Results for “EXTRAVEHICULAR OPERATION” — Page 23

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Wire-break Ignition Testing of Materials for Spacesuit Fire Hazard Control

The input design constraints applied to the extravehicular activity (EVA) spacesuit pose a significant challenge for mitigation of fire hazards. To minimize fatigue and increase comfort of the crewmember operating the suit, the suit pressure is lowered below sea level conditions with typical EVA suit designs operating with 4.3 psia (29.7 kPa). With the lowered operating pressures and the use of closed-loop life support, the suit requires elevated concentrations of oxygen, typically >95%. At these oxygen concentrations, nearly the entirety of the suit internal materials are flammable. This leaves one remaining possible control leg of the fire triangle: ignition sources. Since the Gemini and Apollo programs, this has been a risk that has undergone constant reassessment, with a focus on improved mitigation. After the Apollo I fire, an arc ignition method was developed and used to quantify ignition thresholds for in-suit materials resulting in a current limit for powered in-suit devices applied to all subsequent suit designs. After the discovery of a frayed spacesuit biomed cable on STS-113 during the Shuttle Program, the previous arcing method was repeated with additional methods developed to extend the testing further. One of those methods was wire-break ignition testing, in which the current in a single strand of wire was progressively increased, preheating the material in proximity with a resultant break and the application of a reasonably repeatable arc to ignite the material, all while exposed in the selected environment. This method was used to test a suite of spacesuit materials providing relative performance with respect to ignition with this configuration for application of energy. This paper discusses extension of the current data set to address recent material additions, lowering of energy test levels for quantification of materials too low to measure in previous testing, as well as future plans to improve this method.

Colin Campbell↗

NASA NTRS1985

Physiological considerations for EVA in the Space Station era

The physiological parameters that will affect EMU design and operational scheduling for the Space Station Program are discussed. The system must be designed to safely and effectively handle the increased frequency of extravehicular activity projected for longer flight periods than in the past. In order to minimize the risk of decompression sickness a proper combination of equilibration time to cabin pressure, suit pressure, and prebreathing denitrogenation, is necessary. Effective thermal exchange is projected to be automatically controlled and to have an 8-hr 1000 BTU/hr capability. Physiological changes due to adaptation to weightlessness must be considered in scheduling for their impact on performance/fatigue and in coping with motion sickness. Radiation protection to the limit of 80 rad/quarter must be achieved by scheduling to avoid periodic proton and solar flare exposure, and by additional EMU shielding. Additional EMU considerations are the control of microorganisms and the higher pressure requirement for emergency O2 purge.

Horrigan, D. J., Jr.↗

NASA NTRS1994

EVA-SCRAM operations

This paper wrestles with the on-orbit operational challenges introduced by the proposed Space Construction, Repair, and Maintenance (SCRAM) tool kit for Extra-Vehicular Activity (EVA). SCRAM undertakes a new challenging series of on-orbit tasks in support of the near-term Hubble Space Telescope, Extended Duration Orbiter, Long Duration Orbiter, Space Station Freedom, other orbital platforms, and even the future manned Lunar/Mars missions. These new EVA tasks involve welding, brazing, cutting, coating, heat-treating, and cleaning operations. Anticipated near-term EVA-SCRAM applications include construction of fluid lines and structural members, repair of punctures by orbital debris, refurbishment of surfaces eroded by atomic oxygen, and cleaning of optical, solar panel, and high emissivity radiator surfaces which have been degraded by contaminants. Future EVA-SCRAM applications are also examined, involving mass production tasks automated with robotics and artificial intelligence, for construction of large truss, aerobrake, and reactor shadow shield structures. Realistically achieving EVA-SCRAM is examined by addressing manual, teleoperated, semi-automated, and fully-automated operation modes. The operational challenges posed by EVA-SCRAM tasks are reviewed with respect to capabilities of existing and upcoming EVA systems, such as the Extravehicular Mobility Unit, the Shuttle Remote Manipulating System, the Dexterous End Effector, and the Servicing Aid Tool.

Flanigan, Lee A.↗

NASA NTRS2002

STS-111 Mission Highlights Resource Tape: Flight Days 8 - 10 - Part 3 of 4

An overview of the STS-111 Endeavour mission is given through footage of each flight day. Scenes from flight days 8 through 10 show activities such as extravehicular activity (EVA) preparation, EVA activity to replace the wrist roll joint on the International Space Station's (ISS) robotic arm, logistics transfer operation, space suit check-out and loading of the Leonardo Multi-Purpose Logistics Module onto the Endeavour's cargo bay. Individual shots of Africa, Italy, Hispaniola, Mexico and the Strait of Gilbraltar are shown. For mission footage from flight days 1 to 7 and 11-14, see also, 'STS-111 Mission Highlights Resource Tape, Part 1', 'STS-111 Mission Highlights Resource Tape, Part 2' and 'STS-111 Mission Highlights Resource Tape, Part 4'.

