Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “personal mobility”

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 235 records · Page 13

Exploring the Moon: Preserving the Legacy Through Spacesuit Knowledge Capture and Strategic Communication

NASA is returning to the Moon to stay. To establish a sustained lunar presence, astronauts will pack spacesuits, surface-mobility tools, rovers, and decades’ worth of knowledge. The U.S. Spacesuit Knowledge Capture (SKC) and Strategic Communications (Strat Comm) team is specialized in capturing, preserving, and sharing space-related knowledge with NASA scientists, technicians, engineers, vendors, and the public to support space exploration. Since the SKC Program’s 2007 inception, its focus has been to capture and share valuable spacesuit-related knowledge with the NASA community. As the program evolved, its notoriety, funding, scope, and staffing expanded from a one-person, part-time, unfunded operation to a small-team, funded entity. Currently, this team has been formulated with a diverse skillset to meet the requirements of its stakeholders. The SKC and Strat Comm team has used its skills to produce over 260 recorded knowledge captures of subject-matter experts (SMEs) and photoshoots. These knowledge captures are in the form of photographs, lectures, workshops, vignettes, videos, and interviews containing essential space-related knowledge. To help educate the space community and public, this trove of information (e.g., videos of world-class facilities, photographs, and SME lectures), produced inside NASA Johnson Space Center, can be obtained through various sources. During Fiscal Year 2024, the SKC and Strat Comm team will focus on several initiatives. Examples of initiatives include the following: 1) share lessons learned during NASA’s internal venues such as Safety & Health Day and Day of Remembrance; 2) share knowledge with the public, educators, and students through a media production titled Exploring the Moon; and 3) highlight NASA’s unique capabilities and expertise in a video series titled What’s Behind This Door? This paper discusses the team's approach, unique capture capability, initiatives, and much more.

Cinda Chullen↗

Technology Infusion in U.S. Spacesuits - A Comparative System Analysis

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) has evolved multiple spacesuit systems for performing extravehicular activity (EVA) or space walks. These spacesuit systems include the Apollo Extravehicular Mobility Unit (EMU), Space Shuttle and International Space Station (ISS) EMU, and Exploration EMU (xEMU). Each spacesuit system is like the other for functionality. However, each spacesuit system is different in configuration based on the technology infused into the system associated with the purpose of the mission. Each spacesuit system is made up of many components and the integrate environment targeted for operations leads to an integrated system that is complex. Since Apollo, NASA has invested in multiple technologies that make up these spacesuit systems in different iterations. The Apollo EMU was designed in the 1960’s with a focus to facilitate the first human to walk on the moon. The Space Shuttle EMU was designed in the 1970’s for reusable microgravity operations that began in the early 1980’s. The Space Shuttle EMU was enhanced to facilitate extended operation on the ISS. Over the last 15 years, NASA has been designing, developing, and testing a new spacesuit system, the xEMU which is considered a design, verification, and test unit. NASA is planning to land the first woman and first person of color on the Moon. NASA recently engaged industry through a new contractual arrangement to provide EVA services needed to return to the Moon and to continue operations on the ISS. Spacesuit systems are complex. Understanding the requirements, operational environment, the necessary technologies, and the integrated spacesuit system are paramount. In addition, understanding the technology infusion process to meet the mission objectives is critical. This paper will review the spacesuit systems for EVA and several component functions within the spacesuits, along with a system comparison of those technologies from Apollo to xEMU.

Extravehicular Activity (EVA)↗

Lighter-Than-Air (LTA) "AirStation": Unmanned Aircraft System (UAS) Carrier Concept

