. Larger Habitats had higher volumetric mass efficiency and floor area than smaller Habitats (whose mass was dominated by fixed items such as domes and frames). Hybrid and pure expandable Habitat structures were very mass-efficient, but the structures technology is less mature, and the ability to efficiently package and deploy internal subsystems remains an open issue.

Dorsey, John T.↗