Source record↗

NASA NTRS2010

EVA Physiology, Systems and Performance [EPSP] Project

This viewgraph presentation gives a general overview of the biomedical and technological challenges of Extravehicular Activity (EVA). The topics covered include: 1) Prebreathe Protocols; 2) Lunar Suit Testing and Development; and 3) Lunar Electric Rover and Exploration Operations Concepts.

Gernhardt, Michael L.↗

NASA NTRS2008

Advanced Lithium-Ion Cell Development for NASA's Constellation Missions

The Energy Storage Project of NASA s Exploration Technology Development Program is developing advanced lithium-ion batteries to meet the requirements for specific Constellation missions. NASA GRC, in conjunction with JPL and JSC, is leading efforts to develop High Energy and Ultra High Energy cells for three primary Constellation customers: Altair, Extravehicular Activities (EVA), and Lunar Surface Systems. The objective of the High Energy cell development is to enable a battery system that can operationally deliver approximately 150 Wh/kg for 2000 cycles. The Ultra High Energy cell development will enable a battery system that can operationally deliver 220 Wh/kg for 200 cycles. To accomplish these goals, cathode, electrolyte, separator, and safety components are being developed for High Energy Cells. The Ultra High Energy cell development adds lithium alloy anodes to the component development portfolio to enable much higher cell-level specific energy. The Ultra High Energy cell development is targeted for the ascent stage of Altair, which is the Lunar Lander, and for power for the Portable Life support System of the EVA Lunar spacesuit. For these missions, mass is highly critical, but only a limited number of cycles are required. The High Energy cell development is primarily targeted for Mobility Systems (rovers) for Lunar Surface Systems, however, due to the high risk nature of the Ultra High Energy cell development, the High Energy cell will also serve as a backup technology for Altair and EVA. This paper will discuss mission requirements and the goals of the material, component, and cell development efforts in further detail.

Reid, Concha M.↗

NASA NTRS1994

M.E.366-J embodiment design project: Portable foot restraint

During space shuttle operations, astronauts require support to carry out tasks in the weightless environment. In the past, portable foot restraints (PFR) with orientations adjustable in pitch, roll, and yaw provided this support for payload bay operations. These foot restraints, however, were designed for specific tasks with a load limit of 111.2 Newtons. Since the original design, new applications for foot restraints have been identified. New designs for the foot restraints have been created to boost the operational work load to 444.8 Newtons and decrease setup times. What remains to be designed is an interface between the restraint system and the extravehicular mobility unit (EMU) boots. NASA provided a proposed locking device involving a spring-loaded mechanism. This locking mechanism must withstand loads of 1334.4 Newtons in any direction and weigh less than 222.4 Newtons. This paper develops an embodiment design for the interface between the PFR and the EMU boots. This involves design of the locking mechanism and a removable cleat that allows the boot to interface with this mechanism. The design team used the Paul Beitz engineering methodology to present the systematic development, structural analysis, and production considerations of the embodiment design. This methodology provides a basis for understanding the justification behind the decisions made in the design.

Heaton, Randall↗

NASA NTRS1996

Electromagnetic radiation generated by arcing in low density plasma

An unavoidable step in the process of space exploration is to use high-power, very large spacecraft launched into Earth orbit. Obviously, the spacecraft will need powerful energy sources. Previous experience has shown that electrical discharges occur on the surfaces of a high-voltage array, and these discharges (arcs) are undesirable in many respects. Moreover, any high voltage conductor will interact with the surrounding plasma, and that interaction may result in electrical discharges between the conductor and plasma (or between two conductors with different potentials, for example, during docking and extravehicular activity). One very important aspect is the generation of electromagnetic radiation by arcing. To prevent the negative influence of electromagnetic noise on the operation of spacecraft systems, it seems necessary to determine the spectra and absolute levels of the radiation, and to determine limitations on the solar array bias voltage that depend on the parameters of LEO plasma and the technical requirements of the spacecraft equipment. This report describes the results of an experimental study and computer simulation of the electromagnetic radiation generated by arcing on spacecraft surfaces. A large set of high quality data was obtained during the Solar Array Module Plasma Interaction Experiment (SAMPIE, flight STS-62) and ground test. These data include the amplitudes of current, pulse forms, duration of each arc, and spectra of plasma waves. A theoretical explanation of the observed features is presented in this report too. The elaborated model allows us to determine the parameters of the electromagnetic noise for different frequency ranges, distances from the arcing site, and distinct kinds of plasma waves.