Proposals for adapting modern airship technologies for military missions have mostly focused on exploiting the airships high flight endurance and low fuel requirement to conduct direct surveillance missions requiring high degrees of persistence over the areas to be observed. While this mission has value, it constrains the airship in two regards. (1) It places all the surveillance sensors, communication systems, and other mission equipment in the airship itself. (2) It requires the airship to be physically in the vicinity of the areas to be directly observed. A more advanced utilization of airship technology would be to add the capability to deploy a separate set of surveillance equipment, thereby enabling indirect and distributed observation operations. This can be undertaken by installing surveillance equipment in a squadron of unmanned aircraft systems (UAS) that can be carried and operated remotely from the airship, and then return to the airship as a base of support. This could be accomplished by deploying 20-30 UASs on an optionally manned (5 person crew) airship. The mission focus of the airship UAS carrier would be for support of distributed intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance (ISR), close air support (CAS), maritime patrol and interdiction, electronic warfare (EW), persistent area dominance and missile defense. The logic for utilizing an airship carrier over a ground base to deploy UAS will be examined. Whether to be used as a stand-alone platform or in concert with conventional intelligence gathering techniques, the airship UAS carrier can provide the following benefits: a mobile base that will remain accessible despite political fallout which may render a ground base unavailable for use, the psychological impact of a power projection tool that has no geographical limits (imagined in the same way a naval carrier group projects power), cost-saving intelligence gathering over manned alternatives (assumption), and a wider area of influence when compared to an immobile ground base that must facilitate the transfer of UAS to other bases in order to overfly particular areas (all operations, launch, recover, etc. take place from the airship).

Hochstetler, Ron↗

NASA Space Launch System Completes Key Hot Fire Test and Begins Vehicle Integration

The Moon is again in reach. NASA and its commercial and international partners are on the way back. The team is working to land the first woman and the first person of color on the planetary body. NASA and its partners made significant progress towards that goal in the latter half of 2020 and the first half of 2021, including on the agency’s Space Launch System (SLS) rocket – a key part of the Artemis program. The SLS core stage for the Artemis I mission – the first launch of SLS and an uncrewed Orion capsule – completed the Green Run test series and was successfully mated with the SLS twin solid rocket boosters on the mobile launcher at Kennedy Space Center (KSC). All of the major systems for Artemis I are at KSC for assembly, integration, and launch, targeted for late 2021. Work also continued on SLS hardware for Artemis II, which will be the first flight of crew on Orion and SLS. Work progressed on core stage components, booster segments, and other hardware for Artemis III and future missions. This paper will detail the progress made.

John Honeycutt↗

A 3D Citizen Science Video Game for NeMO-Net, the NASA Neural Multi-Modal Observation and Training Network for Global Coral Reef Assessment

NeMO-Net, the NASA neural multi-modal observation and training network for global coral reef assessment, is an open-source deep convolutional neural network aimed at accurately assessing the present and past dynamics of coral reef ecosystems through determination of percent living cover and morphology. We present here the active learning component of the project, which consists of an interactive video game prototype for tablet and mobile devices where players are able to intuitively label morphology classifications over mm-scale 3D coral reef imagery. Active learning applications present a novel methodology for engaging the public while efficiently providing large-scale training and test data for increasingly complex and data-intensive machine learning algorithms. NeMO-Net trains players on domain-specific knowledge through interactive tutorials and periodically checks players' input against pre-classified coral imagery to gauge their accuracy and utilize in-game mechanics to provide personalized classification training. Players can rate the classifications of other players, unlock rewards and join a global community as they explore and classify coral reefs and other shallow marine environments.

Citizen Science↗

The Feasibility of Wearables in an Enterprise Environment and Their Impact on IT Security

This paper is intended to explore the usability and feasibility of wearables in an enterprise environment and their impact on IT Security. In this day and age, with the advent of the Internet of Things, we must explore all the new technology emerging from the minds of the new inventors. This means exploring the use of wearables in regards to their benefits, limitations, and the new challenges they pose to securing computer networks in the Federal environment. We will explore the design of the wearables, the interfaces needed to connect them, and what it will take to connect personal devices in the Federal enterprise network environment. We will provide an overview of the wearable design, concerns of ensuring the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of information and the challenges faced by those doing so. We will also review the implications and limitations of the policies governing wearable technology and the physical efforts to enforce them.

wearables↗

Walking robot: A design project for undergraduate students

The objective of the University of Maryland walking robot project was to design, analyze, assemble, and test an intelligent, mobile, and terrain-adaptive system. The robot incorporates existing technologies in novel ways. The legs emulate the walking path of a human by an innovative modification of a crank-and-rocker mechanism. The body consists of two tripod frames connected by a turning mechanism. The two sets of three legs are mounted so as to allow the robot to walk with stability in its own footsteps. The computer uses a modular hardware design and distributed processing. Dual-port RAM is used to allow communication between a supervisory personal computer and seven microcontrollers. The microcontrollers provide low-level control for the motors and relieve the processing burden on the PC.