Vayner, Boris V.↗

NASA NTRS2003

Analysis of a Radiation Model of the Shuttle Space Suit

The extravehicular activity (EVA) required to assemble the International Space Station (ISS) will take approximately 1500 hours with 400 hours of EVA per year in operations and maintenance. With the Space Station at an inclination of 51.6 deg the radiation environment is highly variable with solar activity being of great concern. Thus, it is important to study the dose gradients about the body during an EVA to help determine the cancer risk associated with the different environments the ISS will encounter. In this paper we are concerned only with the trapped radiation (electrons and protons). Two different scenarios are looked at: the first is the quiet geomagnetic periods in low Earth orbit (LEO) and the second is during a large solar particle event in the deep space environment. This study includes a description of how the space suit's computer aided design (CAD) model was developed along with a description of the human model. Also included is a brief description of the transport codes used to determine the total integrated dose at several locations within the body. Finally, the results of the transport codes when applied to the space suit and human model and a brief description of the results are presented.

Anderson, Brooke M.↗

NASA NTRS2013

An Onboard ISS Virtual Reality Trainer

Prior to the retirement of the Space Shuttle, many exterior repairs on the International Space Station (ISS) were carried out by shuttle astronauts, trained on the ground and flown to the station to perform these repairs. After the retirement of the shuttle, this is no longer an available option. As such, the need for the ISS crew members to review scenarios while on flight, either for tasks they already trained or for contingency operations has become a very critical subject. In many situations, the time between the last session of Neutral Buoyancy Laboratory (NBL) training and an Extravehicular Activity (EVA) task might be 6 to 8 months. In order to help with training for contingency repairs and to maintain EVA proficiency while on flight, the Johnson Space Center Virtual Reality Lab (VRLab) designed an onboard immersive ISS Virtual Reality Trainer (VRT), incorporating a unique optical system and making use of the already successful Dynamic Onboard Ubiquitous Graphical (DOUG) graphics software, to assist crew members with current procedures and contingency EVAs while on flight. The VRT provides an immersive environment similar to the one experienced at the VRLab crew training facility at NASA Johnson Space Center. EVA tasks are critical for a mission since as time passes the crew members may lose proficiency on previously trained tasks. In addition, there is an increased need for unplanned contingency repairs to fix problems arising as the ISS ages. The need to train and re-train crew members for EVAs and contingency scenarios is crucial and extremely demanding. ISS crew members are now asked to perform EVA tasks for which they have not been trained and potentially have never seen before.

Miralles, Evelyn↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

2023 Artemis Crew Health and Performance System Model Development

While the NASA Human Research Program (HRP) utilizes a Crew Health and Performance (CHP) System to represent all the Agency’s efforts to ensure the health and performance of NASA astronauts, there is no shared mental model of a CHP system at NASA. Some groups may consider a CHP system to be only a medical kit, while others may not be using the concept at all. To facilitate the integration of functions and capabilities to ensure astronaut health and performance during vehicle development, HRP has proposed a CHP Shared Mental Model derived from the NASA Human Health, Medical, and Performance Spaceflight Standards (NASA-STD-3001 Vol.1/Vol.2). [1] Even though many vehicle, ground, and communication systems as well as mission operations are modeled for the Artemis Campaigns, no mission level CHP system model was created to achieve the intent of the HRP CHP Shared Mental Model. The lack of this model renders it difficult to visualize and understand how the many programs work together to provide the necessary cross program functions and capabilities to ensure the health and performance of the crew throughout an Artemis mission. For this purpose, the Exploration Medical Capability (ExMC) element of HRP developed a CHP system model for the Artemis III and IV missions to provide a view of how each program contributes to and interacts with the overall CHP system. To develop the 2023 Artemis CHP system model, ExMC leveraged existing data and models from the Moon to Mars Program Office, the Office of the Chief Health and Medical Officer (OCHMO) and the Orion, Gateway, Extravehicular Activity and Human Surface Mobility (EHP) and Human Landing System (HLS) programs. By using a Model-Based Systems Engineering (MBSE) approach, existing requirements, functions, and concepts of operations were combined to create a single system model focused on representing CHP from the launch to the return to Earth segments of the Artemis III and IV missions. Additionally, by incorporating the HRP Systems Platform for Aggregating and Relating Capabilities, or SPARC tool, the data from the programs was also related back to the 2nd volume of the NASA Human Health, Medical, and Performance Spaceflight Standard (NASA-STD-3001, Vol.2) and the human system risks identified by the Human System Risk Board (HSRB). The first version of the 2023 Artemis CHP system model was baselined in Fall of 2023 after the model was demonstrated to be a potentially useful tool for systems engineers integrating CHP capabilities in vehicle development as well as members of the Health and Medical Technical Authority providing oversight of those programs. The model may also be useful to any stakeholder of astronaut health and performance by providing insights on how an Artemis mission satisfies the NASA Human Health, Medical, and Performance Spaceflight Standards as well as how they mitigate the HSRB Human System Risks. This presentation highlights how the model was developed and the possible benefits of the model. [1] NASA HRP (2022), Crew Health and Performance System Whitepaper