Source record↗

Human-Robot Interaction

Human-robot interaction (HRI) is a discipline investigating the factors affecting the interactions between humans and robots. It is important to evaluate how the design of interfaces affect the human's ability to perform tasks effectively and efficiently when working with a robot. By understanding the effects of interface design on human performance, workload, and situation awareness, interfaces can be developed to appropriately support the human in performing tasks with minimal errors and with appropriate interaction time and effort. Thus, the results of research on human-robot interfaces have direct implications for the design of robotic systems. For efficient and effective remote navigation of a rover, a human operator needs to be aware of the robot's environment. However, during teleoperation, operators may get information about the environment only through a robot's front-mounted camera causing a keyhole effect. The keyhole effect reduces situation awareness which may manifest in navigation issues such as higher number of collisions, missing critical aspects of the environment, or reduced speed. One way to compensate for the keyhole effect and the ambiguities operators experience when they teleoperate a robot is adding multiple cameras and including the robot chassis in the camera view. Augmented reality, such as overlays, can also enhance the way a person sees objects in the environment or in camera views by making them more visible. Scenes can be augmented with integrated telemetry, procedures, or map information. Furthermore, the addition of an exocentric (i.e., third-person) field of view from a camera placed in the robot's environment may provide operators with the additional information needed to gain spatial awareness of the robot. Two research studies investigated possible mitigation approaches to address the keyhole effect: 1) combining the inclusion of the robot chassis in the camera view with augmented reality overlays, and 2) modifying the camera frame of reference. The first study investigated the effects of inclusion and exclusion of the robot chassis along with superimposing a simple arrow overlay onto the video feed of operator task performance during teleoperation of a mobile robot in a driving task. In this study, the front half of the robot chassis was made visible through the use of three cameras, two side-facing and one forward-facing. The purpose of the second study was to compare operator performance when teleoperating a robot from an egocentric-only and combined (egocentric plus exocentric camera) view. Camera view parameters that are found to be beneficial in these laboratory experiments can be implemented on NASA rovers and tested in a real-world driving and navigation scenario on-site at the Johnson Space Center.

Sandor, Aniko↗

Sizing a Common Habitat for Multiple Environments and Mission Durations

A human mission to Mars and other deep space destinations will require a consistent habitation strategy that applies to disparate environments preferably using multiples of identical hardware. The crew will endure high-g forces during launch, microgravity during transit, and various partial gravities on the destination planet, moon, or asteroid. Habitable volume will likely need to be broken up into smaller modules that do not exceed the capacity of launch vehicles and entry-descent-landing technologies. Though it may be possible to design a different unique, optimized habitat for each environment that the crew may encounter, it is more likely that space agencies and other mission sponsors will only have the resources to develop and produce single multi-use hardware that can be used equally well in all environments, with minimal adaptation by the crew. When sizing habitable volume, mission duration and number of crew become important factors to consider. For example, a pressurized rover cabin may only need to support two crew members for a few days at a time, requiring less volume than a habitat that must support the same number of persons for an entire year. In this study the authors consider constraining factors such as launch vehicle capacity, mission duration, crew size, and Mars lander capacity and study how to divide total pressurized volume, subsystems, equipment, consumables, and supplies into multiple manifests. Preference has been given to solutions that use multiples of identical modules over unique optimized volumes. For example at one extreme, can all the habitat pressure vessels, logistic modules, Mars ascent stage cabins, rover cabins, and airlocks be constructed from multiples of the same small-diameter cylindrical modules? On the other extreme, can logistics, habitation volume, mobility, all be enclosed in a single monolithic volume habitat design? Though there may be advantages and disadvantages to either extreme, the conclusion of this study is that most functions can be distilled into two sizes for hardware: multiples of large diameter modules that generally stay in one place, and multiples of smaller volume cabins that can be moved around or function as cockpits for ascent stages, support vehicles, rovers, airlocks, and logistics delivery.

Howe, A Scott↗

Advanced Pressure Garment Space Suit Sizing Considerations

Fitting a space suit to a person could be considered an art form. Establishing a repeatable fitcheck process to accommodate the full anthropometric range of test subjects for a single suit design is a critical process to be able to prove suit functionality. Suited test subjects can have different preferences on how they fit inside a suit, and different suited test environments can lead to differences in certain suit sizing accommodations. Throughout this paper, the process of achieving an acceptable suit fit for test subjects will be discussed, along with sizing considerations for changes in suit design and test environments. Lessons learned from the Exploration Extravehicular Mobility Unit (xEMU) will be used to describe specific examples, along with key takeaways from additional NASA prototype mobility space suits. The suit fitcheck process starts with utilizing the anthropometric measurements of a test subject to evaluate their relation to the dimensions of space suit hardware in creating a predicted suit sizing configuration. From here, subjective comments and test team observations drive iterations to the suit sizing configuration to culminate in an acceptable suit fit for performance of further test evaluations. Understanding the relation of subjective comments to their impact on altering suit sizing is critical in establishing an acceptable suit fit.

spacesuit↗

Advanced Space Suit Sizing Considerations

Fitting a space suit to a person could be considered an art form. Establishing a repeatable fitcheck process to accommodate the full anthropometric range of test subjects for a single suit design is a critical process to be able to prove suit functionality. Suited test subjects can have different preferences on how they fit inside a suit, and different suited test environments can lead to differences in certain suit sizing accommodations. Throughout this paper, the process of achieving an acceptable suit fit for test subjects will be discussed, along with sizing considerations for changes in suit design and test environments. Lessons learned from the Exploration Extravehicular Mobility Unit (xEMU) will be used to describe specific examples, along with key takeaways from additional NASA prototype mobility space suits. The suit fitcheck process starts with utilizing the anthropometric measurements of a test subject to evaluate their relation to the dimensions of space suit hardware in creating a predicted suit sizing configuration. From here, subjective comments and test team observations drive iterations to the suit sizing configuration to culminate in an acceptable suit fit for performance of further test evaluations. Understanding the relation of subjective comments to their impact on altering suit sizing is critical in establishing an acceptable suit fit.

spacesuit↗

Life in motion, in motion!

A 120 day limited mobility experiment with young male rats and its results, including retarded growth and degenerative changes in the cardiac muscle, are described. A 120 day strict bedrest experiment with 10 human volunteers and its results are described and discussed. Early subjective complaints, subsequent adaptation and eventual progressive changes in excitability and reactivity, reduction in functional capability of the cerebral cortex, and disturbances in water-salt, protein and fat metabolism, including development of precursors of atherosclerosis, as well as poor results of the orthostatic test after 4 months, are presented. These results are explained as applied to sedentary workers and recommendations are given for such persons to exercise in the morning, at work and in the evening in order to prevent hypokinesis and its physical, mental and physiological effects.

Kovalenko, Y. A.↗

Characterizing Spatio-Temporal Ozone Gradients Along Coastal Boundaries: Sondes and Mobile Measurements from OWLETS-2

One of the major difficulties for the modeling and satellite communities is the validation of O3 levels in sharp coastal transition regions within metropolitan areas. Land-water gradients of ozone as well as its precursors can be significant due to differences in emissions, land use, surface deposition, boundary layer height, and mesoscale wind patterns. The Ozone Water-Land Environmental Transition Study (OWLETS-2) was a follow-on field campaign spearheaded by NASA GSFC and LaRC's Tropospheric Ozone Lidar Network (TOLnet) conducted in the summer of 2018 within the Upper Chesapeake region to better characterize spatial and vertical distribution of various pollutants across the coastal boundary. Supporting this campaign, 40 ozonesondes were simultaneously launched directly in the marine environment on Hart Miller Island (HMI) and on two land sites: both the University of Maryland, Baltimore County (UMBC) and Howard University-Beltsville (HUBV). In addition, Personal Ozone Monitors (POMs) - small sensors - were deployed in a variety of environments - car, boat, and drone, to name a few - to quantify ozone across fine spatial and temporal thresholds. The purpose of these measurements is multifaceted: to provide both ozone pollution information to coastal metropolitan communities and validation to satellite, modeling, and forecasting communities, especially in current and future satellite endeavors such as TROPOMI and TEMPO.