Systems engineering↗

NASA NTRS2024

2023 Artemis Crew Health and Performance (CHP) System Model Development

While the NASA Human Research Program (HRP) utilizes a Crew Health and Performance (CHP) System to represent all the Agency’s efforts to ensure the health and performance of NASA astronauts, there is no shared mental model of a CHP system at NASA. Some groups may consider a CHP system to be only a medical kit, while others may not be using the concept at all. To facilitate the integration of functions and capabilities to ensure astronaut health and performance during vehicle development, HRP has proposed a CHP Shared Mental Model derived from the NASA Human Health, Medical, and Performance Spaceflight Standards (NASA-STD-3001 Vol.1/Vol.2). [1] Even though many vehicle, ground, and communication systems as well as mission operations are modeled for the Artemis Campaigns, no mission level CHP system model was created to achieve the intent of the HRP CHP Shared Mental Model. The lack of this model renders it difficult to visualize and understand how the many programs work together to provide the necessary cross program functions and capabilities to ensure the health and performance of the crew throughout an Artemis mission. For this purpose, the Exploration Medical Capability (ExMC) element of HRP developed a CHP system model for the Artemis III and IV missions to provide a view of how each program contributes to and interacts with the overall CHP system. To develop the 2023 Artemis CHP system model, ExMC leveraged existing data and models from the Moon to Mars Program Office, the Office of the Chief Health and Medical Officer (OCHMO) and the Orion, Gateway, Extravehicular Activity and Human Surface Mobility (EHP) and Human Landing System (HLS) programs. By using a Model-Based Systems Engineering (MBSE) approach, existing requirements, functions, and concepts of operations were combined to create a single system model focused on representing CHP from the launch to the return to Earth segments of the Artemis III and IV missions. Additionally, by incorporating the HRP Systems Platform for Aggregating and Relating Capabilities, or SPARC tool, the data from the programs was also related back to the 2nd volume of the NASA Human Health, Medical, and Performance Spaceflight Standard (NASA-STD-3001, Vol.2) and the human system risks identified by the Human System Risk Board (HSRB). The first version of the 2023 Artemis CHP system model was baselined in Fall of 2023 after the model was demonstrated to be a potentially useful tool for systems engineers integrating CHP capabilities in vehicle development as well as members of the Health and Medical Technical Authority providing oversight of those programs. The model may also be useful to any stakeholder of astronaut health and performance by providing insights on how an Artemis mission satisfies the NASA Human Health, Medical, and Performance Spaceflight Standards as well as how they mitigate the HSRB Human System Risks. This presentation highlights how the model was developed and the possible benefits of the model. [1] NASA HRP (2022), Crew Health and Performance System Whitepaper

Systems engineering↗

NASA NTRS2020

Development and Evaluation of the Active Response Gravity Offload System as a Lunar and Martian EVA Simulation Environment

In preparation for future exploration missions, NASA seeks the ability to simulate partial-gravity operations for use in ground-based research, crew training, and engineering design evaluations. The Active Response Gravity Offload System (ARGOS) at the Johnson Space Center (JSC) is designed to simulate reduced gravity environments, such as lunar, Martian, or microgravity, using a robotic system similar to an overhead bridge crane. ARGOS continuously offloads a portion of a suited human’s weight during all dynamic motions within the test facility, which can include basic functional movements such as walking, running, and jumping, as well as a wide range of planetary surface activities. This system will be used as part of a metabolic-rate task characterization study to determine the workload associated with partial-gravity extravehicular activity (EVA). Pilot testing was conducted using the MKIII prototype planetary space suit and two gimbal designs to determine the ability of the ARGOS test environment to simulate planetary EVA operations. This paper will describe the lessons learned from the feasibility testing, simulation-environment mockup design, and the results from the pilot tests and their influence into the final study design. Being able to effectively simulate partial-gravity environments and characterize the performance of crewmembers will have an impact on multiple domains including suit design, task design, thermal models, and life-support-system capacity verification plans, among others.