coastal pollution↗

Micrometeoroid and Orbital Debris (MMOD) Testing, Ballistic Limit Definition and Risk Assessment of the Exploration Extravehicular Mobility Unit (xEMU)

A well-known hazard associated with exposure to the space environment is the risk of failure due to an impact from a micrometeoroid and orbital debris (MMOD) particle. As NASA prepares to return astronauts to the moon with the Artemis program, the next generation of spacesuit is in development to support future extravehicular activities (EVAs.) An MMOD impact to the spacesuit is of great concern as a large leak could prevent an astronaut from safely reaching an airlock in time resulting in a loss of life. The exploration extravehicular mobility unit (xEMU) must meet MMOD requirements for multiple environments including those in low earth orbit (LEO) as well as the meteoroid and secondary lunar regolith ejecta environments found on the lunar surface. The subject of this paper is an internal xEMU configuration design developed by NASA Johnson Space Center (JSC) personnel. The xEMU shares similarities with the legacy Extravehicular Mobility Unit (EMU) spacesuit that is currently used for ISS EVAs, however differences in the layup (e.g., materials, thicknesses, and layers) of the fabric environmental protection garment (EPG), portable life support system (xPLSS) and helmet required an extensive test program to determine ballistic performance. Over 100 hypervelocity impact (HVI) tests were performed by the NASA/JSC HVIT and White Sands Test Facility (WSTF) teams on the xEMU EPG, xPLSS and helmet to generate ballistic limit equations (BLEs) for MMOD impacts. Additionally, over 50 low speed tests (< 1km/s) were performed by the NASA/JSC HVIT and Southwest Research Institute (SwRI) teams on the xEMU EPG, xPLSS and helmet to generate BLEs for lunar ejecta impacts. Post testing, ballistic limit equations (BLEs) used to define the performance of the various regions on the xEMU spacesuit were developed from a generic set of BLEs. The HVI and low speed testing was performed to establish a physical basis for the equations with the coefficients and exponents of the generic BLEs adjusted to fit the test data. The xEMU BLEs were added to the NASA/JSC software application used for spacecraft MMOD risk assessments (BUMPER-3). A finite element model (FEM) of the xEMU spacesuit, which defines the size and shape of the spacesuit as well as the locations of the various shielding configurations, was created based on a solid model provided by the xEMU program office. Using the FEM file and added xEMU BLEs, BUMPER-3 assessments of the xEMU spacesuit for probability of no penetration (PNP) were performed. For the LEO assessment of a typical ISS EVA, the orbital debris and meteoroids environments were defined using the latest engineering models, ORDEM 3.2 and MEM-3 respectively. The lunar surface assessment again used the MEM-3 engineering model to define the meteoroid environment along with the current released lunar surface ejecta model, NASA SP-8013 (developed during the Apollo Program). The Space Team in the Natural Environments Branch at Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) will soon release the new Lunar Meteoroid Ejecta Engineering Model (LMEEM), at which time the xEMU lunar surface EVA will be reassessed. Assessment of the MMOD risk for an 8-hour, 2-person EVA in both LEO and on the lunar surface showed that the xEMU spacesuit meets the program technical requirement of 1 in 2500 failure odds. Similar to the legacy EMU spacesuit, the majority of the MMOD risk (96% of the LEO EVA risk and 99% of the lunar surface EVA risk) is concentrated in regions of xEMU that are comprised primarily of softgoods (arms, legs, and gloves) rather than the hardgoods (xPLSS, hard upper torso and helmet).

Micrometeoroid↗

Micrometeoroid and Orbital Debris (MMOD) Testing, Ballistic Limit Equation Definition and Risk Assessment of the Exploration Extravehicular Mobility Unit (xEMU)

A well-known hazard associated with exposure to the space environment is the risk of failure due to an impact from a micrometeoroid and orbital debris (MMOD) particle. As NASA prepares to return astronauts to the moon with the Artemis program, the next generation of spacesuit is in development to support future extravehicular activities (EVAs.) An MMOD impact to the spacesuit is of great concern as a large leak could prevent an astronaut from safely reaching an airlock in time resulting in a loss of life. The exploration extravehicular mobility unit (xEMU) must meet MMOD requirements for multiple environments including those in low earth orbit (LEO) as well as the meteoroid and secondary lunar regolith ejecta environments found on the lunar surface. The subject of this paper is an internal xEMU configuration design developed by NASA Johnson Space Center (JSC) personnel. This paper will expand on the hypervelocity impact (HVI) testing and ballistic limit equation (BLE) definition work that was partially presented at the 2nd International Orbital De-bris (IOC-II) Conference held in Sugar Land, TX in December 2023. The xEMU shares similarities with the legacy Extravehicular Mobility Unit (EMU) spacesuit that is currently used for ISS EVAs, however differences in the layup (e.g., materials, thicknesses, and layers) of the fabric environmental protection garment (EPG), portable life support system (xPLSS) and helmet required an extensive test program to determine ballistic performance. Over 100 hypervelocity impact (HVI) tests were performed by the NASA/JSC HVIT and White Sands Test Facility (WSTF) teams on the xEMU EPG, xPLSS and helmet to generate ballistic limit equations (BLEs) for MMOD impacts. Additionally, over 50 low speed tests (< 1km/s) were performed by the NASA/JSC HVIT and Southwest Research Institute (SwRI) teams on the xEMU EPG, xPLSS and helmet to generate BLEs for lunar ejecta impacts. Post testing, ballistic limit equations used to define the performance of the various regions on the xEMU spacesuit were developed from a generic set of BLEs. The HVI and low speed testing was performed to establish a physical basis for the equations with the co-efficients and exponents of the generic BLEs adjusted to fit the test data. The xEMU BLEs were added to the NASA/JSC software application used for space-craft MMOD risk assessments (BUMPER-3). A finite element model (FEM) of the xEMU spacesuit, which defines the size and shape of the spacesuit as well as the locations of the various shielding configurations, was created based on a solid model provided by the xEMU program office. Using the FEM file and added xEMU BLEs, BUMPER-3 assessments of the xEMU spacesuit for probability of no penetration (PNP) were performed. For the LEO assessment of a typical ISS EVA, the orbital debris and meteoroids environments were defined using the latest engineering models, ORDEM 3.2 and MEM-3 respectively. The lunar sur-face assessment again used the MEM-3 engineering model to define the meteoroid environ-ment along with the current released lunar surface ejecta model, NASA SP-8013 (developed during the Apollo Program). The Space Team in the Natural Environments Branch at Mar-shall Space Flight Center (MSFC) will soon release the new Lunar Meteoroid Ejecta Engineering Model (LMEEM), at which time the xEMU lunar surface EVA will be reassessed. Assessment of the MMOD risk for an 8-hour, 2-person EVA in both LEO and on the lunar surface showed that the xEMU spacesuit meets the program technical requirement of 1 in 2500 failure odds. Similar to the legacy EMU spacesuit, the majority of the MMOD risk (96% of the LEO EVA risk and 99% of the lunar surface EVA risk) is concentrated in regions of xEMU that are comprised primarily of softgoods (arms, legs, and gloves) rather than the hardgoods (xPLSS, hard upper torso and helmet).