Omar S Bekdash↗

NASA NTRS2023

Augmented Reality Tool for Operationally Relevant 3D Sensorimotor Assessments

This project will leverage existing capabilities of an augmented reality (AR) sensorimotor assessment tool. Currently, the tool mimics the capabilities of validated 2-dimensional (2D) assessments. While this modality is well-aligned with seated interactions with flight-deck displays, extravehicular activity (EVA) tasks will require full body mobility wherein astronauts reach and bend in a 3-dimensional (3D) space. These types of motions, naturally including head movements, are known to elicit experiences of disorientation. Thus, sensorimotor assessments that include these stimulations and larger movements are important for understanding astronaut readiness prior to initial EVAs. The proposed effort will extend the current 2D eye-hand coordination task in AR to a 3D task designed to evaluate dynamic balance and eye-hand-body coordination. The new module will extend the range of motion and interaction space such that it better aligns with operational task needs for astronaut readiness evaluation.

Sarah Catherine Moudy↗

NASA NTRS1982

Structural assembly demonstration experiment

The experiment is of an operational variety, designed to assess crew capability in Large Space System (LSS) assembly. The six Structural Assembly Demonstration Experiment objectives include: (1) the establishment of a quantitative correlation between LSS neutral buoyancy simulation and on-orbit assembly operations in order to enhance the validity of those assembly simulations; (2) the quantitative study of the capabilities and mechanics of human assembly in an Extravehicular Activity environment; (3) the further corroboration of the LSS Assembly Analysis cost algorithm through the obtainment of hard data base information; (4) the verification of LSS assembly techniques and timeless, as well as the identification of crew imposed loads and assembly aid requirements and concepts; (5) verification of a Launch/Assembly Platform structure concept for other LSS missions; and (6) lastly, to advance thermal control concepts through a flexible heat pipe.

Stokes, J. W.↗

NASA NTRS1980

Effects of the space environment on the health and safety of space workers

Large numbers of individuals are required to work in space to assemble and operate a Solar Power Satellite. The physiological and behavioral consequences for large groups of men and women who perform complex tasks in the vehicular or extravehicular environments over long periods of orbital stay time were considered. The most disturbing consequences of exposure to the null gravity environment found relate to: (1) a generalized cardiovascular deconditioning along with loss of a significant amount of body fluid volume; (2) loss of bone minerals and muscle mass; and (3) degraded performance of neutral mechanisms which govern equilibrium and spatial orientation.

Hull, W. E.↗

NASA NTRS1988

Advanced space transportation system support contract

The general focus is on a phase 2 lunar base, or a lunar base during the period after the first return of a crew to the Moon, but before permanent occupancy. The software effort produced a series of trajectory programs covering low earth orbit (LEO) to various node locations, the node locations to the lunar surface, and then back to LEO. The surface operations study took a lunar scenario in the civil needs data base (CNDB) and attempted to estimate the amount of space-suit work or extravehicular activity (EVA) required to set up the base. The maintenance and supply options study was a first look at the problems of supplying and maintaining the base. A lunar surface launch and landing facility was conceptually designed. The lunar storm shelter study examined the problems of radiation protection. The lunar surface construction and equipment assembly study defined twenty surface construction and assembly tasks in detail.

Source record↗

NASA NTRS2001

STS-108 Crew Training Clip

This video shows the crew of STS-108, Commander Dominic Gorie, Pilot Mark Kelly, and Mission Specialists Linda Godwin and Daniel Tani, during various parts of their training, including T-38 operations at Ellington, bail-out training (with the Expedition 4 crew: Commander Yuri Onufrienko and Flight Engineers Carl Walz and Daniel Bursch) in CCT2, extravehicular activity (EVA) preparations, Space Station Mockup and Test/Training Facility (SSMTF) transfer and hands-on familiarization (also with E4), Remote Manipulator System training, EVA training in the Neutral Buoyancy Laboratory, and in a payload training class.

Source record↗