Micrometeoroid↗

Public-Private Collaborations with Earth-Space Benefits

The NASA Human Health and Performance Center (NHHPC) was established in October 2010 to promote collaborative problem solving and project development to advance human health and performance innovations benefiting life in space and on Earth. The NHHPC, which now boasts over 150 corporate, government, academic and non-profit members, has convened four successful workshops and engaged in multiple collaborative projects. The virtual center facilitates member engagement through a variety of vehicles, including annual in-person workshops, webcasts, quarterly electronic newsletters, web postings, and the new system for partner engagement. NHHPC workshops serve to bring member organizations together to share best practices, discuss common goals, and facilitate development of the collaborative projects. The most recent NHHPC workshop was conducted in November 2013 on the topic of "Accelerating Innovation: New Organizational Business Models," and focused on various collaborative approaches successfully used by organizations to achieve their goals. Past workshops have addressed smart media and health applications, connecting through collaboration, microbiology innovations, and strategies and best practices in open innovation. A fifth workshop in Houston, Texas, planned for September 18, 2014, will feature "Innovation Through Co-Development: Engaging Partners". One area of great interest to NASA is mobile health applications, including mobile laboratory analytics, health monitoring, and close loop sensing, all of which also offer ground-based health applications for remote and underserved areas. Another project being coordinated by NASA and the Health and Environmental Sciences Institute is the pursuit of one to several novel strategies to increase medication stability that would enable health care in remote terrestrial settings as well as during space flight. NASA has also funded work with corporate NHHPC partner GE, seeking to develop ultrasound methodologies that will enable NASA to further understand the eye changes related to long-duration space flight. The adaptation of ultrasound to this type of eye examination could also expand the use of ultrasound in health care on the Earth in settings where MRIs are not available. To further engage NHHPC members and facilitate partnership development for NASA, the NHHPC created and deployed an engagement system in 2014 that facilitates identification and evaluation of technical needs and opportunities among all NHHPC members.

Davis, Jeffrey R.↗

NASA's Habitation Development Status: Current Concepts and ISRU Opportunities

Introduction: The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) is embarking on a bold journey to return humankind to the Moon and onward to Mars with innovative commercial, international, and academic partnerships. Under the Artemis series of missions, NASA seeks to establish sustained human exploration of deep space through an objectives-based approach. This approach drives the identification of needed system functionality and the current and future capabilities which will eventually allow humanity to sustainably live beyond Earth. Providing evolvable and scalable habitation is a cornerstone function that calls for the collection and integration of current, developmental, and future technologies that can meet near-term exploration needs while growing into long-term sustained presence. NASA is advancing in-space habitation through its Next Space Technologies for Exploration Partnerships (NextSTEP) model while designing lunar, Mars transit, and Mars surface habitat government reference concepts for Artemis missions. These efforts have unveiled possible near-term opportunities for the in-space resource utilization community if human habitation is considered a future customer of space resources. NextSTEP Habitation Development: NASA is closely working with commercial partners under its NextSTEP Appendix A model to advance habitation systems in the arena of inflatable and composite habitation structures. Such efforts promise efficiencies in volumetric packaging and overall spacecraft mass respectively. Recent testing by commercial partners have helped to quantify possible failure mechanisms for inflatable structures while advancing their technology towards eventual flight certification. The advancement of such Class II habitation structures, in which the habitat is only fully deployed once in-space or on a planetary surface, is critical to providing increased habitable volume for long-duration missions with no additional mass penalties. The progression of such technology is infused into NASA’s government reference concepts for notional deep space habitation concepts. Current Government Reference Concepts: To best inform the formulation of future collaborative solicitations, NASA employs the practice of internally developing reference concepts for future exploration elements. These concepts aid in identifying the functions and capabilities needed to complete NASA missions as well as feasible solutions within the timeframe needed. Government reference concepts for a lunar Surface Habitat, Mars Transit Habitat, and Mars Sur-face Habitat are continuously being developed and updated to better guide the Agency’s overall exploration architecture. Lunar Surface Habitat. As NASA returns to the Moon, it is evaluating possible lunar surface habitation concepts. The Surface Habitat (SH) reference concept entails a hybrid metallic-inflatable structure capable of initially housing two crew for surface stays of up to 30 days in duration. While initial missions may span ~7 days in duration, consideration is being given to expanding SH’s capability to support a crew of four for up to 60 days over its 15-year design life. Functionally, the SH serves as a ‘hub’ for all Artemis crewed surface operations, providing internal volume for maintenance, medical, logistics, science utilization, and extravehicular activity (EVA) support in addition to core habitation functionality such as environmental control and life support (ECLS) and power generation and distribution among many others. Additionally, NASA has entered a study agreement with the Italian Space Agency (Agenzia Spaziale Italiana – ASI) to investigation a possible Multi-Purpose Habitat (MPH) as an additional or augmenting habit-able element for the lunar surface. Mars Transit Habitat. NASA’s current architectural concept for initial human missions to Mars entails the utilization of a transit habitat (TH) to transport a four-person crew to and from Mars orbit, departing from and returning to a lunar near-rectilinear halo orbit (NRHO), over the course of a ~1,200-day mission. While holding a similar 15-year design lifetime, TH will also support a series of analog mission activities in NRHO to gradually test the systems and interaction with lunar surface elements, some of which may be adapted for Mars surface exploration. Holding similar functional capabilities as SH, TH is sized to support much longer durations in space and greater logistical independence. Mars Surface Habitat. NASA is still exploring the concept of operations for initial crewed missions to Mars. As such, the Mars Surface Habitat (MSH) concept is still in its infancy as options for mobile, pressurized habitation and stationary habitats are being explored. It is expected MSH will leverage heavily from the lunar SH and possible lunar pressurized rover, however the very different Martian environment will likely necessitate modifications. ISRU Opportunities: Despite the advancements under NASA’s NextSTEP habitation work and continually optimized reference concepts, NASA is facing near-term mass and power challenges that may create opportunities to the ISRU community by providing yet another possible customer for space resources. While NASA desires to use regenerative ECLS systems (ECLSS) for all habitation concepts, their operation comes with initial mass penalties and maintenance overheads when compared to simpler open-loop architectures. Because of this, NASA is currently pro-posing an open-loop, consumables-based architecture for its surface habitats to achieve initial launch and delivery lander mass targets while scarring for the in-corporation of regenerative ECLSS to meet longer mission durations and sustained presence. With such an architecture, oxygen and potable water are needed consumables, which initial ISRU systems may be able to provide in a pilot capacity. Although the TH is expecting to utilize regenerative ECLSS, advancements in lunar surface-based ISRU and possible re-supply of spacecraft in lunar or Mars orbit could significantly reduce the logistical need for ECLSS related spares on TH and possibly allow a similar open-loop and consumables-based architecture. In addition to ECLSS mass concerns, the SH is facing challenges with energy storage to support operations over periods of darkness exceeding 100 hours. Both battery and fuel cell-based power architectures are being traded, opening options for external power generation and energy storage. One possibility is ISRU-produced H2 and O2 feeding external primary fuel cell systems which could supplement habitation power generation while reducing initial mass and volume until much more powerful fission power systems might be deployed. Conclusion: Significant advancements are being made in evolvable habitation concepts that span from near-term technologies, such as inflatable structures under NextSTEP, to potentially revolutionary capabilities like the lunar surface construction as funded through the Moon-to-Mars Planetary Autonomous Construction Technologies (MMPACT) project. As NASA investigates both heritage capabilities and rap-idly advancing, disruptive technologies, there are likely many near-term opportunities for initial ISRU capabilities to significantly aid human habitation and increase self-sufficiency beyond Earth.

habitation↗

Volumetric Limits for Carry in a Spacesuit

Though there is a plethora of ergonomic guidelines for manual material handling, including maximum weight limits, there is not much guidance for the largest size of an object that a person can carry. Moreover, given the new Artemis space program’s intent to reestablish and maintain human presence on the Moon, there is a need to set manual material handling requirements for the partial gravity environment. Lunar surface carry limits while wearing a pressurized spacesuit is chief among them. Specifically, volumetric limits are required to determine the maximum dimensions of an item that a crewmember will be able to carry on the lunar surface. This study will assess spacesuit motion data to determine acceptable locations where the hand can be positioned for carrying an object, as hand position will vary with the crewmember anthropometry, spacesuits constraints and mechanism. Maximum volume limits will be derived from clearances between the suit and the gloved hand. The mobility of the suit and task contexts (e.g., terrain types, ground clearance) will also be taken into consideration to ensure that the volume being carried does not interfere with suit hardware or impart any mobility restrictions. The specific analysis methods and outcomes will be detailed in the final proceeding. The outcome of this study is expected to provide guidelines for maximum volumes that can be carried both two-handed and one-handed while wearing a spacesuit.

Y. Hernandez↗